Role of Meat in Healthy Eating Patterns: Considerations for Protein Quantity and Protein Quality

Nancy R Rodriguez

doi:10.22175/mmb.11687

Abstract

The benefits of higher-protein diets for supporting increases in and maintenance of muscle is well established for athletes and routinely active individuals, weight management, and aging. However, quantity does not always equal quality. Within the framework of the dietary recommendations, the critical role of protein quality has been lost given the complexity of our food system. Science shows that animal-derived proteins better support muscle protein synthesis than plant-based proteins due to higher amounts and unique profiles of essential amino acids, nutrients that cannot be made by the body and must be provided in the diet. Although the lower quality of plant-based proteins may be overcome by eating more total protein or blending complementary plant-based proteins to provide all of the essential amino acids in amounts similar to animal protein, there may be unintended consequences in the context of the total diet (e.g., higher total calories, challenges for weight management). This paper reviews recommendations and research specific to protein quantity and quality in the context of meat's contribution to healthy eating patterns and considers implications of protein source for sustainability and the environment.

Highlights

The characteristics of an eating pattern that optimizes health outcomes while simultaneously being palatable, economically viable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly across the lifespan and various populations remain, for the most part, elusive. Embedded in this conundrum is the role of meat in healthy eating patterns given its widely valued role as a high-quality protein source and nutrient-dense food (Leroy and Cofnas, 2019; Willett et al, 2019; Drewnowski et al, 2020)
Established in 1941, the RDA for protein (0.8 g/kg body weight) for adults was based on meeting essential amino acid (EAA) requirements and is an “estimate of the minimum daily average dietary intake level that meets the nutrient requirements of most (97%–98%) healthy individuals” (National Research Council Subcommittee on the Tenth Edition of the Recommended Dietary Allowances, 1989)
We considered the EAA content, adequacy, and density of animal- and plant-based protein equivalents in the context of 4 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) healthy eating patterns—Omnivore, Vegetarian, Vegan Energy Matched, and Vegan Protein Matched (Table 1)— using the 1,600-calorie recommendation for a sedentary woman aged 51 years (Institute of Medicine, 2005) and found that the EAA content of all 4 meal patterns met established EAA RDA (Figure 1; Fussell et al, 2021)

Summary

Introduction

The characteristics of an eating pattern that optimizes health outcomes while simultaneously being palatable, economically viable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly across the lifespan and various populations remain, for the most part, elusive. We considered the EAA content, adequacy, and density (the amount of EAA relative to total calories or total protein) of animal- and plant-based protein equivalents in the context of 4 USDA healthy eating patterns—Omnivore, Vegetarian, Vegan Energy Matched, and Vegan Protein Matched (Table 1)— using the 1,600-calorie recommendation for a sedentary woman aged 51 years (Institute of Medicine, 2005) and found that the EAA content of all 4 meal patterns met established EAA RDA (Figure 1; Fussell et al, 2021). The calorie cost of obtaining adequate protein and meeting EAA requirements from plant-based protein sources should not be overlooked when developing and implementing healthy eating patterns for older populations This concern persists with plant-based meal patterns aimed to improve health while reducing environmental impact (Gardner et al, 2019). This hypothetical estimate highlights the challenges to designing calorie-efficient healthy eating patterns for older men and women

Summary and Recommendation

Findings

Literature Cited