EAT-柳叶刀委员会关于健康、可持续和公正的食品体系

大家好，欢迎收听《柳叶刀之声》。现在是2025年10月，我是加文·克利弗。今天我们将讨论即将发布的第二份EAT-Lancet委员会报告，与我一同参与讨论的委员有沃尔特·威利特、沙昆达拉·菲尔斯特德和约翰·罗克斯特姆。大家还记得第一份EAT-Lancet委员会报告引起的巨大轰动，因此我很兴奋能向委员们提问，了解关于健康饮食、可持续食品系统、地球边界的最新科学证据，并反思自第一份报告以来的关键更新，包括建模技术的进步。我们还将讨论公平与正义日益增长的重要性，以及为人类和地球健康转型全球食品系统的实际挑战。希望您喜欢这次对话。

Hello, and welcome to The Lancet Voice. It's October 2025, and I'm Gavin Cleaver. Today, we discuss the forthcoming second EAT Lancet Commission reports, and I'm joined by the commissioners Walter Willett, Shakunda Philstedt, and Johan Roxturm. You remember the big splash the first EAT Lancet Commission caused, so I was excited to be able to quiz the commissioners and find out the latest scientific evidence on healthy diets, sustainable food systems, planetary boundaries, and reflects on the key updates since the first EAT Lancet Commission, which include advances in modelling, and we're going to talk as well about the increasing importance of equity and justice, as well as the practical challenges of transforming the global food system for both human and planetary health. We hope you enjoy the conversation.

非常感谢各位的到来，我们真的很感激你们的时间。我们期待第二份EAT委员会报告在《柳叶刀》发布。我想我们可以从关键问题开始，或许沃尔特您先来，从EAT-Lancet一到EAT-Lancet二，发生了什么变化？

Well, thank you all so much for joining me. We really appreciate your time. We're looking forward to the second EAT commission coming out here at The Lancet. I guess the key question that we could start off with, perhaps if you want to kick off, Walter, is what's changed from Eat Lancet one to Eat Lancet two?

首先，我们认为更新非常重要，因为任何认真关注这一话题的人都知道，在营养部分和地球科学部分都有大量工作在进行，他们希望我们拥有最新的信息。因此，更新所有内容对可信度至关重要。但有些话题我们上次略有触及但未深入探讨，这次想扩展一下。其中之一是正义领域，所以我们新增了一个章节，这一点越来越重要，因为我认为非西方、非欧美世界非常清楚他们正在经历气候变化的不利影响，但他们并非造成者。

Well, first of all, we thought it was really important to have an update because I think anyone who's seriously interested in this topic knows that there's a lot of work going on on the nutrition part of it, on the earth sciences part of it, and they'd wanna know that we have the most up to date information. So updating everything was really important for credibility. But there were some topics that we wanted to expand on that we touched on a little bit but didn't get into very deeply the first time around. One was the justice area. So we have added a new section on that, and that's increasingly important because I think the non Western, non European North American world is very much aware that they are experiencing the adverse effects of climate change, but they've not caused it.

因此存在极大的不公平感。食品系统也是如此，我们在北美和欧洲的饮食对环境产生了巨大且不成比例的影响。我认为这在未来是不可接受的。全球体系确实需要更加公平。所以这将是一个新内容。

So there's a great sense of unfairness. And the same exists for the food system too, that we're in North America and Europe have been eating diets that have had huge impacts, very disproportionate impacts on the environment. And I think that's not too acceptable going forward. There really does need to be more fairness in in the global system. So that's gonna be new.

当然，气候变化的更新很重要，因为事情正在加速发展，不仅仅是线性增长。在饮食方面，我们之前的目标是基于对科学文献的深入研究制定的。但现在，既然我们已经描述了健康饮食的组成部分并将其整合，这次我们可以将整个方案带回长期的流行病学研究，真正评估那些更接近行星健康饮食方式的人们表现如何。现在有数十篇论文研究这一点，我们发现对于许多健康结果，包括总死亡率，最坚持行星健康饮食的人获益显著。

Of course, the updates on climate change are important because things are accelerating. They're not just increasing in a linear way. And on the diet side of it, what we had before were were targets that we developed with a a deep look at the scientific literature. But now that we've described what a healthy diet could be based on the pieces and putting it all together, this time, we could take that whole package, go back to our long term epidemiologic studies, and really evaluate how well people did if they came closer to the planetary health diet and in their own way of eating. So there are now dozens of papers looking at that, and we've seen major benefits for many health outcomes, including total mortality for the people who best adhere to the planetary health diet.

那么，沙昆达拉，或许我们可以转向您。

And, Shakuntala, perhaps if we could turn to you.

报告本身及其讨论的话题现在重要，未来重要，在我们开始列表之前就一直重要。因此，我认为这是对我们全球面临的一些非常非常重要问题的延续，一次带来新知识、新视角、新伙伴以及可能拥有找到其他解决方案手段的其他人的更新是重要的。所以不仅仅是我们2019年有一份报告，现在2025年又有一份新报告。

The report in itself and the topics that are discussed in the report is important now, important in the future, and has been important before we start the list. So I would say it's a continuation of some very, very important issues that we face globally, and therefore an update that brings in new knowledge, brings in new ways of looking at the issues, brings in new partners, and brings in others who can find, who perhaps have the means to find other solutions is important. So it's not just that we had the report in 2019, and now we are having a new report in 2025.

那么，Johan，你认为从第一个委员会到这个新委员会，主要的变化有哪些？

And then, Johan, what do you think are the major changes from the first commission to this new one?

是的。感谢Kevin主持这次会议，这是一个非常重要的时刻。作为第一个基本成就，从科学家的角度来看，科学在进步，知识在积累。我们有越来越多的证据，这是一项全球科学评估，使我们能够更新关于什么能带来最佳健康生活结果以及食品体系需要做什么才能为健康地球做出贡献的最新知识。

Yeah. Thanks, Kevin, for hosting us for this. It's a very significant moment. As a first basic accomplishment, I mean, from a scientist's perspective, that science advances, knowledge advances. We have more and more evidence and that this is a global scientific assessment that enables us to update the state of the art knowledge on what gives us the best outcomes for a healthy life and what is required of the food system to be able to contribute towards a healthy planet.

这是世界上对食品体系健康与可持续性最权威、最广泛、最持续全面的跨学科评估。当然，第二届EAT-Lancet委员会因此是我们知识持续更新的重要一步。我为这个委员会的许多事情感到自豪，特别是我们真正将社会科学纳入正义和公平的讨论，并且我们首次进行了——这可能听起来有点技术性——但我们首次进行了模型比对项目。对于那些非常熟悉气候评估的人来说，知道这是证据的核心引擎，它为我们提供了人类引起的气候影响（如干旱和洪水）的证明点，以及通过情景分析政策需要实现什么才能偏离危险的化石燃料排放导致的气候变化。所有这些是通过邀请世界各地的大型建模团队运行他们的大型气候模型，使用相同的叙事，以便我们可以比较结果，并在风险和解决方案路径上获得更好的精确度。

And this is the most authoritative, the broadest, most constant comprehensive interdisciplinary assessment of health and sustainability of the food system in the world. Of course, the second EAT Lancet Commission is thereby a major step forward towards the continuous update of our knowledge. I'm proud of many things in this commission, but in particular that we're getting really the social sciences on board on justice and equity, and also that we do the first, and this might sound a bit techy, but we do the first model into comparison project. For those of us who are working very much on the climate assessment knows that that's the engine room for the evidence that gives us the proof points on human caused climate impacts like droughts and floods, the proof points on what policy needs to accomplish to be able to deviate away from dangerous climate change in terms of fossil fuel emissions through this scenario analysis. All of this is done by inviting a large modeling groups around the world to run their big, big climate models with the same narrative so that we can compare the results and get much better precision on risk, but also on pathway to solutions.

现在我们已经为食品体系做了这件事。首次有八个大型建模团队共同合作，进行食品模型比对，探索如果世界食用健康食品，并且我们在食品生产及整个食品行业价值链中采用可持续实践，是否可能在行星边界内养活人类？这是一个简单的问题，但是一个非常复杂的分析领域。我们实际上首次进行了这种模型比对。

And now we've done it for the food system. For the first time we have eight large modeling groups, all working together, doing a food model into comparison on exploring if the world eats healthy food. And if we adopt sustainable practices for producing food and adding value across the value chain of the food industry, is it possible to feed humanity within planetary boundaries? And it's a simple question, but it's a very complex area of analytics. And we've actually performed that model into comparison for the first time.

所以是的，2019年和2025年之间的区别，正如Jacinto指出的，是一个更全面、更——如果我可以科学地使用这个词——更成熟的评估。

So yes, the difference between 2019 and 2025 is as Jacinto pointed out a much more comprehensive and a more, if I may use that word scientifically mature assessment.

这是一种很好的思考方式。听起来建模从第一个电子委员会以来发生了相当大的变化。

It's a lovely way to think about it. It sounds like the modeling has changed quite extensively from the first eCommission.

哦，是的。我的意思是，第一轮我们只有一个模型。那是由牛津大学的Marcus Springman领导的出色工作。他仍然是模型比对团队之一，但当时我们依赖一个工具，这实际上受到了合理的批评。结果就是，你知道，这对于探索未来这些情景的复杂性来说是不够的。

Oh yes. I mean, the first round we had one model. It was fantastic work led by Marcus Springman at Oxford University. He's still one of the model into comparison teams, but we relied on one tool at that time, and it was actually on good grounds criticized. And as a result that, you know, that that's not that's not enough for the complexity of exploring these scenarios into the future.

现在我们有了更广泛的基础。我的意思是，我们仍然有很大的不确定性范围。还有很多工作要做，但这是一个巨大的飞跃。

Now we have a much broader base. I mean, we still have large uncertainty ranges. There's still much more work to do, but it's a leap forward.

沃尔特，你能给我们讲讲‘食物正义’这个词吗？或许你能为我们解释一下？

Walter, could you perhaps tell us a little bit about the term food justice? Maybe could you unpack that for us?

基本上，在许多中低收入国家，人们每天都要费尽心思才能把健康食品摆上餐桌。当然，实际上在高收入国家，也有很多人这样做，不仅仅是低收入国家。但中低收入人群在食品上的支出占收入的比例要高得多。因此，食品系统中的微小扰动或中断，比如乌克兰战争带来的影响，在许多国家产生了巨大影响。所以我们正在关注这个问题。

Basically in low and middle income countries in so many places, people scrape to really put healthy food on their table every day. Of course, actually, in high income countries, a lot of people do that, not just low income countries as well. But the percentage of income that people in low in middle income spend on their food is much higher. So the small perturbations, small interruptions in food systems, like from the war in Ukraine, have big effects in many countries. So we're shining a light on this.

我们意识到会存在一些不公正，因为当我们为健康饮食设定高标准时，我们在查看任何数据之前就知道许多人负担不起。所以有些人建议我们应该降低目标，但我们说，不。我们不应该仅仅因为人们目前资源不足就妥协他们的健康。这是政府、公民社会以及每个人的责任，确保世界上每个人都能获得并负担得起健康饮食。凭借我们现有的资源，这绝对是可能的，但当然，全球资源分配非常不均衡。

The we realized that there was was going to be some injustice because when we put create a high bar for what a healthy diet is, we knew before we looked at any data that many people wouldn't be able to afford that. So some suggest that we should water down the targets, the goals, but we said, no. We shouldn't compromise health of people just because it's they don't have enough resources right at this moment. That's it's the job of government, civil society, everyone, to be sure that everyone around the world does have access and can afford a healthy diet. It's definitely possible with the resources we have, but there's a very unequal distribution, of course, in resources around the world.

我认为这揭示了人们在负担能力上的差异，并将其与健康结果直接联系起来。

And I think it it puts on the table these disparities in what people can afford, and it connects those very directly with health outcomes.

那么，你们希望人们从这个新委员会报告中带回家的关键信息是什么？

And so what for you all are the key messages that you'd like people to take home from this new commission?

