Plant‐based meat analogues marketed in Catalonia: evaluation of the nutritional profile

Abstract

Abstract In later years, a growing trend is apparent of vegetarian or vegan diets attributable to a number of causes, among of others, consumers’ concern for animal welfare, climate change and, to a lesser degree, for health‐related issues. On a par to this growth, availability of meat analogues in the market has also been on the rise. In this context, an evaluation was carried out of the nutritional composition of plant‐base meat analogues available in the Catalan market in comparison with animal‐based derivatives of similar categories. An analysis was performed as well of ingredients used for the formulation of plant‐based meat analogues, together with the nutritional and health‐related values as stated in their labelling. Results show that plant‐based meat analogues in the market present a great variability in energy content and nutrients, even among products belonging in the same category. This is due to the variability in ingredients and formulations used for their preparation. As far as energetic content is concerned, there is little difference between plant‐based products and animal‐based analogues. Many plant‐based meat analogues are a good source of protein, although some stand out for their low contents in this nutrient. The protein complementation of cereals and legumes is frequent in the plant‐based analogues, and this contributes to increasing their protein quality. Plant‐based products tend to be low in fat, especially in saturated fat, but contribute to higher carbohydrates, fundamentally of complex type and fibre when compared to their animal‐based counterparts. However, plant‐based products contribute to less salt than their animal‐based analogues, though none of them could be labelled “low‐sodium”. Results of this study show the great variability in energy and nutrient content between different plant‐based meat analogues as a consequence of the diversity of ingredients and formulations employed for their preparation. Therefore, it is not always possible to consider them nutritive counterparts for their animal‐based analogues