Comparative review examines sports performance outcomes in Indian athletes on vegan and animal-based diets, suggesting the importance of quality planning.
Vegan diets are increasingly discussed in sport because athletes seek dietary patterns that align with performance, health, ethics, religion, cost, sustainability, and cultural identity. In India, the question is especially distinctive because many athletes already consume largely plant-based home foods such as dal, chana, rajma, soybean, groundnut, millets, rice, wheat, vegetables, chutneys, and spices, while other athletes rely on milk, curd, paneer, eggs, fish, chicken, and meat for protein and micronutrients. This paper compares homemade vegan plant-based diets with animal-based diets for sports performance in the Indian context. The review evaluates energy availability, carbohydrate provision, protein quality, leucine density, iron, zinc, calcium, vitamin B12, vitamin D, iodine, omega-3 fatty acids, creatine, gastrointestinal tolerance, affordability, and practicality across training phases. Current evidence does not show that vegan diets automatically improve performance, but it also does not show that well-planned vegan diets necessarily impair performance. The decisive issue is planning quality. Homemade vegan diets can provide abundant carbohydrate, fiber, phytochemicals, and culturally acceptable meals, but they require intentional protein distribution, vitamin B12 supplementation, attention to iron and zinc bioavailability, vitamin D monitoring, and consideration of creatine or beta-alanine for power events. Animal-based diets offer convenient high-quality protein and vitamin B12 but can still be nutritionally poor if dominated by fried foods, low vegetables, or excess saturated fat. The paper concludes that Indian athletes can perform well on either dietary pattern when total energy, macronutrients, micronutrients, hydration, and recovery are managed. Sport-specific assessment is more valid than ideological comparison.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deepali Sharma (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: