Trends in Global Trade of Red Meats from 1986 to 2023: A Complex Network Analysis with Implications for Public Health
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFor detailed modification suggestions, please refer to the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
I have completed the review of the manuscript entitled “Trends in global trade of red meats from 1986 to 2020. A complex network analysis with implications to public health” submitted to Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal.
The article addresses a current topic of global trends in red meat trade. However, it is difficult to understand that what is the examined two categories concerning red meat. They are slightly different (unprocessed and processed red meat). Normally red meat includes beef, veal, pork and lamb. Please clarify that both categories include the same animal species or not. According to my opinion the aforementioned results and comments are not relevant or cannot used the term of red meat.
Observations:
abstract:
L22-25: Based on your study, can we say whether the greater growth in low-sodium and low-fat processed foods will be global or regional?
Introduction
In the introduction, you mentioned several trends, nutritional and environmental issues related to meat consumption. Could you include other case studies in this section that address global market trends and market outlook?
Materials and methods
Please specify the term of the processed red meat. What species did it contain besides beef and pork?
Please list the countries that fall into 4 categories based on their income.
Regarding Figures: the distribution of the impact of too many countries, it is difficult to understand.
Discussion and Conclusion
No further comments were made.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. Although the literature review covers the issues of meat trade and public health, it does not clearly elaborate on the specific causal relationships and epidemiological evidence linking global red meat trade and non-communicable diseases (NCDs).
2. The manuscript lacks discussion and supporting literature regarding how countries with inadequate nutritional intake might improve protein supply through global trade. It is recommended to supplement relevant literature.
3. The methods section does not clearly explain how missing data from the FAO database were addressed. It is recommended to clarify the strategies used for data cleaning and imputation.
4. The rationale and possible limitations associated with using five-year average data were not explained. For example, potential concealment of short-term fluctuations after data smoothing should be discussed.
5. Results according to countries’ income classification (high, middle, low) are presented only with descriptive statistics, without in-depth analysis or interpretation of the economic or policy implications behind trade fluctuations.
6. Although the abstract mentions the increase in trade and its relationship with public health, it lacks specific quantification or highlights of the most important findings and contributions of the study. It is recommended to include specific data or indicators.
7. The discussion provides a superficial interpretation of the results. A deeper exploration of how trade patterns influence public health policies and nutrition transitions in different countries is needed.
8. The conclusion is overly general and should more clearly emphasize the originality and practical implications of the study’s findings.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe modifications are very good, and I think the article is acceptable.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revisions made in the text are acknowledged, and there are no additional comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author has corrected or supplemented the information in the manuscript and responded to my comments and suggestions in detail.
