research paper topics about vegetarian

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 12 September 2019

The effects of plant-based diets on the body and the brain: a systematic review

• Evelyn Medawar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5011-8275 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Sebastian Huhn 4 ,
• Arno Villringer 1 , 2 , 3 &
• A. Veronica Witte 1  

Translational Psychiatry volume  9 , Article number:  226 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

314k Accesses

200 Citations

1458 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour
• Molecular neuroscience
• Psychiatric disorders

Western societies notice an increasing interest in plant-based eating patterns such as vegetarian and vegan, yet potential effects on the body and brain are a matter of debate. Therefore, we systematically reviewed existing human interventional studies on putative effects of a plant-based diet on the metabolism and cognition, and what is known about the underlying mechanisms. Using the search terms “plant-based OR vegan OR vegetarian AND diet AND intervention” in PubMed filtered for clinical trials in humans retrieved 205 studies out of which 27, plus an additional search extending the selection to another five studies, were eligible for inclusion based on three independent ratings. We found robust evidence for short- to moderate-term beneficial effects of plant-based diets versus conventional diets (duration ≤ 24 months) on weight status, energy metabolism and systemic inflammation in healthy participants, obese and type-2 diabetes patients. Initial experimental studies proposed novel microbiome-related pathways, by which plant-based diets modulate the gut microbiome towards a favorable diversity of bacteria species, yet a functional “bottom up” signaling of plant-based diet-induced microbial changes remains highly speculative. In addition, little is known, based on interventional studies about cognitive effects linked to plant-based diets. Thus, a causal impact of plant-based diets on cognitive functions, mental and neurological health and respective underlying mechanisms has yet to be demonstrated. In sum, the increasing interest for plant-based diets raises the opportunity for developing novel preventive and therapeutic strategies against obesity, eating disorders and related comorbidities. Still, putative effects of plant-based diets on brain health and cognitive functions as well as the underlying mechanisms remain largely unexplored and new studies need to address these questions.

Similar content being viewed by others

Association of plant-based diet indexes with the metabolomic profile

Associations of dietary patterns with brain health from behavioral, neuroimaging, biochemical and genetic analyses

Role of diet and its effects on the gut microbiome in the pathophysiology of mental disorders

Introduction.

Western societies notice an increasing interest in plant-based eating patterns such as avoiding meat or fish or fully excluding animal products (vegetarian or vegan, see Fig.  1 ). In 2015, around 0.4−3.4% US adults, 1−2% British adults, and 5−10% of German adults were reported to eat largely plant-based diets 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , due to various reasons (reviewed in ref. 5 ). Likewise, the number of scientific publications on PubMed (Fig.  2 ) and the public popularity as depicted by Google Trends (Fig.  3 ) underscore the increased interest in plant-based diets. This increasing awareness calls for a better scientific understanding of how plant-based diets affect human health, in particular with regard to potentially relevant effects on mental health and cognitive functions.

From left to right: including all food items (omnivore), including all except for meat (pesco-vegetarian) or meat and fish (ovo-lacto-vegetarian) to including only plant-based items (vegan)

Frequency of publications on PubMed including the search terms “vegan” (in light green), vegetarian (in orange) and plant-based (dark green)—accessed on 19 April 2019

Note indicates technical improvements implemented by Google Trends. Data source: Google Trends . Search performed on 18 April 2019

A potential effect of plant-based diets on mortality rate remains controversial: large epidemiological studies like the Adventist studies ( n  = 22,000−96,000) show a link between plant-based diets, lower all-cause mortality and cardiovascular diseases 6 , 7 , while other studies like the EPIC-Oxford study and the “45 and Up Study” ( n  = 64,000−267,000) show none 8 , 9 . Yet, many, but not all, epidemiological and interventional human studies in the last decades have suggested that plant-based diets exert beneficial health effects with regard to obesity-related metabolic dysfunction, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic low-grade inflammation (e.g. refs. 6 , 7 , 10 , 11 , for reviews, see refs. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ). However, while a putative link between such metabolic alterations and brain health through pathways which might include diet-related neurotransmitter precursors, inflammatory pathways and the gut microbiome 19 becomes increasingly recognized, the notion that plant-based diets exert influence on mental health and cognitive functions appears less documented and controversial 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 . We therefore systematically reviewed the current evidence based on available controlled interventional trials, regarded as the gold standard to assess causality, on potential effects of plant-based diets on (a) metabolic factors including the microbiome and (b) neurological or psychiatric health and brain functions. In addition, we aimed to evaluate potential underlying mechanisms and related implications for cognition.

We performed a systematic PubMed search with the following search terms “plant-based OR vegan OR vegetarian AND diet AND intervention” with the filter “clinical trial” and “humans”, preregistered at PROSPERO (CRD42018111856; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=111856 ) (Suppl. Fig.  1 ). PubMed was used as search engine because it was esteemed to yield the majority of relevant human clinical trials from a medical perspective. Exclusion criteria were insufficient design quality (such as lack of a control group), interventions without a plant-based or vegetarian or vegan diet condition, intervention with multiple factors (such as exercise and diet), and the exclusive report of main outcomes of no interest, such as dietary compliance, nutrient intake (such as vitamins or fiber intake), or nonmetabolic (i.e., not concerning glucose metabolism, lipid profile, gastrointestinal hormones or inflammatory markers) or non-neurological/psychiatric disease outcomes (e.g. cancer, caries).

Studies were independently rated for eligibility into the systematic review by three authors based on reading the abstract and, if needed, methods or other parts of the publication. If opinions differed, a consensus was reached through discussion of the individual study. This yielded 27 eligible out of 205 publications; see Table  1 for details. To increase the search radius for studies dealing with microbial and neurological/psychiatric outcomes, we deleted the search term “intervention”, which increased the number of studies by around one third, and checked for studies with “microbiome/microbiota”, “mental”, “cognitive/cognition” or “psychological/psychology” in the resulting records. Through this, we retrieved another five studies included in Table  1 . Further related studies were reviewed based on additional nonsystematic literature search.

Section I: Effects of plant-based diets on body and brain outcomes

Results based on interventional studies on metabolism, microbiota and brain function.

Overall, the vast majority of studies included in this systematic review reported a short-term beneficial effect of plant-based dietary interventions (study duration 3−24 months) on weight status, glucose, insulin and/or plasma lipids and inflammatory markers, whereas studies investigating whether plant-based diets affect microbial or neurological/psychiatric disease status and other brain functions were scarce and rather inconclusive (Table  1 ).

More specifically, 19 out of 32 studies dealing with T2DM and/or obese subjects and seven out of 32 dealing with healthy subjects observed a more pronounced weight loss and metabolic improvements, such as lowering of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)—a long-term marker for glucose levels—decreased serum levels of low-density (LDL) and high-density lipoproteins (HDL) and total cholesterol (TC), after a plant-based diet compared to an omnivore diet. This is largely in line with recent meta-analyses indicating beneficial metabolic changes after a plant-based diet 25 , 26 , 27 .

For example, Lee et al. found a significantly larger reduction of HbA1c and lower waist circumference after vegan compared to conventional dieting 28 . Jenkins et al. found a disease-attenuating effect in hyperlipidemic patients after 6 months adopting a low-carbohydrate plant-based diet compared to a high-carbohydrate lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet 29 , 30 . However, lower energy intake in the vegan dieters might have contributed to these effects. Yet, while a plant-based diet per se might lead to lower caloric intake, other studies observed nonsignificant trends toward higher effect sizes on metabolic parameters after a vegan diet, even when caloric intake was comparable: two studies in T2DM patients 31 , 32 compared calorie-unrestricted vegan or vegetarian to calorie-restricted conventional diets over periods of 6 months and 1.5 years, respectively, in moderate sample sizes ( n  ~ 75−99) with similar caloric intake achieved in both diet groups. Both studies indicated stronger effects of plant-based diets on disease status, such as reduced medication, improved weight status and increased glucose/insulin sensitivity, proposing a diabetes-preventive potential of plant-based diets. Further, a five-arm study comparing four types of plant-based diets (vegan, vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, semi-vegetarian) to an omnivore diet (total n  = 63) in obese participants found the most pronounced effect on weight loss for a vegan diet (−7.5 ± 4.5% of total body weight) 33 . Here, inflammation markers conceptualized as the dietary inflammatory index were also found to be lower in vegan, vegetarian and pesco-vegetarian compared to semi-vegetarian overweight to obese dieters 33 .

Intriguingly, these results 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 cohesively suggest that although caloric intake was similar across groups, participants who had followed a vegan diet showed higher weight loss and improved metabolic status.

As a limitation, all of the reviewed intervention studies were carried out in moderate sample sizes and over a period of less than 2 years, disregarding that long-term success of dietary interventions stabilizes after 2−5 years only 34 . Future studies with larger sample sizes and tight control of dietary intake need to confirm these results.

Through our systematic review we retrieved only one study that added the gut microbiome as novel outcome for clinical trials investigating the effects of animal-based diets compared to plant-based diets. While the sample size was relatively low ( n  = 10, cross-over within subject design), it showed that changing animal- to plant based diet changed gut microbial activity towards a trade-off between carbohydrate and protein fermentation processes within only 5 days 35 . This is in line with another controlled-feeding study where microbial composition changes already occurred 24 h after changing diet (not exclusively plant-based) 36 . However, future studies incorporating larger sample sizes and a uniform analysis approach of microbial features need to further confirm the hypothesis that a plant-based diet ameliorates microbial diversity and health-related bacteria species.

Considering neurological or psychiatric diseases and brain functions, the systematic review yielded in six clinical trials of diverse clinical groups, i.e. migraine, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis. Here, mild to moderate improvement, e.g. measured by antibody levels, symptom improvement or pain frequency, was reported in five out of six studies, sometimes accompanied by weight loss 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 (Table  1 ). However, given the pilot character of these studies, indicated by small sample sizes ( n  = 32−66), lack of randomization 37 , or that the plant-based diet was additionally free of gluten 40 , the evidence is largely anecdotal. One study in moderately obese women showed no effects on psychological outcomes 41 , two studies with obese and nonobese healthy adults indicated improvements in anxiety, stress and depressive symptom scores 23 , 24 . Taken together, the current evidence based on interventional trials regarding improvements of cognitive and emotional markers and in disease treatment for central nervous system disorders such as multiple sclerosis or fibromyalgia remains considerably fragmentary for plant-based diets.

Among observational studies, a recent large cross-sectional study showed a higher occurrence of depressive symptoms for vegetarian dieters compared to nonvegetarians 20 . Conversely, another observational study with a sample of about 80% women found a beneficial association between a vegan diet and mood disturbance 24 .

Overall, the relationship between mental health (i.e. depression) and restrictive eating patterns has been the focus of recent research 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 42 ; however, causal relationships remain uninvestigated due to the observational design.

Underlying mechanisms linking macronutrient intake to metabolic processes

On the one hand, nutrient sources as well as their intake ratios considerably differ between plant-based and omnivore diets (Suppl. Table  1 ), and on the other hand, dietary micro- and macromolecules as well as their metabolic substrates affect a diversity of physiological functions, pointing to complex interdependencies. Thus, it seems difficult to nail down the proposed beneficial effects of a plant-based diet on metabolic status to one specific component or characteristic, and it seems unlikely that the usually low amount of calories in plant-based diets could explain all observed effects. Rather, plant-based diets might act through multiple pathways, including better glycemic control 43 , lower inflammatory activity 44 and altered neurotransmitter metabolism via dietary intake 45 or intestinal activity 46 (Fig.  4 ).

BMI body-mass-index, HbA1c hemoglobin A1c, LDL-cholesterol low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Trp tryptophan, Tyr tyrosine. Images from commons.wikimedia.org , “Brain human sagittal section” by Lynch 2006 and “Complete GI tract” by Häggström 2008, “Anatomy Figure Vector Clipart” by http://moziru.com

On the macronutrient level, plant-based diets feature different types of fatty acids (mono- and poly-unsaturated versus saturated and trans) and sugars (complex and unrefined versus simple and refined), which might both be important players for mediating beneficial health effects 18 . On the micronutrient level, the EPIC-Oxford study provided the largest sample of vegan dieters worldwide ( n (vegan) = 2396, n (total) = 65,429) and showed on the one hand lower intake of saturated fatty acids (SFA), retinol, vitamin B12 and D, calcium, zinc and protein, and on the other hand higher intake of fiber, magnesium, iron, folic acid, vitamin B1, C and E in vegan compared to omnivore dieters 47 . Other studies confirmed the variance of nutrient intake across dietary groups, i.e. omnivores, vegetarians and vegans, showing the occurrence of critical nutrients for each group 48 , 49 . Not only the amount of SFA but also its source and profile might be important factors regulating metabolic control (reviewed in ref. 14 ), for example through contributing to systemic hyperlipidemia and subsequent cardiovascular risk. Recently, it has been shown in a 4-week intervention trial that short-term dietary changes favoring a diet high in animal-based protein may lead to an increased risk for cardiovascular derangements mediated by higher levels of trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO), which is a metabolite of gut bacteria-driven metabolic pathways 50 .

Secondly, high fiber intake from legumes, grains, vegetables and fruits is a prominent feature of plant-based diets (Table  1 ), which could induce beneficial metabolic processes like upregulated carbohydrate fermentation and downregulated protein fermentation 35 , improved gut hormonal-driven appetite regulation 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , and might prevent chronic diseases such as obesity and T2DM by slowing down digestion and improving lipid control 56 . A comprehensive review including evidence from 185 prospective studies and 58 clinical trials concluded that risk reduction for a myriad of diseases (incl. CVD, T2DM, stroke incidence) was greatest for daily fiber intake between 25 and 29 g 57 . Precise evidence for underlying mechanisms is missing; however, more recently it has been suggested that high fiber intake induces changes on the microbial level leading to lower long-term weight gain 58 , a mechanism discussed below.

The reason for lower systemic inflammation in plant-based dieters could be due to the abundance of antiinflammatory molecule intake and/or avoidance of proinflammatory animal-derived molecules. Assessing systemic inflammation is particularly relevant for medical conditions such as obesity, where it has been proposed to increase the risk for cardiovascular disease 59 , 60 . In addition, higher C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels have been linked with measures of brain microstructure, such as microstructural integrity and white matter lesions 61 , 62 , 63 and higher risk of dementia 64 , and recent studies point out that a diet-related low inflammatory index might also directly affect healthy brain ageing 65 , 66 .

Interventional studies that focus on plant- versus meat-based proteins or micronutrients and potential effects on the body and brain are lacking. A meta-analysis including seven RCTs and one cross-sectional studies on physical performance and dietary habits concluded that a vegetarian diet did not adversely influence physical performance compared to an omnivore diet 67 . An epidemiological study by Song et al. 11 estimated that statistically replacing 3% of animal protein, especially from red meat or eggs, with plant protein would significantly improve mortality rates. This beneficial effect might however not be explained by the protein source itself, but possibly by detrimental components found in meat (e.g. heme-iron or nitrosamines, antibiotics, see below).

Some studies further hypothesized that health benefits observed in a plant-based diet stem from higher levels of fruits and vegetables providing phytochemicals or vitamin C that might boost immune function and eventually prevent certain types of cancer 68 , 69 , 70 . A meta-analysis on the effect of phytochemical intake concluded a beneficial effect on CVD, cancer, overweight, body composition, glucose tolerance, digestion and mental health 71 . Looking further on the impact of micronutrients and single dietary compounds, there is room for speculation that molecules, that are commonly avoided in plant-based diets, might affect metabolic status and overall health, such as opioid-peptides derived from casein 72 , pre- and probiotics 73 , 74 , carry-over antibiotics found in animal products 75 , 76 or food-related carcinogenic toxins, such as dioxin found in eggs or nitrosamines found in red and processed meat 77 , 78 . Although conclusive evidence is missing, these findings propose indirect beneficial effects on health deriving from plant-based compared to animal-based foods, with a potential role for nonprotein substances in mediating those effects 18 . While data regarding chemical contaminant levels (such as crop pesticides, herbicides or heavy metals) in different food items are fragmentary only, certain potentially harmful compounds may be more (or less) frequently consumed in plant-based diets compared to more animal-based diets 79 . Whether these differences lead to systematic health effects need to be explored.

Taken together, the reviewed studies indicating effects of plant-based diets through macro- and micronutrient intake reveal both the potential of single ingredients or food groups (low SFA, high fiber) and the immense complexity of diet-related mechanisms for metabolic health. As proposed by several authors, benefits on health related to diet can probably not be viewed in isolation for the intake (or nonintake) of specific foods, but rather by additive or even synergistic effects between them (reviewed in refs. 12 , 80 ). Even if it remains a challenging task to design long-term RCTs that control macro- and micronutrient levels across dietary intervention groups, technological advancements such as more fine-tuned diagnostic measurements and automated self-monitoring tools, e.g. automatic food recognition systems 81 and urine-related measures of dietary intake 82 , could help to push the field forward.

Nutrients of particular interest in plant-based diets

As described above, plant-based diets have been shown to convey nutritional benefits 48 , 49 , in particular increased fiber, beta carotene, vitamin K and C, folate, magnesium, and potassium intake and an improved dietary health index 83 . However, a major criticism of plant-based diets is the risk of nutrient deficiencies for specific micronutrients, especially vitamin B12, a mainly animal-derived nutrient, which is missing entirely in vegan diets unless supplemented or provided in B12-fortified products, and which seems detrimental for neurological and cognitive health when intake is low. In the EPIC-Oxford study about 50% of the vegan dieters showed serum levels indicating vitamin B12 deficiency 84 . Along other risk factors such as age 85 , diet, and plant-based diets in particular, seem to be the main risk factor for vitamin B12 deficiency (reviewed in ref. 86 ), and therefore supplementing vitamin B12 for these risk groups is highly recommended 87 . Vitamin B12 is a crucial component involved in early brain development, in maintaining normal central nervous system function 88 and suggested to be neuroprotective, particularly for memory performance and hippocampal microstructure 89 . One hypothesis is that high levels of homocysteine, that is associated with vitamin B12 deficiency, might be harmful to the body. Vitamin B12 is the essential cofactor required for the conversion of homocysteine into nonharmful components and serves as a cofactor in different enzymatic reactions. A person suffering from vitamin B12 insufficiency accumulates homocysteine, lastly promoting the formation of plaques in arteries and thereby increasing atherothrombotic risk 90 , possibly facilitating symptoms in patients of Alzheimer’s disease 91 . A meta-analysis found that vitamin B12 deficiency was associated with stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s disease and in even lower concentrations with cognitive impairment 92 , supporting the claim of its high potential for disease prevention when avoided or treated 93 . Further investigations and longitudinal studies are needed, possibly measuring holotranscobalamin (the active form of vitamin B12) as a more specific and sensitive marker for vitamin B12 status 94 , to examine in how far nonsupplementing vegan dieters could be at risk for cardiovascular and cognitive impairment.

Similar health dangers can stem from iron deficiency, another commonly assumed risk for plant-based dieters and other risk groups such as young women. A meta-analysis on 24 studies proposes that although serum ferritin levels were lower in vegetarians on average, it is recommended to sustain an optimal ferritin level (neither too low nor too high), calling for well-monitored supplementation strategies 95 . Iron deficiency is not only dependent on iron intake as such but also on complimentary dietary factors influencing its bioavailability (discussed in ref. 95 ). The picture remains complex: on the one hand iron deficiency may lead to detrimental health effects, such as impairments in early brain development and cognitive functions in adults and in children carried by iron-deficient mothers 96 and a possible role for iron overload in the brain on cognitive impairment on the other hand 97 . One study showed that attention, memory and learning were impaired in iron-deficient compared to iron-sufficient women, which could be restored after a 4-month oral iron supplementation ( n  = 118) 98 . Iron deficiency-related impairments could be attributed to anemia as an underlying cause, possibly leading to fatigue, or an undersupply of blood to the brain or alterations in neurobiological and neuronal systems 99 provoking impaired cognitive functioning.

This leads to the general recommendation to monitor health status by frequent blood tests, to consult a dietician to live healthily on a plant-based diet and to consider supplements to avoid nutrient deficiencies or nutrient-overdose-related toxicity. All in all, organizations such as the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 100 and the German Nutrition Society do not judge iron as a major risk factor for plant-based dieters 101 .

Section II: Effects of diet on the gut microbiome

The link between diet and microbial diversity.

Another putative mechanistic pathway of how plant-based diets can affect health may involve the gut microbiome which has increasingly received scientific and popular interest, lastly not only through initiatives such as the Human Microbiome Project 102 . A common measure for characterizing the gut community is enterotyping, which is a way to stratify individuals according to their gut bacterial diversity, by calculating the ratio between bacterial genera, such as Prevotella and Bacteroides 103 . While interventional controlled trials are still scarce, this ratio has been shown to be conclusive for differentiating plant-based from animal-based microbial profiles 36 . Specifically, in a sample of 98 individuals, Wu et al. 36 found that a diet high in protein and animal fats was related to more Bacteroides, whereas a diet high in carbohydrates, representing a plant-based one, was associated with more Prevotella. Moreover, the authors showed that a change in diet to high-fat/low-fiber or to low-fat/high-fiber in ten individuals elicited a change in gut microbial enterotype with a time delay of 24 h only and remained stable over 10 days, however not being able to switch completely to another enterotype 36 . Another strictly controlled 30-day cross-over interventional study showed that a change in diet to either an exclusively animal-based or plant-based diet promoted gut microbiota diversity and genetic expression to change within 5 days 35 . Particularly, in response to adopting an animal-based diet, microbial diversity increased rapidly, even overshadowing individual microbial gene expression. Beyond large shifts in overall diet, already modest dietary modifications such as the daily consumption of 43 g of walnuts, were able to promote probiotic- and butyric acid-producing bacterial species in two RCTs, after 3 and 8 weeks respectively 104 , 105 , highlighting the high adaptability of the gut microbiome to dietary components. The Prevotella to Bacteroides ratio (P/B) has been shown to be involved in the success of dietary interventions targeting weight loss, with larger weight loss in high P/B compared to low P/B in a 6-month whole-grain diet compared to a conventional diet 106 . Only recently, other microbial communities, such as the salivary microbiome, have been shown to be different between omnivores and vegan dieters 107 , opening new avenues for research on adaptable mechanisms related to dietary intake.

A continuum in microbial diversity dependent on diet

Plant-based diets are supposed to be linked to a specific microbial profile, with a vegan profile being most different from an omnivore, but not always different from a vegetarian profile (reviewed in ref. 15 ). Some specifically vegan gut microbial characteristics have also been found in a small sample of six obese subjects after 1 month following a vegetarian diet, namely less pathobionts, more protective bacterial species improving lipid metabolism and a reduced level of intestinal inflammation 108 . Investigating long-term dietary patterns a study found a dose-dependent effect for altered gut microbiota in vegetarians and vegans compared to omnivores depending on the quantity of animal products 109 . The authors showed that gut microbial profiles of plant-based diets feature the same total number but lower counts of Bacteroides, Bifidobacterium, E. coli and Enterobacteriaceae compared to omnivores, with the biggest difference to vegans. Still today it remains unclear, what this shift in bacterial composition means in functional terms, prompting the field to develop more functional analyses.

In a 30-day intervention study, David et al. found that fermentation processes linked to fat and carbohydrate decomposition were related to the abundance of certain microbial species 35 . They found a strong correlation between fiber intake and Prevotella abundance in the microbial gut. More recently, Prevotella has been associated with plant-based diets 110 that are comparable to low-fat/high-fiber diets 111 and might be linked to the increased synthesis of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) 112 . SCFAs are discussed as putative signaling molecules between the gut microbiome and the receptors, i.e. free fatty acid receptor 2 (FFA2) 51 , found in host cells across different tissues 113 and could therefore be one potential mechanism of microbiome−host communication.

The underlying mechanisms of nutrient decomposition by Prevotella and whether abundant Prevotella populations in the gut are beneficial for overall health remain unknown. Yet it seems possible that an increased fiber intake and therefore higher Prevotella abundance such as associated with plant-based diets is beneficial for regulating glycemic control and keeping inflammatory processes within normal levels, possibly due to reduced appetite and lower energy intake mediated by a higher fiber content 114 . Moreover, it has been brought forward that the microbiome might influence bodily homeostatic control, suggesting a role for the gut microbiota in whole-body control mechanisms on the systemic level. Novel strategies aim to develop gut-microbiota-based therapies to improve bodily states, e.g. glycemic control 115 , based on inducing microbial changes and thereby eliciting higher-level changes in homeostasis. While highly speculative, such strategies could in theory also exert changes on the brain level, which will be discussed next in the light of a bi-directional feedback between the gut and the brain.

Effects on cognition and behavior linking diet and cognition via the microbiome−gut−brain axis

While the number of interventional studies focusing on cognitive and mental health outcomes after adopting plant-based diets overall is very limited (see Section I above), one underlying mechanism of how plant-based diets may affect mood could involve signaling pathways on the microbiome−gut−brain axis 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 . A recent 4-week intervention RCT showed that probiotic administration compared to placebo and no intervention modulated brain activity during emotional decision-making and emotional recognition tasks 117 . In chronic depression it has been proposed that immunoglobulin A and M antibodies are synthesized by the host in response to gut commensals and are linked to depressive symptoms 120 . Whether the identified gram-negative bacteria might also play a role in plant-based diets remains to be explored. A meta-analysis on five studies concluded that probiotics may mediate an alleviating effect on depression symptomatic 121 —however, sample sizes remained rather small ( n  < 100) and no long-term effects were tested (up to 8 weeks).

Currently, several studies aim to identify microbial profiles in relation to disease and how microbial data can be used on a multimodal way to improve functional resolution, e.g. characterizing microbial profiles of individuals suffering from type-1 diabetes 122 . Yet, evidence for specific effects of diet on cognitive functions and behavior through changes in the microbiome remains scarce. A recent study indicated the possibility that our food choices determine the quantity and quality of neurotransmitter-precursor levels that we ingest, which in turn might influence behavior, as shown by lower fairness during a money-redistribution task, called the ultimatum game, after a high-carbohydrate/protein ratio breakfast than after a low-ratio breakfast 123 . Strang et al. found that precursor forms of serotonin and dopamine, measured in blood serum, predicted behavior in this task, and precursor concentrations were dependent on the nutrient profile of the consumed meal before the task. Also on a cross-sectional level tryptophan metabolites from fecal samples have been associated with amygdala-reward network functional connectivity 124 . On top of the dietary composition per se, the microbiota largely contributes to neurotransmitter precursor concentrations; thus, in addition to measuring neurotransmitter precursors in the serum, metabolomics on fecal samples would be helpful to further understand the functional role of the gut microbiota in neurotransmitter biosynthesis and regulation 125 .

Indicating the relevance of gut microbiota for cognition, a first human study assessing cognitive tests and brain imaging could distinguish obese from nonobese individuals using a microbial profile 126 . The authors found a specific microbiotic profile, particularly defined by Actinobacteria phylum abundance, that was associated with microstructural properties in the hypothalamus and in the caudate nucleus. Further, a preclinical study tested whether probiotics could enhance cognitive function in healthy subjects, showing small effects on improved memory performance and reduced stress levels 127 .

A recent study could show that microbial composition influences cerebral amyloidogenesis in a mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease 128 . Health status of the donor mouse seemingly mattered: fecal transplants from transgenic mice had a larger impact on amyloid beta proliferation in the brain compared to wild-type feces. Translational interpretations to humans should be done with caution if at all—yet the results remain elucidative for showing a link between the gut microbiome and brain metabolism.

The evidence for effects of strictly plant-based diets on cognition is very limited. For other plant-based diets such as the Mediterranean diet or DASH diet, there are more available studies that indicate protective effects on cardiovascular and brain health in the aging population (reviewed in refs. 129 , 130 ). Several attempts have been made to clarify potential underlying mechanisms, for example using supplementary plant polyphenols, fish/fish-oil consumption or whole dietary pattern change in RCTs 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137 , yet results are not always equivocal and large-scale intervention studies have yet to be completed.

The overall findings of this paragraph add to the evidence that microbial diversity may be associated with brain health, although underlying mechanisms and candidate signaling molecules remain unknown.

Based on this systematic review of randomized clinical trials, there is an overall robust support for beneficial effects of a plant-based diet on metabolic measures in health and disease. However, the evidence for cognitive and mental effects of a plant-based diet is still inconclusive. Also, it is not clear whether putative effects are due to the diet per se, certain nutrients of the diet (or the avoidance of certain animal-based nutrients) or other factors associated with vegetarian/vegan diets. Evolving concepts argue that emotional distress and mental illnesses are linked to the role of microbiota in neurological function and can be potentially treated via microbial intervention strategies 19 . Moreover, it has been claimed that certain diseases, such as obesity, are caused by a specific microbial composition 138 , and that a balanced gut microbiome is related to healthy ageing 111 . In this light, it seems possible that a plant-based diet is able to influence brain function by still unclear underlying mechanisms of an altered microbial status and systemic metabolic alterations. However, to our knowledge there are no studies linking plant-based diets and cognitive abilities on a neural level, which are urgently needed, due to the hidden potential as a dietary therapeutic tool. Also, further studies are needed to disentangle motivational beliefs on a psychological level that lead to a change in diet from causal effects on the body and the brain mediated e.g., by metabolic alterations or a change in the gut microbiome.

GOV.UK. National Diet and Nutrition Survey: headline results from years 1, 2 and 3 (combined) of the rolling programme 2008/09–2010/11. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-headline-results-from-years-1-2-and-3-combined-of-the-rolling-programme-200809-201011 (2012).

V. E. B. U. Deutschland & Joy, S. Anzahl der Veganer und Vegetarier in Deutschland. Stand 31 , 2016 (2015).

Mensink, G., Barbosa, C. L. & Brettschneider, A.-K. Verbreitung der vegetarischen Ernährungsweise in Deutschland 1 , (2016).

The Vegetarian Resource Group. How many adults in the U.S. are vegetarian and vegan? http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/Polls/2016_adults_veg.htm (2016).

