Researchers said changing packaging on meat and dairy-free products, which often proudly tout their vegan status, could result in more people selecting them.

People are more likely to pick a meat-free option if it’s not labelled vegan, a study suggests.

Foods described as “healthy”, “sustainable” or “plant-based” are all more appealing, according to the University of Southern California.

Its research saw more than 7,000 people asked to choose between a vegan food basket and one with meat and dairy.

The former was randomly labelled “vegan”, “plant-based”, “healthy”, “sustainable” or “healthy and sustainable”.

The experiment found people were more likely to select it when the focus was on its benefits (such as “sustainable”) rather than its content, though “plant-based” was still more popular than “vegan”.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
      link
      fedilink
      16
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Humans also hunted those animals on foot and killed them with rocks. Things are different now and meat consumption is killing the planet.

        • @Warl0k3
          link
          English
          11 year ago

          … Consumption drives production, though.

            • @rodolfo
              link
              English
              21 year ago

              Damn right. market does NOT regulate itself

          • @rodolfo
            link
            English
            11 year ago

            no. companies and people in governments can choose to do the right thing, yet they do the opposite. why? sweet sweet dollars.

      • @rodolfo
        link
        English
        41 year ago

        to be honest, after the hunting period they captured the animals, cross bred them, kept them near them and then obviously killed them to eat them, just to eventually invent the internet, among other things.

    • @Fleur__
      link
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Never vaccinate, humans weren’t vaccinating since the beginning. Don’t fix what is not broken

    • @mhague
      link
      English
      11 year ago

      deleted by creator

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        False dichotomy.

        There’s a number of other alternatives:

        reduction in global population has already been mentioned, but there’s also technology change (industrialised farming has kept us well ahead of the “we can’t feed that many people” curve for a century);

        and technology advances in what we eat (lab grown meat etc);

        there are also unexploited sources of protein such as insects.

      • @rodolfo
        link
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        what are pros of +8 billion humans?

        Edit: let’s also say, >three billions humans

          • @rodolfo
            link
            English
            31 year ago

            oh for a moment I thought there was an upside. completely agree.

            meat isn’t the issue, it’s humans in numbers >3 billions.