News

Ultra-processed plant-based meat alternatives: Healthy or harmful?

Although plant-based meats have been under increasing scrutiny for their ultra-processed nature, they might still offer major health benefits compared with animal-based alternatives.

This was the focus of a webinar hosted last month by the Good Food Institute (GFI), an organisation dedicated to alternative protein innovation. The session featured Dr Michael Greger, a physician, author, and founder of NutritionFacts.org, who provided an in-depth analysis of how plant-based meats compare to conventional meat and whole plant foods in terms of health impacts.

Plant-based meats: The exception to the rule?

The Nova classification system defines ultra-processed foods (UPFs) as industrial formulations that undergo multiple stages of processing and include additives such as emulsifiers, preservatives, and artificial flavours. These foods are often energy-dense and associated with increased risks of obesity, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes.

Greger noted during the webinar that “plant-based meats appear to be the exception to the rule that ultra-processed products are necessarily worse than the foods they’re designed to replace”. While plant-based meat alternatives share some characteristics with traditional UPFs, they demonstrate significant nutritional advantages over conventional meat.

Emerging research underscores the complexity of UPF classification. Studies have highlighted that energy density, hyperpalatability, and food structure play critical roles in driving overconsumption.

For instance, reducing the calorie density and palatability of UPFs has been shown to significantly lower calorie intake, even when these foods remain the predominant source of energy in the diet. These findings suggest that reformulation could mitigate many of the risks associated with UPFs.

How plant-based meat alternatives compare to meat

According to Greger, plant-based meat alternatives consistently outperform meat in several nutritional metrics. They contain significantly lower levels of saturated fat and cholesterol, both linked to cardiovascular disease.

“Replacing even one serving of meat per day with plant-based meat could lower chronic disease risk,” Greger said.

Unlike meat, plant-based alternatives also tend to be much lower in harmful compounds such as nitrates and advanced glycation end-products (AGEs). Research shows that plant-based options contain up to 30 times fewer AGEs than beef burgers, reducing inflammatory potential.

Plant-based alternatives also offer fibre, a nutrient absent in meat, which supports digestive health and satiety.

“In a swap meat trial, participants replacing meat with plant-based options experienced lower body weight and improved satiety without changing total calorie intake,” Greger said.

Certain products, particularly those based on mycoprotein, also stand out for their cholesterol-lowering effects.

“The mycoprotein products seem to do better in terms of LDL [low-density lipoprotein] lowering,” Greger told Ingredients Network. Clinical trials suggest that mycoprotein can reduce LDL cholesterol by as much as 10-20% within weeks, potentially lowering heart disease risk.

Where plant-based meat alternatives face challenges

Despite their advantages, plant-based meat alternatives are not without limitations. Sodium remains a persistent issue.

“Less added sodium and saturated fat is preferable, but none is better,” Greger said. While some products have reduced sodium levels, others still approach daily recommended limits in a single serving.

The inclusion of emulsifiers, commonly used to improve texture and shelf life, has also raised concerns. Preliminary studies suggest these additives may disrupt the gut microbiome and promote inflammation.

“I haven’t seen this issue break through into wider consciousness yet, but it’s something to watch,” Greger said, emphasising the need for more research into additive safety.

Another challenge involves contamination issues in certain crops used for plant-based meat production. Greger noted that mould contamination, particularly in grains and legumes, can lead to health risks if not properly managed.

Finally, the hyperpalatable combinations of salt, fat, and sugar common in some plant-based alternatives echo the same concerns raised with traditional UPFs. These properties can drive overconsumption.

Why whole plant foods still lead nutritionally

Whole plant foods, such as legumes, soybeans, and whole grains, remain the benchmark for nutritional health. These foods retain their natural structure, preserving dietary fibre, phytonutrients, and antioxidants that are often reduced during processing. Unlike plant-based meat alternatives, whole foods avoid sodium and additives, offering a cleaner nutrient profile.

“Whole plant foods remain the gold standard, but plant-based meat provides a bridge for consumers transitioning away from animal products,” Greger said.

These alternatives can serve as a stepping stone for those hesitant to adopt a fully plant-based diet, reducing reliance on meat while paving the way for healthier eating habits.

Whole plant foods also contribute to gut health through their high fiber content and lack of additives. This fosters a balanced microbiome, which is increasingly linked to overall health and disease prevention.

The future of UPF research

The evolving understanding of UPFs reveals that their risks are not uniform but depend on specific properties such as energy density, texture, and nutrient composition.

Greger told Ingredients Network that while many problems with UPFs have been identified, “new heat-induced toxins or new effects (for example, on the microbiome) that we hadn’t anticipated” could emerge as research progresses.