Leona Lindberg , Rachel Reid McCann , Beatrice Smyth , Jayne V. Woodside , Anne P. Nugent
{"title":"肉类替代品的环境影响、成分组成、营养和健康影响:系统综述。","authors":"Leona Lindberg , Rachel Reid McCann , Beatrice Smyth , Jayne V. Woodside , Anne P. Nugent","doi":"10.1016/j.tifs.2024.104483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The promotion of dietary shifts towards reduced meat consumption and increased plant protein consumption, has resulted in increased availability and consumption of meat alternatives which are products made from non-meat proteins to replicate the organoleptic and functional properties of meat. However, a knowledge gap exists on the impact of the production and consumption of these products on the environment and human health.</p></div><div><h3>Scope and approach</h3><p>This systematic review aims to address this research gap by evaluating the literature on the ingredient composition, environmental, nutritional and health impact of meat alternatives compared to meat. Five databases, reference lists and web alerts were searched to identify articles published from 2011 to 2023. 54 articles were included in this systematic review.</p></div><div><h3>Key findings and conclusions</h3><p>Meat alternatives have a lower environmental impact than beef and pork and similar impact to chicken. Compared to meat, meat alternatives contain more ingredients, allergens and food additives. Overall, meat alternatives had lower contents of total and saturated fat, zinc and vitamin B12, and higher contents of carbohydrates, sugars, dietary fibre, salt/sodium, iron and calcium than comparable meat products. Protein contents were comparable or lower for meat alternatives depending on the category. A limited number of single test meal studies and short-term trials investigated the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes, with no adverse effects observed. Further research examining the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes is needed to better understand the role of these foods (if any) in healthy and sustainable dietary patterns.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":441,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Food Science & Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224424001596/pdfft?md5=69c5d57be29915c78b900678340f45e7&pid=1-s2.0-S0924224424001596-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The environmental impact, ingredient composition, nutritional and health impact of meat alternatives: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Leona Lindberg , Rachel Reid McCann , Beatrice Smyth , Jayne V. Woodside , Anne P. Nugent\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tifs.2024.104483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The promotion of dietary shifts towards reduced meat consumption and increased plant protein consumption, has resulted in increased availability and consumption of meat alternatives which are products made from non-meat proteins to replicate the organoleptic and functional properties of meat. However, a knowledge gap exists on the impact of the production and consumption of these products on the environment and human health.</p></div><div><h3>Scope and approach</h3><p>This systematic review aims to address this research gap by evaluating the literature on the ingredient composition, environmental, nutritional and health impact of meat alternatives compared to meat. Five databases, reference lists and web alerts were searched to identify articles published from 2011 to 2023. 54 articles were included in this systematic review.</p></div><div><h3>Key findings and conclusions</h3><p>Meat alternatives have a lower environmental impact than beef and pork and similar impact to chicken. Compared to meat, meat alternatives contain more ingredients, allergens and food additives. Overall, meat alternatives had lower contents of total and saturated fat, zinc and vitamin B12, and higher contents of carbohydrates, sugars, dietary fibre, salt/sodium, iron and calcium than comparable meat products. Protein contents were comparable or lower for meat alternatives depending on the category. A limited number of single test meal studies and short-term trials investigated the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes, with no adverse effects observed. Further research examining the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes is needed to better understand the role of these foods (if any) in healthy and sustainable dietary patterns.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Food Science & Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224424001596/pdfft?md5=69c5d57be29915c78b900678340f45e7&pid=1-s2.0-S0924224424001596-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Food Science & Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224424001596\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Food Science & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224424001596","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The environmental impact, ingredient composition, nutritional and health impact of meat alternatives: A systematic review
Background
The promotion of dietary shifts towards reduced meat consumption and increased plant protein consumption, has resulted in increased availability and consumption of meat alternatives which are products made from non-meat proteins to replicate the organoleptic and functional properties of meat. However, a knowledge gap exists on the impact of the production and consumption of these products on the environment and human health.
Scope and approach
This systematic review aims to address this research gap by evaluating the literature on the ingredient composition, environmental, nutritional and health impact of meat alternatives compared to meat. Five databases, reference lists and web alerts were searched to identify articles published from 2011 to 2023. 54 articles were included in this systematic review.
Key findings and conclusions
Meat alternatives have a lower environmental impact than beef and pork and similar impact to chicken. Compared to meat, meat alternatives contain more ingredients, allergens and food additives. Overall, meat alternatives had lower contents of total and saturated fat, zinc and vitamin B12, and higher contents of carbohydrates, sugars, dietary fibre, salt/sodium, iron and calcium than comparable meat products. Protein contents were comparable or lower for meat alternatives depending on the category. A limited number of single test meal studies and short-term trials investigated the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes, with no adverse effects observed. Further research examining the impact of meat alternative consumption on health outcomes is needed to better understand the role of these foods (if any) in healthy and sustainable dietary patterns.
期刊介绍:
Trends in Food Science & Technology is a prestigious international journal that specializes in peer-reviewed articles covering the latest advancements in technology, food science, and human nutrition. It serves as a bridge between specialized primary journals and general trade magazines, providing readable and scientifically rigorous reviews and commentaries on current research developments and their potential applications in the food industry.
Unlike traditional journals, Trends in Food Science & Technology does not publish original research papers. Instead, it focuses on critical and comprehensive reviews to offer valuable insights for professionals in the field. By bringing together cutting-edge research and industry applications, this journal plays a vital role in disseminating knowledge and facilitating advancements in the food science and technology sector.