The nutritional impact of replacing dietary meat with meat alternatives in the UK: a modelling analysis using nationally representative data

Farsi, Dominic N., Uthumange, Dinithi, Munoz Munoz, Jose and Commane, Daniel M. (2021) The nutritional impact of replacing dietary meat with meat alternatives in the UK: a modelling analysis using nationally representative data. British Journal of Nutrition. ISSN 0007-1145 (In Press)

[img] Text
the-nutritional-impact-of-replacing-dietary-meat-with-meat-alternatives-in-the-uk-a-modelling-analysis-using-nationally-representative-data.pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 21 July 2022.

Download (822kB) | Request a copy
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114521002750

Abstract

Dietary patterns high in meat compromise both planetary and human health. Meat-alternatives may help facilitate meat reduction, however the nutritional implications of displacing meat with meat-alternatives does not appear to have been evaluated. Here, data from the 9th cycle of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey was used as the basis of models to assess the effect of meat substitution on nutritional intake. We implemented three models; model 1 progressively replaced 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100% of the current meat intake with a weighted mean of meat-alternatives available in the UK market. Model 2 compared different ingredient categories of meat-alternative; vegetable, mycoprotein, a combination of bean and pea, tofu, nut and soy. Model 3 compared fortified versus unfortified meat-alternatives. The models elicited significant shifts in nutrients. Overall, there were increases in carbohydrate, fibre, sugars and sodium, whereas reductions were found for protein, total and saturated fat, iron and B12. The greatest effects were seen for; vegetable-based (+24.63g/day carbohydrates), mycoprotein-based (−6.12g/day total fat), nut-based (−19.79g/day protein, +10.23g/day fibre; −4.80g/day saturated fat, +7.44g/day sugars), soy-based (+495.98mg/day sodium), and tofu-based (+7.63mg/day iron, −2.02μg/day B12). Our results suggest meat-alternatives can be a healthful replacement for meat if chosen correctly. Consumers should seek out meat-alternatives which are low in sodium and sugar, high in fibre, protein and with high micronutrient density, to avoid compromising nutritional intake if reducing their meat intake. Manufacturers and policy makers should consider fortification of meat-alternatives with nutrients such as iron and B12 and focus on reducing sodium and sugar content.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Meat replacement, Meat alternatives, Nutritional intake, Nutritional requirements, Public health
Subjects: B400 Nutrition
D600 Food and Beverage studies
Department: Faculties > Health and Life Sciences > Applied Sciences
Depositing User: John Coen
Date Deposited: 21 Jul 2021 13:59
Last Modified: 21 Jul 2021 14:15
URI: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/46726

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics