Comparative assessment of the nutritional composition and degree of processing of meat products and their plant-based analogues

• Tipo: Artigo em Revista Científica Internacional
• Data: 2024

Autores

Sultan, Laila (Autor) FCNAUP; Maganinho, Marta (Autor) FCNAUP; Padrão, Patrícia (Autor) FCNAUP

Revista

Título: Journal of Food Composition and Analysis

Vol. 133

ISSN: 0889-1575

Editora: Elsevier

Indexação

Scopus - 0 Citações

Classificação Científica

CORDIS: Ciências da Saúde

FOS: Ciências médicas e da saúde

Outras Informações

ID Authenticus: P-010-JS0

DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2024.106390

Abstract (EN): A cross-sectional study was conducted to compare the nutritional composition and the degree of processing of prepackaged plant-based meat analogues (PBMA) products (n=63) and their meat counterparts (n=153). Labeling data was collected from all the products available for sale in a main retail chain in Portugal. The products were categorized into burgers, meatballs, sausages, smoked sausages, breaded products, and others. Foods were classified by degree of processing using NOVA. Differences in the nutritional composition (energy, total and saturated fat, carbohydrates, sugars, protein, fiber, and salt) overall and across categories were assessed. Compared to meat-based products (MBP), PBMA had a higher median/100 g carbohydrate (9.8 g vs. 3.0 g, p<0.001), sugar (1.6 g vs.0.6 g, p<0.001) and fiber (3.7 g vs.0.6 g, p<0.001) but lower energy (203 kcal vs.220 kcal, p=0.026), fat (9.6 g vs.14.0 g, p<0.001), saturated fat (1.0 g vs.5.4 g, p<0.001) and salt (1.4 g vs.1.7 g, p=0.007). A higher proportion of ultra-processed foods was found among PBMA products (100 % vs. 85.6 %). All PBMA were ultra-processed but with higher fiber content, and lower fat, saturated fat, and salt levels, despite category variations. The differences in nutritional composition underscore that PBMA and MBP should not be considered equivalent alternatives. © 2024

Idioma: Inglês

Tipo (Avaliação Docente): Científica