首先，关键信息与我们撰写报告的顺序一致。关于健康饮食，我们基本上重申了第一次报告中关于健康饮食的描述，只是稍微调整了几个数字，但由于数据更多，并没有显著变化。但这次我们能够证明采用行星健康饮食对健康有重大益处。如果全球都采用，我们估计可以预防约27%的过早死亡，相当于每年约1500万成年人的死亡。

First of all, the key messages do go along with the order that we've written the report. First, on the healthy diet, we basically reaffirmed pretty closely what we saw the first time in terms of the description of a healthy diet. We tweaked a couple numbers a little bit, but not anything appreciably just given that we had a little more data. But this time around, we could document that there were major health benefits of adopting that planetary health diet. If we adopted that globally, we estimate that would prevent about twenty seven percent of premature deaths, which comes out to be about fifteen million deaths per year in adults.

儿童方面还会有更多数据，但这些数字较难估算，所以我们没有尝试纳入。我们确实看到在环境方面我们严重偏离轨道。现在我们对食品系统产生的温室气体排放有了更好的估算，约占温室气体总排放量的30%。这个比例很大，非常大。化石燃料仍是温室气体排放的最大来源，但30%的比例仍然足够大，如果我们不处理食品系统的温室气体排放，我们就无法真正拥有可持续的全球环境。

That would be some more in children, but those numbers were a little harder to estimate, so we didn't try to include them. We did see that we are very off track on the environmental side of the picture. We now have a better estimate for the greenhouse gas emissions from the food systems, which comes to about 30% of total greenhouse gas emissions. That's big, a big percent. Still, fossil fuels are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, but 30% is still large enough that if we don't deal with greenhouse gas emissions from the food system, we really can't have a sustainable global environment.

我们必须解决这个问题。我们现在有更多证据。大约有11个研究小组对食品系统进行了建模，估算如果我们继续按常规路径发展至2050年，与采用地球健康饮食相比会产生什么影响，同时考虑减少食物损失和浪费以及提高农业系统效率带来的益处。令人惊讶的是，如果我们做到所有这些，实际上可以减少生产食物所需的土地，虽然不是大幅减少，但方向是正确的。这非常重要，因为食品用地的扩张意味着我们在砍伐亚马逊雨林、砍伐非洲森林、在美国开垦更多土地。

We have to deal with that. The We have a lot more evidence. We have about 11 groups that have done modeling of food systems to estimate what the impacts would be going forward to 1950 if we continued on our business as usual pathway versus this planetary health diet, adding the beneficial impacts of reducing food loss and waste and also improving agricultural systems in terms of efficiency. And amazingly, if we did all of that, we could actually reduce the land required for producing food, not dramatically, but in the right direction. And that's really important because the expanding use of land for food means we're cutting down the Amazon, cutting down forests in Africa, plowing up more land in The United States.

这基本上是在释放温室气体，同时夺走了森林和草原，这些原本能帮助我们捕获碳并将其回归土壤。因此，通过这些非常广泛的建模方法，我们可以证明，遵循我们所描述的路径，将对环境参数产生非常积极的影响。然后，再看公正体系，我们更详细地记录了我们已经意识到的那些不公正现象，但现在更加清晰了。最后，我认为最大的挑战基本上是实施我们所学的知识。我们知道我们应该走的路径和方向，如果我们这样做，将对人类健康和环境带来巨大好处，但所需的行动将具有挑战性。

And that basically is releasing greenhouse gas emissions and also taking away the forest, the prairies that allowed us to capture carbon and put it back in the soil. So we actually can show with these very extensive modeling approaches that we would have very positive benefits on the environmental parameters by essentially following this pathway that we're describing. And then, again, looking at the justice system, we have documented in more detail the injustices that we realized were there, but it's much more clear. And finally, I think the biggest challenges are basically implementing what we've learned. We know the path down which we should go and the direction with which we should go, And there will be huge benefits for both human health and for the environment if we do that, but the actions that are needed are gonna be challenging.

这些行动必须在政府层面进行，包括全球、国家、州和城市。但个人也需要参与，既通过改变我们自己的饮食，比如向更健康、更好的方向转变，也要成为活动家。基本上，如果事情要改变，我们需要更多人在街头发声。

They'll have to occur at governmental levels, both global, national, state, city. But individuals need to be involved too, both by changing our own diets, for example, in a healthier, better direction, but also being activists. We need more wires on the streets, basically, if things are gonna change.

对我来说，关键信息是采取以人为本的方法，这就是为什么新增的社会公平与正义主题如此重要。因为如果我们想要健康的饮食，想要健康的人民和适合所有人的地球，实现这一目标的行动是由人们来完成的。因此，以人为本的方法非常重要，而且我们知道人民、社区在地理、文化等各方面都存在差异。所以，如果我们不把人们聚集起来共同努力，我们就无法取得进展。这份报告中有一个词我们没有使用。

The key message for me is to have a people centered approach, and this is why the new topic that was added of social equity and justice is so very important. Because if we would like to have healthy diets, if we would like to have healthy people and the planet that works for all of us, the actions to do this are the actions that are done by people. And therefore it's so important to have a people centred approach and we do know that the peoples, the communities are different geographically, culture and in all different ways. So if we do not bring the people together and work together, it's it just we we wouldn't we won't move further. And there's one word that we haven't used in this report.

嗯，也许这也是因为它非常基于数据和科学。但如果你看看我们作为一个世界如何管理COVID-19大流行，人们指出的最重要的问题和解决方案途径之一就是彼此信任。所以，如果我们作为人民不能团结起来，食品系统中的不同参与者不能相互信任以共同找到正确的解决方案，那么我们人类就迷失了方向，对吗？

Well, maybe it's also because it's very much based on data and science. But if you look at how we as a world manage the COVID-nineteen pandemic, one of the most important issues that people and ways for solutions that people pointed towards is having trust in each other. So if we as people do not get together, different actors within the food systems, and trust each other to work together the proper solutions, then we are lost as a human race. Right?

所以这种公正与团结的概念对于这个新的（报告/方向）非常核心

So this kind of notion of justice and togetherness is very central to this new

核心是煽动性的。说了实话。是的。当然，饮食很重要，农业也很重要。地球和地球边界也很重要，但所有这些都属于人们采取的行动。

inflammatory core. Said truth. Yeah. And, of course, diets are important, and agriculture is important. The planet and the planetary boundaries are important, but all these belong in actions that are taken by people.

我确实认为，确保整个食品系统中的人们能够集体采取正确行动的一种方式是倾听，当然，还要相互信任并共同合作。

I do think one way to make sure that could be collectively we have the right actions by people all across the food systems is to listen, of course, and to trust each other and work together collectively.

对我来说，可能有三项基本原则。第一是我们站在更坚实的科学基础上，量化健康饮食，而《地球健康饮食》并不是规定任何人应该吃什么，而是为你提供了一个宽广的餐盘，你可以用世界各地不同地理和社会中无限多样、精彩纷呈的饮食文化来填充它，但它给了你一个清晰的指南。如果你关心自己、家人、社会的健康，尽量保持在这些边界内，你就有最大的机会获得健康的生活。第二是我们也量化了同样的内容——为健康的地球进行量化。

To me, there are probably three fundamentals. Number one is that we stand on an even more robust scientific floor with regards to quantifying healthy diets and that the Planetary Health Diet is not dictating what anyone should eat, but it gives you the broad plate that you can fill with an infinite number of fantastically diverse dietary cultures from different geographies and societies around the world, but it gives you a clear guide. If you care about your own, your family's, your, your society's health, try to stay within these boundaries and you have the highest chance of healthy livelihoods. And the second is that we quantify also the same. Quantifications for a healthy planet.

这是前所未有的，量化所有地球边界的份额，我甚至称之为责任。食品系统在投资可持续实践时需要满足什么？这是第一项成就，为食品系统的健康、可持续未来提供了科学基础。所以我们有了一些可以衡量的标准。第二肯定是这个问题：今天世界上有90亿共同公民，到本世纪中叶可能会达到95亿，仍有30亿人遭受营养不良，其中营养不良人数仍保持在10亿，不健康饮食是世界上最大的流行病。

And that has never been done before to quantify for all the planetary boundaries, the share, the, I would even call the responsibility. What does the food system needs to meet when it comes to investing in sustainable practices? And that is the accomplishment number one to give that scientific foundation for a healthy, sustainable future for the food system. So we have something to measure against. Second is, is definitely the question of, we're today 9,000,000,000 co citizens in the world who may be heading to 9.5, you know, by the mid of this century, we have 3,000,000,000 people suffering from malnutrition, undernutritionist, still being at the one billion mark, unhealthy diets being the largest epidemic in the world.

我们估计每年有高达1500万人因不健康食品而过早失去生命。这实际上是一个令人震惊的数字。这个数字超过了COVID大流行期间的年均悲剧性损失人数。而这只是在我们允许它发生的情况下发生的。所以当然，这里的公平维度、获取权利以及我们如何配置全球、区域、地方的食品市场、向公民提供食品信息以及整个食品分配方式，以使人们能够吃到健康饮食。

We we estimate that up to fifteen million people prematurely lose their lives each year because of unhealthy food. It's a shocking number actually. It's a number that exceeds the number of tragic losses during the COVID pandemic when it comes to the annual rate of loss. And this is just happening with us just allowing it to occur. So of course, the the equity dimension here and and and the right of access and and how to how do we configure the the global, the regional, the local food markets and information to citizens on food and the whole distribution of food in ways that enable people to eat healthy, diets.

所以我认为这是第二个关键信息。然后第三个是，你已经听我表达过我对未来的热情。我认为我们展示的是，全球食品系统的转型以回到地球边界的安全操作空间确实具有挑战性。实际上，建模的关键结果表明，我们几乎无法回归。这不是不可能的，但需要巨大的努力，这些努力包括减少食物浪费、转向健康饮食。

So I think that's the second key message. And then the third one is, and you've heard me already kind of express my passion for the future. I think what we're showing is that a transformation of the global food system to come back into the safe operating space of planetary boundaries is really challenging. Actually, the key results of the modeling is that we can barely return. It is not impossible, but it will require massive efforts and these efforts cut across reducing food waste, transitioning to healthy diets.

这是我们真正兴奋的结论之一：吃健康食品可以减少对地球边界的压力，你会得到一个双赢的结果。你拥有更健康的生活，并为健康的地球做出贡献。但再次强调，转型食品系统，它如此固守于其大型工业化单一栽培结构，建模显示这是一个重大、重大的挑战。所以机会是存在的。我们有可扩展的解决方案，但不应低估挑战。

And that's one of the conclusions which we're really excited about that eating healthy food reduces pressure on the planet to boundaries and you get a win win outcome. You have healthier lives and contribute to a healthy planet. But again, to transform the food system, which is so stuck in its large industrial monoculture structure is admittedly, and the modeling shows that a major, major challenge. So the opportunities are there. We have scalable solutions, but one should not underestimate the challenge.

此外，我认为，这是经典委员会的第三个关键信息。我们应该记住，我们甚至已经绘制并综合了可扩展、可持续的实践。因此，我们确实展示了我们已尝试扫描所有可用机会，并将其融入模型和结果中，结果表明，嘿，你知道，这是可以实现的，但会非常接近。我认为这为我们提供了大量科学证据，支持或推动经济体之间采取更雄心勃勃的政策制定和行动，以及所有真正改变粮食系统方向的努力。

That also, I think, third, in my view, key message from the classic commission. And we should remember that we've even mapped, done a synthesis of scalable, sustainable practices. So we're really showing that we've tried to scan through all the opportunities we have and plug that into the models and outcomes, a result that shows that, hey, you know, it can be done, but it will be a close one. And I think that gives us a lot of scientific evidence in support or for more ambitious policy making more ambitious actions among economies and then all efforts to really change the direction of the food system.

如果我们不做任何改变，一切照旧会是什么样子？

And what does business as usual look like if we don't make any changes?

一切照旧的路径非常令人担忧。不仅仅是担忧。我认为，我们有很高的确定性，全球气候将出现非常巨大的变化。例如，我们不确定到2021年具体会达到什么数字，但其中一些变化是毁灭性的。但问题在于这些变化不是线性的。

The business as usual pathway is very, worrisome. Not just worrisome. It I think it's very with a high level of certainty, we are going to see very great increases in global climates. For example, there's we're not sure exactly what number we would end up with by 2021, for example, but and some of them are very devastating. But the problem is that the changes are not linear.

它们正在加速，这使得预测非常困难。它们会走向极端，几乎使地球变得无法居住，即使按照我们当前路径的最佳情况，也会带来毁灭性的变化。世界部分地区将变得真正无法居住。水资源极度匮乏已经是世界部分地区的一个极端问题，而且正在蔓延，包括中东，还有美国西南部以及世界许多其他地方。我们肯定正在经历日益增加的干旱，但同时也有洪水。

They're accelerating, which makes prediction very hard. They go to a very extreme, almost unlivable planet to still even the best case scenario given the current path we're on, very devastating changes. Parts of the world will become really unlivable. Water is already extreme lack of water is an extreme problem in parts of the world already, and that's spreading, including The Middle East, but also Southwestern United States, many other places around the world. We're definitely having increasing droughts, but also floods at the same time.

除非我们做出重大的路线修正，否则我们的子孙后代的未来看起来并不乐观。

The future for our children and grandchildren does not look good unless we make major course corrections.

如果我们继续这样下去，我们知道地球将不再适合我们生存，而我们，人类，将采取行动导致这个方向。同样，如果我们希望所有人都健康，能够获得充足、营养且安全的食物，并考虑到他们的文化、地理和季节，那么如果我们让不同的群体共同努力，汇集他们的集体知识，我们就可以作为一个团体共同寻找新的解决方案和创新，使我们更接近实现报告中提到的三个主要部分：全民健康饮食、可持续的地球，以及考虑到所有人的正义和社会公平，不让任何人掉队？

If we carry on as we do we do know that the planet as we have it will not work for us, and we will be and we, the people, would be taking actions that lead in this directions in this direction. The same holds true also for wanting all people to be healthy, to have access to sufficient, nutritious, and safe foods, and taking into consideration their culture, taking into consideration their geographies, their seasons. So if we would have the different groups of people working together and bringing in their collective knowledge, then we can, as a group, work together to find new solutions and new innovations that can bring us further on the right path to having, as the three major parts of the report says, healthy diets for all, sustainable planets, and also taking into account the justice and social equity of all people leaving no one behind?

是的。嗯，我们有一个来自大西洋委员会的严峻结果，即我们首次量化了食品生产在所有九个行星边界中的份额。我们表明，粮食系统是突破九个行星边界中五个的主要全球原因。这实际上相当令人震惊，粮食系统如此之大，以至于它是生物多样性丧失的最大单一原因。也是我们扩张土地进入原始自然（如森林砍伐和湿地排水）的最大单一原因。

Yes. Well, we have one dire result from the Atlantic Commission, which is that for the first time we quantify the share of food production across all the nine planetary boundaries. And we show that the food system is the primary global cause for breaching five of the nine planetary boundaries. That is quite shocking actually that the food system is so large that it's the single largest cause for losing biodiversity. The single largest cause for us expanding land into intact nature like deforestation and draining wet.

它是迄今为止最大的淡水消耗者，特别是蓝水，即地下水、河流和湖泊中的水资源。如果将二氧化碳和非二氧化碳气体（尤其是甲烷和一氧化二氮）都计算在内，它实际上是排放温室气体的最大经济部门。此外，它还是土地系统变化的首要因素，这使其整体上成为决定气候系统稳定性以及广义可持续性结果的重要参与者之一。因此，农业系统承担着巨大的责任。当我们审视整个地球时，我们得出结论：九个边界中有六个已被突破。

It's the, by far number one consumer of freshwater, particularly blue water, the water in groundwater rivers and lakes. It is the single largest economic sector actually emitting greenhouse gases if you include both carbon dioxide and the non CO two gases, particularly methane and nitrous oxide. And then it is the number one part of land system change, which makes it overall one of the big players determining the outcome for the stability of the climate system, but also for sustainability at large. So that places a lot of responsibility on the agricultural system. When you look at the planet as a whole, we conclude that six of the nine boundaries are transgressed.

因此，食品系统可能不是化学物质超载的主导原因。但我们确实量化了农业的份额，并特别研究了农药和抗生素的过度使用，得出结论：对于农药和抗生素，农业系统显然是主导原因。因此，即使在化学污染方面，食品系统也是造成影响的重大原因。当然，人们可以将其视为负面因素，即整体上不可持续。我的意思是，世界各地有许多优秀的再生可持续农业实践。但如果你汇总全球情况，我们仍然遵循着不可持续的粮食生产路径，这是将整个地球稳定性置于风险之中的主要原因，但你可以扭转这一局面。

So the boundary that the food system is potentially not the dominant cause for is the overloading of chemicals. But we do quantify the agricultural share and look particularly into pesticides and antibiotic overuse of antibiotics and conclude there that of course for pesticides and antibiotics, the agricultural system is by far the dominant cause. So even when it comes to chemical pollution, you have areas where the food system is a big cause for impact. So one can take that as a negative, of course, that to be unsustainable overall, I mean, have a lot of great regenerative sustainable agricultural practices around the world. But if you aggregate the whole world, we're still following a pathway of unsustainable food production being a predominant cause for putting the stability of the entire planet at risk, but you can turn that around.

这正是《柳叶刀》委员会所做的，他们也表示，这意味着食品系统或我们生产粮食的方式可以，并且实际上必须成为解决方案的一部分。我们展示了可扩展的解决方案。令人兴奋的是，我们不仅拥有可扩展的解决方案来避免农业扩张、防止生物多样性丧失、更高效地消耗淡水，还实现了氮和磷的循环实践，从而防止它们泄漏到水道和沿海区域。所有这些实践都已绘制出来，我们证明它们存在且可以扩展。

And that is what the Lancet Commission does to say also, well, that means also that the food system or the agriculture how we produce food can be, and actually must be part of the solution. And we show that we have scalable solutions. And the exciting part here, just to tick that off, not only do we have scalable solutions to avoid expanding agriculture, avoid losing biodiversity, consuming fresh water more efficiently, having circular practices for nitrogen and phosphorus. So we don't leak that out into waterways and the coastal zones. All of these practices are mapped and we show that they exist and can be scaled.

