Recently, there was an increasing availability of plant-based alternative products (PBAPs) in the marketplace. This increase has also elevated the degree of concerns over dietary quality and the degree of processing of PBAPs. Considering these concerns, a recent Food Research International study has concurrently evaluated the nutrient profiles and levels of processing of PBAPs that might influence health status.

Study: Are plant-based alternatives healthier? A two-dimensional evaluation from dietary and processing standpoints. Image Credit: Yevhenii Kondratiuk / Shutterstock

Background

Because the name suggests, a plant-based food regimen comprises foods derived from plants, equivalent to vegetables, grains, fruits, legumes, seeds, and nuts. Recently, a greater number of individuals internationally are following a plant-based food regimen. This increase might be attributed to several aspects, including concerns over animal welfare, environment, and health. 

Recently, a unbroken increase within the consumption of plant-based food is being observed in Western countries. Parallel to this effect, there was a rise in the provision of plant-based alternative products (PBAPs), particularly for meat and dairy food products, out there. Even though it is imperative to find out the dietary advantages of PBAPs, few studies can be found. Some studies have indicated the poor dietary profile of PBAPs, particularly their protein content. Nevertheless, plant-based meat alternatives with reduced saturated fat and better fiber content could possibly be healthier options than animal-based food products.

It can be crucial to research the general nutrition content of PBAPs and compare them with their homologs. Typically, while producing PBAPs, the food industry concentrates on preserving the physical and sensory elements of animal-based products. Nevertheless, in the middle of achieving this, the dietary quality of the PBAPs is commonly compromised. Previous studies have also indicated that consumption of ultra-processed foods has an antagonistic effect on the buyer’s health.

In regards to the Study

A complete of two,790 PBAPs are marketed in Spain, which have been classified into fifteen categories. Five major categories of PBAPs are dairy products, cheese, fish, meat, and eggs. These foods were in comparison with their animal-based product counterparts and unprocessed animal-based foods.

The dietary information of PBAPs was obtained from the data provided by the manufacturer through fact sheets, official web sites, or food packaging labels. The fiber content of all food products was assumed to be zero when it was not declared on the dietary labels. These data were obtained between February 2020 and December 2021. 

The nutrient profile was assessed using the modified version of the Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS) rating criteria. FSAm-NPS rating was computed based on nutrient content per 100 grams of product using the Nutri-Rating calculation tool. The range of scores was defined as 15 (most healthy) to 40 (least healthy). The NOVA system was used to categorise food based on the various food processing degree. This method classifies foods and beverages into 4 categories, namely, unprocessed or marginally processed foods (group 1), processed culinary ingredients (group 2), processed foods (group 3), and ultra-processed foods (group 4). 

Study Findings

This study found evidence contradicting the overall belief that plant-based alternatives are unequivocally the healthier alternative to animal-based food products. For example, the commercially available plant-based cheese had lower protein and high sodium levels than those of animal origin. The extent of saturated fat content varied substantially depending on the most important ingredients used. This might be explained using the instance of the PBAP cheese produced from nuts, which has low saturated fat content in comparison with a cheese of animal origin. In contrast, plant-based cheese containing coconut butter has a better saturated fat content.

Interestingly, an identical amount of sugar was present in each plant-based dairy alternatives and yogurts and milk of animal origin. Nevertheless, this result will not be consistent with previous studies that exposed a lower amount of sugar in plant-based dairy alternatives. Consistent with the findings of previous studies, this study revealed that plant-based seafood had lower protein and saturated fat content in comparison with their animal counterparts. Moreover, the dietary composition of meat alternatives exhibited lower protein and saturated fat content and better fiber content in comparison with their animal origin.

Based on NOVA classification, around 41% of PBAPs were ultra-processed. The high degree of processing in PBAPs has been attributed to the will to develop alternative foods with an identical sensory appeal to that of the unique product of animal origin. Nearly all of PBAPs marketed in Spain, included within the Veggie database, were classified into Nutri-Rating categories A and B, which suggests most healthy. Nevertheless, some products have been placed in categories 3 and 4 of the NOVA system, indicating processed and ultra-processed products. These findings underscore the necessity for a two-dimension approach, where each parameters could be considered.

Conclusions

The authors claim this to be the primary study to perform a two-dimensional assessment of the degree of processing and dietary profile of a giant sample of PBAPs marketed in Spain. Nearly all of PBAPs exhibited comparable dietary profiles to their animal-based counterpart products. Nevertheless, in comparison with unprocessed food, these were less healthy resulting from the high content of fat and salt. In the long run, the potential effect of PBAPs on human health should be assessed.