Rosenfeld, D. L. & Burrow, A. L. Vegetarian on purpose: understanding the motivations of plant-based dieters. Appetite 116 , 456–463 (2017).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Orlich, M. J. et al. Vegetarian dietary patterns and mortality in Adventist Health Study 2. JAMA Intern. Med. 173 , 1230–1238 (2013).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Le, L. T. & Sabaté, J. Beyond meatless, the health effects of vegan diets: findings from the Adventist cohorts. Nutrients 6 , 2131–2147 (2014).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mihrshahi, S. et al. Vegetarian diet and all-cause mortality: evidence from a large population-based Australian cohort-the 45 and up study. Prev. Med. 97 , 1–7 (2017).

Key, T. J. et al. Mortality in British vegetarians: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford). Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 89 , 1613S–1619S (2009).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fung, T. T. et al. Low-carbohydrate diets and all-cause and cause-specific mortalitytwo cohort studies. Ann. Intern. Med. 153 , 289–298 (2010).

Song, M. et al. Association of animal and plant protein intake with all-cause and cause-specific mortality. JAMA Intern. Med. 176 , 1453–1463 (2016).

Hu, F. B. Plant-based foods and prevention of cardiovascular disease: an overview. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 78 , 544S–551S (2003).

Tonstad, S., Butler, T., Yan, R. & Fraser, G. E. Type of vegetarian diet, body weight, and prevalence of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 32 , 791–796 (2009).

McEvoy, C. T., Temple, N. & Woodside, J. V. Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: a review. Public Health Nutr. 15 , 2287–2294 (2012).

Glick-Bauer, M. & Yeh, M.-C. The health advantage of a vegan diet: exploring the gut microbiota connection. Nutrients 6 , 4822–4838 (2014).

Appleby, P. N. & Key, T. J. The long-term health of vegetarians and vegans. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 75 , 287–293 (2016).

Eichelmann, F., Schwingshackl, L., Fedirko, V. & Aleksandrova, K. Effect of plant‐based diets on obesity‐related inflammatory profiles: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of intervention trials. Obes. Rev. 17 , 1067–1079 (2016).

McMacken, M. & Shah, S. A plant-based diet for the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes. J. Geriatr. Cardiol. 14 , 342 (2017).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rogers, G. B. et al. From gut dysbiosis to altered brain function and mental illness: mechanisms and pathways. Mol. Psychiatry 21 , 738–748 (2016).

Hibbeln, J. R., Northstone, K., Evans, J. & Golding, J. Vegetarian diets and depressive symptoms among men. J. Affect Disord. 225 , 13–17 (2018).

Forestell, C. A. & Nezlek, J. B. Vegetarianism, depression, and the five factor model of personality. Ecol. Food Nutr. 57 , 246–259 (2018).

Matta, J. et al. Depressive symptoms and vegetarian diets: results from the constances cohort. Nutrients 10 , 1695 (2018).

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Agarwal, U. et al. A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a nutrition intervention program in a multiethnic adult population in the corporate setting reduces depression and anxiety and improves quality of life: the GEICO study. Am. J. Health Promot. 29 , 245–254 (2015).

Beezhold, B., Radnitz, C., Rinne, A. & DiMatteo, J. Vegans report less stress and anxiety than omnivores. Nutr. Neurosci. 18 , 289–296 (2015).

Barnard, N. D., Levin, S. M. & Yokoyama, Y. A systematic review and meta-analysis of changes in body weight in clinical trials of vegetarian diets. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 115 , 954–969 (2015).

Huang, R.-Y., Huang, C.-C., Hu, F. B. & Chavarro, J. E. Vegetarian diets and weight reduction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 31 , 109–116 (2016).

Benatar, J. R. & Stewart, R. A. H. Cardiometabolic risk factors in vegans: a meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS ONE 13 , e0209086 (2018).

Lee, Y.-M. et al. Effect of a brown rice based vegan diet and conventional diabetic diet on glycemic control of patients with type 2 diabetes: a 12-week randomized clinical trial. PLoS ONE 11 , e0155918 (2016).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Jenkins, D. J. A. et al. Effect of a 6-month vegan low-carbohydrate (‘Eco-Atkins’) diet on cardiovascular risk factors and body weight in hyperlipidaemic adults: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 4 , e003505 (2014).

Jenkins, D. J. A. et al. The effect of a plant-based low-carbohydrate (“Eco-Atkins”) diet on body weight and blood lipid concentrations in hyperlipidemic subjects. Arch. Intern. Med. 169 , 1046–1054 (2009).

Barnard, N. D. et al. A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2009.26736H (2009).

Kahleova, H., Hill M. & Pelikánova, T. Vegetarian vs. conventional diabetic diet—a 1-year follow-up. Cor Vasa 56 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvasa.2013.12.004 (2016).

Article   Google Scholar  

Turner-McGrievy, G. M., Davidson, C. R., Wingard, E. E., Wilcox, S. & Frongillo, E. A. Comparative effectiveness of plant-based diets for weight loss: a randomized controlled trial of five different diets. Nutrition 31 , 350–358 (2015).

Wing, R. R. & Phelan, S. Long-term weight loss maintenance. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 82 , 222S–225S (2005).

David, L. A. et al. Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome. Nature 505 , 559–563 (2014).

Wu, G. D. et al. Linking long-term dietary patterns with gut microbial enterotypes. Science (80-) 334 , 105–108 (2011).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Kaartinen, K. et al. Vegan diet alleviates fibromyalgia symptoms. Scand. J. Rheumatol. 29 , 308–313 (2000).

Yadav, V. et al. Low-fat, plant-based diet in multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 9 , 80–90 (2016).

Rauma, A. L., Nenonen, M., Helve, T. & Hänninen, O. Effect of a strict vegan diet on energy and nutrient intakes by Finnish rheumatoid patients. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 47 , 747–749 (1993).

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Elkan, A.-C. et al. Gluten-free vegan diet induces decreased LDL and oxidized LDL levels and raised atheroprotective natural antibodies against phosphorylcholine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized study. Arthritis Res. Ther. 10 , R34 (2008).

Karlsson, J. et al. Predictors and effects of long-term dieting on mental well-being and weight loss in obese women. Appetite 23 , 15–26 (1994).

Beezhold, B. L. & Johnston, C. S. Restriction of meat, fish, and poultry in omnivores improves mood: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Nutr. J. 11 , 9 (2012).

Yokoyama, Y., Barnard, N. D., Levin, S. M. & Watanabe, M. Vegetarian diets and glycemic control in diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc. Diagn. Ther. 4 , 373–382 (2014).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sutliffe, J. T., Wilson, L. D., de Heer, H. D., Foster, R. L. & Carnot, M. J. C-reactive protein response to a vegan lifestyle intervention. Complement Ther. Med. 23 , 32–37 (2015).

Strasser, B., Gostner, J. M. & Fuchs, D. Mood, food, and cognition: role of tryptophan and serotonin. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care 19 , 55–61 (2016).

O’Mahony, S. M., Clarke, G., Borre, Y. E., Dinan, T. G. & Cryan, J. F. Serotonin, tryptophan metabolism and the brain-gut-microbiome axis. Behav. Brain Res. 277 , 32–48 (2015).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Davey, G. K. et al. EPIC–Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK. Public Health Nutr. 6 , 259–268 (2003).

Schüpbach, R., Wegmüller, R., Berguerand, C., Bui, M. & Herter-Aeberli, I. Micronutrient status and intake in omnivores, vegetarians and vegans in Switzerland. Eur. J. Nutr. 56 , 283–293 (2017).

Clarys, P. et al. Comparison of nutritional quality of the vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian and omnivorous diet. Nutrients 6 , 1318–1332 (2014).

Park, J. E., Miller, M., Rhyne, J., Wang, Z. & Hazen, S. L. Differential effect of short-term popular diets on TMAO and other cardio-metabolic risk markers. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 29 , 513–517 (2019).

Psichas, A. et al. The short chain fatty acid propionate stimulates GLP-1 and PYY secretion via free fatty acid receptor 2 in rodents. Int J. Obes. 39 , 424 (2015).

Lin, H. V. et al. Butyrate and propionate protect against diet-induced obesity and regulate gut hormones via free fatty acid receptor 3-independent mechanisms. PLoS ONE 7 , e35240 (2012).

Canfora, E. E., Jocken, J. W. & Blaak, E. E. Short-chain fatty acids in control of body weight and insulin sensitivity. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 11 , 577 (2015).

Guo, Y. et al. Physiological evidence for the involvement of peptide YY in the regulation of energy homeostasis in humans. Obesity 14 , 1562–1570 (2006).

Holzer, P., Reichmann, F. & Farzi, A. Neuropeptide Y, peptide YY and pancreatic polypeptide in the gut–brain axis. Neuropeptides 46 , 261–274 (2012).

Kendall, C. W. C., Esfahani, A. & Jenkins, D. J. A. The link between dietary fibre and human health. Food Hydrocoll. 24 , 42–48 (2010).

Reynolds, A. et al. Carbohydrate quality and human health: a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet . https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31809-9 (2019).

Menni, C. et al. Gut microbiome diversity and high-fibre intake are related to lower long-term weight gain. Int. J. Obes. 41 , 1099 (2017).

Van Gaal, L. F., Mertens, I. L. & Christophe, E. Mechanisms linking obesity with cardiovascular disease. Nature 444 , 875 (2006).

Ferreira, C. M. et al. The central role of the gut microbiota in chronic inflammatory diseases. J. Immunol. Res. 2014 , https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/689492 (2014).

Wersching, H. et al. Serum C-reactive protein is linked to cerebral microstructural integrity and cognitive function. Neurology 74 , 1022–1029 (2010).

Gu, Y. et al. Circulating inflammatory biomarkers in relation to brain structural measurements in a non-demented elderly population. Brain Behav. Immun. 65 , 150–160 (2017).

Lampe, L. et al. Visceral obesity relates to deep white matter hyperintensities via inflammation. Ann. Neurol. 85 , 194–203 (2018).

Google Scholar  

Schmidt, R. et al. Early inflammation and dementia: a 25‐year follow‐up of the Honolulu‐Asia Aging Study. Ann. Neurol. 52 , 168–174 (2002).

Rosano, C., Marsland, A. L. & Gianaros, P. J. Maintaining brain health by monitoring inflammatory processes: a mechanism to promote successful aging. Aging Dis. 3 , 16 (2012).

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Tangney, C. C. et al. Relation of DASH-and Mediterranean-like dietary patterns to cognitive decline in older persons. Neurology 83 , 1410–1416 (2014).

Craddock, J. C., Probst, Y. & Peoples, G. Vegetarian nutrition—comparing physical performance of omnivorous and vegetarian athletes. J. Nutr. Intermed. Metab. 4 , 19 (2016).

Liu, R. H. Health benefits of fruit and vegetables are from additive and synergistic combinations of phytochemicals. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 78 , 517S–520S (2003).

Boffetta, P. et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and overall cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 102 , 529–537 (2010).

Reczek, C. R. & Chandel, N. S. Revisiting vitamin C and cancer. Science (80-) 350 , 1317–1318 (2015).

Probst, Y. C., Guan, V. X. & Kent, K. Dietary phytochemical intake from foods and health outcomes: a systematic review protocol and preliminary scoping. BMJ Open 7 , e013337 (2017).

Hartmann, R. & Meisel, H. Food-derived peptides with biological activity: from research to food applications. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 18 , 163–169 (2007).

Tillisch, K. et al. Consumption of fermented milk product with probiotic modulates brain activity. Gastroenterology 144 , 1394–1401 (2013).

Gibson, G. R. et al. Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) consensus statement on thedefinition and scope of prebiotics. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 14 , 491 (2017).

Nisha, A. R. Antibiotic residues-a global health hazard. Vet. World 1 , 375–377 (2008).

Wang, H. et al. Antibiotic residues in meat, milk and aquatic products in Shanghai and human exposure assessment. Food Control 80 , 217–225 (2017).

Bertazzi, P. A. et al. Health effects of dioxin exposure: a 20-year mortality study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 153 , 1031–1044 (2001).

Bouvard, V. et al. Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat. Lancet Oncol. 16 , 1599–1600 (2015).

Van Audenhaege, M. et al. Impact of food consumption habits on the pesticide dietary intake: comparison between a French vegetarian and the general population. Food Addit. Contam . 26 , 1372–1388 (2009).

Jacobs, D. R. & Tapsell, L. C. Food synergy: the key to a healthy diet. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 72 , 200–206 (2013).

Kawano, Y. & Yanai, K. Foodcam: a real-time food recognition system on a smartphone. Multimed. Tools Appl. 74 , 5263–5287 (2015).

Garcia-Perez, I. et al. Objective assessment of dietary patterns by use of metabolic phenotyping: a randomised, controlled, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 5 , 184–195 (2017).

Turner-McGrievy, G. M. et al. Changes in nutrient intake and dietary quality among participants with type 2 diabetes following a low-fat vegan diet or a conventional diabetes diet for 22 weeks. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 108 , 1636–1645 (2008).

Gilsing, A. M. J. et al. Serum concentrations of vitamin B12 and folate in British male omnivores, vegetarians and vegans: results from a cross-sectional analysis of the EPIC-Oxford cohort study. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 64 , 933–939 (2010).

Allen, L. H. How common is vitamin B-12 deficiency? Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 89 , 693S–696S (2008).

Pawlak, R., Parrott, S. J., Raj, S., Cullum-Dugan, D. & Lucus, D. How prevalent is vitamin B12 deficiency among vegetarians? Nutr. Rev. 71 , 110–117 (2013).

Rizzo, G. et al. Vitamin B12 among vegetarians: status, assessment and supplementation. Nutrients 8 , 767 (2016).

Article   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Stabler, S. P. Vitamin B12 deficiency. N. Engl. J. Med . 368 , 149–160 (2013).

Köbe, T. et al. Vitamin B-12 concentration, memory performance, and hippocampal structure in patients with mild cognitive impairment, 2. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 103 , 1045–1054 (2016).

Ganguly, P. & Alam, S. F. Role of homocysteine in the development of cardiovascular disease. Nutr. J. 14 , 6 (2015).

McCaddon, A., Regland, B., Hudson, P. & Davies, G. Functional vitamin B12 deficiency and Alzheimer disease. Neurology 58 , 1395–1399 (2002).

Moore, E. et al. Cognitive impairment and vitamin B12: a review. Int. Psychogeriatr. 24 , 541–556 (2012).

Spence, J. D. Metabolic vitamin B12 deficiency: a missed opportunity to prevent dementia and stroke. Nutr. Res. 36 , 109–116 (2016).

Nexo, E. & Hoffmann-Lücke, E. Holotranscobalamin, a marker of vitamin B-12 status: analytical aspects and clinical utility. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 94 , 359S–365S (2011).

Haider, L. M., Schwingshackl, L., Hoffmann, G. & Ekmekcioglu, C. The effect of vegetarian diets on iron status in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 58 , 1359–1374 (2018).

Lozoff, B. & Georgieff, M. K. et al. Iron deficiency and brain development. Semin. Pediatr. Neurol. 13 , 158–165 (2006).

Ayton, S. et al. Brain iron is associated with accelerated cognitive decline in people with Alzheimer pathology. Mol. Psychiatry 1 , https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-019-0375-7 (2019).

Murray-Kolb, L. E. & Beard, J. L. Iron treatment normalizes cognitive functioning in young women. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 85 , 778–787 (2007).

Beard, J. Iron deficiency alters brain development and functioning. J. Nutr. 133 , 1468S–1472S (2003).

Melina, V., Craig, W. & Levin, S. Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: vegetarian diets. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 116 , 1970–1980 (2016).

Richter, M. et al. For the German Nutrition Society (DGE)(2016) Vegan diet. Position of the German Nutrition Society (DGE). Ernaehrungsumschau 63 , 92–102 (2016).

Peterson, J. et al. The NIH human microbiome project. Genome Res. 19 , 2317–2323 (2009).

Arumugam, M. et al. Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome. Nature 473 , 174–180 (2013).

Bamberger, C. et al. A walnut-enriched diet affects gut microbiome in healthy Caucasian subjects: a randomized, controlled trial. Nutrients 10 , 244 (2018).

Holscher, H. D. et al. Walnut consumption alters the gastrointestinal microbiota, microbially derived secondary bile acids, and health markers in healthy adults: a randomized controlled trial. J. Nutr. 148 , 861–867 (2018).

Hjorth, M. F. et al. Pre-treatment microbial Prevotella-to-Bacteroides ratio, determines body fat loss success during a 6-month randomized controlled diet intervention. Int J. Obes. 42 , 580 (2018).

Hansen, T. H. et al. Impact of a vegan diet on the human salivary microbiota. Sci. Rep. 8 , 5847 (2018).

Kim, M., Hwang, S., Park, E. & Bae, J. Strict vegetarian diet improves the risk factors associated with metabolic diseases by modulating gut microbiota and reducing intestinal inflammation. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 5 , 765–775 (2013).

Zimmer, J. et al. A vegan or vegetarian diet substantially alters the human colonic faecal microbiota. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 66 , 53–60 (2012).

De Filippis, F., Pellegrini, N., Laghi, L., Gobbetti, M. & Ercolini, D. Unusual sub-genus associations of faecal Prevotella and Bacteroides with specific dietary patterns. Microbiome 4 , 57 (2016).

Kumar, M., Babaei, P., Ji, B. & Nielsen, J. Human gut microbiota and healthy aging: Recent developments and future prospective. Nutr. Health Aging 4 , 3–16 (2016).

Wu, G. D. et al. Comparative metabolomics in vegans and omnivores reveal constraints on diet-dependent gut microbiota metabolite production. Gut 65 , 63–72 (2014).

Morrison, D. J. & Preston, T. Formation of short chain fatty acids by the gut microbiota and their impact on human metabolism. Gut Microbes 7 , 189–200 (2016).

Wanders, A. J. et al. Effects of dietary fibre on subjective appetite, energy intake and body weight: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Obes. Rev. 12 , 724–739 (2011).

Brunkwall, L. & Orho-Melander, M. The gut microbiome as a target for prevention and treatment of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: from current human evidence to future possibilities. Diabetologia 60 , 943–951 (2017).

Lach, G., Schellekens, H., Dinan, T. G. & Cryan, J. F. Anxiety, depression, and the microbiome: a role for gut peptides. Neurotherapeutics 15 , 36–59 (2018).

Bagga, D. et al. Influence of 4-week multi-strain probiotic administration on resting-state functional connectivity in healthy volunteers. Eur. J. Nutr. 58 , 1821–1827 (2018).

Foster, J. A. & Neufeld, K.-A. M. Gut–brain axis: how the microbiome influences anxiety and depression. Trends Neurosci. 36 , 305–312 (2013).

Saulnier, D. M. et al. The intestinal microbiome, probiotics and prebiotics in neurogastroenterology. Gut Microbes 4 , 17–27 (2013).

Maes, M., Kubera, M., Leunis, J.-C. & Berk, M. Increased IgA and IgM responses against gut commensals in chronic depression: further evidence for increased bacterial translocation or leaky gut. J. Affect Disord. 141 , 55–62 (2012).

Huang, R., Wang, K. & Hu, J. Effect of probiotics on depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutrients 8 , 483 (2016).

Heintz-Buschart, A. et al. Integrated multi-omics of the human gut microbiome in a case study of familial type 1 diabetes. Nat. Microbiol. 2 , 16180 (2016).

Strang, S. et al. Impact of nutrition on social decision making. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 114 , 6510–6514 (2017).

Osadchiy, V. et al. Correlation of tryptophan metabolites with connectivity of extended central reward network in healthy subjects. PLoS ONE 13 , e0201772 (2018).

Franzosa, E. A. et al. Sequencing and beyond: integrating molecular’omics’ for microbial community profiling. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 13 , 360–372 (2015).

Fernandez-Real, J.-M. et al. Gut microbiota interacts with brain microstructure and function. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 100 , 4505–4513 (2015).

Allen, A. P. et al. Bifidobacterium longum 1714 as a translational psychobiotic: modulation of stress, electrophysiology and neurocognition in healthy volunteers. Transl. Psychiatry 6 , e939 (2016).

Harach, T. et al. Reduction of Abeta amyloid pathology in APPPS1 transgenic mice in the absence of gut microbiota. Sci. Rep. 7 , 41802 (2017).

Huhn, S., Masouleh, S. K., Stumvoll, M., Villringer, A. & Witte, A. V. Components of a Mediterranean diet and their impact on cognitive functions in aging. Front Aging Neurosci 7 , 132 (2015).

Larsson, S. C., Wallin, A. & Wolk, A. Dietary approaches to stop hypertension diet and incidence of stroke: results from 2 prospective cohorts. Stroke 47 , 986–990 (2016).

van de Rest, O. et al. Effect of fish oil on cognitive performance in older subjects: a randomized, controlled trial. Neurology 71 , 430–438 (2008).

Witte, A. V. et al. Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids improve brain function and structure in older adults. Cereb. Cortex 24 , 3059–3068 (2013).

Witte, A. V., Kerti, L., Margulies, D. S. & Flöel, A. Effects of resveratrol on memory performance, hippocampal functional connectivity, and glucose metabolism in healthy older adults. J. Neurosci. 34 , 7862–7870 (2014).

Brickman, A. M. et al. Enhancing dentate gyrus function with dietary flavanols improves cognition in older adults. Nat. Neurosci. 17 , 1798 (2014).

Martínez-González, M. A. et al. Benefits of the Mediterranean diet: insights from the PREDIMED study. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 58 , 50–60 (2015).

Huhn, S. et al. Effects of resveratrol on memory performance, hippocampus connectivity and microstructure in older adults—a randomized controlled trial. Neuroimage (2018).

Rosenberg, A. et al. Multidomain lifestyle intervention benefits a large elderly population at risk for cognitive decline and dementia regardless of baseline characteristics: The FINGER trial. Alzheimer’s. Dement. 14 , 263–270 (2018).

Turnbaugh, P. J. Microbes and diet-induced obesity: fast, cheap, and out of control. Cell Host Microbe 21 , 278–281 (2017).

Turner-Mc Grievy, G. M., Barnard, N. D. & Scialli, A. R. A two-year randomized weight loss trial comparing a vegan diet to a more moderate low-fat diet*. Obesity 15 , 2276–2281 (2007).

Burke, L. E. et al. A randomized clinical trial of a standard versus vegetarian diet for weight loss: the impact of treatment preference. Int. J. Obes. 32 , 166–176 (2008).

Barnard, N. D. et al. A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 89 , 1588S–1596S (2009).

Marniemi, J., Seppänen, A. & Hakala, P. Long-term effects on lipid metabolism of weight reduction on lactovegetarian and mixed diet. Int. J. Obes. 14 , 113–125 (1990).

Acharya, S. D., Brooks, M. M., Evans, R. W., Linkov, F. & Burke, L. E. Weight loss is more important than the diet type in improving adiponectin levels among overweight/obese adults. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 32 , 264–271 (2013).

Wright, N., Wilson, L., Smith, M., Duncan, B. & McHugh, P. The BROAD study: A randomised controlled trial using a whole food plant-based diet in the community for obesity, ischaemic heart disease or diabetes. Nutr. Diabetes 7 , e256 (2017).

Turner-McGrievy, G. M., Davidson, C. R., Wingard, E. E. & Billings, D. L. Low glycemic index vegan or low-calorie weight loss diets for women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomized controlled feasibility study. Nutr. Res. 34 , 552–558 (2014).

Kahleova, H. et al. Vegetarian diet improves insulin resistance and oxidative stress markers more than conventional diet in subjects with Type 2 diabetes. Diabet. Med 28 , 549–559 (2011).

Ferdowsian, H. R. et al. A multicomponent intervention reduces body weight and cardiovascular risk at a GEICO corporate site. Am. J. Heal. Promot 24 , 384–387 (2010).

Mishra, S. et al. A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a plant-based nutrition program to reduce body weight and cardiovascular risk in the corporate setting: the GEICO study. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 67 , 718 (2013).

Agarwal, U. et al. A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a nutrition intervention program in a multiethnic adult population in the corporate setting reduces depression and anxiety and improves quality of life: the GEICO study. Am. J. Heal. Promot 29 , 245–254 (2015).

Kahleova, H., Dort, S., Holubkov, R. & Barnard, N. A plant-based high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in overweight individuals in a 16-week randomized clinical trial: the role of carbohydrates. Nutrients 10 , 1302 (2018).

Barnard, N., Scialli, A. R., Bertron, P., Hurlock, D. & Edmonds, K. Acceptability of a therapeutic low-fat, vegan diet in premenopausal women. J. Nutr. Educ. 32 , 314–319 (2000).

Gardner, C. D. et al. The effect of a plant-based diet on plasma lipids in hypercholesterolemic adults: a randomized trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 142 , 733 (2005).

Macknin, M. et al. Plant-based, no-added-fat or American Heart Association diets: impact on cardiovascular risk in obese children with hypercholesterolemia and their parents. J. Pediatr. 166 , 953–959 (2015).

Sciarrone, S. E. et al. Biochemical and neurohormonal responses to the introduction of a lacto-ovovegetarian diet. J. Hypertens. 11 , 849–860 (1993).

Alleman, R. J., Harvey, I. C., Farney, T. M. & Bloomer, R. J. Both a traditional and modified Daniel Fast improve the cardio-metabolic profile in men and women. Lipids Health Dis. 12 , 114 (2013).

Neacsu, M., Fyfe, C., Horgan, G. & Johnstone, A. M. Appetite control and biomarkers of satiety with vegetarian (soy) and meat-based high-protein diets for weight loss in obese men: a randomized crossover trial–. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 100 , 548–558 (2014).

Koebnick, C. et al. Double-blind, randomized feedback control fails to improve the hypocholesterolemic effect of a plant-based low-fat diet in patients with moderately elevated total cholesterol levels. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 58 , 1402 (2004).

Kjeldsen-Kragh, J., Haugen, M., Førre, Ø., Laache, H. & Malt, U. F. Vegetarian diet for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: can the clinical effects be explained by the psychological characteristics of the patients? Rheumatology 33 , 569–575 (1994).

Bunner, A. E., Agarwal, U., Gonzales, J. F., Valente, F. & Barnard, N. D. Nutrition intervention for migraine: a randomized crossover trial. J. Headache Pain. 15 , 69 (2014).

Kahleova, H., Hrachovinova, T., Hill, M. & Pelikanova, T. Vegetarian diet in type 2 diabetes–improvement in quality of life, mood and eating behaviour. Diabet. Med 30 , 127–129 (2013).

Turner-McGrievy, G. M. et al. Randomization to plant-based dietary approaches leads to larger short-term improvements in Dietary Inflammatory Index scores and macronutrient intake compared with diets that contain meat. Nutr. Res. 35 , 97–106 (2015).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a scholarship (E.M.) by the German Federal Environmental Foundation and by the grants of the German Research Foundation contract grant number CRC 1052 “Obesity mechanisms” Project A1 (AV) and WI 3342/3-1 (A.V.W.).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany

Evelyn Medawar, Arno Villringer & A. Veronica Witte

Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Evelyn Medawar & Arno Villringer

Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research GmbH—UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

Sebastian Huhn

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

E.M., A.V. and A.V.W. designed research; E.M. conducted research; E.M., S.H. and A.V.W. analyzed data; E.M. and A.V.W. wrote the paper; E.M., A.V. and A.V.W. had primary responsibility for final content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evelyn Medawar .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Suppl. table 1, suppl. figure 1, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Medawar, E., Huhn, S., Villringer, A. et al. The effects of plant-based diets on the body and the brain: a systematic review. Transl Psychiatry 9 , 226 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-019-0552-0

Download citation

Received : 20 February 2019

Revised : 22 June 2019

Accepted : 17 July 2019

Published : 12 September 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-019-0552-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Biopurification using non-growing microorganisms to improve plant protein ingredients.

• Avis Dwi Wahyu Nugroho
• Saskia van Schalkwijk
• Herwig Bachmann

npj Science of Food (2024)

Between “better than” and “as good as”: mobilizing social representations of alternative proteins to transform meat and dairy consumption practices

• Claudia Laviolette
• Laurence Godin

Agriculture and Human Values (2024)

Nutrient scoring for the DEGS1-FFQ – from food intake to nutrient intake

• Ronja Thieleking
• Lennard Schneidewind
• Evelyn Medawar

BMC Nutrition (2023)

Environmental pressures and pesticide exposure associated with an increase in the share of plant-based foods in the diet

• Emmanuelle Kesse-Guyot
• Benjamin Allès
• Julia Baudry

Scientific Reports (2023)

Animal protein intake is directly associated with serum level of pentraxin 3 in hemodialysis patients

• Fatemeh Navab
• Sahar Foshati
• Mohammad Hossein Rouhani

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Supplement Archive
• Article Collection Archive
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Call for Papers
• Why Publish?
• About Nutrition Reviews
• About International Life Sciences Institute
• Editorial Board
• Early Career Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, risk of bias within studies, acknowledgments.

• < Previous

Diet quality of vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets: a systematic review

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Haley W Parker, Maya K Vadiveloo, Diet quality of vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets: a systematic review, Nutrition Reviews , Volume 77, Issue 3, March 2019, Pages 144–160, https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuy067

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Vegetarian diets are consistently associated with improved health outcomes, and higher diet quality may contribute to improved health outcomes. This systematic review aims to qualitatively compare the a priori diet quality of vegetarian and nonvegetarian diets.

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol, 2 online databases (Web of Science and PubMed) were searched for English language studies comparing diet quality among vegetarian and nonvegetarian adults using an a priori diet quality index. Two reviewers assessed study eligibility. Comparisons were made between total and component (when available) diet quality scores among the 12 studies meeting inclusion criteria.

Lacto-ovo vegetarians or vegans had higher overall diet quality (4.5–16.4 points higher on the Healthy Eating Index 2010 [HEI-2010]) compared with nonvegetarians in 9 of 12 studies. Higher HEI-2010 scores for vegetarians were driven by closer adherence to recommendations for total fruit, whole grains, seafood and plant protein, and sodium. However, nonvegetarians had closer adherence to recommendations for refined grains and total protein foods. Higher diet quality in vegetarian diets may partially explain improvements in health outcomes compared with nonvegetarians; however, more research controlling for known confounders like health consciousness is needed.

