Demand for plant-based meat substitutes is growing globally for nutritional and environmental reasons, with Australia the third-fastest growing vegan market worldwide. This study aimed to profile and compare plant-based meat substitutes (mimicking meat) with equivalent meat products, and 2015 data. An audit undertaken in May (updated in September 2019) from four metropolitan Sydney supermarkets (Coles, Woolworths, Aldi, IGA), collected nutrition information and Health Star Rating (HSR) from 137 products (50 burgers, 10 mince, 29 sausages, 24 chicken, 9 seafood, 15 other). Mean (± standard deviation (SD)) and median (range) was calculated for nutrients and HSR. Plant-based options were generally lower in kilojoules, total and saturated fat, higher in carbohydrate, sugars, and dietary fibre compared with meat. Only 4% of products were low in sodium (58–1200 mg/100 g). Less than a quarter of products (24%) were fortified with vitamin B12, 20% with iron, and 18% with zinc. HSR featured on 46% (3.6–4.4 stars). On-pack claims were vegetarian/vegan/plant-based (80%), protein (63%), non-genetically modified/organic (34%), gluten free (28%). Product numbers increased five-fold (↑429%) in four years. The plant protein trend has prompted innovation in meat substitutes, however wide nutrient ranges and higher sodium levels highlights the importance of nutrition guidelines in their development to ensure equivalence with animal-based proteins.

Plant-based and flexitarian eating patterns are increasingly popular, and the food supply system has responded with a wide range of convenience products despite a lack of understanding regarding consumer views. The aim of this study was to explore consumer and nutrition professional (NP) perceptions and attitudes to plant protein, including plant-based meat alternatives (PBMA) within an Australian context. Using an online survey promoted via social media, 679 responses (89% completion rate), achieved an even spread across key age groups. A total of sixty percent reported following a special diet, with 25% vegan and 19% flexitarian. ‘Health’ was a key driver for diet type among the NPs (53.3%) and they were less likely to follow a special diet, while “ethical” reasons were cited by consumers (69%). Plant-based eating was considered a vegan dietary pattern and the most frequently consumed plant-based proteins were whole grains. Most (74%) had tried PBMA, but they were more frequently chosen by consumers, with burger patties then sausages and mince selected as a ‘trendy’ choice; taste was very important across both groups. Products mimicking chicken and fish were of less interest. Plant-based claims were observed by 78% but these were also of greater interest to consumers. Participants reported looking for whole ingredients and iron content and expected that both iron and vitamin B12 would be comparable to red meat. Sodium was the nutrient of greatest interest to NPs and, together, these results help inform the direction for product innovation, while also highlighting the need to assess the adequacy of the dietary pattern when promoting sustainable plant-based eating.

Despite the well-known human and planetary health benefits of legumes, consumption is often low. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the inclusion of legumes in global food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG), and to review consumption data against global food group classifications for legumes. The review of FBDG from 94 countries identified legume-based key messaging, the key terms used to define legumes, recommended serving size and frequency of consumption and the classification of legumes into food groups as depicted by food guides. The 2018 Global Dietary Database isolated consumption data of legumes and beans using individual-level, nationally representative dietary survey data for matched countries. Food-based dietary guidelines from 40/94 countries most often identified legumes utilising the term legumes, followed by beans (n = 13), pulses (n = 10), or as beans, peas and lentils (n = 5). The serving size recommendations for legume consumption varied widely, and there was no consistency in the suggested frequency of consumption. Median bean and legume consumption for countries with FBDG ranged from 1.2 g/d (Norway) to 122.7 g/d (Afghanistan). Classification of legumes into food groups varied, with 38% of countries categorising legumes in the protein-rich food group, 20% were in a group on their own and 15% were in the starchy staples group. In countries where legumes were together with either nuts or seeds had the greatest range in intake (11.6–122.7 g/day), followed by those that grouped legumes together with protein-rich foods (4.0–104.7 g/day), while countries that grouped legumes into two food groups, in an attempt to promote consumption, tended to have a lower consumption. Greater emphasis and perhaps repositioning of legumes in dietary guidelines may be required to encourage consumption for health, environmental and economic benefits.

While health benefits of legume consumption are well documented, intake is well below recommendations in many Western cultures, and little is known regarding culinary use and consumer understanding of these foods. This study aimed to investigate consumption, knowledge, attitudes, and culinary use of legumes in a convenience sample of Australians. An online computer-based survey was used to gather data and demographic characteristics. Respondents (505 individuals answered in full or in part) were regular consumers of legumes (177/376 consumed legumes 2–4 times weekly). Chickpeas, green peas, and kidney beans were most often consumed, and were made into most commonly Mexican, then Indian and Middle Eastern meals. Consumers correctly identified protein and dietary fibre (37%) as key nutritional attributes. For non-consumers (7%; 34/463), taste, a lack of knowledge of how to prepare and include legumes, and the time taken to prepare, along with family preferences, hindered consumption. Participants identified the food category as “beans” rather than “legumes”, and this may have implications for dietary guidance at an individual and policy level. Addressing barriers to consumption, perhaps through food innovation, emphasizing positive health attributes, and clarification within dietary guidelines, are important considerations for increasing consumption of legumes.

Whole grains may assist in reducing risk of non-communicable disease, but consumption is limited in many countries. In Australia, the reasons for poor consumption are not well understood. The aim of this study was to investigate consumers’ knowledge, attitudes and identification of whole grains, incorporating an exploration of factors influencing consumption, promotion and provision. An online semi-structured questionnaire was used to gather responses from 735 participants (61% complete responses). Although 92% of respondents consumed grains, only 8% reported an intake consistent with age and gender recommendations. Refined pasta and rice were the most frequently purchased grain foods followed by wholemeal/whole grain bread. Of whole grain foods, bread and breakfast cereals were consumed more frequently. However, overall, participants did not prioritise consumption of whole grains. Despite this, 93% of participants had seen food packaging information drawing attention to whole grain content, with a high proportion describing whole grain as less processed (72%) or high in dietary fibre (67%). Two-thirds were aware of health benefits but stated that if they had further information, they would be more likely to swap to whole grain. Further education, increasing exposure, accessibility and extensive promotion of whole grain health benefits are required to facilitate whole grain consumption. Furthermore, removing the negative stigma associated with carbohydrate foods, including grains, will be necessary to improve consumption.