不仅如此，越来越多的证据表明，这些实践不会牺牲产量水平。它们可以被采用并保持产量水平不变。在许多情况下，通过建立更具韧性的农业系统，使其更能应对冲击和压力，从而增加产量，特别是通过基于多样化的种植系统、具有高度生态完整性的缓冲带，以及拥有更多极端洪水缓冲带等景观。因此，我认为这是一个非常积极的信息。挑战在于我们如何转向并开始朝着新方向前进？

But not only that, there's increasing evidence that they do not sacrifice yield levels. They can be adopted and keep yield levels intact. And in many cases, increasing that, particularly by building more resilience by making the farming systems more able to deal with shocks and stresses because they based more on diverse cropping systems, buffer zones with high degree of ecological integrity with landscapes that have more buffer zones for extreme floods, etcetera. So it's, I would argue a very positive message. The challenge is how do we turn the corner and start moving in a new direction?

现在，第一个EAT-Lancet委员会显然引起了巨大轰动。经过几年的消化（请原谅这个双关语），你对该委员会的反响有何看法？

Now the first EAT Lancet commission obviously caused a massive splash. How do you feel about how that commission was received now that you've had a few years to digest it, if you'll forgive the pun?

是的。嗯，该委员会确实产生了巨大影响。多年来我参与了许多报告和委员会的工作，而这份报告的影响力显然比其他任何我参与的报告高出一个数量级。部分原因我认为是时机和地点恰到好处，当时许多人正在反思。我们在健康方面存在问题，在环境方面也存在问题。

Yeah. Well, the commission definitely had a big impact that I've worked on lots of reports and commissions and things over the years, and this was clearly an order of magnitude more impactful than any of the other reports that I've participated in. Partly that's I think it was the right time and the right place that a lot of people were reeling. We had problems on the health side. We had problems on the environment side.

这些问题可能相互关联，但这是我们第一次将所有这些不同领域的专家聚集在一起，并将各部分整合到一份报告中。它在科学文献中被引用超过11,000次（具体数字我不清楚，但引用次数非常多）。我甚至不知道科学论文在政策领域的引用次数还有一个引用指数。在这方面，我们是有史以来排名前十的科学论文之一。

They probably had something to do with each other, but that was this was really the first time that we brought experts in all these different areas together and put the pieces in into one report. And it's had way over 11,000 citations. I don't know the exact number, but a huge number of citations in the scientific literature. It's also been I didn't even know there was a citation index for the number of times scientific papers have been cited in the policy area. And we were in the top 10, I think, of all time scientific papers that way.

它确实产生了影响，并且其中很大一部分是积极的。我认为从政府到地方机构的许多组织都在使用大西洋委员会的报告作为蓝图，来规划他们的餐饮服务提供什么、采购什么，以及制定有助于在国家层面支持正确方向行动的政策。当然，在美国，我们的国家政府甚至不承认气候变化，并且正在尽一切努力加速气候变化，摧毁已经建成并准备投入使用的风力发电机的进展。这些项目被阻挠，无法完成。但世界上许多地方实际上正在朝着正确的方向前进。

It definitely had impact and a huge proportion of that was positive. And I think many organizations from governments down to local institutions are using the Atlantic Commission report as a blueprint for planning what they serve in their food services, what they purchase, policies that would help support actions in the right direction at the national level. Of course, in The United States, our national government doesn't even recognize climate change and is doing everything they can to accelerate climate change, demolishing progress or windmills that are mostly built and ready to put into action. Those are being blocked, and it can't be finished. But lots of the world is actually moving forward in the right direction.

有很多积极的事情正在朝着正确的方向发展。因此，我们确实需要将全球正在发生的事情联系起来，才能看到全貌。但我们也遇到了一些预料之中的阻力。我们知道牛肉行业会对我们发布的内容大为不满，他们非常强大，并且当然是我们在许多阻碍活动背后看到的推手。但我认为这很重要。

There's a lot of positive things happening in the right direction. So we really have to connect what's going on globally to see the full picture. But we also got some expected pushbacks too. The beef industry is we knew they would beef quite a bit about what we were publishing, And that's that they're very powerful and, of course, are behind a lot of these obstruction activities that we're seeing. But I think it's important.

我认为这激发了一些互动，甚至让牛肉行业的一些人意识到，一切照旧是不可行的。将适量红肉和牛肉纳入行星健康饮食是他们可以努力的方向，尝试提高质量并减少他们生产过程中对环境的影响。所以这不是全有或全无。一切都可以讨论，但我们真正谈论的是食物比例的改变。这并不意味着每个人、每个国家都需要减少红肉消费。

We've that stimulated some interaction that has, I think, even some people in the beef industry realize that business as usual is not viable. And having some modest amounts of red meat and beef as was included in a planetary health diet is something that they could work with trying to improve the quality and reduce the environmental impacts of what they are producing. So it's not all or nothing. Everything is on the table, but we're really talking about shifts in proportions of food. And that doesn't mean that everybody needs that every country needs to reduce their consumption of red meat.

例如，东南亚就低于目标数量。实际上，如果他们愿意的话——我并不是说这一定是好事——如果他们愿意，他们可以稍微增加一点红肉消费。

Southeast Asia, for example, is below the target number. And there's actually if they wanted to, I'm not that's not necessarily a good thing. If they wanted to, they could increase their red meat consumption a little bit.

许多人，直到今天，仍然会参考全球报告来寻找自己的空间在哪里？我的国家空间在哪里？我的社区空间在哪里？这份新报告也将面临同样的情况。因为请记住，这份报告和2019年2月之前的那份报告，它们都是全球性的报告，并且会不断发展。

Many people, and still today, look towards a global report to see where is the space for me? Where is the space for my country? Where is the space for my community? And that will be the same of this new report. Because remember this report and the one before 02/2019, they will grow their global reports.

因此，当报告完成并且它是一个审视全球问题的全球性报告时，我们必须将其落实到地方层面。我认为最好的落实方式是在国家层面，因为国家政府需要与国内的社区、国内的行动者一起采取必要的行动。话虽如此，我们处理的是食物，是农业，是为地球寻找解决方案，这与我们如何使用地球、如何种植食物、如何使用地球资源密切相关。那么，这里有不同的群体，有非常贫困和脆弱的群体，必须让他们在谈判桌上有一席之地，他们的声音必须被听到，我们也必须为他们找到非常好和明智的前进方式。但在另一端，我们还有政府、政府官员以及大型公司，它们是粮食系统的主要组成部分。

So when the report is done and it's a global it's looking at issues globally, we have to bring that down. And I think the best way to bring that down is at national level because national governments, together with communities in their country, together with actors in their country need to take the actions that are necessary. When that is said, we are dealing with food, we are dealing with agriculture, we are dealing with solutions for the planet, which is much related to how we use the planet, how we grow food, how we use the resources of the planet, then there are different populations group and you have the very poor and vulnerable who must be given a seat at the table and their voices must be heard and they must also, we must find very good and smart ways for them to move forward. But we also have at the other ends, government and government and government officials and also big corporations, which are a major part of food systems.

首先，我发现这非常令人安心，它表明存在一种——如果我可以用这个有点傻的词的话——‘渴望’，渴望获得更多关于……的科学知识，我认为在这个案例中，确实是关于什么构成了健康饮食，但也有一种将粮食系统提升到行星尺度并证明粮食系统实际上是行星尺度上一个因素的兴奋和兴趣。当然，正如你所说，它成为了《柳叶刀》被引用最多的报告之一，并且在政策领域最常被引用的科学报告中名列前十。所以，是的，我认为总的来说表明科学正在及时地进步。话虽如此，我们在第二个委员会中付出了很多努力，但也存在一些误解，其中一些是故意的。最根本的误解之一是，我们首次敢于基于拥有的大量证据来量化健康饮食。

And to begin with, I found that to be very reassuring that it showed that there is a hunger, if I may use that silly word, for more scientific knowledge about, I think in this case, was really about what constitutes a healthy diet, but also an excitement and interest in bringing the food system to that planetary scale and showing the proof points that the food system is actually a factor at the planetary scale. Of course, as you say, it became one of the most cited Lancet reports and it scored among the top 10 most referred to scientific reports in the policy domain. So yes, I think overall showed that there is a timely advancement of the science. That said, what we have spent a lot of effort in the second commission, there were some misinterpretations, some of them deliberate. And one of the most fundamental was that we dared for the first time, based on the fact that we had so much evidence to quantify healthy diets.

我们甚至将其称为行星健康饮食。这被一些人错误地解读为我们在居高临下地指手画脚，说你们必须吃这种饮食。我们承认当时的沟通方式确实容易招致这种批评，因为我们提到地中海饮食非常接近植物性健康饮食，而且它是一种弹性素食。这给人一种印象，觉得这像是北方富裕都市人的饮食指南，这是个错误，因为我们量化行星健康饮食是基于最佳证据，不论你居住何处、饮食习惯如何或处于何种生态气候带。这次我们非常注重准确传达内容，正如我们一直讨论的那样：这为任何地方、任何饮食方式的个体提供了实现最健康结果的边界条件。

And we called it even a planetary health diet. And that was wrongly by some interpreted as if we were pointing fingers from above to say, thou must eat this diet. And we did admittedly communicate it in a way that welcomed that critique because we were talking about the Mediterranean diet being very close to the planty health diet and that it was a flexitarian diet. And it kind of gave this impression that it was a bit of a Northern wealthy urbanite kind of dietary guideline, which was a mistake because we quantify the PaniHealth diet based on the best evidence, irrespective of where you live, what you eat and what ecological or hydro climatic zone you reside in. And that has been a very strong focus this time to communicate the content exactly as we've been discussing it so far that this provides the boundary conditions for the healthiest outcome for any individual living anywhere, eating any diet.

我们甚至在报告中非常强调，我们发现这实际上仍处于科学前沿。我预见第三次EAT-Lancet委员会将会评估：如果我们回归更传统的饮食，那些传统本土饮食往往比我们现代更工业化、加工化和简化的饮食更接近行星健康饮食。我认为这是我们第一轮工作中学到的经验。所以既有积极面也有消极面。最后我想说——我预计这次也会发生——食物是一个能吸引大众的话题，但同时这里也涉及强大的利益集团。

And we're even emphasizing very strongly in the report that what we find is that's actually still on the scientific frontier. I foresee that to come in the third eat Lancet commission as an assessment that if we return to more traditional diets, that traditional indigenous local diets are often closer to the mental health diet than our modern, more industrialized, processed and simplified diets. So I think that is something that we've learned from the first round. So there were both positives and negatives. And then finally to say, which I foresee will happen this time around as well, is that food is a topic that engages people in general, but also that there are big powerful interests here.

这里有整个肉类行业，有大型零售公司。全球食品行业规模庞大，它们也非常积极地参与有关食物的信息传播。第一轮时就发生了这种情况，第二轮肯定也会发生。

You have the whole meat industry, big retail companies you have. There's a large global food industry that is very actively involved in also communicating messaging around food. And that happened the first round and will certainly happen also the second round.

那么你认为未来会怎样？第三次EAT-Lancet报告会是怎样的？

And so what do you think the future holds? What does EAT Lancet three look like?

相比你问我的第一份报告时期（现在是2025年，上一份报告是2019年），我认为如今在国家层面、民众之间以及全球范围内，人们对健康饮食重要性的认识提高了。对于需要做什么来确保地球未来能为我们和所有民族服务，也有了更好的认识。所以这种理解我认为已经广泛得多，很多人都有了这种意识。

I do think where we are today, compared to where we were you asked me about the first report, which is now we're in 2025, and we the last report was in 2019. I do think at at country level among people and globally, there's a better recognition of the importance of healthy diets. There's a better recognition of what we need to do to ensure that our planet has works for us moving forward and for all peoples. So that understanding, I think, is much more widespread. It's among many.

我也认为各国都有兴趣推进解决方案来确保这一点。我还看到年轻人以及许多不同人群的参与度更高了。举个例子，我与土著和传统群体在粮食系统方面合作，我确实看到了更深的理解，他们正在为自己争取更好的空间，让他们眼中的解决方案不仅能为自己所用，也能为他人提供解决之道。所以我非常乐观。我知道约翰刚告诉我们又有一个行星边界被突破了，我对此感到非常非常难过。

And I do think that countries are interested in moving forward with solutions to ensure this. And also I see a greater engagement of youth and I see a greater engagement of many different population groups. If I would take for example, I work with indigenous and traditional groups, for example, with respect to food systems, and I do see a greater understanding, and they're seeking a better space for themselves as to how they what they see as solutions moving forward can be used, not just by themselves, but also give solutions for others. So I'm very optimistic. I know Johan just told us about another planetary boundary being transgressed, and I was very, very unhappy about that.

但我持积极态度。正如我所说，我对年轻一代也持积极态度。例如，我对学童之间正在形成的理解也持积极态度。而这将引向什么样的积极行动呢？

But I'm positive. And as I said, I'm positive also with younger generations. I'm positive also with the understanding among that's being done among school children, for example. And and that what kinds of actions that would lead to positive actions?

首先，我完全致力于推动我们开展第三次评估工作。它设立了一个委员会。我的意思是，当我们最初与沃尔特·威利特、古内斯·杜达伦以及当时的团队提出这个想法时，我们就认为，如果成功的话，它本质上将成为一个机构，可以将其视为对食品进行定期全球科学评估的机制。所以，是的，我确实希望我们将开始围绕第三次EAT-Lancet委员会制定战略。这会带我们走向何方？

Well to begin with I am absolutely committed for us to work towards a third. It has a commission. I mean when when we even when we came up with the idea with Walt Willett and Gunes Dudalen and, and well the team at the time, we thought of this as, you know, if, if we succeed that it would become essentially an institution that, that you could think of a, repeated global scientific assessment on food. So, so yes, I definitely hope that we will, embark on starting to strategize around a third economic asset commission. What, where will that take us?

首先，我认为有一些基础要素，就像IPCC（政府间气候变化专门委员会）一样，它现在正在筹备第七次评估报告，其结构包括第一工作组负责物理学基础，我认为这对我们来说相当于为量化可持续粮食系统中的健康膳食设定底线。这就是第一工作组的对等部分。然后你有第二工作组负责气候变化的影响。而我们这里是对人类的影响、对生态系统的影响。接着是未来部分，以及IPCC中通往安全着陆路径的第三工作组，我们在EAT-Lancet委员会中也同样有情景建模的部分。

To begin with, I think there are some fundamentals that just like the IPCC, which is now preparing its seventh report has a structure of working one on the physics, which I think is the equivalent for us on setting the floor of quantifying healthy diets from sustainable food systems. That's the equivalent of the working group one. And then you have the working group two on impacts of climate change. And here we have the impacts on people, impacts on ecosystems. And then you have the future and then the pathways to a safe landing working group three in the IPCC and that's what we have in the EAT Lancet Commission as well with the scenario modeling.

IPCC也越来越多地关注公平和正义维度，我预见这将继续是EAT-Lancet工作的重中之重。我认为持续提升知识水平是有价值的。但是，你说得对。除了这些基础板块之外，肯定还会有新的方向指引。如果你问我我认为我们在向何处发展，不幸的是，我们仍然走在一条偏离轨道的道路上。

IPCC is also increasingly looking into, you know, equity and justice dimensions and I foresee that that to be a continued high priority for the Atlantic work. I think there's a value of continuously rising the state of knowledge. But, but you're right. There will certainly be new pointers forward apart from these fundamental blocks. If you ask me where I think that we're moving, we're unfortunately still on a path.

我也试图保持乐观。我同意有理由乐观，因为解决方案是存在的，并且我们知道踏上可持续、健康的粮食道路会带来多重益处。但我也得出结论，我们仍然面临阻力。曲线仍然在向错误的方向移动。我们仍在远离而不是回归安全操作空间。

I'm trying to be optimistic as well. And I agree that there is reason for optimism in the sense that the solutions are there and we know we have multiple benefits of embarking on a sustainable, healthy food pathway. But I do conclude also that we still have headwinds. We're still, the curves are still moving in the wrong direction. We're still moving further away from the safe operating space than coming back.

遭受苦难的人数在增加而非减少。因此我预见，科学界，包括EAT-Lancet委员会的工作，必须越来越多地研究加速变革的方法。我们如何，是否存在社会临界点或积极临界点，能够以社会-环境的方式加速这一进程？我们如何改变这种渐进式的方式？我的意思是，即使我们取得了一些成功，有很多社区采纳健康膳食、更多本地生产食品和更具韧性的农业系统的成功案例。

We have more people suffering than coming back. So I do foresee that, science must increasingly also in the Atlantic commission work, look into, you know, ways of accelerating change. How do we, are there social tipping points or positive tipping points that can in a social environmental way accelerate the pathway? How do we change this incremental? I mean, even if we are making success to them, plenty of successes of communities adopting healthy diets and more locally produced foods and more resilient agricultural systems.

有非常多优秀的范例，但它们没有形成合力。它们没有规模化，也没有改变整体的进程轨迹。我认为这必须日益成为一个焦点，它在EAT-Lancet委员会第一次报告中有一章，第二次报告中也有，但我认为它在未来可能会扮演更重要的角色。我们真正需要拉动哪些变革杠杆来改变方向？因为每过去一年而没有取得进展，事情就变得越发紧迫。

There are so many great examples, but they're not adding up. They're not scaling and they're not changing the course of travel. And I think that must be increasingly a focus and it has had a chapter in the Atlanta commission one and it has had a chapter commission two, but I think it may play an even larger role in the future. What are the levers of change that we really need to turn to change the direction? Because for every year that passes without making progress, the more urgent it becomes as well.

沃尔特（Walter），约翰（Johan），非常感谢你们加入我们，并抽时间参与播客节目。我们非常感激，并预祝新的EAT-Lancet委员会报告顺利发布。非常感谢你们今天加入《柳叶刀之声》。如果您对《柳叶刀》的更多播客感兴趣，可以访问 thelancet.com/podcast，您会找到我们所有来自《柳叶刀》各期刊的节目。再次感谢你们的参与。

Walter, Johan, thanks so much for joining us and giving us your time here on the podcast. We really appreciate it, and best of luck for the publication of the New Eat Lancet Commission. Well, thanks so much for joining us on The Lancet Voice today. If you're interested in more podcasts from The Lancet, you can go to thelancet.com/podcast where you'll find all our offerings from across every Lancet journal. Thanks again for joining us.

保重，我们下次再见。

Take care, and we'll see you next time.