Vegetarian diets have been repeatedly and consistently associated with improved health outcomes, 1 including reduced risk of chronic diseases, such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and obesity, 2–4 as well as increased life expectancy. 5 Due to the substantial burden of chronic disease, vegetarian diets have been increasingly recommended as a strategy for improving population health, 6 although the mechanism by which vegetarian diets improve health outcomes is not completely understood. Advocates of vegetarian diets often contend that vegetarian diets are more healthful, but the diet quality of vegetarian diets has not been systematically evaluated, making it difficult to exclude competing explanations such as increased health consciousness among vegetarians.

Types of vegetarian diets

Diet quality typically indicates concordance of a dietary pattern with evidence-based recommendations about food and nutrient intake to promote health and reduce risk of chronic disease. 21 The advantage in assessing diet quality over assessing intake of individual nutrients is that diet quality offers a more holistic assessment, accounting for the synergy between foods and nutrients. 22 Diet quality may be measured using an a priori index where an individual’s intake is compared with either a predetermined standard (ie, national nutrition recommendations) or the sample’s intake distribution. 23 Alternatively, a posteriori approaches can be used to analyze dietary patterns (eg, principle component analysis); however, this review will focus on the a priori assessment of diet quality because a posteriori methods of assessment are data-driven, rather than recommendation-driven. 24 Components, which collectively determine overall diet quality, reflect intake of specific food groups and/or nutrients. 25 Components can be classified as either adequacy components, which are scored directly (higher intake, higher scores) and represent food groups/nutrients where increased intake is encouraged (ie, fruits and vegetables), or moderation components, which are scored inversely (higher intake, lower score) and represent food groups/nutrients where decreased intake is encouraged (ie, added sugar). 25 Without understanding the diet quality of vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets, it is difficult to ascertain whether vegetarianism improves adherence to dietary recommendations, subsequently increasing diet quality and reducing the risk of adverse health outcomes, 26–28 or whether health consciousness associated with vegetarian lifestyles improves health outcomes.

Health consciousness is favorably associated with chronic disease and mortality risk regardless of dietary pattern 29 and may be an important confounding or mediating variable in the association between vegetarianism and improved health outcomes. Vegetarians are more likely to engage in healthful behaviors such as avoiding tobacco, limiting alcohol, being physically active, and maintaining a healthy weight. 30–32 Additionally, health is a commonly cited motivation for following a vegetarian diet, 33 and this regard for health may translate to other behaviors, leading to systematic differences between vegetarians and nonvegetarians in many health-related facets. Populations where vegetarian diets are common tend to be health conscious (eg, Seventh Day Adventists 34 ), which may confound the understanding of the relationship between vegetarianism and health outcomes. Furthermore, vegetarians and health-conscious nonvegetarians have been found to have similar mortality rates in several studies, 35–37 suggesting that the health benefits associated with vegetarianism may be heavily influenced by health consciousness rather than the exclusion of meat.

To date, it is unclear to what degree the association between vegetarianism and improved health outcomes is explained by health consciousness, elimination of meat, and consumption of healthful foods. Thus far, most studies examining the association between vegetarianism and health outcomes fail to consider diet quality as a confounding and/or mediating variable, making it difficult to identify the mechanism. Assessing and comparing the diet quality of nonvegetarian and vegetarian diets (including more- and less-restrictive diets; ie, vegan, pesco-vegetarian, and semi-vegetarian) can help elucidate the underlying mechanism(s) through which vegetarianism confers protection. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to compare the diet quality (including total and component scores) of vegetarian and nonvegetarian diets.

PICOS criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies

Overall diet quality of vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets

Scores for vegetarian diets are for lacto-ovo vegetarian diets unless noted otherwise.

Abbreviations: AHEI, Alternative Healthy Eating Index; BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; DII, Dietary Inflammatory Index (low score reflects better adherence to recommendations); HEI, Healthy Eating Index; MDS, Mediterranean Diet Score; mHEI, Modified Alternative Healthy Eating Index; NHANES, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; OR, odds ratio.

Significantly different from nonvegetarians at P  < 0.05.

Significantly different from nonvegetarians at P  < 0.01.

Vegetarians and vegans scored an average of 38.5 collectively; separate scores were not reported.

Study selection flow diagram.

From the included studies, information was collected regarding type(s) of vegetarian diet(s) examined, diet quality index(es) used, and the mean and standard deviation of vegetarian (and/or vegan, semi-vegetarian, and pesco-vegetarian when available) and nonvegetarian diet quality scores for total and component scores when provided. Studies were also evaluated for their risk of bias based on the methods of participant selection and dietary pattern categorization, measurement of diet history and diet quality, study design, statistical analyses, and control for confounding variables.

Eleven of the 12 included studies made comparisons between the diet quality of (lacto-ovo) vegetarian and nonvegetarian diets (4 studies also compared more- and/or less-restrictive diets), and 1 study solely compared a vegan diet with a nonvegetarian diet. Half of the studies were completed in the United States (n = 6), and the other half were completed in various Western countries (Belgium, Canada, Australia, Italy, and Germany).

Throughout the 12 studies, 7 different diet quality indexes were used, including Healthy Eating Index (HEI; n = 6), Alternative Healthy Eating Index (AHEI; n = 2), Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS; n = 2), Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII; n = 1), Rapid Eating and Activity Assessment for Patients (n = 1), Italian Mediterranean Diet Index (n = 1), and Healthy Eating Quiz (n = 1), and 1 study used an index created for the study (note that some studies used multiple indexes). The HEI and AHEI assess both nutrient and food group intake 7 , 39–43 , 47 and the remaining indexes either focused on nutrient intake (ie, DII 9 ) or food groups (ie, MDS, 7 , 39 Rapid Eating and Activity Assessment for Patients, 8 Healthy Eating Quiz, 45 Italian Mediterranean Diet Index 46 ). Higher scores on all of the indexes (with the exception of the DII, which is scored inversely 9 ) are associated with greater adherence to dietary recommendations presumed or shown to improve health outcomes. Overall scores can be compared among the different indexes; however, components vary greatly across indexes and can only be compared across certain, similar indexes (eg, versions of the HEI and AHEI).

Although the diet quality indexes used differed among the included studies, total diet quality was generally calculated using a combination of adequacy and moderation components; adequacy components assessed adherence to recommended food groups, and moderation components were scored inversely and assessed adherence to recommendations to limit food groups or nutrients associated with adverse health outcomes. To elucidate the mechanisms through which diet quality is influenced by vegetarian and nonvegetarian status, results will first compare overall diet quality, followed by diet quality in adequacy and moderation components. Lastly, findings for diet quality among dietary patterns that are more (ie, vegan) and less (ie, semi-vegetarian and pesco-vegetarian) restrictive than lacto-ovo vegetarian will be reported.

Overall diet quality in lacto-ovo vegetarian diets

Overall diet quality was significantly ( P  < 0.05) higher in vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets in 8 of 11 studies, 2 studies found no differences, and 1 study found that diet quality was significantly ( P  < 0.05) lower in vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets. Of the 11 studies, 10 were observational studies, and 1 was a randomized control trial. Observational studies categorized dietary patterns in 1 of 2 ways, either using participant self-reported vegetarian status (n = 6) or objectively categorized vegetarian status based on the absence of meat, poultry, and fish in participant-reported dietary recalls (n = 3). The categorization method used was not reported for 1 study. 44 Because research shows that approximately 64%–80% of self-identified vegetarians also report meat intake on diet recalls, 13 , 48 , 49 use of self-reported vegetarian status may lead to misclassification. In the 6 studies examining self-reported vegetarian status in convenience samples, vegetarians had consistently higher diet quality compared with nonvegetarians (4.5–7.4 points higher on the HEI and 0.5 points higher on the MDS). 7 , 8 , 39 , 41 , 45 , 46 Vegetarians also had higher diet quality in 2 nationally representative samples, including 1 study within the 2007–2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) using objective categorization 40 and 1 study from Germany (categorization method not provided). 44 Among NHANES 2007–2012 participants, those who reported no meat, fish, or poultry on their 24-hour recall had significantly higher scores on the HEI-2010 (72.81 vs 56.44; P  < 0.001) and AHEI-2010 (49.73 vs 38.49; P  < 0.001) scores compared with participants who reported meat, fish, or poultry on their recalls. 40

In the remaining 3 studies, there were either no differences in diet quality among vegetarians and non-vegetarians 9 , 42 or vegetarians had significantly lower diet quality than nonvegetarians ( P  < 0.05). 43 In a 2-month weight loss trial, participants were randomized to consume 1 of 5 avoidance diets (vegan, vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, or nonvegetarian) and were given advice on foods to exclude as well as guidelines for a low-glycemic-index and low-fat diet. 9 At baseline, 2 months, and 6 months, diet quality was measured by the DII. 9 Although no differences in diet quality between the vegetarian and nonvegetarian groups were detected, 9 adherence to assigned dietary pattern was low (for vegetarian, 77% adhered to the diet at 2 months and 39% at 6 months 50 ) and may have resulted in misclassification bias. It is also difficult to discern the influence of dietary pattern on diet quality in a weight loss trial because the goal of weight loss may have increased diet quality independent of dietary pattern. Similarly, a study examining the NHANES 1999–2004 data did not detect any differences in HEI-2005 scores between vegetarians and nonvegetarians (50.5 vs 50.1), although diet quality differed by dieting status. 42 Among dieters (consuming at least 500 kcals below estimated energy needs), vegetarians had lower HEI-2005 scores than nonvegetarians (47.3 vs 51.0, P  < 0.01), and the finding was reversed for nondieters (53.0 vs 49.7; P  < 0.01), 42 indicating that differences in diet quality between dietary patterns may be influenced by restricted energy intake. Lastly, in a study examining data from the Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (1994–1996), vegetarians scored significantly lower on the HEI-1995 than nonvegetarians (60.8 vs 63.2; P  < 0.05). 43 However, it is important to note that the diet quality indexes used may influence conclusions about diet quality among vegetarians and nonvegetarians. The HEI-1995 and HEI-2005 assessed total protein foods (called “meat and beans” in the earlier HEI). 51 , 52 However, unlike the more recent HEI-2010, a subscore for plant and seafood protein was not included in HEI-1995 and HEI-2005. 51–53 Thus, it is likely that differences between the HEI-1995/HEI-2005 and HEI-2010 contributed to the differing conclusions drawn as findings from a more recent NHANES 2007–2012 study indicated significant differences between vegetarians and nonvegetarians when assessing diet quality with the HEI-2010 ( P  < 0.05). 40

Diet quality in adequacy component scores

Comparisons of average Healthy Eating Index adequacy component scores between vegetarian and nonvegetarian dietary patterns

A dash (–) indicates this was not assessed/reported.

Abbreviation: HEI: Healthy Eating Index.

Significantly different from nonvegetarian at P < 0.05.

Named meat and beans in the HEI-2005.

Scores reported for the HEI-2005 reflect the oils component score.

Fruit. All 4 studies assessing component scores for total fruit found higher scores in vegetarian versus nonvegetarian diets. 7 , 39 , 42 , 43 Differences in total fruit scores between dietary patterns were larger in convenience samples (0.9–1.2 points) 7 , 39 compared with nationally representative studies (0.33–0.7 points). 42 , 43 Three of the studies separately analyzed whole fruit scores (excluding juice), 2 of which found that vegetarians also scored higher on whole fruit than nonvegetarians within health-conscious convenience samples of Belgian adults. 7 , 39 However, a nationally representative US study found no differences in whole fruit scores between vegetarians and nonvegetarians, 42 suggesting that fruit juice intake may be high in the broader vegetarian population, thus obscuring differences in total fruit intake between dietary patterns. Therefore, although total fruit scores were consistently higher in vegetarians, scores for whole fruit intake were less consistent.

Whole grains. Whole-grain component scores were generally higher in vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians, with vegetarians scoring significantly higher in 2 of 3 studies, 7 , 42 and a third study found scores to be comparable between dietary patterns. 39 Vegetarians in an NHANES 1999–2004 sample scored more than 50% higher than nonvegetarians on the whole-grain component score (1.55 vs 0.92 out of 5; P  < 0.01) of the HEI-2005. 42 Another study, which used the HEI-2010, also found that vegetarians scored significantly higher than nonvegetarians (7.6 vs 6.8 out of 10; P  < 0.01). In the third study, although insignificant, vegetarians scored marginally higher when matched with nonvegetarians by sex, age, body mass index, physical activity, alcohol use, and tobacco use on the HEI-2010 whole-grains component score (9.1 vs 8.2 pts; P  = 0.052). 39 Overall, whole-grain intake appears to be higher in vegetarians.

Protein. In all 3 studies assessing component scores for total protein foods, vegetarians scored lower than nonvegetarians. 7 , 39 , 42 In an NHANES 1999–2004 analysis using the HEI-2005, vegetarians obtained an average score of less than half that of nonvegetarians (3.66 vs 8.46 of 10 total points; P  < 0.01) on the meat and beans component. 42 However, plant protein consumption was not assessed in the HEI-2005 as it was in later versions of the HEI, 53 and further food group analyses indicated that the vegetarians consumed significantly more plant proteins (including soy, nuts, and legumes) than nonvegetarians ( P  < 0.01). 42 For the HEI-2010, the meat and beans component from the HEI-2005 was divided into total protein foods and seafood and plant protein, where some plant proteins could contribute points in both categories. 53 This modification allowed vegetarian diets to obtain higher scores on the HEI-2010 compared with the HEI-2005, as indicated in 2 other studies that assessed seafood and plant protein with the HEI-2010 and found that vegetarians scored higher than nonvegetarians. 7 , 39 Therefore, although vegetarians scored lower in the total protein foods component, they scored higher on the seafood and plant protein component.

Vegetables. Less consistent findings were observed for other adequacy components. Vegetable intake was assessed in 3 studies; 2 found no significant differences between dietary patterns, 7 , 39 and 1 found that vegetarians scored lower than nonvegetarians in an NHANES 1999–2004 sample (3.04 vs 2.74 points on total vegetables HEI-2005 score; P  < 0.01). 42 However, subgroup analyses revealed that vegetarians consumed significantly more dark green vegetables (0.15 vs 0.11 cups per day; P  < 0.01) and significantly less potatoes (0.25 vs 0.41 cups per day; P  < 0.01) than nonvegetarians, 42 potentially revealing differences in the quality of vegetables consumed between these groups. Although unprocessed potatoes are a rich source of nutrients such as potassium and fiber, 54 in the United States, potatoes are commonly consumed with added fat and sodium (eg, French fries, potato chips, etc), 55 , 56 which may diminish the health benefits associated with vegetable consumption, 57 making potato preparation method an important consideration in the contribution of vegetables to diet quality. Therefore, although vegetarians and nonvegetarians appeared to consume similar amounts of total vegetables, higher vegetable scores in nonvegetarians may have been driven by increased potato consumption, and the relative quality of vegetables consumed among vegetarians may be higher.

Dietary fat. Findings in the dietary-fat component scores varied across studies. The HEI components for fats were recently restructured from the oils (unsaturated fats from plants and fish) and saturated fat components used in the HEI-2005 to the fatty-acids component (ratio of unsaturated to saturated fat) in the HEI-2010, 53 making direct comparisons difficult. In 2 studies using the HEI-2010, vegetarians scored higher on the fatty-acids component (unsaturated fat/saturated fat) in 1 unadjusted analysis 7 ; however, in a second study, vegetarians matched with nonvegetarians by lifestyle factors scored lower (the increased score in nonvegetarians was attributed to fish intake). 39 Using the HEI-2005, a study within NHANES 1999–2004 found no difference in oils (unsaturated fats from plants and fish) scores between dietary patterns, but saturated fat scores were significantly higher (lower consumption, in line with recommendations) in vegetarians ( P  < 0.01). 42 Overall, vegetarians appear to have lower intake of saturated fat, and unsaturated fat intake appears to be similar between vegetarians and nonvegetarians.

Dairy. Findings for dairy component scores were also inconsistent; 1 study found that vegetarians scored higher than nonvegetarians, 42 and in 2 studies, scores were comparable. 7 , 39 In an NHANES 1999–2004 sample, dairy component scores were higher in vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians (5.66 vs 4.86; P  < 0.01). 42 However, 2 studies examining convenience samples of Belgian adults found no differences in dairy scores between dietary patterns, 7 , 39 although 1 study included soy beverages as protein food rather than as a dairy food, 7 which could have artificially decreased dairy component scores in participants who consumed calcium-fortified soymilk. It should be noted that dairy is assessed as an adequacy component on the HEI, 53 but on other indexes such as the MDS, 20 dairy is a moderation component. Consequently, the influence of dairy intake on overall diet quality depends on both the index used and the foods contributing to the dairy component.

Diet quality in moderation component scores

Comparisons of average Healthy Eating Index moderation component scores between vegetarian and nonvegetarian dietary patterns

Inverse scoring was used on all moderation components, therefore higher scores are more desirable. A dash (–) indicates this was not assessed/reported.

Abbreviation: HEI, Healthy Eating Index.

Significantly different from nonvegetarian at P  < 0.05.

Among samples of Belgian adults, refined-grain component scores in vegetarians were 0.9–1.3 HEI-2010 points lower than the nonvegetarians scores. 7 , 39 Similarly, in an NHANES 1999–2004 analysis where refined-grain intake was assessed but not as a component score (the HEI-2005 only accounted for total and whole-grain intake), vegetarians consumed more refined grains (6.64 vs 6.11 ounces per day; P  < 0.01). 42 No differences between dietary patterns in empty calorie scores (comprised of calories from solid fat, added sugar, and alcohol in excess of recommendations) were observed in any of these 3 studies. 7 , 39 , 42 Vegetarians consumed less sodium per day compared with nonvegetarians in 2 of 3 studies: 1068 mg less in a convenience sample 7 and 467 mg less in an NHANES 1999–2004 sample. 42 However, in a sample where vegetarians and nonvegetarians were matched by lifestyle characteristics, they had similar sodium component scores, 39 so in this population, sodium intake may be related to health consciousness. Compared with nonvegetarians, vegetarians appear to have higher refined-grain intake, similar empty calorie intake, and potentially lower sodium intake.

Diet quality in more- and less-restrictive diets

To better understand the contribution of vegetarianism to overall diet quality, it is pertinent to examine the diet quality of more- and less-restrictive dietary patterns (relative to lacto-ovo vegetarian). The vegan diet is similar to the vegetarian diet but further restricts all animal products, including eggs and dairy. Less-restricted vegetarian diets, such as semi-vegetarian and pesco-vegetarian, have been recently popular as liberalized vegetarian diets. 58 Pesco-vegetarian is commonly defined as a vegetarian diet that includes fish, whereas the definitions for semi-vegetarian vary widely but involve limited meat intake. 58

Of the 12 included studies, 5 studies examined more- and/or less-restrictive vegetarian diets; 1 weight loss trial compared a vegan and nonvegetarian diet, 47 1 observational study compared vegan, lacto-ovo vegetarian, and nonvegetarian diets, 46 and 2 studies (a weight loss trial and an observational analysis) examined vegan, pesco-vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, lacto-ovo vegetarian, and nonvegetarian diets. 7 , 9 Lastly, 1 observational study examined many different dietary patterns, including vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, paleo, and low carbohydrate; however, diet quality scores of the individual dietary patterns were not reported. 8

Vegan diets. Five total studies assessed the diet quality of vegan diets, and findings generally indicated that vegans scored higher than nonvegetarians. One study compared AHEI scores among individuals participating in a 22-week weight loss trial who were assigned to either a low-fat vegan diet or a nonvegetarian, control diet (the American Diabetic Association diet); those assigned to the vegan diet significantly increased AHEI total and all component scores from baseline ( P  < 0.01), whereas the control group did not change AHEI scores. 47 Another study examined diet quality among various dietary patterns in distance runners using the Rapid Eating and Activity Assessment for Patients and found that self-identified vegans and vegetarians (data not shown for individual patterns) had better diet quality scores compared with nonvegetarians (38.5 ± 3.6 vs 32.8 ± 4.5; P  < 0.001). 8

In the remaining 3 studies, diet quality scores were compared across a range of diets, including vegan, vegetarian, and nonvegetarian, and in 2 studies, pesco-vegetarian and semi-vegetarian diets were also compared. 7 , 9 , 46 A dose–response relationship between dietary pattern restriction and diet quality was seen in 2 observational studies where vegans had the highest diet quality, followed by vegetarians, then nonvegetarians. 7 , 46 In a purposefully selected sample of Italian adults, Rosi et al 46 found that on the Italian Mediterranean Diet Index, vegetarians scored (6.0 ± 2.0) significantly higher than nonvegetarians (4.0 ± 3.0; P  < 0.05) and significantly lower than vegans (7.0 ± 2.0; P  < 0.05). Similarly, in a cross-sectional study among a convenience sample of Belgian adults, vegans scored significantly higher on the HEI-2010 and MDS compared with vegetarians and nonvegetarians ( P  < 0.01). 7 Higher HEI-2010 scores in vegans compared with vegetarians were driven by higher component scores for total protein foods, seafood and plant protein, fatty acids, sodium, refined grains, and empty calories. 7 One experimental study where participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 dietary patterns did not observe any differences among DII scores for those assigned to vegan, vegetarian, and nonvegetarian diets at both the 2- and 6-month follow-ups. 9 However, in weight loss trials, overall energy restriction, rather than dietary pattern, may be more influential on diet quality. Additionally, the version of the DII used in the included study solely assessed nutrient intake, 9 which may lead to potential confounding by fortified foods otherwise not recommend in a healthful dietary pattern. Preliminary evidence suggests that the diet quality of vegan diets are, at minimum, comparable with vegetarian diets, and there is some indication of a dose–response relationship between restrictiveness of vegetarian dietary pattern and diet quality, suggesting that diet quality of vegan diets may be higher than vegetarian diets.

Less-restrictive diets (semi-vegetarian and pesco-vegetarian). Only 2 studies examined the diet quality of semi-vegetarians and pesco-vegetarians, and both studies made comparisons among semi-vegetarian, pesco- vegetarian, vegan, vegetarian, and nonvegetarian diets. 7 , 9 One experimental trial found that 6 months after the intervention, there were no differences in DII scores across the 5 dietary patterns. 9 However, at 2 months, participants assigned to vegan, vegetarian, and pesco-vegetarian diets had better DII scores (−1.2 ± 0.5, −1.0 ± 0.5, −0.7 ± 0.5, respectively; lower scores are desirable) than those assigned to a semivegetarian diet (1.3 ± 0.6). 9 In an observational study using the HEI-2010, scores were similar among self-reported vegetarians (58.7 ± 8.9), semi-vegetarians (59.4 ± 7.4), and pesco-vegetarians (58.7 ± 7.9), all of whom scored significantly higher than nonvegetarians (54.2 ± 9.0; P  < 0.01) and significantly lower than vegans (65.4 ± 8.3; P  < 0.01). 7 On the MDS, pesco-vegetarians scored similar to vegans, whereas semi-vegetarians scored significantly lower than vegans ( P  < 0.01). 7 However, vegans, semi-vegetarians, and pesco-vegetarians all scored significantly higher ( P  < 0.01) than both vegetarians and nonvegetarians. 7 Because only 2 studies to date have made diet quality comparisons involving semi-vegetarian and pesco-vegetarian diets and the findings were inconsistent, more research is needed to determine the relative diet quality of these dietary patterns.

The risk of bias varied considerably amonng the 12 included studies. For participant selection, although most studies (n = 8) featured convenience samples, nationally representative studies were also common (n = 4). Although 2 of the 4 nationally representative studies did not find that vegetarian diets were higher in diet quality than nonvegetarian diets, this was likely due to the diet quality indexes used rather than the sample. 42 , 43 Aside from these 2 studies, findings were similar in both convenience samples and nationally representative studies, indicating that there is a low risk of bias from participant selection in the overall findings.

For dietary pattern categorization, all studies in this review (n = 6) that categorized participants using self-identified dietary patterns found that vegetarians had higher diet quality than nonvegetarians. Because research suggests that self-identified vegetarians often report meat consumption on dietary assessments, 13 , 48 , 49 studies using self-report are at increased risk for misclassification of dietary patterns. Some included studies (n = 3) categorized dietary patterns objectively (based on diet recall) within nationally representative samples, 1 of which found that vegetarians had higher diet quality than nonvegetarians. 40 Although 2 of the studies using objective categorization in nationally representative samples did not find that diet quality was higher in vegetarians, this is likely due to the diet quality indexes and not the classification method used. 42 , 43 Therefore, dietary pattern categorization is an unlikely source of bias.

Measurement of diet history and diet quality are also unlikely sources of bias in the overall conclusions. Almost all studies used reputable methods (24-hour recalls, weighted food records, or food frequency questionnaires) for diet history collection. Although 1 study used a nonvalidated, modified subset of questions from a validated food frequency questionnaire, this is unlikely to impact the overall risk of bias. 45 For measurement of diet quality, 6 studies used validated indexes, 8 , 39 , 42 , 43 , 46 , 47 1 study developed a new index for the purpose of the study and did not validate it, 44 and 5 studies made alterations to validated indexes. 7 , 9 , 40 , 41 , 45 In the cases of modifications, the validity of the measurement of diet quality may have been compromised, thus modestly increasing the risk of bias. For example, Clarys et al 7 categorized all soy beverages as protein foods instead of dairy foods on the HEI-2010. This alteration likely led to lower dairy component scores and higher component scores for both total protein foods and plant and seafood protein for soymilk consumers, resulting in an overall increase in total HEI-2010 scores. Without further validation it is not clear whether the scores obtained with this change (and similar changes in other studies) accurately reflect diet quality. However, the influence of the nonvalidated diet quality indexes on the overall conclusions is likely modest because most modifications were minor and most studies used validated and commonly used diet quality indexes (ie, HEI and MDS) where higher scores are correlated with more favorable health outcomes 20 , 59–62 and findings were similar between the studies that did and did not use validated indexes.

Lack of control for confounding variables in this body of evidence was identified as a potential source of bias in the overall conclusions. Because vegetarians are more likely to be health conscious 30–33 and health consciousness is related to diet quality, 34 health consciousness can confound the relationship between vegetarian diets and diet quality. Despite the repeated indications of increased health consciousness in vegetarians, only 1 study in this review controlled for covariates related to health consciousness by matching vegetarians and nonvegetarians on lifestyle characteristics such as smoking, physical activity, and body mass index. 39 Even with controlling for some lifestyle factors, vegetarians still scored significantly higher than nonvegetarians on the HEI-2010 and MDS ( P  < 0.05), 39 suggesting that health consciousness is not exclusively driving the association between vegetarian diet and improved health outcomes.

Study design should also be considered when examining confounding by health consciousness, which is mainly a concern in observational studies due to lack of randomization. Two included studies were randomized control trials, 1 of which found no differences in diet quality 6 months after assignment to 1 of 5 dietary patterns, 9 and the other study found that participants assigned to a low-fat vegan diet significantly improved diet quality scores over those assigned to a diabetic diet ( P  < 0.01). 47 However, these were weight loss trials where the assigned dietary pattern may have played a relatively minor role in diet quality. Therefore, it is difficult to decipher the influence that the lack of control for confounding by health consciousness had in the overall conclusions. Overall, there is an indication that vegetarian diets are higher in diet quality compared with nonvegetarian diets; however, conclusions should be interpreted cautiously because some level of confounding due to health consciousness is expected.

This systematic review compared diet quality between vegetarian and nonvegetarian diets in an effort to understand the role of diet quality in the relationship between vegetarian diets and improved health outcomes. Collectively, observational studies suggest that vegetarian diets are higher in overall diet quality compared with nonvegetarian diets. In studies using the HEI-2010 (most commonly used index), vegetarians scored between 4.5 and 16.4 points (out of 100 points) higher than nonvegetarians. 7 , 39 , 40 Few observational studies (n = 2) in this review found that vegetarians had similar or lower diet quality than nonvegetarians, and those that did used versions of the HEI that assessed adherence to older dietary recommendations. 42 , 43 The limited number of studies examining HEI component scores (n = 4) suggests that higher diet quality in vegetarians may have been driven by higher scores for whole grains, total fruits, plant and seafood protein, and sodium and lower scores for refined grains and total protein foods. However, few studies controlled for lifestyle characteristics, which may confound these findings. Diet patterns more and less restrictive than the lacto-ovo vegetarian diet had less consistent associations with diet quality. Although limited evidence suggests that diet quality in vegan diets is comparable with or better than the diet quality of vegetarian diets, findings for less-restrictive vegetarian diets were inconsistent, which may be due in part to variable definitions of semi-vegetarian.

Studies included in this review were published between 2001 and 2017, spanning a period of time where changes in the definition of a high-quality diet in accordance with dietary recommendations occurred due to progressive understanding of healthy diets. 63 For example, elucidation of the health benefits associated with plant protein consumption prompted changes in dietary recommendations calling for increased consumption as well as increased acceptance of vegetarian diets, which were previously thought to be nutritionally inadequate but are now regarded as safe and protective against chronic diseases. 64 In this review, several studies using diet quality indexes that reflected previous dietary recommendations (ie, HEI-1995 and HEI-2005) 42 , 43 had findings that were inconsistent with studies using indexes reflecting more recent dietary recommendations (ie, HEI-2010). 7 , 39 , 40 For example, Farmer et al 42 analyzed NHANES 1999–2004 data with the HEI-2005 and noted that vegetarians scored substantially lower than nonvegetarians on the meat and beans component but consumed significantly ( P  < 0.01) more plant proteins and met the protein recommended dietary allowance. Had diet quality been evaluated with a more recent version of the HEI where plant protein scores more favorably than animal proteins (excluding fish), vegetarians may have scored higher than nonvegetarians. Furthermore, although none of the included studies used the most recent version of the HEI, the HEI-2015, changes made to the HEI-2010 in developing the HEI-2015 involved further incentives for the consumption of legumes. On the HEI-2010, legumes contributed points in only 2 categories (either total vegetables and greens and beans or total protein foods and seafood and plant protein) 53 ; however, the HEI-2015 allows legumes to contribute points in all 4 categories, 65 a change that is likely to increase scores for vegetarians.

Substitutions that increase diet quality

The diet quality of vegetarian diets compared with nonvegetarian diets is somewhat dependent on the index used but more so determined by the foods consumed in place of meat, fish, and poultry. Many diet quality indexes penalize red and processed meat consumption 19 , 20 , 61 due to associations with increased risk of chronic disease and mortality. 10–12 Therefore, replacing red and processed meat, which is void of fiber and generally contains saturated fat and added sodium, with fiber-rich plant proteins, will likely increase diet quality and improve health outcomes. 66 Furthermore, some vegetarian replacements for red meat have been shown to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in substitution analyses: risk of coronary heart disease was reduced by 30% when 1 serving of red meat per day was replaced with 1 serving of nuts 67 and replacing red meat with vegetables also resulted in decreased risk of myocardial infarction. 68

Although replacing red meat with vegetables may be beneficial, this review did not find that vegetarians consumed more vegetables than nonvegetarians. However, it is important to note that there was some suggestion that nonvegetarians may have higher potato intake than vegetarians, potentially obscuring the relationship between vegetable intake and dietary pattern. This speculation is consistent with findings from a nationally representative study where diet recall– and self-identified nonvegetarians had higher fried potato consumption compared with diet recall– and/or self-identified lacto-ovo vegetarians. 13 Consumption of tomatoes, lettuce, and other vegetables were descriptively higher in diet recall– and/or self-identified lacto-ovo vegetarians compared with diet recall– and self-identified nonvegetarians. 13 Total vegetable intake also varied by categorization method; participants who consumed meat, regardless of self-identified dietary pattern, had similar vegetable intake, whereas vegetable intake in diet recall–identified vegetarians was significantly higher than nonvegetarians (250 ± 14 g vs 159 ± 8 g; P  < 0.05). 13 Taken together, this also suggests that the health consciousness associated with identifying as vegetarian may substantially contribute to diet quality and health outcomes.

Substitutions that lead to decreases in diet quality

Not all vegetarian substitutions for meat, fish, and poultry will result in improved diet quality and health outcomes. For instance, replacing fatty fish is more controversial because fatty fish consumption is associated with a reduced risk of mortality. 69 , 70 Additionally, poultry consumption is generally not associated with mortality risk. 71 In a substitution analysis, substituting vegetables for poultry did not impact myocardial infarction risk, although risk increased when vegetables replaced fatty fish. 68 Fatty fish is weighted more heavily on many diet quality indexes (compared with vegetables and plant proteins) because of differences in recommendations. For example, on the AHEI, 2 servings of fatty fish per week, 1 serving of nuts and legumes per day, and 5 servings of vegetables per day are considered optimal. 61 Therefore, consuming any vegetarian food in place of fatty fish could negatively impact diet quality. Consequently, one might expect pesco-vegetarian diets to be higher in diet quality than vegetarian diets. However, in this review, only 1 study found that pesco-vegetarian diets were higher in diet quality compared with vegetarian diets when assessing diet quality with the MDS; when diet quality was assessed with the HEI-2010, scores were similar. 7

Substitutions that lead to variable changes in diet quality

Although the evidence is limited, articles in this review suggested that vegan diets may be higher in diet quality than vegetarian and nonvegetarian diets. Elimination of eggs and dairy distinguishes vegan from vegetarian diets, and there is currently a lack of consensus regarding the health impacts of these foods. Dairy foods may be protective against some cardiovascular diseases 72 but are generally not associated with all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality, 73 and findings regarding egg consumption and mortality and disease are inconsistent. 69 , 74–76 On the HEI, dairy is an adequacy component and eggs contribute to total protein foods 53 but other diet quality indexes rarely assess total protein foods, and dairy consumption is penalized on some indexes. 20 Therefore, the health outcomes associated with egg and dairy consumption are not well established, and the effects of consumption on diet quality are dependent on the index used.

Although there is no strong consensus regarding the health impacts of egg and dairy consumption, whole grains have been consistently shown to protect against chronic disease and mortality. 77 Therefore, in diet quality indexes, whole-grain consumption is commonly incentivized (adequacy component), whereas refined-grain consumption is penalized. 53 , 61 In this review, vegetarians consumed more whole and refined grains, suggesting that these foods may be used to take the place of meat, fish, and poultry. Consuming refined grains in place of saturated fat (commonly found in meats and dairy) increases cardiovascular disease risk, although the association reverses when whole grains replace saturated fat. 78 Because some vegetarian exchanges can result in lower diet quality and poorer health outcomes, it’s important that healthful exchanges are highlighted in the promotion of vegetarian diets.

Limitations and strengths

This systematic review adds to the understanding of the diet quality of vegetarian diets by synthesizing the current research using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. This review featured a variety of study designs in diverse populations and using various diet quality indexes, contributing to the quality of insight provided on vegetarian diets and their impacts on diet quality. Some limitations of the present review must also be noted. Relatively few studies included component score analyses, and of the studies that did include component score analyses, there were a variety of indexes used. Because compatibility between indexes is low, it was not possible to make direct comparisons. Additionally, the lack of control for confounding variables related to health consciousness limits the strength of the conclusions drawn in this review.

On a broader scale, limitations involved with examining diet quality should be considered. Although examining diet quality offers a more holistic assessment of the overall diet compared with examining individual nutrients/food groups, little is known about the relative importance of the individual components. Although diet quality scores from various indexes have been shown to be associated with mortality and chronic disease risk, 26–28 scoring criteria (ie, component point values, maximum score criteria) are oftentimes arbitrary, and indexes may not adequately account for the synergistic relationships present within and between nutrients and food groups. 23 Nevertheless, although refinements to diet quality indexes have the potential to improve their predictive validity, examining overall diet quality rather than the contributions of individual foods and nutrients toward health provides an avenue to begin exploring the interrelationships between foods and nutrients that exist within complex dietary patterns.

Findings indicated that vegetarians generally have higher diet quality than nonvegetarians. However, these results should be interpreted with caution because the studies included in this review largely did not control for confounding by health consciousness. Further research controlling for confounding variables is needed to ascertain whether vegetarian diets, or the health consciousness associated with vegetarian diets, leads to improved diet quality. Additionally, interventions involving vegetarian diets are vital to understand the impact of vegetarian diet interventions on diet quality because they can help to reduce confounding by health consciousness, which may be present when analyzing self-selected dietary patterns. In guidance for individuals seeking to follow vegetarian diets, recommendations must clearly suggest healthful substitutions (eg, plant-based protein sources, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains) for animal products because some substitutions may reduce diet quality and attenuate observed health benefits (eg, refined grains and other processed foods).

The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance in formulating search terms provided by the research librarians at the university libraries of the University of Rhode Island and Montana State University, as well as the graduate students in the department of Nutrition and Food Sciences at the University of Rhode Island who assisted with editing the manuscript.

Author contributions. Both authors contributed to the conception of the research question. Additionally, both authors created the search terms and independently screened the articles obtained. The analysis, risk of bias assessment, and manuscript draft writing were completed by H.P. M.V. provided support and guidance on the analysis and manuscript preparation, confirmed findings, and critically reviewed the draft for important intellectual content.

Funding. The authors have no funding sources to disclose.

Declaration of interest. The authors have no relevant interests to disclose.

Craig WJ. Nutrition concerns and health effects of vegetarian diets . Nutr Clin Pract. 2010 ; 25 : 613 – 620 .

Google Scholar

Huang T , Yang B , Zheng J , et al. . Cardiovascular disease mortality and cancer incidence in vegetarians: a meta-analysis and systematic review . Ann Nutr Metab. 2012 ; 60 : 233 – 240 .

Kahleova H , Pelikanova T. Vegetarian diets in the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes . J Am Coll Nutr . 2015 ; 34 : 448 – 458 .

Fraser GE. Vegetarian diets: what do we know of their effects on common chronic diseases? Am J Clin Nutr . 2009 ; 89 : 1607S – 1612S .

Singh PN , Sabaté J , Fraser GE. Does low meat consumption increase life expectancy in humans? Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 ; 78(3 suppl) : 526S – 532S .

Jacobs DR , Haddad EH , Lanou AJ , et al. . Food, plant food, and vegetarian diets in the US dietary guidelines: conclusions of an expert panel . Am J Clin Nutr . 2009 ; 89 : 1549S – 1552S .

Clarys P , Deliens T , Huybrechts I , et al. . Comparison of nutritional quality of the vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian and omnivorous diet . Nutrients . 2014 ; 6 : 1318 – 1332 .

Turner-McGrievy GM , Moore WJ , Barr-Anderson D. The interconnectedness of diet choice and distance running: results of the Research Understanding the Nutrition of Endurance Runners (RUNNER) study . Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab . 2016 ; 26 : 205 – 211 .

Turner-McGrievy GM , Wirth MD , Shivappa N , et al. . Randomization to plant-based dietary approaches leads to larger short-term improvements in Dietary Inflammatory Index scores and macronutrient intake compared with diets that contain meat . Nutr Res . 2015 ; 35 : 97 – 106 .

Larsson SC , Orsini N. Red meat and processed meat consumption and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis . Am J Epidemiol . 2014 ; 179 : 282 – 289 .

Micha R , Michas G , Mozaffarian D. Unprocessed red and processed meats and risk of coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes—an updated review of the evidence . Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2012 ; 14 : 515 – 524 .

Rouhani MH , Salehi-Abargouei A , Surkan PJ , et al. . Is there a relationship between red or processed meat intake and obesity? A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies . Obes Rev. 2014 ; 15 : 740 – 748 .

Haddad EH , Tanzman JS. What do vegetarians in the United States eat? . Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 ; 78 : 626S – 632S .

Jaacks LM , Kapoor D , Singh K , et al. . Vegetarianism and cardiometabolic disease risk factors: differences between South Asian and US adults . Nutrition . 2016 ; 32 : 975 – 984 .

Slavin JL , Lloyd B. Health benefits of fruits and vegetables . Adv Nutr . 2012 ; 3 : 506 – 516 .

Craig WJ. Phytochemicals: guardians of our health . J Am Diet Assoc . 1997 ; 97(10 suppl 2) : S199 – S204 .

Smith CE , Tucker KL. Health benefits of cereal fibre: a review of clinical trials . Nutr Res Rev. 2011 ; 24 : 118 – 131 .

Bouchenak M , Lamri-Senhadji M. Nutritional quality of legumes, and their role in cardiometabolic risk prevention: a review . J Med Food . 2013 ; 16 : 185 – 198 .

Fung T , Chiuve S , McCullough M , et al. . Adherence to a DASH-style diet and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke in women . Arch Intern Med. 2008 ; 168 : 713. doi:10.1001/archinte.168.7.713.

Sofi F , Macchi C , Abbate R , et al. . Mediterranean diet and health status: an updated meta-analysis and a proposal for a literature-based adherence score . Public Health Nutr. 2014 ; 17 : 2769 – 2782 .

Wirt A , Collins CE. Diet quality—what is it and does it matter? Public Health Nutr. 2492 ; 12 : 2473. doi:10.1017/S136898000900531X.

Kant AK. Indexes of overall diet quality. A review . J Am Diet Assoc . 1996 ; 96 : 785 – 791 .

Waijers PMCM , Feskens EJM , Ocké MC. A critical review of predefined diet quality scores . Br J Nutr . 2007 ; 97 :219–231.

Hu FB. Dietary pattern analysis: a new direction in nutritional epidemiology . Curr Opin Lipidol. 2002 ; 13 : 3 – 9 .

Alkerwi A. Diet quality concept . Nutrition . 2014 ; 30 : 613 – 618 .

Sotos-Prieto M , Bhupathiraju SN , Mattei J , et al. . Changes in diet quality scores and risk of cardiovascular disease among US men and women . Circulation . 2015 ; 132 : 2212 – 2219 .

Schwingshackl L , Hoffmann G. Diet quality as assessed by the Healthy Eating Index, the Alternate Healthy Eating Index, the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension Score, and health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies . J Acad Nutr Diet . 2015 ; 115 : 780 – 800.e5 .

Reedy J , Krebs-Smith SM , Miller PE , et al. . Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults . J Nutr . 2014 ; 144 : 881 – 889 .

O’Doherty MG , Cairns K , O’Neill V , et al. . Effect of major lifestyle risk factors, independent and jointly, on life expectancy with and without cardiovascular disease: results from the Consortium on Health and Ageing Network of Cohorts in Europe and the United States (CHANCES) . Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 ; 31 : 455 – 468 .

Alewaeters K , Clarys P , Hebbelinck M , et al. . Cross-sectional analysis of BMI and some lifestyle variables in Flemish vegetarians compared with non-vegetarians . Ergonomics . 2005 ; 48 : 1433 – 1444 .

Bedford JL , Barr SI. Diets and selected lifestyle practices of self-defined adult vegetarians from a population-based sample suggest they are more “health conscious.” Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act . 2005 ; 2 : 4. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-2-4.

Tonstad S , Butler T , Yan R , et al. . Type of vegetarian diet, body weight, and prevalence of type 2 diabetes . Diabetes Care . 2009 ; 32 : 791 – 796 .

De Backer CJ , Hudders L. From meatless Mondays to meatless Sundays: motivations for meat reduction among vegetarians and semi-vegetarians who mildly or significantly reduce their meat intake . Ecol Food Nutr . 2014 ; 53 : 639 – 657 .

Orlich MJ , Singh PN , Sabate J , et al. . Vegetarian dietary patterns and mortality in Adventist Health Study 2 . JAMA Intern Med. 2013 ; 173 : 1230 – 1238 .

Key TJ , Appleby PN , Davey GK , et al. . Mortality in British vegetarians: review and preliminary results from EPIC-Oxford . Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 ; 78 : 533S – 538S .

Appleby PN , Crowe FL , Bradbury KE , et al. . Mortality in vegetarians and comparable nonvegetarians in the United Kingdom . Am J Clin Nutr . 2016 ; 103 : 218 – 230 .

Chang-Claude J , Hermann S , Eilber U , Steindorf K. Lifestyle determinants and mortality in German vegetarians and health-conscious persons: results of a 21-year follow-up . Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev . 2005 ; 14 : 963 – 968 .

Moher D , Liberati A , Tetzlaff J , Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement . PLoS Med. 2009 ; 6 : e1000097.

Clarys P , Deriemaeker P , Huybrechts I , et al. . Dietary pattern analysis: a comparison between matched vegetarian and omnivorous subjects . Nutr J . 2013 ; 12 : 82 . doi:10.1186/1475-2891-12-82 .

Conrad Z , Karlsen M , Chui K , Jahns L. Diet quality on meatless days: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 2007–2012 . Public Health Nutr . 2017 ; 20 : 1564 – 1573 .

de Souza RJ , Zulyniak MA , Desai D , et al. . Harmonization of food-frequency questionnaires and dietary pattern analysis in 4 ethnically diverse birth cohorts . J Nutr . 2016 ; 146 : 2343 – 2350 .

Farmer B , Larson BT , Fulgoni VL , et al. . A vegetarian dietary pattern as a nutrient-dense approach to weight management: an analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2004 . J Am Diet Assoc . 2011 ; 111 : 819 – 827 .

Kennedy ET , Bowman SA , Spence JT , et al. . Popular diets: correlation to health, nutrition, and obesity . J Am Diet Assoc . 2001 ; 101 : 411 – 420 .

Thiele S , Mensink GB , Beitz R. Determinants of diet quality . Public Health Nutr. 2004 ; 7 : 29 – 37 .

Williams RL , Rollo ME , Schumacher T , et al. . Diet quality scores of Australian adults who have completed the healthy eating quiz . Nutrients . 2017 ; 9 : 880 . doi:10.3390/nu9080880 .

Rosi A , Mena P , Pellegrini N , et al. . Environmental impact of omnivorous, ovo-lacto-vegetarian, and vegan diet . Sci Rep. 2017 ; 7 : 6105. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-06466-8.

Turner-McGrievy GM , Barnard ND , Cohen J , et al. . Changes in nutrient intake and dietary quality among participants with type 2 diabetes following a low-fat vegan diet or a conventional diabetes diet for 22 weeks . J Am Diet Assoc . 2008 ; 108 : 1636 – 1645 .

Barr SI , Chapman GE. Perceptions and practices of self-defined current vegetarian, former vegetarian, and nonvegetarian women . J Am Diet Assoc . 2002 ; 102 : 354 – 360 .

Vinnari M , Montonen J , Harkanen T , et al. . Identifying vegetarians and their food consumption according to self-identification and operationalized definition in Finland . Public Health Nutr . 2009 ; 12 :481. doi:10.1017/S1368980008002486.

Turner-McGrievy GM , Davidson CR , Wingard EE , et al. . Comparative effectiveness of plant-based diets for weight loss: a randomized controlled trial of five different diets . Nutrition . 2015 ; 31 : 350 – 358 . doi:10.1016/j.nut.2014.09.002.

Guenther PM , Reedy J , Krebs-Smith SM. Development of the Healthy Eating Index–2005 . J Am Diet Assoc . 2008 ; 108 : 1896 – 1901 .

Kennedy ET , Ohls J , Carlson S , et al. . The Healthy Eating Index: design and applications . J Am Diet Assoc . 1995 ; 95 : 1103 – 1108 .

Guenther PM , Casavale KO , Reedy J , et al. . Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2010 . J Acad Nutr Diet . 2013 ; 113 : 569 – 580 .

King JC , Slavin JL. White potatoes, human health, and dietary guidance . Adv Nutr . 2013 ; 4 : 393S – 401S .

Storey ML , Anderson PA. Contributions of white vegetables to nutrient intake: NHANES 2009-2010 . Adv Nutr . 2013 ; 4 : 335S – 344S .

Kimmons J , Gillespie C , Seymour J , et al. . Fruit and vegetable intake among adolescents and adults in the United States: percentage meeting individualized recommendations . Medscape J Med . 2009 ; 11 : 26 .

Schwingshackl L , Schwedhelm C , Hoffmann G , et al. . Potatoes and risk of chronic disease: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis . Eur J Nutr. 2018 . doi:10.1007/s00394-018-1774-2 .

Derbyshire EJ. Flexitarian diets and health: a review of the evidence-based literature . Front Nutr. 2016 ; 3 : 55. doi:10.3389/fnut.2016.00055.

Guenther PM , Kirkpatrick SI , Reedy J , et al. . The Healthy Eating Index–2010 is a valid and reliable measure of diet quality according to the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans . J Nutr . 2014 ; 144 : 399 – 407 .

Guenther PM , Reedy J , Krebs-Smith SM , et al. . Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index–2005 . J Am Diet Assoc . 2008 ; 108 : 1854 – 1864 .

Chiuve SE , Fung TT , Rimm EB , et al. . Alternative dietary indices both strongly predict risk of chronic disease . J Nutr . 2012 ; 142 : 1009 – 1018 .

Tabung FK , Smith-Warner SA , Chavarro JE , et al. . Development and validation of an empirical dietary inflammatory index . J Nutr . 2016 ; 146 : 1560 – 1570 .

Schneeman BO. Evolution of dietary guidelines . J Am Diet Assoc . 2003 ; 103(12 suppl 2) : S5 – S9 .

Leitzmann C. Vegetarian nutrition: past, present, future . Am J Clin Nutr . 2014 ; 100(suppl 1) : 496S – 502S .

National Cancer Institue . Comparing the HEI-2015, HEI–2010 & HEI–2005. 2017 . Available at: https://epi.grants.cancer.gov/hei/comparing.html . Accessed August 6, 2017.

McGill CR , Birkett A , Fulgonii III VL. Healthy Eating Index–2010 and food groups consumed by US adults who meet or exceed fiber intake recommendations NHANES 2001–2010 . Food Nutr Res . 2016 ; 60 : 29977. doi:10.3402/fnr.v60.29977.

Bernstein AM , Sun Q , Hu FB , et al. . Major dietary protein sources and risk of coronary heart disease in women . Circulation . 2010 ; 122 : 876 – 883 .

Würtz AML , Hansen MD , Tjønneland A , et al. . Substitution of meat and fish with vegetables or potatoes and risk of myocardial infarction . Br J Nutr. 2016 ; 116 : 1602 – 1610 .

Schwingshackl L , Schwedhelm C , Hoffmann G , et al. . Food groups and risk of all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies . Am J Clin Nutr . 2017 ; 105 : 1462 – 1473 .

Zheng J , Huang T , Yu Y , et al. . Fish consumption and CHD mortality: an updated meta-analysis of seventeen cohort studies . Public Health Nutr. 2012 ; 15 : 725 – 737 .

Abete I , Romaguera D , Vieira AR , et al. . Association between total, processed, red and white meat consumption and all-cause, CVD and IHD mortality: a meta-analysis of cohort studies . Br J Nutr. 2014 ; 112 : 762 – 775 .

Drouin-Chartier J-P , Brassard D , Tessier-Grenier M , et al. . Systematic review of the association between dairy product consumption and risk of cardiovascular-related clinical outcomes . Adv Nutr. 2016 ; 7 : 1026 – 1040 .

Guo J , Astrup A , Lovegrove JA , et al. . Milk and dairy consumption and risk of cardiovascular diseases and all-cause mortality: dose–response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies . Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 ; 32 : 269 – 287 .

Nakamura Y , Okamura T , Tamaki S , et al. . Egg consumption, serum cholesterol, and cause-specific and all-cause mortality: the National Integrated Project for Prospective Observation of Non-communicable Disease and Its Trends in the Aged, 1980 (NIPPON DATA80) . Am J Clin Nutr . 2004 ; 80 : 58 – 63 .

Djoussé L , Gaziano JM. Egg consumption in relation to cardiovascular disease and mortality: the Physicians’ Health Study . Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 ; 87 : 964 – 969 .

Fuller N , Sainsbury A , Caterson I , et al. . Egg consumption and human cardio-metabolic health in people with and without diabetes . Nutrients . 2015 ; 7 : 7399 – 7420 .

Aune D , Keum N , Giovannucci E , et al. . Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies . BMJ . 2016 ; 353 : i2716.

Briggs MA , Petersen KS , Kris-Etherton PM. Saturated fatty acids and cardiovascular disease: replacements for saturated fat to reduce cardiovascular risk . Healthcare . 2017 ; 5:29 . doi:10.3390/healthcare5020029 .

• vegetarianism

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1753-4887
• Print ISSN 0029-6643
• Copyright © 2024 International Life Sciences Institute
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Health, environmental, and animal rights motives for vegetarian eating

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation University of California, Davis, CA, United States America

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Roles Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis

• Christopher J. Hopwood, 
• Wiebke Bleidorn, 
• Ted Schwaba, 
• Sophia Chen

• Published: April 2, 2020
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

Health, the environment, and animal rights represent the three main reasons people cite for vegetarian diet in Western societies. However, it has not been shown that these motives can be distinguished empirically, and little is known about what kind of people are likely to be compelled by these different motives. This study had three goals. First, we aimed to use construct validation to test whether develop health, environmental, and animal rights motives for a vegetarian diet could be distinguished. Second, we evaluated whether these motivations were associated with different demographic, behavioral, and personality profiles in three diverse samples. Third, we examined whether peoples’ motivations were related to responses to vegetarian advocacy materials. We created the Vegetarian Eating Motives Inventory, a 15-item measure whose structure was invariant across three samples (N = 1006, 1004, 5478) and two languages (English and Dutch). Using this measure, we found that health was the most common motive for non-vegetarians to consider vegetarian diets and it had the broadest array of correlates, which primarily involved communal and agentic values. Correlates of environmental and animal rights motives were limited, but these motives were strong and specific predictors of advocacy materials in a fourth sample (N = 739). These results provide researchers with a useful tool for identifying vegetarian motives among both vegetarian and non-vegetarian respondents, offer useful insights into the nomological net of vegetarian motivations, and provide advocates with guidance about how to best target campaigns promoting a vegetarian diet.

Citation: Hopwood CJ, Bleidorn W, Schwaba T, Chen S (2020) Health, environmental, and animal rights motives for vegetarian eating. PLoS ONE 15(4): e0230609. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609

Editor: Valerio Capraro, Middlesex University, UNITED KINGDOM

Received: December 18, 2019; Accepted: March 3, 2020; Published: April 2, 2020

Copyright: © 2020 Hopwood et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Pre-registration, methods, measures, scripts, and supplemental results for samples 1-3 as well as data for samples 1 and 2 are available at https://osf.io/52v6z/ . Data for sample 3 cannot be shared publicly because it is not owned by the authors. It can be requested at https://www.lissdata.nl . Preregistration, materials, and data for sample 4 are available at https://osf.io/9wre4/ .

Funding: Funding was provided to Christopher J. Hopwood and Wiebke Bleidorn by Animal Charity Evaluators ( https://animalcharityevaluators.org ). The funding agency advised on study design issues prior to data collection; all decisions about study design were determined by the authors.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Eating is an important day to day behavior at the interface of individual differences, social dynamics, economics, health, and ethics. Vegetarianism has emerged as a significant dietary movement in Western cultures [ 1 – 3 ]. The benefits of vegetarian diets include improved individual health [ 4 – 8 ], a more sustainable environment [ 4 , 9 – 11 ], and a more humane approach to inter-species relationships [ 12 – 19 ].

Health, environment, and animal rights also appear to represent the primary non-religious motives for a plant-based diet [ 1 , 20 – 24 ]. However, thus far there is very little evidence that these motives can be distinguished empirically, and no existing measures of eating behavior is available to measure health, environment, and animal rights as distinct motives for vegetarian diet. One consequence of this gap in the literature is that relatively little is known about the psychological implications of these different reasons for a vegetarian diet. Initial research suggests that extraverted and sociable individuals tend to be more motivated by health [ 25 , 26 ] whereas factors such as agreeableness, openness, altruism, and empathy may be more related to ethical motivations [ 27 , 28 ]. However, findings are often inconsistent, and a wide range of potentially important correlates have not been examined. Understanding these motives is important for advancing knowledge about this increasingly important behavior, and it may also have practical value in the area of advocacy.

Advocates for plant-based diets typically focus on at least one of these three motives when trying to convince people to adopt a plant-based diet or join a vegan organization [ 20 , 29 – 31 ]. Advocacy campaigns may be more effective to the degree that they target the specific motives of different groups and individuals [ 30 , 32 ] because people are more likely to respond to messages that target their personal needs and interests [ 33 ]. Moreover, focusing on issues that do not resonate with individuals’ motives may negatively impact animal advocacy, such as when the exposure to animal rights advocacy creates an unpleasant emotional reaction [ 34 ] that worsens opinions of vegetarians and animal advocacy [ 31 ]. Thus, it is in the interest of advocacy groups to better understand the kinds of people who are more or less likely to respond to activism that emphasizes health, the environment, or animal rights. From an advocacy perspective, it is particularly important to understand the motives to which non-vegetarians are most sympathetic, given that these are the individuals that are targeted by advocacy campaigns.

The goals of this research were to 1) evaluate the structure of common motives for a vegetarian diet, 2) to use that measure to develop behavioral and psychological profiles of people who would be most likely to adopt a plant-based diet for different reasons, and 3) examine whether this profile predicts responses to advocacy materials.

Motives for a plant-based diet

Many instruments have been developed to assess diet-related motives. Early work tended to focus on specific motives of interest for a particular research topic. For example, Jackson, Cooper, Mintz, and Albino [ 35 ] created a scale focused on eating motives in the context of substance abuse, which included four dimensions: coping, social motives, compliance, and pleasure. While this instrument outlines a useful model of psychological eating motives, it is less suitable for research on vegetarian diet because any of these four motives could lead a person to eat either vegetarian or non-vegetarian food, depending on other considerations.

Several instruments tap eating motives that are more likely to distinguish vegetarian from non-vegetarian eaters. The Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ; [ 36 ]) focuses on nine motives: convenience, price, health, sensory appeal, weight control, natural content, mood, familiarity, and ethical concerns. Renner, Sproesser, Strohbach, & Schupp [ 37 ] developed The Eating Motivations Survey (TEMS), a broad, multidimensional measure of 15 different motives including liking, habits, hunger, health, convenience, pleasure, tradition, nature, sociability, price, visual appeal, weight control, affect regulation, social norms, and social image. These multiscale measures provide a general taxonomy of individual motivations in food choice, but they do not distinguish the three core motives most central to vegetarian diets, and they include a variety of motives that are less relevant for plant-based diets such as mood or affect regulation.

Other measures have focused more specifically on ideological or ethical factors potentially more relevant to vegetarianism. Lindeman and Stark [ 38 ] created a measure with scales designed to distinguish ideological reasons, weight control, health, and pleasure. In a similar project, Arbit, Ruby, and Rozin [ 39 ] crafted the Meaning in Food Life Questionnaire (MFLQ), which has three dimensions, social, sacred (i.e., religious), and aesthetic, that are not relevant to our study, and two that are: moral (which could include animal rights and environmental motives) and health. Lindeman and Väänänen [ 40 ] set out to enhance the FCQ by developing four scales focused on ethical dimensions, including animal welfare, the environment, politics (e.g., human rights related to food production), and religion. However, in their study, the animal welfare and environment scales were so highly correlated that they collapsed into a single factor. Measures focused on ethical motivations for food choice begin to capture variation in motives that might be specific to vegetarian diets, but they tend to collapse different ethical concerns relevant to vegetarian diet into a single factor and don’t always include health. Indeed, distinguishing various ethical factors may be difficult in practice [ 21 , 41 , 42 ], as results from these studies also show that even when items are identified to distinguish moral from health-related motives, it is challenging to distinguish these motives in terms of external correlates. An important exception is the Dietarian Identity Questionnaire [ 2 ], which has scales designed to measure a range of dimensions that link dietary behavior to identity, including the emphasis an eater places on prosocial as opposed to moral concerns when making food choices. This framework has considerable promise for identifying the mechanisms underlying these different motivations for vegetarian diets (e.g., Rosenfeld, 2019 [ 43 ]), but it does not provide scales to directly measure health, environmental, and animal rights motives for a vegetarian diet.

