Abstract

In Western societies, reducing red meat consumption gained prominence due to health, environmental, and animal welfare considerations. We estimated the public health impact of substituting beef with house cricket (Acheta domesticus) in European diets (Denmark, France, and Greece) using the risk-benefit assessment (RBA) methodology, building upon the EFSA-funded NovRBA project. The overall health impact of substituting beef patties with insect powder-containing patties was found to be impacted by the amount of cricket powder incorporated in the patties. While using high amounts of cricket powder in meat substitutes may be safe, it does not inherently offer a healthier dietary option compared to beef. Adjustment of cricket powder levels is needed to yield a positive overall health impact. The main driver of the outcome is sodium, naturally present in substantial amounts in crickets. Moreover, the way that cricket powder is hydrated before being used for the production of patties (ratio of powder to water), influences the results. Our study highlighted that any consideration for dietary substitution should be multidimensional, considering nutritional, microbiological and toxicological aspects, and that the design of new food products in the framework of dietary shifts should consider both health risks and benefits associated with the food.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call