In summary
* “The EAT Lancet diet” was published in January 2019. The diet (with ranges) was specified to the gram and calorie. Animal food intake (meat fish, eggs and dairy) could be zero.
* I analysed the nutrition content of the diet. Even using the maximum intake of animal foods allowed, the diet was severely nutritionally deficient. The most significant concerns were retinol, vitamin B12, vitamin D, vitamin K, calcium, iron, and omega-3 essential fatty acids.
* I submitted a letter to the Lancet pointing out the deficiencies. They refused to publish it.
* On 2nd October 2025, an update of the EAT Lancet diet was published. It is now called “The Planetary Health Diet.”
* This post shares the original diet, nutrient analysis and list of deficiencies. It then reports on the 2025 diet and compares the two diets to highlight what has changed and to see if the nutritional deficiencies have been addressed. Using the Supplementary Appendix called “What is a healthy diet?“, this note reviews if deficiencies have been addressed or explained.
Introduction
A report was published in The Lancet on 17th January 2019. The report was commissioned by The Lancet. The report was written by 37 people from 16 different countries and was 3 years in the making (Ref 1). The report launched something interchangeably called “The healthy reference diet” and/or “The EAT Lancet diet”, or just “The EAT diet.”
The report contained a table detailing the recommended diet. On the day of publication, I put the specified food items into a tool that worked with the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) all-foods database. This analysed the nutrient composition of the recommended diet. Animal food intake was positioned as 0 to X grams, because the authors were content for people to follow a vegan diet with no animal foods whatsoever. Even using the maximum intake of animal foods allowed, the diet was severely nutritionally deficient.
On 26th January 2019, I submitted a letter to The Lancet detailing the nutritional deficiencies (Ref 2). On 7th March 2019, I received a reply from The Lancet saying, “I am sorry to say that we are unable to accept it for publication.” They weren’t sorry at all. That was their choice. They didn’t want criticism posted alongside their (commissioned) flagship diet.
On 2nd October 2025, an update of the EAT Lancet diet was published. It is now called “The Planetary Health Diet” – abbreviated to PHD (Ref 3). In the 76 page report, PHD occurs 164 times and “planetary” a further 153 times. I don’t know where to start on the arrogance and hubris of multiple authors who think that they can tell the world what to eat and why.
This week’s note reviews the revised diet to see if the original nutritional deficiencies have been corrected. Spoiler alert – they haven’t. I don’t need to repeat the nutritional analysis, as the revised diet is so close to the original. This note, therefore, shares the original diet, nutrient analysis and list of deficiencies. It then reports on the 2025 diet and compares the two diets to highlight what has changed.
Five supplementary appendices were published alongside the 2025 update. Appendix 1 tried to address nutrients needed and nutrients delivered. This note analyses that document to see if nutritional deficiencies have been addressed or explained.
Zoe
Source link