Thus, the first step in our research was to use a construct validation strategy to test whether the three main reasons people might have adopted or be compelled to adopt a plant-based diet—health, animal rights, and the environment—can be distinguished empirically. Given ambiguities in the literature, we focused specifically on differentiating environmental and animal rights factors.

Identifying characteristic profiles of people with different vegetarian motives

Variables related to plant-based eating in general include younger age [ 44 , 45 ], being female [ 1 , 44 , 46 – 49 ], living in urban areas [ 50 – 54 ], and having liberal values [ 45 , 46 , 49 , 52 , 55 – 59 ]. Thus, vegetarians can be reliably characterized, to some degree, in broad strokes.

Yet, different vegetarians can arrive at a plant-based diet for very different reasons. How are people who are primarily motivated by their personal health different from people who are primarily motivated by their concerns about the environment or their compassion for animals? The second goal of this project is to distinguish people who are most likely to pursue plant-based diets for reasons related to their personal health, the environment, or animal rights. Distinct profiles of people with these different motives could help advocacy campaigns reliably identify individuals and groups who are most likely to respond to their message.

Given the limited evidence regarding correlates of different motivations and the fact that there is a wide range of plausible correlates, our overall approach was to include an extensive array of possible attributes with plausible links to vegetarian motives and to use multiple samples and increasingly strict statistical tests to hone in on replicable associations. We included attributes related to demographic characteristics, personality traits, values, hobbies, religious background and behavior, habits, entertainment preferences, and patterns of social media use. We then 1) identified potential correlates in an American undergraduate convenience sample, 2) identified which associations replicate in an American community convenience sample, and 3) tested preregistered hypotheses, based on these replicated associations, about which variables would replicate in a large representative Dutch sample. We reasoned that any associations observed consistently across all three of these samples would be sufficiently robust to be useful for informing research on motives for plant-based eating and for guiding advocacy efforts.

Vegetarian motives and responsiveness to advocacy materials

The motivational complexity of vegetarian behavior implies that advocacy will generally be most effective if it targets the specific motives of its audience. This is presumably why advocacy groups tend to campaign on one of the three main reasons to adopt plant-based diets—health, the environment, and animal rights. But is it true that people with different levels of health, environmental, and animal rights motives will be differentially sensitive to advocacy materials that target their primary motives? The third goal of this project was to use the measure we developed to determine whether individual differences in motives for vegetarian eating predict responsiveness to advocacy materials that focus on health, the environment, or animal rights.

This study was approved by the UC Davis IRB #1145613–1 and #1372555–2.

Our first sample consisted of 1006 undergraduates attending a public university in the United States who participated in exchange for course credit. The mean age of these students was 19.80 (SD = 3.33); 822 (81.7%) were female, 180 (17.9%) male, and 4 (0.4%) nonbinary. Racial composition was 485 Asian (48.2%), 22 black (2.2%), 47 Latin American (4.7%), 27 Native American (2.7%), 328 white (32.6%), 94 multiracial (9.3%), and 3 other (0.3%); 252 (25.0%) reported Hispanic ethnicity. Eleven participants self-identified as vegan and 44 as vegetarian.

Our second sample consisted of 1004 Amazon MTurk Workers who completed a survey for financial compensation (prorated at $10/hour). The average age in this sample was 36.46 (SD = 10.99); 471 (46.91%) were female, 532 (53.00%) were male, and 1 (0.1%) was nonbinary. Ethnic/racial composition was 63 (6.7%) Asian, 113 (11.3%) black, 111 (11.1%) Hispanic, 10 (1.0%) Native American, 780 (77.7%) white, 32 (3.2%) multiracial, and 6 (0.6%) other. Participants in this sample were not restricted based on geography. Seventeen participants self-identified as vegan and 25 as vegetarian.

Our third sample included 5478 Dutch participants drawn from the Longitudinal Internet Studies of the Social Sciences (LISS). The mean age in this sample was 51.34 (SD = 18.31); 3,106 (54.0%) were female and 2,642 (46.0%) were male. Sixty-nine participants self-identified as vegan; vegetarian identity was not assessed in the LISS sample.

Our fourth sample consisted of 739 undergraduate participants (mean age = 20.01, SD = 3,60; 615 women (83.0%); 186 Hispanic (25.0%) ethnicity; 178 white (24.0%), 10 black (1.4%), 363 Asian (49.0%), 4 Pacific Islander (0.5%), 84 multiracial (11.4%), and 95 other race (12.9%). Eight people reported vegan diet and 27 reported vegetarian diet.

The only exclusion criterion across samples was being 18 years or older. Participants were not excluded based on dietary habits or preferences.

Instrument development strategies

Based on an initial literature review, we generated 26 items designed to assess health, environmental, and animal rights motives for a plant-based diet. We administered these items to participants in Sample 1 and conducted a series of item-level factor analyses to identify a reduced set of items that loaded onto the three factors with strong pattern coefficients and minimal cross-loadings. We then administered and examined this reduced set of items in Sample 2. We examined the fit of the measurement model within both samples and measurement invariance across both samples using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Items, instructions, and response scales for the final version of the instrument, which we called the Vegetarian Eating Motives Inventory (VEMI), are given in Table 1 .

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

Please rate the importance of each of the following reasons for you to eat less meat or animal products. Please rate these items even if you don’t intend to change your diet.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t001

We translated the VEMI items into Dutch in order to administer it to Sample 3. We first asked a native Dutch speaker who also speaks English to translate the items. We then asked a native English speaker who also speaks Dutch to back translate them. The research team confirmed that the content was retained for all items through this process. We evaluated the fit of the measurement model and measurement invariance using CFA. Items, instructions, and response scales for the Dutch version of the VEMI are available at https://osf.io/wyfgb/ .

Validating measures

We sought to measure a wide range of variables that could plausibly distinguish motives for a plant-based diet. Our main constraint was the measures that already existed in the LISS data (i.e., Sample 3) to whom we would administer the VEMI but whose data collection was otherwise already planned. Overall, we assessed 260 characteristics ( https://osf.io/y8nd5/ ). These characteristics included demographic features, personality traits, terminal and instrumental values, religious beliefs and behaviors, involvement in various organizations and volunteer activities, employment/income, hobbies/interests, online behavior and preferences, social behavior, and habits.

Strategy for identifying correlates of vegetarian motives

Our general approach to identifying specific motive-outcome associations in order to pre-register hypotheses for Sample 3 was to estimate a series of multiple latent regressions using the R package lavaan [ 60 ] in Sample 1 that we then attempted to replicate in Sample 2. First, we estimated six different models separately: one in which all associations between outcome and the three latent eating motives variables were constrained to be equal (model All Equal), one in which all motive-outcome associations were constrained to zero (model All Zero), three in which one motive-outcome association was estimated freely but the other two motives were constrained to have equal associations with the outcome (models Animal Free, Environment Free, and Health Free), and one in which all motive-outcome associations were estimated freely (model All Free).

We then conducted a series of nested χ 2 model comparison tests for each motive-outcome association to identify which of these six models best fit the data. We first compared the fit of model All Equal to model All Zero. If model All Zero did not fit significantly worse ( p < .05), we selected model All Zero as the best fit and concluded that no eating motives were significantly associated with the outcome variable. If model All Zero fit worse than model All Free, we compared the fit of model All Equal to whichever of Animal Free, Environment Free, and Health Free fit best to the data (as these models have equal degrees of freedom, they were not nested; the best-fitting model was identified as the one with the lowest χ 2 and BIC values). If none of these models fit significantly better than model All Equal, we selected model All Equal as the best fit and concluded that the three eating motives were not differentially associated with the outcome variable. However, if Animal Free, Environment Free, or Health Free models fit significantly better to the data than model All Equal, we compared the fit of that model versus the fit of model All Free. If model All Free fit significantly better, we concluded that eating motives were differentially associated with the outcome variable. If All Free did not fit significantly better, and Animal Free, Environment Free, or Health Free was the best fitting model, we concluded that one specific motive was differentially associated with the outcome variable. The R code used to perform these analyses is available at https://osf.io/49shv/ .

Next, we examined whether any patterns of non-zero motive-outcome associations replicated in the MTurk sample. To do this, we estimated two multiple-groups models in lavaan. In the first model (model Replication), motive-outcome associations from the best-fitting model identified in Sample 1 (model All Free, Animal Free, Health Free, Environment Free, or All Equal) were imposed to be equal across both samples. In the second model (model Nonreplication), motive-outcome associations in Sample 1 were constrained to the best-fitting model, while motive-outcome associations in Sample 2 were freely estimated. We compared the fits of these two nested models using a χ 2 model comparison test. If model Nonreplication fit the data significantly better ( p < .05), we concluded that the pattern of associations did not replicate across samples. Otherwise, we concluded that the pattern of associations in Sample 1 replicated in Sample 2.

Although the aforementioned steps described our primary procedure, it had two important limitations. First, inspection of the path coefficients revealed instances when very similar effect sizes across samples were classified as non-replications. Second, because these analyses used multiple regressions, they were also prone to suppression effects. We therefore contextualized these initial results with two additional rules. First, to restrict our interpretations to meaningful effects, we examined whether any moderate-or-stronger associations between specific eating motives and outcomes replicated across samples. To do this, we first identified all outcomes for which one or more motive-outcome associations was stronger than Beta weights = |.15| in both samples. We only retained variables with an effect of |.15| or larger. Second, to avoid interpreting effects that were only present due to statistical suppression, we examined the bivariate correlations for each replicated motive-criterion association in the first two samples and discarded the cases in which the regression coefficient and bivariate correlation were of opposite signs or in which the bivariate correlation was < |.15|.

Vegetarian motives and responsivity to advocacy flyers

We conducted a pre-registered validation study to test the sensitivity of the VEMI scales to attitudes about advocacy flyers specifically appealing to health, environmental, and animal rights motives for a plant-based diet (see https://www.vegansociety.com ). Participants answered six questions about each flyer (e.g., this flyer made me want to be vegan) on a scale from 1–7. Internal consistencies were above .90 for these sets of questions for all three flyers, and an item-level factor analysis provided strong support for a single factor. We predicted that scores on the VEMI motives scales would be specifically associated with positive attitudes about the flyer targeting that motive (e.g., health motives would be related to positive attitudes about the health flyer) as indexed by both significant bivariate correlations and significant Beta weights in regression models in which all three VEMI scales are regressed upon the attitude scales, one at a time.

Pre-registration, methods, measures, scripts, and supplemental results for samples 1–3 as well as data for samples 1 and 2 are available at https://osf.io/52v6z/ . Data for sample 3 can be requested at https://www.lissdata.nl . Preregistration, materials, and data for sample 4 are available at https://osf.io/9wre4/ .

Developing the Vegetarian Motives Inventory (VEMI)

Fifteen items were chosen from the original pool of 26 ( Table 1 ) based on exploratory factor analyses in Sample 1. The model fit the data well and was invariant across all three samples ( Table 2 ). It was also invariant across men and women and across white vs. non-white participants in samples 1 and 2 ( Table 2 ). Cronbach’s alpha estimates of internal consistency across the three samples, respectively, were .88, .91, and .89 for the health scale, .90, .94, and .92 for the environment scale, and .93, .96, and .94 for the animal rights scale. Latent correlations between these scales in the three samples, respectively, were .33, .40, and .43 between health and environment, .27, .35, and .49 between health and animal rights, and .57, .70, and .59 between environment and animal rights.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t002

VEMI scale means across our first three samples are given in Table 3 . In general, people tended to respond above the raw midpoint of 4, indicating that health, the environment, and animal rights are all considered to be generally compelling reasons to adopt a plant-based diet. This was particularly the case for the health scale, for which the mean approached 6 (out of 7) in all three samples. As a validity check, we also asked participants in Samples 1 and 2 to rank the main reason they would choose to adopt a plant-based diet. Of the 1826 participants who responded to this question, the standardized means for corresponding VEMI scales were consistently ranked as the most important reason (e.g. people who rated Health highest on the VEMI scale also tended to rank Health as their main reason to adopt a plant-based diet). Again, these results showed that health is the most common reason among this primarily non-vegetarian sample to consider eating less meat, as 75% of respondents ranked this motive first. Finally, large effects distinguished the 97 vegans across all three samples from non-vegan respondents for the health (d = .51), environment (d = 1.29), and animal rights (d = .97) scales (all p < .001; Table 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t004

Identifying correlates of plant-based eating motives

Based on an initial examination of criterion variable distributions, the following variables were log-transformed in order to normalize distributions: gross monthly income, all values, weekly hours volunteering, weekly hours spent watching sports, weekly hours watching tv, weekly hours listening to the radio, number of books read in the last 30 days, frequency of social media use, and hours per week spent online. We also log-transformed these variables in Samples 2 and 3. We excluded 49 binary variables with insufficient variance in either Samples 1 or 2 (i.e., less than 50 participants responding either “no” or “yes”) and 4 continuous variables with no variance in Samples 1 or 2. We did not consider any other variables in the LISS sample that were not also assessed in Samples 1 and 2. Given these exclusions, we examined associations between VEMI scales and 207 remaining criterion variables.

We first computed bivariate correlations between VEMI scales and the 207 criterion variables. The 56 criterion variables with replicated associations (p < .01) across all three samples are presented in Table 5 . Among those, most variables correlated with all three motives, with health motives uniquely, or with both health and animal rights motives.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t005

As described above, our primary analytic approach used a regression-based strategy in a latent-variable framework to test preregistered predictions in sample 3 based on results from samples 1 and 2. Among the207 criterion variables, we identified 33 that were significantly associated with at least one VEMI scale in both of the first two samples. Table 6 shows the results of the best-fitting models for those criterion variables. We based predictions for Sample 3 based on two criteria from analyses of data from samples 1 and 2.: a positive standardized path coefficient of |.15| or larger and a bivariate correlation of |.15| or larger. Based on these results, we predicted that a) valuing peace would be related to all three motives (in this case we relaxed our rule somewhat; although the regression coefficient for animal motives was .14 in the second sample, bivariate correlations were virtually identical across variables), b) agreeable personality, valuing truth, responsibility, hard work, forgivingness, courage, helpfulness, lovingness, self-control, independence, instrumental happiness, intellect, family security, freedom, self-respect, terminal happiness, wisdom, national security, salvation, friendship, accomplishment, harmony, comfort, and mature love would have specific associations with health motives, c) being involved with an environmental organization would have a specific association with environmental motives, and d) caring for plants or animals would have a specific association with animal rights motives. Seven variables with standardized regression coefficients above our threshold in both samples did not have bivariate correlations < |.15| and thus we predicted they would not be related to any plant-based eating motives in the LISS data. The preregistration document for Sample 3 based on these findings can be found at https://osf.io/rk4en/ . We mistakenly made predictions about three variables based on results in sample 1 and 2 that were not available in LISS—being vegetarian, eating meat, and being involved in an animal organization.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t006

Associations that met the replication criteria described in the preceding paragraph are given in Table 7 . Overall, 16 variables were related specifically and positively to health motives, including the personality trait agreeableness and a number of different values. The only variable that was related specifically to environmental motives was participation in an environmental organization. No variables were related specifically to animal rights motives.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t007

Participants from Sample 4 completed the VEMI and answered questions about advocacy flyers targeting health, environment, and animal rights motives created by The Vegan Society. We used these data to test pre-registered hypotheses about the specificity of correlations between the VEMI scales and attitudes about flyers targeting health, environment, and animal rights motives ( https://osf.io/9wre4/ ). Table 8 shows that all bivariate correlations between motives and responses to flyers were statistically significant ( p < .05). As predicted, the strongest correlate of the environment flyer was the VEMI environment scale and the strongest correlate of the animal rights flyer was the VEMI animal rights scale. Inconsistent with our hypotheses, both the environment and animal rights scales were also more strongly correlated with responses to the health flyer, suggesting that people who are motivated by health are not particularly impacted by vegetarian advocacy, in general.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230609.t008

Regression models confirmed primary associations between the environment motives and responses to the environment flyer and animal rights motives to the animal rights flyer. The VEMI environment scale emerged as the only significant predictor in the regression model for the health flyer. These preregistered regression models tested associations between vegetarian motives and responses to the flyers, controlling for other vegetarian motives. We conducted exploratory analyses in which we reversed the independent and dependent variables in our regression analyses, to test whether flyers would have specific relations with motives, controlling for the responses to other flyers. In those models, responses to the health flyer emerged as the only significant predictor of the VEMI health scale (β = .15). Likewise, responses to the environment and animal rights flyers were the only significant predictors of the VEMI environment and animal rights scales, respectively. This pattern indicates that, controlling for general motives to be a vegetarian, there are no specific links between health motives and responses to health-focused advocacy, whereas controlling for general responsivity to advocacy, there may be specific links between health-focused advocacy and health-related vegetarian motives. Overall, the results support the utility of targeting advocacy based on the environment or animal rights to people most likely to care about those issues, and provide weak to mixed support for targeting advocacy based on health motives.

The variety of pathways that can lead a person to vegetarian diet raises the possibility that people who select different pathways are also different in other ways, but little is known about these differences or their importance for eating behavior. Thus, the purposes of this study were to develop a measure of health, environmental, and animal rights motives for vegetarian eating, examine the correlates of these dimensions, and test whether motives differentially predict responses to advocacy materials.

Vegetarian eating motives inventory

Our first step was to develop the Vegetarian Eating Motives Inventory (VEMI), a measure that reliably distinguishes between health, environmental, and animal rights motives for plant-based diets. The scales of this brief instrument were internally consistent and demonstrated a robust factor structure, including measurement invariance across three samples in two languages, men and women, and white and non-white participants. This measure has considerable promise for future research on the motivations for plant-based eating in Western cultures. Moreover, although our goal was to develop the VEMI to assess the potential motives of non-vegetarians in a general population, it can be easily adapted for research among vegans, vegetarians, flexitarians, reducetarians, and other groups. It could also be used at an individual level to better understand the kinds of factors that might be most influential for a particular person. The VEMI thus provides researchers and advocates with a well-validated and flexible measure for assessing the primary motives for plant-based eating among various individuals and groups.

Eating motivation profiles

We next used the VEMI scale to identify profiles of individuals who are most sympathetic to different reasons to be vegetarian. Overall, findings from three diverse samples suggested that health motives are the most common reason to consider adopting a plant-based diet in general and that health motives have the broadest array of correlates.

A number of criteria reliably correlated with plant-based motives across samples. By this standard, 21 variables correlated with all three motives. The common thread in this list seemed to be a communal orientation to life (e.g., agreeableness, loving, and valuing peace). The profile of people motivated by health was more conventional, as defined by 20 variables (e.g., male, hard-working, obedient, life satisfaction, and religiosity). The only variables that correlated uniquely with environmental motives were openness to experience and having visited a museum. Being involved in a religious organization and doing crafts were uniquely related to the animal rights motive. Valuing intellectual pursuits was related to both health and environmental motives, whereas being involved in a humanity organization was related to both environmental and animal rights motives. Finally, nine variables were related to both health and animal rights motives. As a group, they seemed to involve morality (e.g., conscientiousness, valuing truth, being self-controlled).

In our primary analytic approach, we used a more restrictive strategy with latent variables to account for measurement error and regression models to identify unique associations with each of the plant-based motives. Based on this approach, people who were primarily motivated by their health tended to be more agreeable, to have instrumental values (i.e. preferred means of achieving goals) involving hard work, courage, love, self-control, being happy, and to have terminal values (i.e., desired end states) involving family security, self-respect, happiness, national security, salvation, friendship, accomplishment, harmony, comfort, and mature love. This pattern paints a picture of a fairly conventional person who views working hard and getting along with others as the formula for a good life. In general, people whose main motives for considering a vegetarian diet are related to their health were not particularly compelled by vegetarian flyers, regardless of their content.

The only criterion uniquely and reliably related to environmental motives was participation in an environmental rights organization. No criteria were reliably related to animal rights motives across all three samples based on our primary analytic strategy. These circumscribed findings for the environment and animal rights scales surprised us given the large number of correlates we examined. This could have to do with our relatively conservative analytic approach, given the larger number of findings based on bivariate correlations that were significant at p < .01. However, by and large these results suggest that few traits, values, hobbies, habits, or demographic characteristics correlate in a way that is both robust and specific to the two major ethical motives for plant-based eating. This may suggest that “ethical vegetarianism” is a moral issue with relative specificity, as exemplified by the large numbers of people who actively promote social justice and environmental protection yet continue to eat animals. While there was some specificity between animal rights/environmental motives and responsivity to animal rights/environmental flyers, a more general finding is that people with ethical motives to consider a vegetarian diet were more responsive to advocacy flyers, including one that emphasized health benefits.

Implications for targeted advocacy

This pattern of results presents a kind of paradox for targeted advocacy. The most common reason people say they would consider being vegetarian has to do with health, and this study identified factors that could be used to identify those people. However, people driven primarily by health motives are least likely to respond to vegetarian advocacy. One interpretation of these results is that most people care about their health, but most people don’t connect health to vegetarian diet because the connection is indeed tenuous empirically. The fact that the most common reason people cite for considering a vegetarian diet is also the least compelling may help explain why there continues to be relatively few vegetarians, and why people motivated by health are also least strict [ 41 , 45 , 61 – 63 ] and compliant [ 1 , 64 , 65 ] with a vegetarian diet. Our data also supports this view somewhat, in that being vegan was more strongly associated with animal and plant motives than health motives in all three samples, although it did not surpass our cutoff in Sample 1 (correlations were .12 with both the animal and environment scales).

Conversely, people who are sympathetic to the ethical arguments for a vegetarian diet cannot easily be distinguished in other ways, but they are most likely to respond to vegetarian advocacy. The one exception is the relatively unsurprising finding that people affiliated with environmental advocacy groups are most likely to respond to an environmental argument supports the idea of encouraging individuals motivated by such concerns to see the connection between plant-based diets and climate change (e.g., [ 66 ]). Indeed, it is likely that many individuals who are passionate about this issue are not fully informed about the negative environmental impact of eating meat [ 67 ], and this information gap could be usefully exploited by animal advocacy groups who target individuals with a demonstrated interest in environmental activism.

However, overall these results do not seem to support the utility of selecting advocacy materials based on the kinds of people those materials would target. Instead, these results provide important information about ways in which targeted advocacy might not be productive. For instance, none of the demographic features that are known to be associated with plant-based eating in general, such as being young [ 44 , 45 ], female [ 1 , 44 , 46 – 49 , 63 ] and liberal [ 45 , 46 , 49 , 52 , 55 – 59 ], were differentially associated with health, environmental, or animal rights motives. The higher rates of vegetarianism among such individuals suggest that they represent fruitful targets for advocacy in general, but the results of this study do not provide guidance about which motives to appeal to among them, in particular.

It is worth noting that approaches to advocacy may depend on the end goal and beliefs about the best way to achieve that goal. Animal rights advocates [ 29 , 68 ] have argued that vegetarian advocacy should always focus on ethical motives. The more practical sector of plant-based diet advocacy (e.g., Leenaert, 2017; Joy, 2008 [ 30 , 31 ]) may be relatively more receptive to emphasizing health as a potential first step in reducing meat consumption. Our results about the specific correlates of health motives may help guide this step. Ultimately, evidence that links motives, advocacy approaches, and behavior change will determine the best way to reduce meat consumption in general, and we suspect that a multipronged approach may prove most effective [ 69 ].

Limitations and future directions

Although we examined a large number of criteria, we were constrained by the data collected by LISS and it is likely that we missed important unmeasured variables that would specifically correlate with different vegetarian motives. Likewise, while health, the environment, and animal rights are the most common motives for plant-based diets in Western societies, certain individuals may have more specific reasons that are not sampled on the VEMI, such as those related to religion or taste. Specificity may also be required to better understand the resistance to vegetarian diets. For instance, concerns have been raised about the difficulties poorer people have in finding healthy plant-based food, and this poses a considerable challenge to plant-based diet advocates for whom positioning one form of social justice (i.e., animal rights) against another (i.e., opportunities for the underprivileged) does little good.

A second major limitation is that the current results do not inform specific strategies to encourage people with different motives to change their diets in practice. For instance, some research suggested that people change their behavior upon becoming more aware of the impacts of eating animals [ 34 , 65 , 70 – 72 ], whereas other research suggested that increasing people’s awareness alone may not be sufficient to effectively change their behavior [ 31 , 73 ]. This issue sits downstream from the goals of our work, but it is equally critical for the ultimate goals of understanding the transition to vegetarian diets.

Third, in this study we exclusively employed self-report measures because we were interested in consciously accessible motives. However, future work examining attitudes that may be outside of peoples’ conscious awareness as well as directly behavioral outcome variables would be a useful extension of the current studies. Fourth, further work could be done to understand the underlying mechanisms of different attitudes towards plant-based dieting and animals [ 74 ]. Fifth, we focused in this study on distinguishing among the three major non-religious motives for vegetarian diet, because research suggests that these are the most common motives in general and because advocacy focuses almost exclusively on these three reasons to avoid meat. However, our results suggest that the VEMI scales could be combined into an overall composite useful for examining motives for vegetarian diet in general, in that the scales were intercorrelated and each distinguished vegan from non-vegan respondents. Moreover, there may be considerable value in assessing motives beyond those measured by the VEMI.

Finally, different approaches to the one taken here may be useful for identifying profiles of people who will tend to respond to different forms of activism. For example, machine learning approaches can be used in very large samples of users to identify an array of online behaviors that may be related to different motives for plant-based diets. This is a powerful tool that may have applicability, for instance in sampling online behavior to produce algorithms that can target specified audiences from within social media platforms [ 75 ]. Another is that considering the motives in favor of meat-eating [ 76 ] may prove useful in identifying the best way of encouraging plant-based diets. In a previous, preliminary study, we found that health motives were unrelated to motives for eating meat, whereas the environmental and animal rights motives were negatively related to seeing meat eating as “normal” or “nice” [ 77 ]. Future work that examines the links between motives to avoid meat and motives to eat meat would accordingly be informative.

In this study, we developed the Vegetarian Eating Motives Inventory (VEMI), a brief and psychometrically robust measure of the three main motives for adopting a plant-based diet: health, the environment, and animal rights. We used this measure to identify profiles of people most likely to respond to appeals to these different motives and to test whether motives predict responses to advocacy materials. In a general populati0n, health motives are the most common and have the widest array of correlates, which generally involve agentic and communal values. However, people who cite health motives were relatively unresponsive to advocacy materials compared to people who cite environmental or animal rights motives.

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 3. Šimčikas S. IS THE PERCENTAGE OF VEGETARIANS AND VEGANS IN THE U.S. INCREASING? [Internet]. Animal Charity Evaluators. 2018. https://animalcharityevaluators.org/blog/is-the-percentage-of-vegetarians-and-vegans-in-the-u-s-increasing/#review .
• 20. Cooney N. Veganomics: the surprising science on vegetarians, from the breakfast table to the bedroom. New York: Lantern Books; 2014. 194 p.
• 29. Ball M, Friedrich B. The animal activists’ handbook: maximizing our positive impact in today’s world. New York: Lantern Books; 2009. 117 p.
• 30. Joy M. Strategic action for animals: a handbook on strategic movement building, organizing, and activism for animal liberation. New York: Lantern Books; 2008.
• 31. Leenaert T. How to create a vegan world: a pragmatic approach. New York: Lantern Books; 2017.
• 67. Oppenlander RA. Food choice and sustainability: why buying local, eating less meat, and taking baby steps won’t work. Minneapolis, MN: Langdon Street Press: Distributed by Itasca Books; 2013.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Vegetarian Diet: An Overview through the Perspective of Quality of Life Domains

Affiliations.

• 1 Department of Nutrition, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Brasilia (UnB), Campus Darcy Ribeiro, Asa Norte, Brasilia, DF 70910-900, Brazil.
• 2 CBIOS (Research Center for Biosciences and Health Technologies), Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Campo Grande 376, 1749-024 Lisboa, Portugal.
• 3 Department of Animal Pathology and Production, Bromatology and Food Technology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Trasmontaña s/n, 35413 Arucas, Spain.
• PMID: 33921521
• PMCID: PMC8069426
• DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18084067

Vegetarianism has gained more visibility in recent years. Despite the well-described effects of a vegetarian diet on health, its influence on the quality of life of the individuals who follow it still needs to be properly investigated. Quality of life relates to a subjective perception of well-being and functionality, and encompasses four main life domains: physical, psychological, social, and environmental. The adoption of a vegetarian diet, despite being a dietary pattern, could potentially influence and be influenced by all of these domains, either positively or negatively. This review aims to present an overview of the background, conceptualization, features, and potential effects of vegetarianism in all quality of life domains. The choice of adopting a vegetarian diet could have positive outcomes, such as better physical health, positive feelings related to the adoption of a morally correct attitude, an increased sense of belonging (to a vegetarian community), and lower environmental impact. Other factors, however, could have a negative impact on the quality of life of those choosing to abstain from meats or other animal products, especially when they go beyond one's control. These include the environment, the social/cultural group in which a person is inserted, gender-based differences, economic aspects, and a limited access to a wide variety of plant-based foods. It is important to understand all the effects of adopting a vegetarian diet-beyond its nutritional aspects. Not only do studies in this area provide more consistent data, but they may also contribute to mitigating all factors that might prevent individuals from adopting a vegetarian diet, or that may have a negative impact on the quality of life of those who already follow it.

