Plant- and animal-protein diets in relation to sociodemographic drivers, quality, and cost: Findings from the Seattle Obesity Study

33Citations
Citations of this article
148Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Promoting plant-based proteins is at the forefront of many initiatives in public health nutrition. Objectives: The aim of this study was to characterize the sociodemographic drivers of plant-based protein diet consumption, and to study these in relation to diet quality and cost. Methods: The Seattle Obesity Study series (SOS I and II) yielded the study sample (n = 1636). Sociodemographic data were obtained by survey self-report. Diet quality and cost came from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Food-Frequency Questionnaire linked to retail food prices. The Healthy Eating Index 2010 (HEI-2010) and mean adequacy ratio (MAR) served as measures of diet quality. Linear regressions with robust standard errors examined associations. Results: Total proteins contributed 16.8% of daily dietary energy. The breakdown by animal and plant proteins was 10.9% and 5.9%, respectively. The sociodemographic factors associated with plant-protein consumption were a positive attitude towards healthy eating and higher education but not income. Plant-protein diets were characterized by severalfold increases in nuts and seeds, soy and legumes, but much less meat, poultry, dairy, solid fats, and added sugars. Higher quartiles of plant-based diets were associated with significantly higher HEI-2010 (β: 13.0 from quartile 1 to quartile 4; 95% CI: 11.8, 14.3) and higher MAR (β: 6.0; 95% CI: 3.5, 8.5) with minimal impact on diet costs (β: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.67). In contrast, higher quartiles of animal-protein diets were associated with higher diet costs (β: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.77, 1.36) but lower HEI-2010 (β: -3.2; 95% CI: -4.5, -1.9). Each additional 3% of energy from plant proteins was associated with an 8.4-unit increase in HEI-2010 (95% CI: 7.6, 9.1) and with a 4.1-unit increase in MAR (95% CI: 2.7, 5.5) with a minimal increase in diet cost (β: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.50). Conclusion: Plant-based protein diets may be a cost-effective way to improve diet quality at all levels of income. Future research needs to evaluate the quality of plant-based protein in relation to amino acids and health.

References Powered by Scopus

Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems

6686Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Meta-analysis of the effects of soy protein intake on serum lipids

1834Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Meat consumption, health, and the environment

1234Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The public health rationale for promoting plant protein as an important part of a sustainable and healthy diet

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Plant protein-based delivery systems: An emerging approach for increasing the efficacy of lipophilic bioactive compounds

56Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Nutritional and anti-nutritional properties of lentil (Lens culinaris) protein isolates prepared by pilot-scale processing

55Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aggarwal, A., & Drewnowski, A. (2019). Plant- and animal-protein diets in relation to sociodemographic drivers, quality, and cost: Findings from the Seattle Obesity Study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 110(2), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqz064

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 29

63%

Researcher 11

24%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

9%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 19

41%

Nursing and Health Professions 10

22%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9

20%

Social Sciences 8

17%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free