Fuente: PubMed "meat" Eur J Nutr. 2026 Jun 2;65(4):148. doi: 10.1007/s00394-026-04009-4.ABSTRACTPURPOSE: Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) are a key instrument for translating nutrition science into public health advice, yet direct comparison across guidelines is hindered by differences in food grouping, units, and formulation of recommendations. Slovenia has recently developed and scientifically completed the Slovenian Nutrition Guidelines 2025 (SNG2025), its updated FBDGs, which have been submitted for governmental adoption but are not yet officially adopted. The SNG2025 extend conventional FBDGs into a quantitative, plant-forward framework that integrates health and environmental sustainability. However, their quantitative position relative to contemporary international guidelines and nationally representative intake data has not yet been systematically evaluated.METHODS: We compared 13 national FBDGs (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Austria, Spain, France, Canada, United States, China, United Kingdom and Australia) and two international frameworks (Nordic Nutrition Recommendations and EAT-Lancet) with the SNG2025. Recommendations were extracted for major food groups and mathematically converted (standardised) to a common unit (g/day) using predefined conversion factors and explicitly stated assumptions.RESULTS: The SNG2025 are largely consistent with international practice. Strong convergence was observed for fruits and vegetables, while recommendations for legumes, nuts, and whole grains closely aligned with EAT-Lancet targets and those from Spain and Austria. Slovenian upper limits for meat, dairy and eggs were comparable to those in several European and international guidelines; notably, some FBDGs suggest more stringent reductions than the SNG2025. Several guidelines allow fortified plant-based alternatives to fully replace animal-based dairy. Greater variability was observed for fish and seafood, reflecting regional dietary traditions. Significant heterogeneity in the formulation of recommendations (e.g., portion-based vs. weight-based) was identified.CONCLUSIONS: The SNG2025 are well aligned with contemporary international and national recommendations and align with widely accepted quantitative ranges for all major food groups. Differences between guidelines reflect cultural framing and quantification rather than conflicting nutritional principles. The SNG2025 demonstrate that contemporary dietary guidelines can integrate quantitative guidance, a plant-forward approach, and sustainability considerations while remaining aligned with international evidence. These findings support the use of SNG2025 as a reference framework for the development and evaluation of future dietary guidelines in comparable settings.PMID:42228199 | DOI:10.1007/s00394-026-04009-4