Keywords: quality of life; quality of life domains; vegetarian diet; vegetarianism.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Connections between aspects of vegetarianism…

Connections between aspects of vegetarianism and quality of life domains. The arrows indicate…

Similar articles

• Quality of Life of Brazilian Vegetarians Measured by the WHOQOL-BREF: Influence of Type of Diet, Motivation and Sociodemographic Data. Hargreaves SM, Nakano EY, Han H, Raposo A, Ariza-Montes A, Vega-Muñoz A, Zandonadi RP. Hargreaves SM, et al. Nutrients. 2021 Jul 30;13(8):2648. doi: 10.3390/nu13082648. Nutrients. 2021. PMID: 34444816 Free PMC article.
• Brazilian Vegetarian Population-Influence of Type of Diet, Motivation and Sociodemographic Variables on Quality of Life Measured by Specific Tool (VEGQOL). Hargreaves SM, Nakano EY, Zandonadi RP. Hargreaves SM, et al. Nutrients. 2020 May 14;12(5):1406. doi: 10.3390/nu12051406. Nutrients. 2020. PMID: 32422862 Free PMC article.
• The unified model of vegetarian identity: A conceptual framework for understanding plant-based food choices. Rosenfeld DL, Burrow AL. Rosenfeld DL, et al. Appetite. 2017 May 1;112:78-95. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.01.017. Epub 2017 Jan 18. Appetite. 2017. PMID: 28109732
• Plant-based and vegetarian diets: an overview and definition of these dietary patterns. Hargreaves SM, Rosenfeld DL, Moreira AVB, Zandonadi RP. Hargreaves SM, et al. Eur J Nutr. 2023 Apr;62(3):1109-1121. doi: 10.1007/s00394-023-03086-z. Epub 2023 Jan 22. Eur J Nutr. 2023. PMID: 36681744 Review.
• Nutritional considerations for vegetarian athletes. Barr SI, Rideout CA. Barr SI, et al. Nutrition. 2004 Jul-Aug;20(7-8):696-703. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2004.04.015. Nutrition. 2004. PMID: 15212753 Review.
• Health and functional advantages of cheese containing soy protein and soybean-derived casein. Messina M, Messina V. Messina M, et al. Front Plant Sci. 2024 Jul 23;15:1407506. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1407506. eCollection 2024. Front Plant Sci. 2024. PMID: 39109061 Free PMC article. Review.
• The Effects of Different Dietary Patterns on Bone Health. Liu X, Wu Y, Bennett S, Zou J, Xu J, Zhang L. Liu X, et al. Nutrients. 2024 Jul 17;16(14):2289. doi: 10.3390/nu16142289. Nutrients. 2024. PMID: 39064732 Free PMC article. Review.
• Socio-demographic and cross-country differences in attention to sustainable certifications and changes in food consumption. Mota-Gutierrez J, Sparacino A, Merlino VM, Blanc S, Brun F, Massimelli F, Vassallo E, Borra D, Massaglia S. Mota-Gutierrez J, et al. NPJ Sci Food. 2024 Jun 1;8(1):31. doi: 10.1038/s41538-024-00274-x. NPJ Sci Food. 2024. PMID: 38824122 Free PMC article.
• A Holistic Approach for Ethics and Sustainability in the Food Chain: The Gateway to Oral and Systemic Health. Varzakas T, Antoniadou M. Varzakas T, et al. Foods. 2024 Apr 17;13(8):1224. doi: 10.3390/foods13081224. Foods. 2024. PMID: 38672896 Free PMC article. Review.
• Impact of Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media on Quality of Life and Psychological Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Study. Sidam S, Sahoo AK, Mishra UP, Gupta V, Kushwah A, Sahoo PK. Sidam S, et al. Cureus. 2024 Feb 13;16(2):e54150. doi: 10.7759/cureus.54150. eCollection 2024 Feb. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 38496104 Free PMC article.
• Beig B.B. Master’s Thesis. Universidade Estadual Paulista; São Paulo, Brazil: 2008. A Prática Vegetariana em Rio Claro: Corpo, Espiríto e Natureza.
• Alsdorf L. In: The History of Vegetarianism and Cow-Veneration in India. Asdorf L., Bollée W., editors. Routledge; Weisbaden, Germany: 2010.
• Savage G.P. Vegetarianism: A nutritional Ideology? Part 1: History, Ideology and nutritional aspects. NZ Sci. Rev. 1996;53:72–78. doi: 10.13140/2.1.3984.1921. - DOI
• De Souza E.C.G., Duarte M.S.L., da Conceição L.L. In: Alimentação Vegetariana—Atualidades na Abordagem Nutricional. 1st ed. Editora Rubio, editor. Rubio; Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: 2017.
• Amato P.R., Partridge S.A. The New Vegetarians: Promoting Health and Protectting Life. Springer; São Paulo, Brasil: 1989. The Origins of Modern Vegetarianism; pp. 1–29.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

Related information

• Cited in Books

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Europe PubMed Central
• PubMed Central

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations
• MedlinePlus Health Information

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Advertisement

Happy but Vegetarian? Understanding the Relationship of Vegetarian Subjective Well-Being from the Nature-Connectedness Perspective of University Students

• Published: 08 October 2020
• Volume 16 , pages 2221–2249, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Jana Krizanova   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9557-2284 1 &
• Jorge Guardiola   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3594-9756 2  

2385 Accesses

12 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Vegetarianism constitutes not only a diet, but also a way of life and social movement currently in expansion worldwide. Since meat consumption negatively influences the environment, vegetarianism helps to preserve the health of ecosystems enhancing people’s well-being. Yet vegetarians tend to experience lower subjective well-being. Potential reasons for this include social stigmatization, underlying mental conditions, or perception of the world as unfair. In this paper, we explore the possibility that vegetarians who feel connected to nature enjoy higher subjective well-being. To do so, we explore a sample comprising 1068 undergraduates and relate vegetarian commitment, accounting for vegetarian identity and vegetarian self-assessment scale, with connectedness to nature for three different measures of subjective well-being, life satisfaction, emotional well-being, and subjective vitality. We find that vegetarian subjective well-being is better understood through individuals’ connection with the environment. Our results suggest that connectedness to nature is positively related, and vegetarian commitment generally associates negatively to subjective well-being except for vegans who have greater emotional well-being and vitality than other food identities. However, vegans experience greater life satisfaction while highly connected to nature. Lacto-pesco and lacto-ovo vegetarians also enjoy greater emotional well-being and vitality, respectively, while highly connected to nature. Considering vegetarian scale, individuals rating higher experience increased subjective vitality when highly connected to nature. Therefore, we propose that further policy developments in the area should consider the role of connectedness to nature in order to achieve higher levels of subjective well-being, while actively promoting pro-environmental behaviors such as vegetarianism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Conceptualizations of Happiness and Vegetarianism: Empirical Evidence from University Students in Spain

The motivations and practices of vegetarian and vegan Saudis

Knowledge, attitudes, and factors associated with vegetarianism in the Saudi Population

Data availability.

Survey definitions for dietary habit: a. Omnivorous: eats meat and its derivatives, fish and seafood, as well as fruit, vegetables, and cereals. b. Organic omnivore: buys organic meat. c. Flexitarian: does not eat meat at least once a week. d. Lacto-pesco vegetarian: eats dairy products, fish and seafood, but does not eat meat. e. Lacto-ovo vegetarian: eats eggs and dairy products but does not eat fish, seafood, white, or red meats. f. Vegan: eats fruits, vegetables, legumes, and cereals but does not eat red or white meats, dairy products, eggs, seafood, and fish.

Agarwal, U., Mishra, S., Xu, J., Levin, S., Gonzales, J., & Barnard, N. D. (2015). A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a nutrition intervention program in a multiethnic adult population in the corporate setting reduces depression and anxiety and improves quality of life: The GEICO study. American Journal of Health Promotion, 29 (4), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.130218-QUAN-72 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Albrecht, G., Sartore, G. M., Connor, L., Higginbotham, N., Freeman, S., Kelly, B., et al. (2007). Solastalgia: the distress caused by environmental change. Australasian Psychiatry, 15 (sup1), S95–S98.

Allen, M. W., Wilson, M., Ng, S. H., & Dunne, M. (2000). Values and beliefs of vegetarians and omnivores. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140 (4), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540009600481 .

Appleby, P. N., & Key, T. J. (2016). The long-term health of vegetarians and vegans. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 75 (3), 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665115004334 .

Bacon, L., & Krpan, D. (2018). (not) eating for the environment: The impact of restaurant menu design on vegetarian food choice. Appetite, 125 , 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.02.006 .

Bajželj, B., Richards, K. S., Allwood, J. M., Smith, P., Dennis, J. S., Curmi, E., & Gilligan, C. A. (2014). Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation. Nature Climate Change, 4 (10), 924–929. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2353 .

Barbaro, N., & Pickett, S. M. (2016). Mindfully green: Examining the effect of connectedness to nature on the relationship between mindfulness and engagement in pro-environmental behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 93 , 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.026 .

Barthels, F., Meyer, F., & Pietrowsky, R. (2018). Orthorexic and restrained eating behaviour in vegans, vegetarians, and individuals on a diet. Eating and Weight Disorders-Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity, 23 (2), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-018-0479-0 .

Batat, W., Manna, V., Ulusoy, E., Peter, P. C., Ulusoy, E., Vicdan, H., & Hong, S. (2016). New paths in researching “alternative” consumption and well-being in marketing: Alternative food consumption/alternative food consumption: What is “alternative”?/rethinking “literacy” in the adoption of AFC/social class dynamics in AFC. Marketing Theory, 16 (4), 561–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593116649793 .

Beardsworth, A., & Keil, T. (1992). The vegetarian option: Varieties, conversions, motives and careers. The Sociological Review, 40 (2), 253–293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1992.tb00889.x .

Beezhold, B. L., & Johnston, C. S. (2012). Restriction of meat, fish, and poultry in omnivores improves mood: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Nutrition Journal, 11 (1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-11-9 .

Beezhold, B. L., Johnston, C. S., & Daigle, D. R. (2010). Vegetarian diets are associated with healthy mood states: A cross-sectional study in seventh day adventist adults. Nutrition Journal, 9 (1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-9-26 .

Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1997). The postmodern turn . New York: Guilford Press.

Google Scholar  

Blanchflower, D. G., Oswald, A. J., & Stewart-Brown, S. (2013). Is psychological well-being linked to the consumption of fruit and vegetables? Social Indicators Research, 114 (3), 785–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0173-y .

Brown, K. W., & Kasser, T. (2005). Are Psychological and ecological well-being compatible? The Role of values, mindfulness, and lifestyle. Social Indicators Research, 74 (2), 349–368.

Byerly, H., Balmford, A., Ferraro, P. J., Hammond Wagner, C., Palchak, E., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T. H., Schwartz, A. J., & Fisher, B. (2018). Nudging pro-environmental behavior: Evidence and opportunities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 16 (3), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1777 .

Capaldi, C. A., Dopko, R. L., & Zelenski, J. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5 , 976. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00976 .

Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. Identity and the natural environment. The Psychological Significance of Nature , 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748 .

Conner, T. S., Brookie, K. L., Carr, A. C., Mainvil, L. A., & Vissers, M. C. (2017). Let them eat fruit! The effect of fruit and vegetable consumption on psychological well-being in young adults: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One, 12 (2), e0171206. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171206 .

Costa, I., Gill, P., Morda, R., & Ali, L. (2019). “More than a diet”: A qualitative investigation of young vegan Women's relationship to food. Appetite, 143 , 104418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104418 .

Craig, W. J. (2009). Health effects of vegan diets. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89 (5), 1627S–1633S. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2009.26736N .

de Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today’s consumer society: Questioning the citizen-consumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25 (6), 877–894.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 .

Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. (2008). Gross national happiness as an answer to the Easterlin paradox? Journal of Development Economics, 86 (1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2007.06.008 .

Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54 (1), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056 .

Dobersek, U., Wy, G., Adkins, J., Altmeyer, S., Krout, K., Lavie, C. J., & Archer, E. (2020). Meat and mental health: A systematic review of meat abstention and depression, anxiety, and related phenomena. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition , 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1741505 .

Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29 (1), 94–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.09.001 .

Engelbrecht, H. J. (2009). Natural capital, subjective well-being, and the new welfare economics of sustainability: Some evidence from cross-country regressions. Ecological Economics, 69 (2), 380–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.08.011 .

Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Frijters, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness? The Economic Journal, 114 (497), 641–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2004.00235.x .

Forestell, C. A., & Nezlek, J. B. (2018). Vegetarianism, depression, and the five factor model of personality. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 57 (3), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.2018.1455675 .

Foster, M., Chu, A., Petocz, P., & Samman, S. (2013). Effect of vegetarian diets on zinc status: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in humans. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 93 (10), 2362–2371. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6179 .

Fox, M. A. (2000). Vegetarianism and planetary health. Ethics & the Environment, 5 (2), 163–174 https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/368893 .

Fox, N., & Ward, K. J. (2008). You are what you eat? Vegetarianism, health and identity. Social Science & Medicine, 66 (12), 2585–2595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.02.011 .

Fraser, G. E. (1999). Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California seventh-day Adventists. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 70 (3), 532s–538s. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/70.3.532s .

Gallego-Narbón, A., Zapatera, B., Barrios, L., & Vaquero, M. P. (2019). Vitamin B 12 and folate status in Spanish lacto-ovo vegetarians and vegans. Journal of Nutritional Science, 8 , e7. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2019.2 .

Geerling, D. M., & Diener, E. (2018). Effect size strengths in subjective well-being research. Applied Research in Quality of Life , 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-018-9670-8 .

Google. (2019). Google Trends. https://trends.google.es/trends/explore?date=all&q=vegan,vegetarian . Last Accessed 15th October 2019.

Guillen-Royo, M. (2019). Sustainable consumption and wellbeing: Does on-line shopping matter? Journal of Cleaner Production, 229 , 1112–1124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.061 .

Haider, L. M., Schwingshackl, L., Hoffmann, G., & Ekmekcioglu, C. (2018). The effect of vegetarian diets on iron status in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 58 (8), 1359–1374. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2016.1259210 .

Hallström, E., Röös, E., & Börjesson, P. (2014). Sustainable meat consumption: A quantitative analysis of nutritional intake, greenhouse gas emissions and land use from a Swedish perspective. Food Policy, 47 , 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.04.002 .

Heiss, S., Coffino, J. A., & Hormes, J. M. (2017). Eating and health behaviors in vegans compared to omnivores: Dispelling common myths. Appetite, 118 , 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.08.001 .

Helliwell, J. F. (2014). How can subjective wellbeing be improved? Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide , 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell054 .

Hibbeln, J. R., Northstone, K., Evans, J., & Golding, J. (2018). Vegetarian diets and depressive symptoms among men. Journal of Affective Disorders, 225 , 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.051 .

Hill, P. L., Burrow, A. L., Brandenberger, J. W., Lapsley, D. K., & Quaranto, J. C. (2010). Collegiate purpose orientations and well-being in early and middle adulthood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31 (2), 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2009.12.001 .

Iguacel, I., Huybrechts, I., Moreno, L. A., & Michels, N. (2020). Vegetarianism and veganism compared with mental health and cognitive outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrition Reviews . https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaa030 .

Jabs, J., Sobal, J., & Devine, C. M. (2000). Managing vegetarianism: Identities, norms and interactions. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 39 (5), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.2000.9991625 .

Jackson, T. (2005). Live better by consuming less?: Is there a “double dividend” in sustainable consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9 (1–2), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198054084734 .

Jain, R., Degremont, A., Philippou, E., & Latunde-Dada, G. O. (2020). Association between vegetarian and vegan diets and depression: A systematic review. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , 79 (OCE1). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665119001496 .

Janda, S., & Trocchia, P. J. (2001). Vegetarianism: Toward a greater understanding. Psychology & Marketing, 18 (12), 1205–1240. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.1050 .

Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.). (1999). Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology. Russell Sage Foundation.

Kris-Etherton, P. M., Petersen, K. S., Hibbeln, J. R., Hurley, D., Kolick, V., Peoples, S., Rodriguez, N., & Woodward-Lopez, G. (2020). Nutrition and behavioral health disorders: Depression and anxiety. Nutrition Reviews . https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaa025 .

Lavallee, K., Zhang, X. C., Michalak, J., Schneider, S., & Margraf, J. (2019). Vegetarian diet and mental health: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses in culturally diverse samples. Journal of Affective Disorders, 248 , 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.01.035 .

Lea, E. J., Crawford, D., & Worsley, A. (2006). Consumers' readiness to eat a plant-based diet. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 60 (3), 342–351.

Leitzmann, C. (2003). Nutrition ecology: The contribution of vegetarian diets. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78 (3), 657S–659S. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/78.3.657S .

Leitzmann, C. (2005). Vegetarian diets: What are the advantages?. In Diet diversification and health promotion (Vol. 57, pp. 147-156). Karger Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1159/000083787 .

Lindeman, M. (2002). The state of mind of vegetarians: Psychological well-being or distress? Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 41 (1), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670240212533 .

Lindeman, M., & Stark, K. (1999). Pleasure, pursuit of health or negotiation of identity? Personality correlates of food choice motives among young and middle-aged women. Appetite, 33 (1), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1999.0241 .

Link, L. B., Hussaini, N. S., & Jacobson, J. S. (2008). Change in quality of life and immune markers after a stay at a raw vegan institute: A pilot study. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 16 (3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2008.02.004 .

MacInnis, C. C., & Hodson, G. (2017). It ain’t easy eating greens: Evidence of bias toward vegetarians and vegans from both source and target. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20 (6), 721–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215618253 .

Matta, J., Czernichow, S., Kesse-Guyot, E., Hoertel, N., Limosin, F., Goldberg, M., Zins, M., & Lemogne, C. (2018). Depressive symptoms and vegetarian diets: Results from the constances cohort. Nutrients, 10 (11), 1695. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10111695 .

Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24 (4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001 .

McEvoy, C. T., Temple, N., & Woodside, J. V. (2012). Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: A review. Public Health Nutrition, 15 (12), 2287–2294. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980012000936 .

Medawar, E., Huhn, S., Villringer, A., & Witte, A. V. (2019). The effects of plant-based diets on the body and the brain: A systematic review. Translational Psychiatry, 9 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-019-0552-0 .

Melina, V., Craig, W., & Levin, S. (2016). Position of the academy of nutrition and dietetics: Vegetarian diets. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 116 (12), 1970–1980. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 24(4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2016.09.025 .

Michalak, J., Zhang, X. C., & Jacobi, F. (2012). Vegetarian diet and mental disorders: Results from a representative community survey. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9 (1), 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-9-67 .

Morris, C., & Kirwan, J. (2006). Vegetarians: Uninvited, uncomfortable or special guests at the table of the alternative food economy? Sociologia Ruralis, 46 (3), 192–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00414.x .

Mujcic, R., & Oswald, J. A. (2016). Evolution of well-being and happiness after increases in consumption of fruit and vegetables. American Journal of Public Health, 106 (8), 1504–1510.

Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41 (5), 715–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748 .

Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2011). Happiness is in our nature: Exploring nature relatedness as a contributor to subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12 (2), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9197-7 .

Null, G., & Pennesi, L. (2017). Diet and lifestyle intervention on chronic moderate to severe depression and anxiety and other chronic conditions. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 29 , 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2017.09.007 .

Orlich, M. J., & Fraser, G. E. (2014). Vegetarian diets in the Adventist health study 2: A review of initial published findings. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 100 (suppl_1), 353S–358S. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.113.071233 .

Remick, A. K., Pliner, P., & McLean, K. C. (2009). The relationship between restrained eating, pleasure associated with eating, and well-being re-visited. Eating Behaviors, 10 (1), 42–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2008.11.001 .

Romo, L. K., & Donovan-Kicken, E. (2012). “Actually, I don't eat meat”: A multiple-goals perspective of communication about vegetarianism. Communication Studies, 63 (4), 405–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2011.623752 .

Rosenfeld, D. L. (2018). The psychology of vegetarianism: Recent advances and future directions. Appetite, 131 , 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.011 .

Rosenfeld, D. L., & Burrow, A. L. (2017). Vegetarian on purpose: Understanding the motivations of plant-based dieters. Appetite, 116 , 456–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.039 .

Rosenfeld, D. L., & Burrow, A. L. (2018). Development and validation of the dietarian identity questionnaire: Assessing self-perceptions of animal-product consumption. Appetite, 127 , 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.05.003 .

Rozin, P. (2005). The meaning of food in our lives: A cross-cultural perspective on eating and well-being. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 37 , S107–S112.

Rozin, P., Markwith, M., & Stoess, C. (1997). Moralization and becoming a vegetarian: The transformation of preferences into values and the recruitment of disgust. Psychological Science, 8 (2), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00685.x .

Ruby, M. B. (2012). Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite, 58 (1), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.09.019 .

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 (1), 141–166.

Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65 (3), 529–565. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00326.x .

Salonen, A. O., & Åhlberg, M. (2013). Towards sustainable society: From materialism to post-materialism. International Journal of Sustainable Society, 5 (4), 374–393. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSOC.2013.056846 .

Schenk, P., Rössel, J., & Scholz, M. (2018). Motivations and constraints of meat avoidance. Sustainability, 10 (11), 3858. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113858 .

Shapiro, K. J. (2015). “I am a vegetarian”: Reflections on a way of being. Society and Animals, 23 (2), 128–147. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341356 .

Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of human–nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14 (2), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225 .

Statista. (2020). Vegan representation in selected countries in Europe in 2018. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1064081/share-of-people-following-a-vegan-diet-in-europe-by-age-group/ . Last Accessed 9th June 2020.

Steinfeld, H., Wassenaar, T., & Jutzi, S. (2006). Livestock production systems in developing countries: Status, drivers, trends. Revue Scientifique et Technique, 25 (2), 505–516.

Stoll-Kleemann, S., & Schmidt, U. J. (2017). Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: A review of influence factors. Regional Environmental Change, 17 (5), 1261–1277.

Taylor, A. M., & Holscher, H. D. (2020). A review of dietary and microbial connections to depression, anxiety, and stress. Nutritional Neuroscience, 23 (3), 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/1028415X.2018.1493808 .

The Vegan Society. (2020). Statistics of the Vegan Society. https://www.vegansociety.com/news/media/statistics . Last Accessed 9th June 2020.

Timko, C. A., Hormes, J. M., & Chubski, J. (2012). Will the real vegetarian please stand up? An investigation of dietary restraint and eating disorder symptoms in vegetarians versus non-vegetarians. Appetite, 58 (3), 982–990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.02.005 .

Tong, T. Y., Appleby, P. N., Bradbury, K. E., Perez-Cornago, A., Travis, R. C., Clarke, R., & Key, T. J. (2019). Risks of ischaemic heart disease and stroke in meat eaters, fish eaters, and vegetarians over 18 years of follow-up: Results from the prospective EPIC-Oxford study. British Medical Journal, 366 , l4897. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4897 .

Twigg, J. (1979). Food for thought: Purity and vegetarianism. Religion, 9 (1), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-721X(79)90051-4 .

Vemuri, A. W., & Costanza, R. (2006). The role of human, social, built, and natural capital in explaining life satisfaction at the country level: Toward a National Well-Being Index (NWI). Ecological Economics, 58 (1), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.02.008 .

Vice-Rectorate for Research and Knowledge Transfer. (2020). Code of Good Practice in Research. https://investigacion.ugr.es/sites/vicerrectorados_files/vic_investigacion/public/ficheros/extendidas/2020-02/Code%20of%20Good%20Practice%20in%20Research%20EN%20unido%202019.pdf . Last Accessed 17th July 2020.

Warner, R. M., Frye, K., Morrell, J. S., & Carey, G. (2017). Fruit and vegetable intake predicts positive affect. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18 (3), 809–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9749-6 .

Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (4), 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.678 .

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (6), 1063–1070.

Weinstein, L., & Anton, F. (1982). Vegetarianism vs. meatarianism and emotional upset. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 19 (2), 99–100. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330052 .

Welsch, H. (2002). Preferences over prosperity and pollution: Environmental valuation based on happiness surveys. Kyklos, 55 (4), 473–494. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6435.00198 .

Weng, T. T., Hao, J. H., Qian, Q. W., Cao, H., Fu, J. L., Sun, Y., Huang, L., & Tao, F. B. (2012). Is there any relationship between dietary patterns and depression and anxiety in Chinese adolescents? Public Health Nutrition, 15 (4), 673–682. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980011003077 .

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Yokoyama, Y., Barnard, N. D., Levin, S. M., & Watanabe, M. (2014). Vegetarian diets and glycemic control in diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy, 4 (5), 373. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-3652.2014.10.04 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Daniel Rosenfeld who contributed to this work with various kinds of support and valuable insights. The manuscript has been enriched thanks to the comments of the people attending to the International Society of Quality of Life Studies, held in September 2019 in Granada, particularly Dr. Chitra S. Nair and Dr. Tithi Bhatnagar. Usual disclaimer applies.

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Spanish Agencia Estatal de Investigación and the European Regional Development Fund (project ECO2017–86822-R); the Regional Government of Andalusia and the European Regional Development Fund (projects P18-RT-576 and B-SEJ-018-UGR18) and the University of Granada (Plan Propio. Unidad Científica de Excelencia: Desigualdad, Derechos Humanos y Sostenibilidad -DEHUSO-).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Faculty of Economics and Business, Universidad de Granada, Campus Universitario de La Cartuja, 18071, Granada, Spain

Jana Krizanova

Institute of Peace and Conflicts and Department of Applied Economics, Universidad de Granada, C/ Rector López Argueta, s/n, 18001, Granada, Spain

Jorge Guardiola

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Jana Krizanova and Jorge Guardiola. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Jana Krizanova and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge Guardiola .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Research Involving Human Participants and Informed Consent

We interviewed students that were informed that the data included would be anonymous and used for scientific purposes.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Krizanova, J., Guardiola, J. Happy but Vegetarian? Understanding the Relationship of Vegetarian Subjective Well-Being from the Nature-Connectedness Perspective of University Students. Applied Research Quality Life 16 , 2221–2249 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-020-09872-9

Download citation

Received : 18 June 2020

Accepted : 29 September 2020

Published : 08 October 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-020-09872-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Vegetarianism
• Subjective well-being
• Life satisfaction
• Nature connectedness
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Articles on Vegetarianism

Displaying 1 - 20 of 106 articles.

What kind of diner are you? 6 types of diners who avoid plant-based meat dishes

David Fechner , Griffith University ; Bettina Grün , Vienna University of Economics and Business , and Sara Dolnicar , The University of Queensland

Climate labels similar to cigarette packet warnings could cut meat consumption – new research

Jack Hughes , Durham University ; Mario Weick , Durham University , and Milica Vasiljevic , Durham University

Vegan diet has just 30% of the environmental impact of a high-meat diet, major study finds

Michael Clark , University of Oxford and Keren Papier , University of Oxford

Are vegan pet diets as unhealthy as they’re claimed to be? Here’s what the evidence says

Alexandra Whittaker , University of Adelaide ; Adriana Domínguez-Oliva , Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (México) , and Daniel Mota-Rojas

Egg shortage: a nutritionist on the best egg alternatives

Hazel Flight , Edge Hill University

My kid has gone vegetarian. What do I need to know (especially if they’re a picky eater)?

Evangeline Mantzioris , University of South Australia

Vegetarians more likely to be depressed than meat-eaters – possible reasons

Chris Bryant , University of Bath

Vegetarian diets may be better for the planet – but the Mediterranean diet is the one omnivores will actually adopt

Nicole Allenden , University of New England ; Amy Lykins , University of New England , and Annette Cowie

Vegan and vegetarian diets may lack certain nutrients – here’s how to get more of them

Martin Warren , Quadram Institute ; Kourosh Ahmadi , University of Surrey ; Liangzi Zhang , Quadram Institute , and Maria Traka , Quadram Institute

Why Seventh-day Adventists are so often vegan or vegetarian

Tamas Lestar , University of Winchester

The meat paradox: how your brain wrestles with the ethics of eating animals

Sarah Gradidge , Anglia Ruskin University and Magdalena Zawisza , Anglia Ruskin University

‘Sallets’ – how to eat healthily the 1600s way

Catie Gill , Loughborough University and Sara Read , Loughborough University

Diners more likely to choose a vegetarian option when 75% of the menu is meat-free – new research

Beth Parkin , University of Westminster

Individual dietary choices can add – or take away – minutes, hours and years of life

Olivier Jolliet , University of Michigan and Katerina S. Stylianou , University of Michigan

Does a plant-based diet really help beat  COVID-19 ?

Duane Mellor , Aston University

Anti-nutrients – they’re part of a normal diet and not as scary as they sound

Jill Joyce , Oklahoma State University

Diet resolutions: 6 things to know about eating less meat and more plant-based  foods

Mariana Lamas , Northern Alberta Institute of Technology

Singapore approves cell-cultured chicken bites – who will be the first to try them?

Vegetarian and vegan diet: five things for over-65s to consider when switching to a plant-based  diet

Taibat (Tai) Ibitoye , University of Reading

My talk with Jane Goodall: vegetarianism, animal welfare and the power of children’s advocacy

Clive Phillips , The University of Queensland

Related Topics

• Animal welfare
• Climate change
• Meat eaters
• Plant-based diet

Top contributors

Director, Agri-Food Analytics Lab, Professor in Food Distribution and Policy, Dalhousie University

Associate Professor in Sociology, University of East Anglia

Lecturer in Social Psychology, Lancaster University

Lecturer in Criminology, The Open University

Honorary Research Associate, Department of Psychology, University of Bath

Professor of History and Philosophy, and Deputy Dean Research (Faculty of Arts), University of Adelaide

Senior research associate, University of Technology Sydney

Senior Lecturer in Science Communication, The University of Western Australia

NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow and Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University

PhD Candidate, Biological and Experimental Psychology, Queen Mary University of London

Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

Professor, Food Economics, University of Guelph

Researcher, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and Honorary Research Fellow, University of Manchester

Professor, Dept of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Guelph

Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, University of South Australia

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

The Impact of Vegan and Vegetarian Diets on Physical Performance and Molecular Signaling in Skeletal Muscle

Alexander pohl.

1 Department of Biosciences of Sport Science, Institute of Sport Science, University of Hildesheim, 31141 Hildesheim, Germany; ed.miehsedlih-inu@110euhcs (F.S.); ed.miehsedlih-inu@nisreb (K.B.); ed.nleok-shsd@trelheg (S.G.)

Frederik Schünemann

Käthe bersiner, sebastian gehlert.

2 Department for Molecular and Cellular Sports Medicine, German Sports University Cologne, 50933 Cologne, Germany

Muscular adaptations can be triggered by exercise and diet. As vegan and vegetarian diets differ in nutrient composition compared to an omnivorous diet, a change in dietary regimen might alter physiological responses to physical exercise and influence physical performance. Mitochondria abundance, muscle capillary density, hemoglobin concentration, endothelial function, functional heart morphology and availability of carbohydrates affect endurance performance and can be influenced by diet. Based on these factors, a vegan and vegetarian diet possesses potentially advantageous properties for endurance performance. Properties of the contractile elements, muscle protein synthesis, the neuromuscular system and phosphagen availability affect strength performance and can also be influenced by diet. However, a vegan and vegetarian diet possesses potentially disadvantageous properties for strength performance. Current research has failed to demonstrate consistent differences of performance between diets but a trend towards improved performance after vegetarian and vegan diets for both endurance and strength exercise has been shown. Importantly, diet alters molecular signaling via leucine, creatine, DHA and EPA that directly modulates skeletal muscle adaptation. By changing the gut microbiome, diet can modulate signaling through the production of SFCA.

1. Introduction

In recent years, vegetarian and vegan diets and their impact on health and performance have been brought into focus of scientific research. It is well known that nutrition influences exercise performance [ 1 ]. Yet, while the relationship of nutrition in general, and also on aspects of performance and adaptation to exercise is well established [ 2 ], research on vegetarian and vegan diets and their impact on performance and training adaptation is scarce. The purpose of this review is firstly to summarize the published research on vegetarian and vegan diets with a special emphasis on strength- and endurance-related exercise performance. Secondly, we also aim to highlight the potential impact of those diets on systemic and molecular muscle adaptations through training. In order to be considered as suitable for the first purpose, research items had to meet two criteria. First, subjects in the involved studies had to follow a vegetarian or vegan diet and second, performance outcome had to be measured. Additionally, research on general aspects and properties of endurance and strength performance as well as research that focused on the adaptation of molecular mechanisms affected by those diets was included.

2. Properties of Vegetarian and Vegan Diets

Vegetarian diets can be divided into six different types, as shown in Table 1 . These different types are depended on the inclusion and exclusion of food sources. Vegan diets show a considerable variety with the omittance of non-rooted vegetables being a classic variation. However, to our knowledge no scientific data show differences in nutritional properties of these variations and their impact on health or performance.

Properties of diets (adapted from [ 3 , 4 ]).

2.1. Differences in Macronutrients between Diets

Due to dietary-based food compositions, energy, macronutrient and micronutrient intake vary between diets [ 3 ]. Vegan (stated as strict vegetarian in the original article) and omnivorous (stated as non-vegetarian in the original article) diets usually offer the greatest difference concerning macronutrient intake [ 3 ]. Vegan diets are usually higher in carbohydrates and fiber, but lower in fat compared to omnivorous and vegetarian diets [ 3 ]. There are no significant differences in unsaturated fatty acid intake between diet regimens, although a tendency of a higher mono-unsaturated fatty acid intake in omnivores has been recognized [ 3 ]. Vegans consume significantly fewer saturated fatty acids (SFA) and unsaturated docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) compared to omnivores and similar to vegetarians [ 3 ]. Protein intake of vegans is slightly lower compared to omnivores but similar to semi vegetarians and lacto-ovo vegetarians, with omnivores consuming the highest amount of animal protein compared to other dietary regimens (see Table 2 ) [ 3 ].

Macronutrient and micronutrient intake of diets (adapted from [ 3 ]). Mean nutrient intake values with standard errors (SE) standardized to 2000 kcal/day.

* Significant contrast ( p < 0.05 and a mean difference ≥20% when compared to omnivorous dietary pattern as the group of reference. a MUFA = Mono Unsaturated Fatty Acid. b SFA = Saturated Fatty Acid. c DHA = Docosahexaenoic Acid.

2.2. Differences in Micronutrients between Diets

Furthermore, there are differences in micronutrient intake, as vegans consume significantly less vitamin D than omnivores ( p < 0.05) but not than vegetarians, while none of the examined dietary groups (omnivores, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, lacto-ovo-vegetarian, vegan) [ 3 ] consumed the daily recommended intake of 600 IU (15 µg) [ 5 , 6 ] (see Table 2 ). The degree of adherence to a plant-based Mediterranean diet, was found to be positively associated with high circulating levels of vitamin D [ 7 ] emphasizing the long term benefits of this diet for the elevation of circulating vitamin D levels.

However, despite the various beneficial aspects of a Mediterranean diet [ 8 ] it is not necessarily superior to vegan or omnivorous diets in terms of vitamin D blood levels. It has been shown that omnivores and vegans show higher blood levels of 26.1 ng/mL and 31.6 ng/mL, respectively, compared to 23.0 ng/mL in subjects consuming a Mediterranean diet [ 7 , 9 ].

Magnesium intake is significantly higher ( p < 0.05) in vegans but not vegetarians compared to omnivores [ 3 ] with all groups meeting the daily recommended intake (females: 310–320 mg/day; males: 400–420 mg/day) [ 10 ]. This nutrient distribution can also be found in European populations [ 11 ], with a more pronounced deficiency in vitamin D intake.

Total creatine concentration measured in skeletal muscle tissue differs between vegetarians and omnivores, with omnivores showing the highest total creatine concentrations [ 12 ]. As the body synthesizes approximately 1 g per day of creatine endogenously, food, in the form of meat, fish and poultry, provides an additional 1 g [ 13 ]. Due to the restrictive dietary pattern, vegetarians and vegans consume less dietary creatine than omnivores [ 14 ] and vegans’ repletion of creatine stores entirely depends on endogenous synthesis [ 15 ].

Despite these minor differences in nutritional composition, vegan and vegetarian diets have been shown to be nutritionally adequate in terms of meeting the recommended energy, macronutrient and micronutrient intake, when organized appropriately [ 1 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ].

An appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diet includes a variety of plant foods [ 16 ], however, the supplementation of micronutrients such as vitamin D, vitamin B12 and iron is frequently observed [ 19 ].

3. Do Vegetarian and Vegan Diets Affect Exercise Performance

The impact of nutrition on exercise performance is well studied. Over the past two decades, research papers on nutrition and exercise performance have rapidly increased in number, peaking in 2020 with 1758 published research items containing the keywords nutrition and exercise performance (source: PubMed, 28.July.2021). However, research on vegetarian and vegan diets and their impact on exercise performance is scarce—only three and six research items, respectively, were published on these topics in 2020 (source: PubMed, 28.July.2021; keywords: vegetarian diet and exercise performance; vegan diet and exercise performance). Due to the limited research in this field, this review takes both, the impact of vegetarian and also vegan diets on exercise performance into account and extracts the essential data of these papers. Research from 1999 to 2021 was examined and 14 research items were identified as suitable for the purpose of this brief narrative review and are summarized in Table 3 . These studies are described in detail in the section on vegetarian and vegan diets and endurance performance and vegetarian and vegan diets and strength performance.

Overview of suitable research items. (Arrows indicate an increase (↑), no change (→) or a decrease (↓)).

4. Vegan and Vegetarian Diet and Endurance Performance

4.1. factors that may affect endurance performance differently between diets.

Endurance performance is usually assessed with the measurement of VO 2 max [ 20 ]. It is a common indicator for systemic training effects on global oxidative capacity [ 20 ], although endurance performance depends on different physiological subsystems, e.g., mitochondrial abundance and muscle capillary density [ 20 , 21 , 22 ]. No significant difference in mitochondrial density between vegans and omnivores has been detected, although there was a trend towards a higher relative mitochondrial DNA content (relative amount of mitochondrial DNA to nuclear DNA) in vegans [ 23 ]. To our knowledge, no research on vegan or vegetarian diet and capillarization has been conducted yet, but it has been shown that in vitro, the isoflavone Genistein from the soybean inhibits neovascularization in bovine microvascular endothelial cells [ 24 ]. As vegetarians and vegans consume significantly more soy protein ( p < 0.05) [ 3 ], these diets may influence capillarization. In trained athletes however, VO 2 max critically depends on the cardiac output in combination with the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood and thus hemoglobin concentration [ 25 , 26 ]. The former may be affected by a vegan diet as it positively influences both morphological and functional heart remodeling such as lower relative wall thickness (RWT), and better left ventricular systolic and diastolic function [ 27 ]. The RWT describes the relation of wall thickness to chamber dimension [ 28 ]. The positive changes in systolic and diastolic function may occur because of the antioxidant properties of vegan and vegetarian diets and an improved endothelial function in vegans and vegetarians [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. Moreover, the lower intake of saturated fatty acids (SFA) may be responsible for the slightly better diastolic function in vegans [ 27 ].

A healthy adult has a hemoglobin concentration of 12–16 g/dL [ 32 , 33 ] and iron intake has been shown to be a critical component for the maintenance of hemoglobin concentration in endurance athletes [ 34 ] but also in vegans and vegetarians [ 35 , 36 ]. Despite the similar dietary iron intake of omnivores, vegetarians and vegans (see Table 2 ), endurance performance can be influenced by the dietary choice due to the greater bioavailability of animal-derived heme-iron (15–35% absorption) compared to plant-derived non-heme-iron (2–20% absorption) [ 37 ]. It has been shown that both, vegans and vegetarians, exhibit a higher prevalence of decreased iron status compared to omnivores which leading to an insufficient hemoglobin synthesis, which can negatively affect endurance performance [ 26 ].

Another nutritional factor that may affect endurance performance between diets is vitamin D intake. In subjects with low serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25(OH)D) levels, a low phosphocreatine (PCr)/inorganic phosphate (Pi) ratio was observed, suggesting a reduced oxidative phosphorylation in muscles [ 38 ]. It has also been reported that a supplementation of vitamin D improved post-exercise PCr and ADP recovery, increased the PCr/Pi ratio, and reduced Pi/adenosine triphosphate (ATP) ratio significantly, proposing an improved mitochondrial oxidative capacity [ 38 , 39 ].

The knockdown of vitamin D receptor (VDR) in C2C12 myoblasts resulted in decreased mitochondrial oxidative capacity and ATP production, further strengthening the role of vitamin D in endurance performance [ 40 ]. As vegans consume significantly less vitamin D compared to omnivores [ 3 ], this may affect endurance performance. A recent study has shown a positive association between vitamin D status and endurance performance but also showed that vitamin D supplementation did not improve exercise performance [ 41 ]. Therefore, data on vitamin D supplementation and endurance exercise performance are still inconsistent and this field requires further research.

Muscular carnosine content may also influence exercise performance. Carnosine is a dipeptide composed of β-alanine and L-histidine [ 42 ] and its major physiological functions include muscular pH-buffering and the activation of muscle ATPase to provide energy [ 43 ]. As it is highly abundant in beef and absent from plants [ 43 ], dietary choices can influence carnosine levels in the long-term [ 44 ] and therefore may affect exercise performance [ 45 , 46 , 47 ]. Carnosine may also influence strength performance [ 48 ].

In summary, the properties of vegetarian and vegan diets may have an impact on cardiac output, hemoglobin concentration, mitochondrial function and pH-buffering capacity, possibly affecting endurance performance.

4.2. Differences in Substrate Availability between Vegan or Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets May Affect Endurance Performance

Of major importance for acutely conducted endurance exercise is the substrate availability of the macronutrients fat and carbohydrates [ 49 ]. Carbohydrates become the predominant energy source when exercising with intensities of more than 60% of the VO 2 max [ 50 , 51 ]. Endurance exercise carried out with lower intensities relies to a higher degree on fat oxidation [ 49 ]. Hence, with increasing exercise intensity, muscle glycogen and plasma glucose oxidation increase whereas fat oxidation declines [ 52 ]. These results underpin the essential role of carbohydrates as a fuel for acute endurance performance [ 49 ].

As displayed in Table 2 , vegans and vegetarians consume 16% and 7% more carbohydrates than omnivores, respectively, which could lead to an advantage in endurance performance.

When performing endurance exercise near VO 2 max, over 80% of energy is mainly supplied from glycogen granules from the intercellular substrate stores of muscle fibers (IMG) [ 53 ]. Mitochondrial ATP generation due to carbohydrate metabolism depends mainly on IMG stores as only 20-30% of the fuels are supplied via the capillaries [ 53 ] from the blood stream.

However, to our knowledge, no studies investigating the basal density of muscle glycogen granules and intramuscular lipid droplets comparing omnivores, vegetarians or vegans have been conducted yet. Therefore, the advantage of higher basal carbohydrate consumption in vegans or vegetarians towards enhanced endurance performance are not clear. It must be considered that exercise training per se is the most important driver for increasing intramuscular substrate stores [ 54 ].

Moreover, the carbohydrate consumption during endurance exercise affects endurance performance [ 55 ]. During prolonged endurance exercise and under conditions when IMG stores decline, an increasing amount of glucose is delivered via the blood stream towards working muscle [ 56 ]. It is well established that carbohydrate consumption during prolonged endurance exercises extends time to exhaustion [ 57 ]. However, the huge amount of sports-nutrition available for acute provision of carbohydrates is mainly plant-based [ 58 ] and to date there is no scientific evidence that pure vegan compared to vegetarian and omnivorous energy sources (power gels, energy bars, isotonic carbohydrate drinks) show functional differences in gastrointestinal emptying, carbohydrate availability or other factors that may affect endurance performance.

In conclusion, endurance performance is affected on multiple levels. While exercise dominantly stimulates endurance exercise adaptation, different macro- and micronutrient intake between diets may affect cardiac output, oxygen carrying capacity, mitochondrial function and substrate availability. It has yet to be determined how diets impact endurance exercise capacity ( Figure 1 ).

Impact of dietary properties on physiological subsystems and performance. ( A ): Vegan, vegetarian and omnivorous diets possess unique nutritional properties. This affects the intake of differential levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids (DHA/EPA), carbohydrates (CHO), creatine, protein, vitamin D, heme iron, antioxidants and saturated fatty acids (SFA). ( B ): The diet composition affects substrate storage and tissue adaptations on multiple levels and ( C ): finally can change strength and endurance performance in combination with physical exercise. The arrows describe a high occurrence (↑) and a low occurrence (↓) in the particular diet [ 27 , 44 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 ]. Omnivorous diets (OMN, blue section) possess higher amounts of DHA/EPA, vitamin D and protein which have a strong effect on muscular adaptation and therefore on strength and endurance performance. The high amount of creatine has a strong effect on substrate availability and therefore strength performance, whereas the low amount of CHO has a weak effect on substrate availability and therefore affect endurance performance to a lower extent. The high heme iron content has a strong effect on blood adaptation and therefore on endurance performance. Low antioxidant content and high amounts of SFA have a weak effect on cardiovascular adaptation, affecting endurance performance to a lower extent. Nevertheless, studies showed a significant increase in physical performance of an OMN diet when combined with physical exercise. Vegan diets (VEG, green section) possess low amounts of protein, DHA/EPA and vitamin D and therefore exert only a weak effect to support muscular adaptations for strength and endurance performance. The high amount of CHO has a strong effect on energy-deriving substrate availability and therefore endurance exercise. whereas the low amount of creatine has a weak effect on energy-deriving substrate availability and therefore on strength performance. Low heme iron levels have a weak effect on blood adaption therefore affecting blood adaptations to a smaller extent. Low amounts of SFA and high amounts of antioxidants have a strong effect on cardiovascular adaptations and therefore on endurance performance. Nevertheless, studies showed a significant increase in physical performance of a VEG diet when combined with physical exercise. Vegetarian diets (VGT, yellow section) possess low amounts of protein and DHA/EPA, and therefore have a weak effect on muscular adaptations and strength performance. In contrast, the higher amount of vitamin D has a strong effect on muscular adaptation and therefore on muscular adaptations. The high CHO content has a strong effect on substrate availability for endurance exercise, whereas the low creatine content has a weak effect on substrate availability for strength exercise. Low heme iron content has a weak effect on blood adaptation, therefore affecting endurance performance to a lower extent. High levels of antioxidants and low amounts of SFA have a strong effect on cardiovascular adaptations and therefore influences endurance performance to a greater extent. Nevertheless, studies showed a significant increase in physical performance of a VGT diet when combined with physical exercise.

4.3. Evidences on Vegetarian and Vegan Diets and Endurance Performance

Nine studies examined the influence of a vegetarian or vegan diet on endurance performance. Five of these studies chose a cross-sectional study design, which means that without exercise intervention, the baseline performance levels of vegans/vegetarians were generally compared with omnivores.

Król and colleagues [ 27 ] compared the absolute exercise capacity (VO 2 max) and peak power output (PPO) of vegan ( n = 22) and omnivorous ( n = 30) amateur runners who trained at least three times a week. Weekly training volume did not differ between groups. Exercise capacity was assessed on a treadmill as absolute (L/min) and relative VO 2 max (mL/kg bodyweight/min) as well as PPO in watts. While no difference in absolute VO 2 max was detected between groups, relative VO 2 max was significantly higher in vegans compared to omnivores ( p < 0.05) due to the significantly lower body weight ( p < 0.05) of vegans compared to omnivores. PPO showed no difference between groups. Overall, no difference in oxidative capacity was detected between modes.

Lynch and co-authors [ 59 ] compared the cardiorespiratory fitness in a mixed cohort of 27 vegetarian and 43 omnivorous elite runners. Cardiorespiratory fitness was determined according to the Bruce protocol and expressed as VO 2 max [ 71 ].

The results revealed a significantly higher relative maximal oxygen uptake in the vegetarian diet group compared to the omnivorous group in females ( p < 0.05) but not in males. In contrast, the absolute maximal oxygen uptake (L/min) did not differ between groups. The higher relative maximal oxygen uptake of the vegetarian females in this study was also explained with a lower body mass in vegetarians compared to the omnivores (0.05 < p < 0.10).

Another study yielded similar results [ 60 ]. This cross-sectional study of 28 strict vegetarians (can be stated as vegans) and 28 omnivores, who performed aerobic exercise for 196.3 min/week and 196.8 min/week, respectively, showed that vegans had both a higher estimated VO 2 max (44.5 ± 5.2 vs. 41.6 ± mL/kg bodyweight/min; p = 0.03) and higher submaximal endurance time to exhaustion (12.2 ± 5.7 vs. 8.8 ± 3.0 min; p = 0.007) than omnivores on a cycle ergometer. VO 2 max was calculated using a validated prediction equation adjusted for body weight: VO 2 max (mL/kg/min) = 10.8× (power output [W]/body weight [kg]) + 7. W is the maximal power output the participants achieved during the incremental cycle ergometer test. Body weight did not differ between groups ( p = 0.8).

In contrast, Nebl and colleagues [ 70 ] did not observe differences in exercise capacity between lacto-ovo vegetarian, vegan and omnivorous recreational runners with similar training habits with a tendency of higher running distance ( p = 0.054) and running time per week ( p = 0.079) for lacto-ovo vegetarians. As a primary outcome, maximal power output (P max /bodyweight) that was reached in a graded exercise test on a bicycle ergometer was measured. As a secondary outcome, maximum power output related to lean body mass (P max /LBM) was assessed. There was no statistical difference in BMI ( p = 0.559) and LBM between groups ( p = 0.866). This indicates that all examined diets did not affect exercise capacity between groups.

A recent study [ 61 ] compared the cardiovascular fitness of nine habitual vegan and 16 habitual omnivorous young, healthy men by assessing the relative and absolute VO 2 max on a cycle ergometer. The data indicated no differences between groups for both relative and absolute VO 2 max.

These results suggest that long-term vegetarian and vegan diets do not have a detrimental effect on endurance performance, but may have the potential to improve endurance performance when performing exercise intensities relying on higher carbohydrate usage.

Four studies used an experimental approach. Blancquaert and colleagues [ 62 ] assigned 40 healthy female omnivores to either an omnivorous group ( n = 10), a vegetarian group that was supplemented with creatine and β-alanine ( n = 15) or a vegetarian group that received a placebo ( n = 15) over a period of six months. Groups did not differ in age, height, weight and BMI. At baseline, 3 months and 6 months, subjects performed an incremental cycling test to assess VO 2 max (mL/kg body weight). VO 2 max did not differ between groups at baseline, nor did it change during the 6-month intervention period. Energy and macronutrient intake did not differ between the omnivorous group and the vegetarian groups.

In another study [ 44 ], 20 healthy, physically active (2–3 h of sport weekly) omnivores were allocated to either a lacto-ovo vegetarian or a mixed diet group and the influence of diet and a five-week sprint training program on power output, measured as 6×6 s repeated sprint ability on a cycle ergometer, was examined. To avoid a creatine deficiency, both groups supplemented 1g creatine monohydrate daily. Five weeks of sprint training led to an increase in power output per sprint ( p < 0.05) and an increased mean power output for all sprints together ( p < 0.001) independent of diet group ( p = 0.707). No differences in energy and macronutrient intake were reported. These data do not show any superiority of either diet in terms of endurance performance or trainability.

Hietavala and co-authors [ 63 ] conducted a cross-over design study with nine healthy recreationally active men. Subjects were assigned to both a low-protein vegetarian and an omnivorous diet for four days each, separated by a 10–16-day washout phase. The data showed a significantly higher energy ( p < 0.05), protein ( p < 0.001) and fat intake ( p < 0.01) in the omnivorous diet compared to the low-protein vegetarian diet. After the low-protein vegetarian diet, VO 2 was significantly higher at 40% ( p = 0.035), 60 ( p < 0.001) and 80% ( p < 0.001) of VO 2 max compared to the omnivorous diet, but no differences in exercise time to exhaustion between diets were detected. In fact, as no differences in RQ, plasma free fatty acids or triglycerides, plasma lactate or glucose contents were detected between groups, a changed use of substrates in energy production seems not to be an explanation of the differences in oxygen consumption. Further research is needed to elucidate this topic.

Another study was carried out on patients with type 2 diabetes [ 64 ]. In this study, 37 participants were respectively assigned to a hypocaloric (−500 kcal) vegetarian or hypocaloric conventional (omnivorous) diet group. Both groups performed aerobic exercise three times a week for 12 weeks. Two sessions were performed at 60% of maximal heart rate for 1h under professional supervision at the sports center, and the third session took place either at home or at the sports center. The results revealed a significant 21% increase in maximal performance (P max ) ( p < 0.001) and an increase in VO 2 max by 12% ( p < 0.001) in the vegetarian diet group, but no significant changes in the omnivorous diet group, indicating that a vegetarian diet leads more effectively to an improvement in physical fitness in type 2 diabetes patients than an omnivorous diet.

Summarized, these studies do not unequivocally anticipate a superior role of vegan or vegetarian diet concerning performance, but detected a tendency of improved aerobic performance, which leads to the question of whether or how nutrition influences trainability and molecular adaptations.

5. Vegan and Vegetarian Diets and Strength Performance

5.1. properties of strength performance.

Muscular strength is the ability to generate force by skeletal muscle [ 72 ]. This essential physiological mechanism depends on several factors [ 72 ].

A main factor for muscular strength is the availability of phosphagens [ 73 ]. As strength performance is of shorter duration compared to endurance performance, but usually carried out with a higher power output, phosphagens such ATP and creatine phosphate are the predominant substrates for energy provision during resistance exercise [ 74 , 75 ]. It was shown that type II muscle fibers had a higher creatine content than type I muscle fibers ( p < 0.01), and the ATP content of both fiber types, but especially that of type II fibers, were greatly reduced after a 25s maximal isokinetic cycling ergometer exercise ( p < 0.01) [ 76 ]. Because of the lower dietary creatine intake, both blood and muscle creatine concentrations are lower by about 50% in plasma, by 35–39% in serum, and by 27–50% in red blood cells, in vegetarians compared to omnivores [ 13 ]. Creatine values of the less-restricted vegetarian diets were shown to be located between omnivorous and vegan values [ 3 , 77 ].

Therefore, fiber type distribution and the rate of anaerobic supply of ATP is critical to strength performance [ 75 ].

Second are the properties of the contractile elements. The distribution of slow-twitch type I muscle fibers and fast-twitch type II muscle fibers [ 78 ] varies between athletes according to the demands in their particular sporting discipline. Sprint runners have a lower percentage of slow-twitch fibers compared to distance runners [ 79 ] and strength trained individuals have a higher cross-sectional area (CSA) of type II muscle fibers compared to sedentary and endurance-trained individuals [ 80 ]. It has been shown that a caloric restriction of diet in rats led to decreased muscle weight and fiber area but did not affect neither the muscle fiber composition nor the muscle fiber transformation from type I to type IIA or IIB and vice versa [ 81 ]. To our knowledge, no studies on diet and muscle fiber type transformation in humans exist.

Third is the neuromuscular system. Research showed that four weeks of eccentric training led to adaptions of the central nervous system, resulting in an increased EMG activity of the agonist muscles during isometric activity and a decrease in the antagonists coactivation in concentric and eccentric actions ( p < 0.05) [ 82 ]. However, it was also shown that a leucine-enriched protein supplementation did not influence neuromuscular adaptations in older adults [ 83 ], suggesting that the differences in protein intake between vegans, vegetarians and omnivores [ 3 ] do not affect neuromuscular adaptations to strength training. Vegan diets contain fewer amounts of leucine [ 65 , 84 ] and the role of leucine in skeletal muscle adaptation to strength training will be described in the following chapter. However, further research on this topic is needed.

Summarized, strength performance depends highly on substrate availability, the properties of contractile elements and the neuromuscular system. Nutritional differences between diets may affect phosphagen levels and muscle mass and thereby have an impact on strength performance.

5.2. Nutritional Aspects and Strength Performance

Strength performance is considerably affected by the nutritional behavior of the athlete [ 85 , 86 ]. After resistance exercise with 70% 1RM, muscle protein synthesis (MPS) increases up to four-fold compared to baseline [ 87 ]. In the fasted state, both MPS and muscle protein breakdown (MPB) increase after resistance training, while maintaining a negative muscle protein balance [ 88 ]. Therefore, nutrition in combination with resistance exercise promotes muscle anabolism [ 88 ]. Ingestion of dietary protein, particularly essential amino acids (EAA), after resistance training augments MPS and attenuates the exercise-induced increase in MPB, leading to a positive muscle protein balance [ 88 ]. The persistence of an EAA deficit throughout training would therefore lead to a maladaptation, as muscles cannot be remodeled without amino acids. It has been shown that both magnitude and duration of MPS can be enhanced if dietary EAA availability is increased after exercise [ 89 ]. Research showed that the consumption of both a low-dose (6.3 g) and a high-dose (12.6 g) essential amino acid (EAA) beverage led to a reduced protein breakdown compared to the consumption of 12.6 g whey protein [ 90 ]. Furthermore, both whole body protein synthesis and muscle protein synthesis were greater after ingestion of the EAA beverages compared to whey protein. As the administration of EAAs and mixed amino acids (MAA) resulted in a similar net protein balance after resistance training, non-essential amino acids do not appear necessary to elicit an anabolic response from muscle [ 91 ]. These results suggest a crucial impact of EAAs on muscle net protein balance. Additional ingestion of leucine with a meal-like amount of protein resulted in a greater MPS and a higher dietary protein incorporation into muscle protein [ 92 ]. Underpinning the importance of leucine for MPS, data showed that a low-protein (6.25 g) mixed macronutrient beverage can increase MPS as effectively as a high-protein beverage (25 g) if supplemented with additional 5.0g of leucine [ 93 ]. The crucial role of leucine in adaptations to strength training is discussed in the section on how vegan, vegetarian and omnivorous diets nutrition may affect molecular regulators of exercise adaptation.

Research on how regular dietary patterns affect MPS is sparse, but it has been shown that MPS increased both in young and elderly subjects by about 51% after ingesting a 113.4 g lean ground-beef patty [ 94 ]. In a more recent study, it was shown that MPS increased by 108% during the 5h period following a meal (340 g serving: 660 kcal, 90 g protein, 33 g fat) and a bout of resistance exercise. The more than doubled MPS can be attributed to both the higher protein intake and the addition of resistance exercise. These results show that protein-rich meals can increase MPS [ 95 ]. It should be noted that protein quality and quantity play a crucial role in stimulating MPS [ 96 ]. It is widely accepted that animal-derived proteins are higher in quality compared to proteins from plant sources [ 97 , 98 ]. Post-prandial muscle protein synthesis responses after ingestion of animal-derived proteins are higher compared to the ingestion of an equivalent amount of plant-based proteins [ 99 ]. The amino acid profile of plant-derived protein can be improved by combining plant sources [ 84 ]. MPS can also be enhanced by consuming a greater amount of plant protein [ 100 ].

In summary, muscle mass and strength performance depend on a positive muscle protein balance over extended time courses. This can be achieved by adequate protein and essential amino acid intake in combination with resistance exercise.

5.3. Vitamin D and Strength Performance

Vitamin D can be obtained either from diet or from sun exposure [ 101 ].

Within cultured chick myoblasts, it has been shown that vitamin D receptors (VDR) translocate from the nucleus to the cytoplasm rapidly (1–10 min) after exposure to the biologically active form 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 [ 102 ]. When binding to the VDR in the cytoplasm, 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 elicits rapid uptake of calcium within the muscle cell, implying a non-genomic role for calcium handling and muscle function [ 103 ].

Research on the relationship of vitamin D levels and muscle function generate ambiguous results.

Cross-sectional studies display correlations of vitamin D levels and muscle function.

Lower 25(OH)D serum concentrations were correlated with lower knee extension strength ( r = 0.08, p = 0.020) and flexion strength ( r = 0.07, p = 0.032) in 75-year-old women [ 104 ].

