Concurso: ¿Cómo cambiarías el mundo? - Contest: How would you change the world?

First and foremost, I would launch a social campaign using various communication channels, with the overall aim of encouraging change for the benefit of society as a whole. The specific objectives would be geared towards raising awareness and promoting positive changes in society for the common good through education, seeking to unite people around an environmental cause.

The topics to be covered in the campaign would be: climate change, diets, and gut microbiota.

It is the most widely known, but the vast majority of people are unclear about the definitions of “greenhouse effect,” “global warming,” and “climate change,” and may not even be able to discern the differences between them.

The emphasis of the topic to be developed would be that global warming caused by greenhouse gases is causing a rise in temperature (or global warming), which is actually the manifestation of climate change that is already being perceived in changes in the intensity and frequency of swirling clouds (for example, hurricanes), variations in rainy seasons, and the melting of glaciers. More information on this topic can be found in a post I wrote almost six years ago, which can be read by clicking here.

_{Credit: Animated image made in CorelDRAW X8 and Photoshop CC 2017 from another with authorship NASA/JPL-Caltech (The Causes of Climate Change) NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted.}

It would be very important to take into account the dissemination of information on the First Academic Report on Climate Change in Venezuela (2018) by the Venezuelan scientific institution Academy of Physical, Mathematical, and Natural Sciences, and as soon as it is published in 2026, information on the Second Academic Report on Climate Change in Venezuela (2025), the Summary for policymakers on climate change and the Cross-cutting and sectoral guidelines and strategies for addressing climate change. I would also use both reports to make comparisons to show the evolution of climate change in the years between the two reports.

This topic is regularly known and would involve raising awareness that diets influence not only health but also greenhouse gas emissions. In general, summarizing the topics that would be included in the campaign, it would report that plant-based foods are associated with lower greenhouse gas emissions than meat, especially from ruminant animals, and that this has led climate change experts to recommend a reduction in meat consumption, especially from cattle and sheep that produce methane. I would emphasize that the recommendation to reduce meat consumption in the human diet is consistent with dietary guidelines to increase consumption of vegetables (legumes, fruits, nuts, whole products) and with knowledge about Mediterranean dietary patterns, whose health benefits are well documented.

Of course, I would point out that eating red meat (beef, veal, pork, lamb) provides important nutrients for the diet, such as essential amino acids, vitamins (including B12), and minerals (such as iron and zinc) , but also that processed red meat (ham, sausages, bacon, salami, among others) undergoes treatments (curing, smoking, salting, or the use of chemical preservatives and additives) to improve its shelf life and/or taste. In general, I would like to point out that high consumption of red meat, and especially processed meat, is associated with an increased risk of several major chronic diseases and premature mortality, because many people are unaware that in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer officially classified, based on sufficient evidence, processed meats as “carcinogenic to humans” in Group 1 along with tobacco, and raw meats, based on limited evidence, in Group 2A as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” with positive associations between red meat consumption and colon, pancreatic, and prostate cancers. Classifications that have subsequently been backed up by evidence for colorectal cancer and the incidence of other types of cancer such as head and neck, upper aerodigestive tract, lung, prostate, breast, esophagus, stomach, bladder, pancreas, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, among others. To this relevant and persuasive scientific information, I would add the fact that red meat production also has an environmental impact, considering that some European countries have integrated human health with the “health of the planet” in new national dietary guidelines and recommended limiting red meat consumption.

More explicitly, I would emphasize that current meat consumption is harmful to human health and equally bad for the planet. The details would imply that livestock farming has colonized more than 30 % of the planet's surface, mainly in permanent pastures, and that animals used for meat and dairy products represent approximately 20 % of the total biomass of terrestrial animals (almost four times the biomass of humans). Other implications I would include are accelerated human sexual development, either as a result of meat and fat consumption itself or as a result of exogenous or naturally occurring growth-promoting hormones in meat, widespread antibiotic resistance following the use of antibiotics to promote livestock growth, the reduction of available human food and consequent hunger, as high-value grains and legumes are used to feed livestock (more than 97 % of global soybean flour production is used for livestock), and the increased risks of infected food from animals raised using inappropriate feeding practices.

Among the damage to planetary health, I would include information on aquifer depletion, since the production of 1 kilogram of meat protein requires more than 110,000 liters of water, the production of 37 % of anthropogenic methane (with 23 times the global warming potential of CO₂), and 65 % of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (almost 300 times the potential of CO₂), groundwater pollution, and anthropogenic ammonia emissions (64 %) that contribute significantly to acid rain and the acidification of ecosystems. It would also report that the combination of rainforest destruction for livestock and greenhouse gas production by livestock contributes more to climate change than fossil fuels used for transportation.

Although microorganisms colonize virtually all surfaces of the human body that are exposed to the external environment, including the skin, oral cavity, and respiratory, urogenital, and gastrointestinal tracts, the gastrointestinal tract is the most densely colonized, and the complex community of microorganisms that reside there or pass through it is known as the gut microbiota. The subject matter is not well known, but it is shaping up to be one that will generate major changes in medicine in the future, because there is a relationship between diet, gut microbiota, and health status, and it indicates a role for diet-driven alterations in the microbiota in different rates of health decline with aging.

In the campaign, I would report that the gut microbiota plays a role in metabolic, nutritional, physiological, and immunological processes in the human body. For example, it performs important metabolic activities by extracting energy from dietary polysaccharides that would otherwise be indigestible, such as resistant starch and dietary fiber, and that such metabolic activities also lead to the production of important nutrients, such as short-chain fatty acids, vitamin K, vitamin B12, folic acid, and amino acids, which humans cannot produce themselves. It would include that the gut microbiota participates in defense against pathogenic microorganisms through mechanisms such as resistance to colonization and the production of antimicrobial compounds, and further, that the gut microbiota participates in the development, maturation, and maintenance of gastrointestinal sensory and motor functions, the intestinal barrier, and the mucosal immune system.

In detail, I would provide very clear information about the fact that the microbiota can adapt, but that there can also be an imbalance in its composition related to the balance between beneficial bacteria (health) and pathogenic bacteria (disease), an alteration known as intestinal dysbiosis that causes all kinds of health problems. Likewise, in the same vein, it would report that dysbiosis can manifest itself as an increase in disease-causing bacteria, a decrease in beneficial bacterial species, and/or a reduction in bacterial species diversity. As health problems are innumerable, it would provide options for restoring balance, including good nutrition, probiotics, prebiotics, and postbiotics.

In addition to the above general information on microbiota, the reality is that all the information I would include on the subject of gut microbiota would be aimed a change in diet, that is, this topic is closely related, albeit subtly, to the previous topic of diet and its impact on human health and the health of the planet, depending on the consumption of meat and plant-based foods. In this sense, I would focus the promotion of topics on microbiota towards the consumption of vegetables. Below, I explain in greater detail the topics I would include, based on information I wrote in a book.

Digestible carbohydrates are enzymatically broken down in the small intestine and include starches and sugars such as glucose, fructose, sucrose, and lactose. After breakdown, these compounds release glucose into the bloodstream and stimulate an insulin response. Humans fed high levels of glucose, fructose, and sucrose, in the form of seasonal fruits, increase the relative abundance of microorganisms of the genus Bifidobacterium and reduce those of the genus Bacteroides.

Unlike digestible carbohydrates, non-digestible carbohydrates such as fiber and resistant starch are not enzymatically broken down in the small intestine, but instead reach the large intestine where they undergo fermentation by resident microorganisms. Consequently, dietary fiber is a good source of “microbiota-accessible carbohydrates,” which can be used by microorganisms to provide the host with energy and a carbon source, and in the process, can modify the intestinal environment. This property of fibers guarantees their designation as prebiotics, which by definition are non-digestible dietary components that benefit the health of the host through the selective stimulation of the growth and/or activity of certain microorganisms. Sources of prebiotics include soy, inulins, unrefined wheat and barley, raw oats, and non-digestible oligosaccharides such as fructans, polydextrose, fructooligosaccharides, galactooligosaccharides, xylooligosaccharides, and arabinooligosaccharides. Diets rich in whole grains and wheat bran, which contain indigestible carbohydrates, are associated with an increase in bifidobacteria and lactobacilli in the intestine. This prebiotic effect on bifidobacteria has also been observed with whole corn, resulting in a beneficial change in the microbiota. Consumption of other non-digestible carbohydrates, such as whole grain barley, results in enrichment of the genera Roseburia, Bifidobacterium, Dialister, and the species Eubacterium rectale, Roseburia faecis, and Roseburia intestinalis; and resistant starch increases Ruminococcus bromii and Eubacterium rectal. Non-digestible carbohydrates can produce marked changes in the gut microbiota, but these are dependent on the initial composition of the individual's gut microbiota. Consumption of whole grains and complex non-digestible carbohydrates found in whole grains can significantly change the microbial ecology of the large intestine.

There is evidence that resistant starch can counteract the harmful effects of high red meat intake on colorectal cancer risk. After high meat consumption and in the absence of fermentable carbohydrates, red meat can produce pro-mutagenic DNA adducts and alter the composition of the microbiota. Therefore, a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet can alter the colonic microbiota, favoring a more pro-inflammatory microbiota profile and lower production of short-chain fatty acids. Consumption in conjunction with fermentable carbohydrates can reduce this effect, as resistant starch prevents the formation of red meat-induced adducts; this is associated with increased levels of short-chain fatty acids and changes in the composition of the microbiota.

On the other hand, among topics to be highlighted, studies on various diets, including Western, gluten-free, omnivorous, vegetarian, vegan, and Mediterranean diets, due to their ability to modulate the gut microbiota. Vegetarian and vegan diets are enriched with plant-based fermentable foods. The Mediterranean diet is a markedly, but not exclusively, vegetarian style of diet that has been shown to be beneficial in the treatment of obesity, type 2 diabetes, inflammatory diseases, and cardiovascular disease. The benefits of the Mediterranean diet in protecting against chronic disorders, such as cardiovascular disease, are generally attributed to high vegetable consumption and low meat consumption.

I would highlight, based on studies, that a Western diet (high in protein and animal fat, and low in fiber) led to a marked decrease in the number of total bacteria and beneficial species of Bifidobacterium and Eubacterium, that consumption of a Western diet has been associated with the production of cancer-promoting nitrosamines, that the Mediterranean diet is considered a healthy and balanced diet, and that it is distinguished by a beneficial fatty acid profile rich in monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids, high levels of polyphenols and other antioxidants, high intake of fiber and other low glycemic index carbohydrates, and relatively higher intake of plant proteins than animal proteins. Specifically, olive oil, fruits, cereals, nuts, and other vegetables, moderate consumption of fish and poultry, and lower intake of dairy products, red meat, processed meat, and sweets characterize the traditional Mediterranean diet.

I invite users @abneagro and @belkisa758 to participate in this contest. For information about the contest, click here.