Meat substitutes pose risks to health
Published: Tuesday, Sep 3rd 2024, 10:50
Back to Live Feed
Meat substitutes are better for the environment than meat. Replacing meat with substitute products also has health benefits. However, there is also a risk of deficiency symptoms when not eating meat. This was the conclusion reached by the Swiss Foundation for Technology Assessment in a report presented on Tuesday.
Supermarkets are offering an increasing range of plant-based foods, from pea steak to soy milk, as the Swiss Foundation for Technology Assessment (TA-Swiss) noted in its report. Such products are intended to replace dairy products and meat.
This is a response to the wishes of customers who do not want to consume any or fewer products of animal origin for ecological, animal welfare or health reasons. For the report, researchers from the University of Bern and the Agroscope research institute investigated whether these alternative or substitute products are actually capable of doing this.
Better for the environment
In terms of environmental aspects, the production of meat substitutes performs better than the production of meat. The environmental impact was measured in terms of CO2 emissions, water and land consumption and loss of biodiversity. "Wheat, corn, rice and soy are considered staple foods in many countries. In this country, we import a lot of it as concentrated feed so that our farm animals grow more meat and produce more milk," the researchers wrote in the report.
If fewer animals are kept in agriculture and more plants are cultivated, this tends to have a positive impact on the environment. For example, the greenhouse gas potential of wheat or soy pulp is six times lower than that of meat. Falafel even has a greenhouse gas potential that is 15 times lower.
However, the results for milk substitutes are mixed. Although soy drinks perform better than cow's milk, the water consumption of other products is significantly higher. In the case of oat drinks, water consumption is four times higher than for cow's milk, and for almond drinks it is even thirty times higher.
Confusing for consumers
There are certain health benefits to not eating meat. In particular, the consumption of red meat increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases, certain types of cancer and other non-communicable diseases, TA-Swiss stated in the report.
However, vitamin B12, which is important for the functioning of the nervous system as well as for various metabolic processes and blood formation, is only found in animal products. The human body is less able to absorb other essential micronutrients, such as iron, if they are of plant origin. According to the report, there is a risk of deficiency symptoms with an exclusively plant-based diet.
As there are more and more products that look similar at first glance, it is becoming more difficult for consumers to choose foods that meet their physical needs, according to the TA-Swiss report. The researchers therefore advocate clear information on important micronutrients and ideally also on the environmental impact associated with production on the products.
Higher degree of self-sufficiency
A predominantly plant-based diet could also, in theory, increase Switzerland's self-sufficiency in food, according to the report. For example, growing more legumes such as peas and soybeans could potentially cover more than Switzerland's entire protein requirements.
However, if the degree of self-sufficiency is taken as a benchmark, the report states that it is not expedient to completely abandon meat and milk production. Cattle breeding and dairy farming indirectly make pasture land usable as a source of food that is unsuitable for arable farming.
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic