Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 6;17(8):e89457.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.89457. eCollection 2025 Aug.

Meat Attachment and Consumption Patterns in Primary Care: A Cross-Sectional Study

Paul Sebo  1 , Bruno Delaunay  1 , Benoit Tudrej  2 , Mohamed Amir Moussa  1 , Hubert Maisonneuve  1
Affiliations

Meat Attachment and Consumption Patterns in Primary Care: A Cross-Sectional Study

Paul Sebo et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Background: Meat consumption is deeply embedded in many cultures but poses significant health and environmental challenges. This study investigates the association between attachment to meat, as measured by the validated French Meat Attachment Questionnaire (MAQ), and actual meat consumption among primary care patients.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in primary care practices in Geneva, Switzerland, from January to May 2024. A total of 425 patients were invited to participate. Participants were non-urgent, French-speaking, consecutive adult patients who were able to understand the study and provide written informed consent, and data were collected using self-administered questionnaires during routine consultations. The French version of the 16-item MAQ (MAQ-16) was used to assess attachment to meat, and meat consumption patterns for poultry, beef, veal, and pork were measured. ANOVA and multivariable linear regressions were conducted to examine associations between meat attachment and consumption.

Results: Of the 425 invited patients, 336 accepted the invitation, resulting in a participation rate of 79%. The sample comprised 61% women, with a median age of 53 years. Participants had a mean MAQ score of 3.3 (SD: 0.7), with male individuals reporting significantly higher scores than female individuals (3.5 vs. 3.2, adjusted difference: 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2-0.6), adjusted p-value<0.001). Poultry was the most frequently consumed meat, with 39% of participants consuming it more than once a week. Men reported higher meat consumption across all types examined. Higher MAQ scores were significantly associated with greater meat consumption; for example, those consuming poultry more than once per week had a mean score of 3.5 compared to 2.7 for non-consumers (adjusted difference: 0.8 (95% CI: 0.6-0.9), adjusted p-value<0.001).

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a strong emotional attachment to meat is significantly associated with higher levels of meat consumption. Understanding these psychological factors can inform public health strategies aimed at promoting dietary changes, addressing both health outcomes and environmental sustainability.

Keywords: gender; maq; meat attachment; meat attitude; meat consumption; primary care; switzerland.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Human subjects: Informed consent for treatment and open access publication was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Cantonal Research Ethics Commission of Geneva issued approval 2023-01941. Ethical approval: The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University College of General Practice at Claude Bernard University (Project ID: IRB 2023-01-03-01) and was granted a waiver from the Cantonal Research Ethics Commission of Geneva (Project ID: 2023-01941). Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flowchart of the study.
PCP, primary care physician.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. The benefits and burdens of meat consumption: a historical analysis. Coyle C, McKinstry A. Voices Bioeth. 2023;9
    1. Consumer attitudes towards environmental concerns of meat consumption: a systematic review. Sanchez-Sabate R, Sabaté J. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors. Stoll-Kleemann S, Schmidt UJ. Reg Environ Change. 2017;17:1261–1277.
    1. Association between total, processed, red and white meat consumption and all-cause, CVD and IHD mortality: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Abete I, Romaguera D, Vieira AR, Lopez de Munain A, Norat T. Br J Nutr. 2014;112:762–775. - PubMed
    1. Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat. Bouvard V, Loomis D, Guyton KZ, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:1599–1600. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources