Researchers looked at what Swiss people have been eating from 1990 to 2017 and studied how their food choices affect three important things: nutrition, health, and the environment. They found that eating less red meat and more chicken, beans, fruits, and vegetables could make diets healthier while also being better for the planet. The study shows that food choices involve trade-offs—sometimes what’s best for your health might have different environmental impacts than you’d expect. Overall, the research suggests that small changes in what we eat, like swapping red meat for poultry or adding more beans and nuts, could improve both personal health and environmental sustainability.

The Quick Take

  • What they studied: How Swiss people’s eating habits changed over 27 years and whether those changes were good or bad for nutrition, health, and the environment
  • Who participated: The study analyzed household food purchase data from Switzerland across four time periods (1990, 2000, 2010, and 2017), representing typical Swiss eating patterns rather than individual people
  • Key finding: When Swiss people ate less red meat and more chicken, beans, fruits, and vegetables, their diets became more nutritious and healthier while also reducing environmental damage from food production
  • What it means for you: You might consider eating less red and processed meat and more poultry, beans, fruits, vegetables, and nuts. These changes could help you feel healthier and reduce your personal impact on the environment, though individual results vary based on your current diet

The Research Details

Researchers used a special method called life cycle assessment (LCA) to measure the environmental impact of different foods. They looked at household shopping data from Switzerland over 27 years to see how eating patterns changed. They used two scoring systems—one called NRF10.3 to measure how nutritious foods are, and another called HENI to measure how foods affect health. Then they used statistical analysis to find patterns and trends in how Swiss people’s diets changed and what that meant for nutrition, health, and the environment.

This approach is like taking a snapshot of what an entire country eats at different points in time and then examining each food choice through three different lenses: Is it nutritious? Is it healthy? Is it good for the planet? By combining all three perspectives, the researchers could see the full picture of how food choices matter.

This research approach is important because it shows that food choices aren’t simple. A food might be very nutritious but have a big environmental impact, or vice versa. By studying real shopping data from an entire country rather than just asking people what they eat, the researchers got accurate information about actual eating patterns. Looking at 27 years of data also shows long-term trends, not just what happened in one year.

This study used actual household purchase data from official government records, which is more reliable than asking people to remember what they ate. The researchers used established scientific methods for measuring environmental impact (life cycle assessment) and nutritional value. However, the study doesn’t tell us about individual people’s health outcomes—it shows patterns in what groups of people bought and ate. The findings are specific to Switzerland, so they may not apply exactly the same way to other countries with different food systems and eating cultures.

What the Results Show

The study found that Swiss people’s eating habits changed significantly between 1990 and 2017. Most importantly, people ate less red meat and processed meat over time, but ate more chicken. This shift had positive effects: diets became more nutritious, and the environmental damage from meat production decreased.

When researchers looked at the overall nutritional quality of Swiss diets, they found it improved over the 27-year period. However, when they measured health impacts using the HENI index, the healthiest eating patterns were actually in the year 2000, suggesting that some of the changes after 2000 may have moved diets in less healthy directions.

The environmental impact of food was complicated and depended on which specific environmental problem you were measuring—like greenhouse gas emissions, water use, or land use. Different foods had different environmental impacts depending on which measure was used.

The research revealed that Swiss people ate very small amounts of beans, lentils, fruits, vegetables, and nuts compared to what health experts recommend. This is important because increasing these foods could improve nutrition, health, and environmental outcomes all at the same time. The study also showed that there are often trade-offs between the three dimensions—improving one aspect of food choice might affect another aspect differently than expected.

This research builds on previous studies that looked at either nutrition or environmental impact separately. By combining all three dimensions—nutrition, health, and environment—this study provides a more complete picture than earlier research. The findings support previous research showing that reducing red meat consumption is beneficial for health and the environment, while adding more plant-based foods like beans and vegetables is helpful for all three dimensions.

The study looked at what people bought at stores, not necessarily what they actually ate or how much they wasted. Food purchase data doesn’t capture restaurant meals or food eaten outside the home. The research is specific to Switzerland, so the results may not apply the same way to other countries with different food systems, climates, and eating cultures. The study doesn’t show how individual people’s health actually changed—it only analyzes food patterns at a population level. Additionally, the environmental measurements depend on current farming and transportation methods, which change over time.

The Bottom Line

Based on this research, consider these changes (moderate confidence level): Eat less red meat and processed meat, and replace some of it with chicken or plant-based proteins like beans and lentils. Increase your intake of fruits, vegetables, and nuts. These changes appear to improve nutrition, support better health, and reduce environmental impact. The evidence is strongest for reducing red meat and increasing plant-based foods, though individual health benefits depend on your current diet and personal health situation.

These findings matter for anyone interested in eating healthier or reducing their environmental footprint. They’re especially relevant for people in developed countries like Switzerland with similar food systems. The recommendations are appropriate for most adults, though people with specific health conditions or dietary restrictions should consult with a healthcare provider. Parents might find this helpful for planning family meals. The findings are less directly applicable to people in countries with very different food systems or limited access to varied foods.

If you make these dietary changes, you might notice improved energy levels and digestion within a few weeks. Health benefits like better weight management or improved cholesterol levels typically take 2-3 months to become noticeable. Environmental benefits happen immediately with each food choice you make, though the broader planetary impact depends on many people making similar changes. Long-term health benefits develop over months and years of consistent eating patterns.

Want to Apply This Research?

  • Track your weekly meat consumption by type (red meat, processed meat, poultry) and your servings of beans, lentils, fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Set a goal to reduce red/processed meat by 20% and increase plant-based foods by 2-3 servings per week
  • Use the app to plan one meatless meal per week using beans or lentils, and add a vegetable or fruit to each meal. Create shopping lists that emphasize poultry over red meat and include nuts and seeds as snacks
  • Review your eating patterns monthly to see trends in meat consumption and plant-based food intake. Compare your nutrition scores and environmental impact estimates over time. Set quarterly goals to gradually shift toward the recommended patterns

This research describes population-level trends in Swiss food consumption and their associations with nutritional, health, and environmental dimensions. It does not provide personalized medical advice or diagnose health conditions. Individual nutritional needs vary based on age, sex, activity level, health status, and medical conditions. Before making significant dietary changes, especially if you have existing health conditions, take medications, or have food allergies, consult with a healthcare provider or registered dietitian. This study shows associations and trends, not definitive proof of cause and effect. Environmental impact assessments are based on current farming and transportation methods and may change over time.