Purpose Alternatives to animal-sourced foods (Alt-ASFs) are processed plant-based products that mimic animal-sourced foods. This study aimed to describe the consumption of Alt-ASFs in the Norwegian dietary survey (Norkost 4) and compare population characteristics and nutritional intake in regular consumers. Further, to compare the nutritional quality of Alt-ASFs consumed and describe the distribution of the Nutri-Score and NewTools-score - a proposed revised version of Nutri-Score, among these products. Methods Dietary data were collected from 1,815 adults in Norkost 4 using 2*24-h recalls and a food frequency questionnaire. Alt-ASFs were identified and compared with corresponding ASFs. Nutritional quality was assessed and products were scored using Nutri-Score and NewTools-score. Results Overall, the consumption of Alt-ASF was low (mean: 0.3 energy %, SD: 1.6). 8% ( n = 147) reported consuming one or more Alt-ASFs regularly, defined as ≥ 2 times/week, with dairy alternatives being most frequently consumed. Regular consumers were typically younger, female, and more likely to report a vegetarian diet. Most Alt-ASFs contained lower levels of the assessed micronutrients except for meat and fortified milk, whose micronutrient content was similar or higher than ASFs. There was a wide variation in nutritional scores for Alt-ASFs. Unfortified Alt-ASFs typically had a low micronutrient content but could still achieve favourable Nutri-Scores if low in salt, sugar and saturated fat. Conclusion Our findings indicate that only a minor part of Norwegian adults regularly consumes Alt-ASFs and consumption is low. Shifting from ASFs to Alt-ASFs may have some nutritional benefits and some disadvantages, largely dependent on the chosen products.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amberntsson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: