News

Study finds that plant-based meat isn’t nutritionally equivalent to real meat

Plant-based diets are becoming increasingly popular. Approximately 6% of US consumers are now vegan, which is six times higher than in 2014. 

Consumers that follow a plant-based diet do so for a variety of reasons, and many rely on meat substitutes as part of their meal plan. 

But, while meat substitutes are designed to taste similar to the real meat, in a recent study, scientists found that the nutritional content is hugely different. 

The study, which was carried out by researchers at Duke University, determined that meat products and plant-based substitutes are not “truly nutritionally interchangeable.”

According to the researchers, this information should be made available to consumers so that they can make an informed choice about their food choices. 

In the last few years, a number of studies have urged people to cut down their meat and dairy consumption, and for countries to start producing much less of these products. 

There are huge concerns over the effects of meat production on the environment, including the high level of greenhouse gas emissions from cattle. 

After years of investments and impressive marketing campaigns, companies have started to create plant-based alternatives to meat, many of which taste similar to the real thing. 

However, despite the manufacturers claiming their products are “indistinguishable” from real meat, the latest research shows that they are vastly different in terms of nutrients. 

Manufacturers add certain nutrients to their plant-based meat, including proteins from soy, peas, and other plant sources, vitamin B12, zinc, leghemoglobin (an iron-carrying molecule from soy and red beet), and the fiber methylcellulose. 

The study found that there were large differences in the nutritional profiles. The beef samples that were used contained 22 metabolites not found in the alternative, and the plant-based version contained 31 that weren’t found in real meat. 

Some metabolites, such as DHA, spermine, and creatine, were found in much higher quantities in beef than in the plant-based beef alternative. 

However, the author noted, “It is important for consumers to understand that these products should not be viewed as nutritionally interchangeable, but that’s not to say that one is better than the other. Plant and animal foods can be complementary because they provide different nutrients”.

Claire Robinson

Recent Posts

Can Trump Lower Gas and Diesel Prices Before the Midterms?

  American drivers and businesses are facing higher energy expenses as the Trump administration attempts…

4 days ago

France Unrest Highlights Cost-of-Living and Service Crisis

  Growing frustration over household expenses and declining public services has fueled a wave of…

1 week ago

Skincubator for Premature Babies Makes Skin-to-Skin Care Easier

  For parents of premature babies, the first opportunity to hold their newborn can be…

2 weeks ago

Saudi Arabia Airport Attack Raises Regional Tensions

Repeated attacks on Saudi airports have raised fresh concerns about the widening regional conflict and…

2 weeks ago

Childhood Vaccine Delays Raise Concerns About Preventable Diseases

  Not every parent who postpones a child's vaccination opposes vaccines. Some want to discuss…

3 weeks ago

Tesla Flying Car: Elon Musk Reveals New Roadster Prototype

  Tesla is bringing the idea of a flying car closer to reality, at least…

3 weeks ago