Plant-based meats have come a long way in replicating the taste and texture of animal-based products, but a new study from the University of Illinois suggests that many of them could be missing the mark in terms of simulating real meat’s nutritional quality and digestibility.
Protein Profiles Vary Widely
The examination, distributed in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, contrasted supplement profiles of plant-based steaks and cold cuts with those of meat renditions. However, the amino acid composition and digestibility of protein in these plant-based products were inconsistent among different plants used.
Flesh foods overall, on the other hand, only had the highest score in animal-based products (score 13–33), but plant alternatives presented a wide variability of quality scores for protein gathered across studies. This implies that consumers who are consuming these foods or ingredients as protein substitutes may not be obtaining the same quantity of proteins and amino acids in comparison to their regular meat counterparts.
The variation in nutritional value is an important caveat for anyone thinking of substituting meat for plant-based alternatives, the researchers stress. Even though many of these products have the texture and taste consumers prefer, they may not offer all of the nutritional positives found in the whole food.
Implications for Consumers
The results of this study are particularly salient for consumers seeking to include more plant-based meals in their diets. The appeal of these products as a convenient and more environmentally friendly alternative to traditional protein sources is clear, but the study underscores that consumers must be aware of what they are consuming in terms of nutrition.
In contrast to protein intake (which most consumers fall short of in Western countries), the extensive range of amino acid profiles and digestibility of plant-based meats seem like a square block to stuff into a round hole for those looking to maintain or enhance their protein consumption. Therefore, consumers may wish to review the nutrition facts of these types of products and use that information to make choices tailored to their dietary goals (Hue et al., 2014).
Another key takeaway from the study is that producers and consumers need a common understanding when it comes to nutritional contrasts in plant-based meat alternatives compared with traditional meat products. Consumers can be more discerning about which products to choose for their dietary requirements and lifestyle choices, given accurate and transparent information.
Conclusion
The results of the study are a reminder that although plant-based meat alternatives have made remarkable advances in mimicking the flavour and texture of animal-based products, there is still work to be done to bring those same nutritional benefits. As these plant-food products become more mainstream, it will be important for both manufacturers and consumers to view these alternatives through the lens of their nutritional landscape, rather than just taste.
