{"id":1006,"date":"2025-10-30T14:14:22","date_gmt":"2025-10-30T13:14:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nutrimedia.info\/?post_type=news&p=1006"},"modified":"2025-10-23T14:14:47","modified_gmt":"2025-10-23T12:14:47","slug":"the-limits-of-plant-processing","status":"publish","type":"news","link":"https:\/\/www.nutrimedia.info\/en\/news\/les-limites-de-la-transformation-vegetale\/","title":{"rendered":"Plant processing: the invisible limit of \u00abeating better\u00bb.\u00bb"},"content":{"rendered":"

Not all ultra-processed plant products are created equal: according to two recent INRAE studies published in The Lancet Regional Health - Europe<\/em>, However, their impact on health depends very much on the level of processing and the actual nutritional profile, rather than simply on the fact that they are \u201cplant-based\u201d.<\/strong> So plant-based processing has its limits...<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Plants are the way forward, but at what nutritional cost?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

With sales of plant products jumping by more than 20 % in Europe between 2020 and 2024, the question of their real nutritional quality<\/strong> is a must. Behind the boom in veggie burgers<\/a>, A paradox is emerging: not all of them offer the health benefits that consumers spontaneously associate with \u201cplants\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The INRAE, through two successive studies, is exploring in detail the impact of the level of transformation<\/strong> of plant-based foods on the health of French consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why measure the level of plant transformation?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Since the classification NOVA<\/strong>, used by the WHO and the FAO, food is divided into four levels according to the degree of processing:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Raw or minimally processed foods<\/strong> (fruit, vegetables, pulses, seeds, homemade tofu)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Processed culinary ingredients<\/strong> (oils, flours, syrups, salt)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Processed products<\/strong> (wholemeal bread, preserves, smoked tofu, simple dishes)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Ultra-processed foods (UPF)<\/strong> (veggie burgers, snacks<\/a>, protein bars, fortified drinks)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    This typology, applied here to vegetable products, distinguishes useful processing - that which ensures safety and preservation - from excessive processing, often associated with nutritional losses and the addition of technological additives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"Why<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    INRAE's objective<\/strong> was to clarify a persistent lack of clarity: are ultra-processed plant products better, worse or simply different from animal products? ultra-processed <\/a>?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What the INRAE study shows: not all plant products are created equal<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The team at Benjamin Alles<\/strong> and Cl\u00e9mentine Prioux<\/strong> (INRAE, Paris) analysed the consumption of over 100,000 French adults, using the NutriNet-Sant\u00e9 cohort. Result: the share of ultra-processed plant foods<\/strong> in the diet varies greatly according to dietary and socio-economic profiles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Key findings:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • Consumers who eat a predominantly plant-based diet have better overall nutritional quality<\/strong> (less saturated fat, more fibre and micronutrients).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • But within these plant systems<\/strong>, a high consumption of products ultra-processed<\/strong> (burgers, ready-to-eat meals, enriched desserts). associated with a less favourable metabolic profile<\/strong> excessive intake of free sugars and sodium, increased energy density.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Conversely, a plant-based diet based on minimally processed foods (pulses, seeds, wholegrain products) has the following advantages expected positive effects<\/strong> on weight, blood pressure and cholesterol.
      <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
      \n

      In other words: plants are no guarantee of quality. It's the level of transformation that makes the difference.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

      Table: simplified typology according to the NOVA classification applied to plant products<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
      NOVA level<\/strong><\/td>Examples<\/strong><\/td>Key features<\/strong><\/td>Estimated nutritional impact<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
      1 - Lightly processed<\/td>Lentils, chickpeas, home-made tofu<\/td>Rich in fibre, protein and low in additives<\/td>Very favourable<\/td><\/tr>
      2 - Culinary ingredients<\/td>Vegetable oils, flours, rice syrup<\/td>Source of energy, partial loss of nutrients<\/td>Neutral to moderate<\/td><\/tr>
      3 - Transformed<\/td>Wholemeal bread, preserves, smoked tofu<\/td>Addition of salt, heat, fermentation<\/td>Moderately favourable<\/td><\/tr>
      4 - Ultra-processed<\/td>Veggie burger, protein snack, flavoured veggie drink<\/td>Additives, isolates, extrusion, texturing<\/td>Varies according to recipe: from neutral to unfavourable<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

      Implications for players in the plant and ingredients sectors<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

      1. Differentiation through reasoned transformation<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

      These results open up an area of strategic innovation: the \u201clow processed vegetable<\/strong>. Manufacturers can add value to smooth processes<\/strong> (cold texturing, fermentation, limited extrusion) as an argument for naturalness and nutrition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      2. Rethinking the wording<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

      INRAE studies suggest that negative metabolic effects<\/strong> do not come from the plant itself, but from the over-composed matrices<\/strong>. As a result :<\/p>\n\n\n\n