The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant-based animal product alternatives are healthier and more environmentally sustainable than animal products
Open accessAbstract
There are increasingly strong reasons to move away from industrial animal agriculture for the good of the environment, animals, our personal health, and public health. Plant-based animal product alternatives (PB-APAs) represent a highly feasible way to reduce animal product consumption, since they address the core consumer decision drivers of taste, price, and convenience. PB-APAs tend to displace demand for animal products, not other plant foods, and are more able to do this compared to whole plant foods alone. This paper reviews 43 studies on the healthiness and environmental sustainability of PB-APAs compared to animal products. In terms of environmental sustainability, PB-APAs are more sustainable compared to animal products across a range of outcomes including greenhouse gas emissions, water use, land use, and other outcomes. In terms of healthiness, PB-APAs present a number of benefits, including generally favourable nutritional profiles, aiding weight loss and muscle synthesis, and catering to specific health conditions. Moreover, several studies present ways in which PB-APAs can further improve their healthiness using optimal ingredients and processing. As more conventional meat producers move into plant-based meat products, consumers and policymakers should resist naturalistic heuristics about PB-APAs and instead embrace their benefits for the environment, public health, personal health, and animals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
(2020) · IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · doi:10.1088/issn.1755-1315 · Cited by 12,764
Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems
Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S., Garnett, T., Tilman, D., DeClerck, F., Wood, A., et al. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31788-4 · Cited by 10,880
STEPTOE, A., POLLARD, T. M., & WARDLE, J. (1995) · Appetite · doi:10.1006/appe.1995.0061 · Cited by 2,176
Hall, K. D., Ayuketah, A., Brychta, R., Cai, H., Cassimatis, T., Chen, K. Y., Chung, S. T., Costa, E., Courville, A., Darcey, V., et al. (2019) · Cell Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2019.05.008 · Cited by 1,971
Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat
Bouvard, V., Loomis, D., Guyton, K. Z., Grosse, Y., Ghissassi, F. E., Benbrahim-Tallaa, L., Guha, N., Mattock, H., & Straif, K. (2015) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00444-1 · Cited by 1,882
Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change
Jones, B. A., Grace, D., Kock, R., Alonso, S., Rushton, J., Said, M. Y., McKeever, D., Mutua, F., Young, J., McDermott, J., et al. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1208059110 · Cited by 1,197
The Economics of Biodiversity : The Dasgupta Review
Dasgupta, P. S. (2021) · Cited by 1,068
Onwezen, M. C., Bouwman, E. P., Reinders, M. J., & Dagevos, H. (2021) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058 · Cited by 1,048
Hoek, A. C., Luning, P. A., Weijzen, P., Engels, W., Kok, F. J., & de Graaf, C. (2011) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.02.001 · Cited by 757
Understanding scoping reviews: Definition, purpose, and process
Peterson, J., Pearce, P. F., Ferguson, L. A., & Langford, C. A. (2017) · Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · doi:10.1002/2327-6924.12380 · Cited by 740
Cited by
Appiani, M., Cattaneo, C., & Laureati, M. (2023) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2023.1268068 · Cited by 162
“According to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies, plant-based foods are more environmentally sustainable regarding greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, and energy use (Smetana et al., 2021; Bryant, 2022).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Bryant, C. J.
- Venue
- Future Foods
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-12
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 100174
- ISSN
- 2666-8335 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4288046970
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 31.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Plant-based animal product alternatives are healthier and more environmentally sustainable than animal products. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.fufo.2022.100174
- The paper
- Bryant, C. J. (2022). Plant-based animal product alternatives are healthier and more environmentally sustainable than animal products. Future Foods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2022.100174
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.