In contrast, another study detected no consistent association between serum 25(OH)D and muscle mass (total body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) or muscle strength (handgrip force and isometric knee extension moment) in 311 men (22–93 years old) and 356 women (21–97 years old) [ 105 ].

However, there was a significant association between low 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 levels and low skeletal mass in both men ( p = 0.041) and women ( p = 0.001) and low isometric knee extension moment ( p = 0.018) as well as handgrip force ( p = 0.026) in women when subjects were younger than 65 years [ 105 ]. The association between low vitamin D levels and low skeletal muscle strength needs further research as findings are inconsistent [ 106 , 107 ].

Summarized, the substrate availability, the properties of the contractile elements, neuromuscular adaptions, protein (especially essential amino acid) and vitamin D intake can influence strength performance. As already mentioned, diet is partly capable of altering these factors and therefore, due to the restrictive dietary pattern, vegetarian and vegan diets may impact strength performance differently than omnivorous diets.

5.4. Evidences on Vegetarian and Vegan Diets and Strength Performance

Eight studies examined the influence of a vegetarian or vegan diet on strength performance. Three of these studies chose a cross-sectional study design. Lynch and colleagues compared isokinetic leg extension strength of 27 vegetarian and 43 omnivore elite runners at angle velocities of 60°/s, 180°/s and 240°/s [ 59 ]. The results showed no difference of peak torque when performing leg extension, suggesting that a vegetarian diet may adequately support strength.

Another study compared 28 vegan and 28 omnivorous lean physically active women. Muscle strength was assessed using a leg press and a chest press machine and measured using the one repetition maximum (1RM). Additionally, muscular strength indices were calculated for both the leg press and the chest press and expressed as weight lifted in kg per kg lean body mass [ 60 ]. Lean body mass in subjects was not significantly different ( p = 0.8). The results showed a tendency for decreased upper body muscle strength in vegans ( p = 0.06) but no differences in lower body muscle strength ( p = 0.5).

A recent study compared the lower body strength of 16 habitual omnivorous and nine habitual vegan healthy, young men [ 61 ]. Therefore, subjects performed knee extension maximal voluntary isometric contraction on an isokinetic dynamometer. The data showed no differences between groups.

Based on these results, the authors conclude that a vegan diet seems not to have a detrimental effect on muscle strength in healthy young, physically active individuals. This suggests that a vegan diet may be adequately supportive to maintain muscle strength.

The remaining five studies used an experimental approach. In one study [ 66 ], 21 male subjects were allocated to a self-selected lacto-ovo-vegetarian (LOV) diet for two weeks to familiarize with the dietary pattern. After these two weeks, baseline strength assessment was conducted for five exercises (knee extension, seated leg curl, double leg press, seated arm pulldown, seated chest press). After baseline measurements, the participants were randomly divided into two dietary groups. One group received 0.6 g protein/kg bodyweight/day of beef products additionally to their LOV diet, the other group received 0.6 g protein/kg bodyweight/day texturized vegetable protein meat-analog products (TVP). Over the following 12 weeks, subjects participated in resistance training on three nonconsecutive days per week at 80% of their assessed 1RM. Strength assessment was conducted at baseline, after five weeks and after 12 weeks of resistance training. Baseline strength values showed no significant differences between groups. Maximal strength (1RM) increased significantly ( p < 0.05) in all of the trained muscle groups by 14% to 38%. No difference between the TVP and the meat group were detected in 4/5 exercises. The TVP group had a greater increase in strength for the knee extension exercise (group × time interaction [ p < 0.01]) compared to the beef group. Body weight, energy and macronutrient intake did not differ between groups at baseline, 5 weeks and 12 weeks of intervention. These results suggest that a vegetarian diet may not have a detrimental effect on muscular strength, but on the contrary tends to be more beneficial to strength performance than the beef-containing diet, as indicated by the increased strength for the knee extension exercise.

Haub and colleagues [ 67 ] used a similar study design, as participants underwent a two-week baseline period, during which they familiarized with an LOV diet and TVP, followed by a 12 week intervention with resistance training and protein intake standardization [ 66 ]. The resistance training sessions consisted of two sets of eight repetitions at 80% 1RM and a third set until voluntary fatigue. Upper body (Newton per second) and lower body power output (Newton meter per second) were assessed at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the previously tested 1RM. After 12 weeks of resistance training, power output was retested. The results showed an increase in lower body and upper body 1RM after the 12-week resistance training program. No differences between groups concerning muscular strength and power output were detected. Energy and macronutrient intake did not differ between groups at baseline and post-intervention. These results indicate that both diets are equally effective at improving muscle strength and power output.

In a previous study by Haub and colleagues [ 68 ], participants underwent a study protocol similar to the one aforementioned [ 66 ]. Body weight, fat-free mass and fat mass were not significantly different between groups before the intervention and remained unchanged throughout the study. Energy and protein intake were not significantly different either between groups. Muscle strength (1RM) increased significantly ( p < 0.05) for all muscle groups trained (unilateral seated leg extension, unilateral seated leg flexion, bilateral leg press, seated chest press, arm pull) independent of diet. These results suggest that the predominant source of dietary protein does not influence the increase in muscle strength.

The results of another study [ 69 ] support this notion. In this study, overweight participants ( n = 19) were allocated to two groups. One group maintained their habitual (omnivorous) diet ( n = 9), the other group was counseled to self-select a LOV ( n = 10) diet. After assessing baseline measurements, subjects participated in a 12-week resistance training program with two nonconsecutive sessions a week, performing two sets of eight repetitions at 80% 1RM and a third set until muscular fatigue. Tests and evaluations were carried out at baseline, week 6 and week 12 of RT. The results showed a significant increase in dynamic muscular strength in the exercised muscle groups in both dietary groups. No significant differences in baseline strength and strength increases throughout the 12-week period of resistance training between dietary groups were detected, but fat-free mass and skeletal muscle mass increased in subjects with a meat-containing diet and decreased in subjects with a lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet.

In a recent study [ 65 ], a group of habitual vegans ( n = 19) and a group of habitual omnivores ( n = 19) performed strength training twice a week over a period of 12 weeks. Habitual protein intake was assessed at baseline and adjusted to 1.6 g/kg bodyweight/day via supplemental protein. After the intervention, leg lean mass, rectus femoris CSA, vastus lateralis CSA, vastus lateralis muscle fiber type I and type II CSA and leg-press 1RM increased significantly compared to baseline with no differences between groups.

These findings lead to the conclusion that a vegetarian and vegan diet can be sufficient for strength improvement, but are inferior to a meat-containing diet regarding an increase in fat-free mass and skeletal muscle mass. These findings lead to the question of whether or how diet influences trainability and molecular adaptions and as a consequence strength performance.

6. Vegan, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets May Affect Molecular Regulators of Exercise Adaptation in Human Skeletal Muscle

Regardless of the type of diet, any adaptation of skeletal muscle towards exercise depends on the coordinated activation of molecular signaling pathways [ 108 ] ( Figure 2 ). Resistance exercise (RE) as well as endurance exercise (EE) adaptations in skeletal muscle are regulated by diverse subsets of molecular pathways that ensure a very specific adaptation in muscle.

Influence of dietary properties on molecular signaling and muscular adaptation. ( A ): Vegan (VEG), vegetarian (VGT) and omnivorous (OMN) diets possess unique nutritional properties. This affects differential levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids, dietary fibers, plant- and animal-based protein sources, creatine and leucine. ( B ): Diet composition affects molecular signaling pathways. ( C ): Molecular signaling activates mitochondrial and myofibrillar protein synthesis and degradation and hereby modulates skeletal muscle adaptation and ( D ): exercise performance.Omnivorous diets (OMN, blue section) possess a lower amount of dietary fiber. This negatively affects the gut microbiome and reduces intestinal short chain fatty acid (SCFA) production. This induces increased FOXO and NF-κB signaling which can increase protein degradation. Reduced amounts of SCFA activate AMPK signaling to a lower extent which decreases AMPK-induced PGC-1α activation and affects mitochondrial biogenesis. In contrast, OMN diets contain elevated amounts of DHA/EPA and taurine, which enhances PPAR-induced PGC-1α activation. Taurine also activates AMPK signaling, leading to an overall moderate effect on mitochondrial biogenesis. OMN diets contain low amounts of plant-based protein sources but high amounts of animal-based protein with a higher leucine and creatine content. These two diet dependent factors lead to an activation of mTOR-based signaling which enhances the potential for increased myofibrillar protein synthesis (MFPS). Vegan diets (VEG, green section) possess a higher amount of dietary fiber. This positively affects the gut microbiome and enhances the intestinal SCFA production. This reduces FOXO and NF-κB signaling which leads to a decreased protein degradation. Increased amounts of SCFA activate AMPK to a higher extent which increases AMPK-induced PGC-1α activation and enhances mitochondrial biogenesis. In contrast, VEG diets contain reduced amounts of DHA/EPA and taurine which leads to a decreased PPAR-induced PGC-1α activation. The low taurine content also decreases AMPK activation leading to an overall moderate effect on mitochondrial biogenesis. VEG diets contain high amounts of plant-based protein but low amounts of creatine- and leucine-rich animal-based proteins. Therefore, a VEG diet result in a lower activation of mTOR-based signaling which reduces the potential for increased MFPS.Vegetarian diets (VGT, yellow section) possess a higher amount of dietary fiber. This positively affects the gut microbiome and enhances the intestinal SCFA production. This reduces FOXO and NF-κB signaling which leads to a decreased protein degradation. Increased amounts of SCFA activate AMPK to a higher extent which increases AMPK-induced PGC-1α activation and enhances mitochondrial biogenesis. In contrast, VGT diets contain reduced amounts of DHA/EPA and taurine which leads to a decreased PPAR-induced PGC-1α activation. The low taurine content also decreases AMPK activation leading to an overall moderate effect on mitochondrial biogenesis. VGT diets contain high amounts of plant-based protein but low amounts of creatine- and leucine-rich animal-based proteins. Therefore, a VEG diet result in a lower activation of mTOR-based signaling which reduces the potential for increased MFPS.

While RE increases the synthesis of mainly sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar proteins and increases strength, EE induces increased mitochondrial protein synthesis [ 109 ], the formation of new capillaries [ 110 ], and enhances cardiac adaptations [ 22 ]. The entire subsets of proteins, metabolites and transcriptomic responses that are differently occurring between RE and EE are still being unraveled [ 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 ]. Therefore, it is not yet precisely described whether vegan or vegetarian diets may enhance or even blunt the molecular exercise adaptation towards RE or EE compared to omnivorous diets. This process could occur mainly on two levels.

Firstly, the composition of the diet may have a direct effect on the acute molecular adaptation process in skeletal muscle after exercise. Secondly, the diet may modulate the gut microbiome, which then indirectly but permanently changes the systemic environment in the organism [ 115 ] to modulate skeletal muscle adaptation [ 116 ] and nutrient uptake [ 117 ].

6.1. Proteins and Amino Acids and Their Impact on Molecular Signaling

The main macronutrients that significantly drive the adaptation towards RE are proteins and their molecular building blocks amino acids [ 118 ]. Resistance exercise drives the mechanically-induced activation of mTORC-1 signaling initiating ribosome activity and protein synthesis [ 119 ] which depends also on the availability of amino acids in skeletal muscle [ 120 ]. Leucine is an essential amino acid that activates mTOR signaling [ 121 ] after entrance into the muscle cell via LAT1 amino acid transporters [ 122 ]. Protein administration rapidly elevates amino acid levels in the blood stream, increases the abundance of amino acid transporters [ 123 ] and consequently the uptake of amino acids within muscle. Therefore, protein administration is generally accepted to increase muscle protein synthesis significantly above the levels of RE when carried out in the fasted state [ 124 ]. This emphasizes also a critical role for protein uptake in combination with RE in the elderly [ 125 ].

A reduction in caloric intake and especially proteins [ 126 ] may reduce muscle mass rapidly in the elderly [ 127 ] and in younger individuals [ 128 , 129 ], while increased protein levels may preserve muscle mass [ 129 ]. Nutritional imbalances, especially due to reduced protein intake can be found in aging adults. This has been shown to be involved in delineating the nutritional frailty phenotype in the elderly [ 130 , 131 ]. Data show that an increase in protein intake in aging subjects is an important aspect to maintain and increase muscle mass and moreover to substantially enhance muscle function [ 132 ]. However, whether a vegetarian or vegan diet poses a risk of insufficient protein provision for the elderly is discussed controversially [ 133 ].

Meanwhile, the growing scientific knowledge concerning mechanisms and consequences of protein supplementation formed a stable basis for athletes [ 128 , 134 ], but also for the fitness-associated and aging population [ 135 ]. However, it is still investigated and discussed [ 84 ] whether differences in protein composition between vegan, vegetarian and omnivorous diets may differently modulate adaptability and performance towards RE [ 65 , 136 ]. Ciuris and colleagues determined [ 98 ] that subjects consuming vegan protein sources may require an additional 10 g of protein per day as digestibility and metabolism are less efficient in vegan protein sources. Additionally, distinct protein preparations, e.g., soy, egg-, milk- and beef-derived proteins can differ in the kinetics and rate of amino acid uptake in the body [ 137 ]. Long term effects of RE under application of soy vs casein exerted unequivocal results concerning strength and increases in muscle mass. Some studies observed no difference between plant-based soy protein vs milk protein concerning performance [ 138 ], while others showed augmented effects of milk compared to soy protein [ 139 , 140 ].

6.2. Creatine and Its Impact on Molecular Signaling

The mTOR complex is regulated on many levels including mechanical stimulation [ 119 ], amino acid abundance [ 120 ] and also by growth factors such as insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) [ 141 ]. It has been shown that the mRNA levels of IGF-1 can be increased by the supplementation of creatine in cultured myotubes [ 142 ] and in human skeletal muscle [ 143 ] and is associated with muscle hypertrophy [ 142 ]. Therefore, It may be hypothesized that creatine consumption due to OMV, VGT and VEG nutritional habits may differently affect skeletal muscle adaptation. However, although IGF-1 accumulation in skeletal muscle fibers is indeed increased upon supplementation with creatine, VGT-related subjects showed similar responses to creatine supplementation compared to OMV-related subjects [ 144 ].

6.3. Vitamin D and Its Impact on Molecular Signaling

It has also been shown that vitamin D affects molecular processes that can influence muscle strength [ 103 ]. The biologically active form 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 binds to the specific VDR that is located both in the cytoplasm and the nucleus [ 103 ]. VDR expression is strongly upregulated following injury [ 145 ] and the overexpression of VDR in rat skeletal muscle leads to increases in anabolic signaling, ribosomal biogenesis and protein synthesis, resulting in increased skeletal muscle hypertrophy [ 146 ]. Evidence suggests that genomic responses to 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 down-regulate myoblast proliferation and enhance differentiation into myotubes, as shown in cultured rat and mice myoblast cells [ 147 ].

The habitual vegan diet is lower in dietary protein and vitamin D than the habitual omnivorous diet [ 3 , 65 ]. Plant-based diets have also been shown to contain significantly fewer amounts of essential amino acids in general, and leucine in particular ( p < 0.05) [ 65 , 84 ]. These differences in amino acid composition between plant-based and animal-based proteins are thought to be related to the inferior postprandial MPS of subjects consuming a habitual vegan diet [ 84 ], as it has been shown that beef stimulated postprandial MPS to a greater extent than an isonitrogenous amount of a soy-based beef replacement [ 134 ].

Still, the current guidelines for protein administration range from 1.2 g to 2.2 g per kg of bodyweight [ 1 , 86 ].

However, it was recently proposed that vegan protein sources will have a similar effect on amino acid uptake and muscle anabolism, when a higher amount of vegan protein is consumed, different sources of protein are ingested or additional doses of leucine are consumed [ 84 , 136 ].

Summarized, dietary regimens are capable of affecting MPS by both providing proteins as building blocks for muscle tissue and activation of molecular signaling pathways through leucine, vitamin D and creatine. Since vegetarians and vegans consume less of these nutrients compared to omnivores, a vegetarian or vegan diet might affect muscular adaptation negatively. The regular composition of omnivorous diets more strongly supports the adaptive potential towards resistance exercise.

6.4. Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids May Augment Skeletal Muscle Adaptation in Response to Exercise

With the exception of pesco-vegetarians, vegetarians and vegans consume a significantly lower amount of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) [ 3 , 148 ]. Fatty acids are used as substrates for oxidative metabolism [ 149 ] and stored in lipid droplets within skeletal muscle fibers adjacent to mitochondria [ 150 ]. Generally, fatty acids and related compounds have important roles for composing the architecture and rebuilding of cell membranes during tissue turnover [ 151 , 152 ]. The chemistry, metabolism and fate of fatty acids in the physiological environment and their role for exercise performance is complex [ 153 ]. In some animals, the administration of omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA via natural food intake has received great attention. Birds like the sandpiper (calidris pusilla) that perform long-haul flights once a year, travel enormous distances while the energetic demand must nearly exclusively depend on fatty acid oxidation [ 154 ]. The energetic environment in flight muscles requires a sufficient number of mitochondria and a dominantly fatty-acid-based fuel to spare weight (glycogen has a much lower energy density and weighs more), while also preserving enough energy for several days of non-stop repetitive muscle contraction [ 154 ]. Before they start their journey, they consume increased amounts of small crabs (corophium volutator) containing a significant amount of PUFA fatty acids, especially EPA and DHA [ 155 ]. Although this kind of diet is far from being vegan or vegetarian, the oxidative environment of skeletal muscle is significantly increased during this time. This is regulated by the persistent activation of molecular signaling towards significantly enhanced mitochondrial adaptation [ 156 ], importantly: without increased training. Moreover, in these birds, increased transport capacity of fatty acids towards the mitochondria is substantially enhanced due to an increased membrane permeability mediated by the incorporation of DHA and EPA in cell membranes [ 157 ]. PPAR receptors (PPAR alpha, beta and gamma) are substantially activated by these fatty acids and mediate the communication between fatty acid availability and adaptation [ 158 ]. Indeed, these receptors serve as molecular switches that sense and bind these fatty acids to link nutrition-dependent signals to a PPAR-dependent signaling. This affects the transcription of proteins involved in fatty acid metabolism as well as augmented PGC1-alpha signaling to mediate mitochondrial adaptation [ 159 , 160 ].

While beneficial effects of DHA and EPA on migrating birds are an extreme example for the physiological relevance of this mechanism, studies have also determined detrimental effects of those fatty acids. It was determined that cell proliferation in vitro [ 161 ] as well as myogenesis and mitochondrial biogenesis in developing mice [ 162 ] were reduced. Additionally, there seem to be substantial dose-dependent effects, as high doses were shown to switch myogenesis to adipogenesis in C2C12 primary muscle cells [ 163 ]. Therefore, to which extent fatty acid-mediated signaling may drive enhanced muscle adaptation in humans is still investigated. Findings from animal studies determined increased satellite cell proliferation upon EPA and DHA treatment [ 164 , 165 ], while evidence for enhanced satellite cell proliferation in humans and thus the potential to support the growth potential of skeletal muscle in the long-term has not been shown so far [ 166 ]. However, some human studies show that muscle mass and strength can be augmented under EPA and DHA administration [ 167 ] and phosphorylation of mTOR-related signaling as well as protein synthesis can be increased [ 168 ], while others observed no increase after acute RE compared to placebo treatment [ 169 ].

In summary, beneficial effects for strength and muscle mass in humans are partly inconclusive [ 170 ] and the overall effect of those fatty acids on EE performance is considerably lower in humans than in migrating birds [ 171 , 172 , 173 ].

Nevertheless, given that omnivorous, vegetarian and vegan diets do not differ in terms of total fat intake, but they do differ significantly in DHA intake (182 mg, 33.8 mg, 18.2 mg, respectively, standardized to 2000 kcal/d) [ 3 ], it may trigger exercise-induced adaptation towards EE and RE in a more subtle but persistent manner and importantly more in omnivores. The pesco-vegetarian diet is an exception that contains high levels of DHA and EPA due to the consumption of fish [ 3 , 148 ]. DHA and EPA are not considered essential since they can be converted from alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) (at a conversion rate of about 5–8%) [ 148 ]. As plant-based foods containing ALA are also high in linoleic acid (LA), the nutritional challenge for vegans and vegetarians is to increase dietary ALA without increasing dietary LA, because these fatty acids compete for the same biochemical pathway for conversion to EPA and arachidonic acids (AA), respectively [ 148 ].

Besides PUFAs, the amino acid taurine is also capable of altering muscular molecular signaling [ 174 , 175 ]. The knockout of taurine transporters in mice led to reduced levels of PPARα and its transcriptional targets [ 174 ], whereas taurine supplementation increased the activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) in mice [ 175 ]. AMPK is a major energy sensor in skeletal muscle that regulates energy homeostasis [ 176 ] and mitochondrial biogenesis [ 177 ] by increasing the phosphorylation and expression of PGC1-alpha [ 178 ]. As taurine is highly abundant in beef and absent from plants [ 43 ], dietary choices may possibly affect molecular adaptation and performance.

In summary, polyunsaturated fatty acids like EPA and DHA as well as the amino acid taurine provide a significant molecular potential to enhance skeletal muscle adaptation due to an increased nutritional uptake. However, despite findings from in vitro studies, there is no clear evidence that either an increased natural uptake based on the choice of diet or an increased artificial uptake of EPA/DPA via supplementation significantly increases tissue adaptation and exercise performance in humans.

7. Influence of Diet on the Microbiome and Its Effect on Exercise Performance and Basal Molecular Signaling

The gut microbiome may have a collective genome size 150-fold that of the human, and it has been argued that because of its metabolic capacity, it merits the consideration as an organ in its own right [ 179 ]. The microbiota of a healthy individual is diverse and the majority of the microbial communities are symbiotic and commensal [ 180 ]. It has been shown that the microbiota can be modulated by exercise training [ 180 , 181 ] and diet [ 180 , 182 ]. Modulations caused by exercise affect the epithelial cells integrity and intestinal epithelium permeability [ 116 ]. High volume endurance training increases epithelium permeability, promoting the passing of bacterial toxins and pathogens to pass into the bloodstream [ 183 ]. As a consequence, NF-κB-dependent inflammatory pathways as well as FOXO-dependent muscle degradation pathways are activated and adaption to exercise is negatively affected [ 116 ]. In vitro experiments showed that FOXO promotes atrophy of muscle mass in mice [ 184 , 185 , 186 ]. Experiments in rodents showed that the activation of NF-κB caused atrophy in skeletal muscle whereas the inhibition of this pathway prevented atrophy [ 187 , 188 ].

Changes of the gut microbiome through diet already occur after 24 h and will reverse to baseline 48 h after discontinuation [ 182 ]. These changes include carbohydrate and protein fermentation processes [ 189 , 190 ], intestinal inflammation [ 190 ], fat oxidation [ 191 ] and might also be capable of promoting protein anabolism by increasing amino acid availability [ 116 , 181 ]. Modulation of the immune response, oxidative stress, metabolic processes, and nutrient bioavailability are considered as the main mechanisms by which the microbiota affects training adaptation [ 116 ]. Intestinal microbiota may contribute to myocyte anabolism by alleviating farnesoid X receptor (FXR) that plays an important role in metabolic pathways, lipoprotein and glucose turnover [ 116 ]. Another contribution of the gut microbiome for improving human body physiology is the synthesis of short-chained fatty acids (SCFA), the end products of fermentation of dietary fibers in the intestines [ 192 ]. The level and ratio of the different SCFAs (molar ratio of 60:20:20 in acetate, proprionate and butyrate) [ 193 ] are key parameters for microbiota and mucosa health [ 180 ]. Providing about 10% of the daily caloric requirement [ 192 ], SCFAs can be used as energy-deriving substrate for numerous tissues including muscle, indicating that they can contribute to enhanced skeletal muscle growth [ 194 ]. SCFA produced by intestinal bacteria have a positive effect on the integrity of the intestinal barrier, protecting it against inflammation [ 116 ]. Furthermore, SCFAs are discussed as putative signaling molecules for skeletal muscle adaptation of skeletal muscle [ 192 ]. SCFA can directly phosphorylate and activate AMPK by increasing the AMP/ATP ratio in skeletal muscle [ 116 , 192 ].

As vegan diets contain significantly more fiber than in OMV and VGT [ 3 ], a higher basal SCFA synthesis may therefore increase the basal molecular activation of AMPK and PGC1-alpha, a molecular basis for increased capacity for oxidative metabolism and fatty acid oxidation in VEG [ 178 ].

Excessive protein intake causes an increase in the number of protein fermenting bacteria and decrease of number of carbohydrate-fermenting bacteria. By-products of fermentation of undigested protein such as ammonia, biogenic amines, indole compounds, and phenols are mainly toxic and may exacerbate the inflammatory response and increase tissue permeability, therefore being detrimental to gut health [ 116 , 195 ]. Diets with a high protein content would increase small intestinal pH, favoring the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria. When switching to a diet with reduced protein intake, microbial composition shifts towards higher counts of beneficial, carbohydrate-fermenting bacteria [ 195 ]. In addition to the quantity, the quality of dietary protein may also influence protein fermentation within the gastrointestinal tract. Highly digestible proteins, like casein, can be digested in the proximal intestine, resulting in less undigested proteins for fermentation in the distal intestine [ 195 ]. Plant-derived protein are not completely digested in the proximal intestine, resulting in microbial fermentation in the distal intestine. As a result, the source of protein, and as a consequence residual protein volume, affects the composition of bacterial groups involved in protein fermentation [ 195 ]. By consuming dietary protein with a high digestibility, the amount of dietary protein reaching the distal intestine can be diminished, leading to a suppression of the growth and activity of potential pathogens. Studies on the effect of dietary protein on gut microbiome composition is ambivalent and needs further research (for review see [ 195 ]).

Excessive fat intake may also significantly affect the composition of the intestinal microbiota, limiting substrates for SCFAs production [ 116 ].

High-fat diet also reduces the diversity of bacterial strains and the abundance of Bacteroidetes, which are considered the leading factor of gut homeostasis and health while promoting the growth of Firmicutes and Proteobacteria [ 116 , 196 ], the latter having inflammatory properties [ 197 ]. Research shows ambivalent results about the effect of diet on Firmicute abundance. Research of Hills and colleagues report a higher ratio of Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes in the gut of omnivores and in obese subjects compared to lean subjects [ 197 ], whereas Jandhyala and colleagues report a decrease in Firmicutes as a result of an omnivorous diet [ 198 ].

Vitamin D plays an essential role in maintaining a healthy gut microenvironment [ 180 ]. Considering the variety of functions of vitamin D, an inadequate level may impair intestinal homeostasis, since vitamin D can influence bacterial colonization and exert anti-inflammatory responses through interaction with VDR. VDR expression and location may be also regulated by commensal or pathogenic gut microbiota [ 180 ]. Vitamin D also contributes to maintenance of the integrity of the epithelial barrier [ 180 , 199 ].

Yet, the connection between gut microbiome and physical performance is not completely understood [ 181 ] and needs to be investigated more closely.

Summarized, the gut microbiome is strongly dependent on nutrient intake. A high fiber intake promotes SCFA production which has a positive effect on gut microbiome composition as well as molecular adaptions through activating AMPK, suggesting a favorable effect of a diet high in fiber on adaptation to EE. Excessive intake of protein, especially proteins with a low digestibility, affects the gut microbiome negatively by lowering the intestinal pH, favoring the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria. High-fat diets also reduce the favorable diversity of bacterial strains of the gut microbiome. Vitamin D contributes to intestinal homeostasis since it is capable of influencing bacterial colonization and has anti-inflammatory properties through interaction with VDR. As vegans’, vegetarians’ and omnivorous’ intake differ in these nutrients, dietary regimens might have an impact on gut microbiome health.

8. Summary and Future Directions of Research

Research on the influence of a vegan or vegetarian diet on exercise performance is scarce. Exercise performance is dependent on multiple physiological subsystems. Those can be affected either directly, during exercise, through the uptake of specific nutrients but also indirectly, by nutrient-induced modulation of the molecular environment that promotes e.g., muscular adaptations. Endurance performance depends on skeletal muscle mitochondrial and capillary density, hemoglobin concentration, endothelial function, functional heart morphology and availability of carbohydrates. The macro- and micronutrient composition of vegan and vegetarian diets implies potentially advantageous properties for endurance performance compared to an omnivorous diet.

Strength performance depends on factors that can be influenced by diet e.g., creatine and protein availability which alter muscle protein synthesis. Therefore, when not controlled, the macro- and micronutrient composition of vegan and vegetarian diets may elicit potentially disadvantageous properties for strength performance.

Although the impact of a vegetarian or vegan diet on molecular muscular adaptation has yet not been thoroughly investigated, the existing literature indicates the influence of particularly important nutrients, like leucine, taurine, DHA, EPA and SCFA on molecular signaling in tissues and in the long-term different diet regimens may therefore affect exercise performance.

Besides that, the choice of diet also influences the gut microbiome. It is widely accepted that the constellation and variety of the gut microbiome significantly affects mechanisms like intestinal inflammation, production of SCFA, fat oxidation, carbohydrate and protein fermentation processes, and protein anabolism. Vegan and vegetarian diets possess potentially beneficial properties for the gut microbiome and might therefore influence those mechanisms which may affect in the long-term exercise performance.

However, scientific research yet failed to show a robust difference of physical performance between diets.

To unravel the detrimental and beneficial aspects of the dietary choice on exercise performance, future studies must carefully combine the analysis of molecular signaling networks in combination with physiological read-outs in extended time frames. It must be considered, that upon dietary changes a multitude of metabolic pathways may change within the organism. Therefore, the use of blood metabolomics may be an important tool to study diet-induced changes in the metabolism.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.P. and S.G.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P. and S.G.; writing—review and editing, S.G, K.B. and F.S.; visualization, A.P. and S.G.; supervision, A.P. and S.G.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best veganism topic ideas & essay examples, ⭐ good research topics about veganism, ❓ veganism research questions.

• Vegan vs. Vegetarian Diets: Impacts on Health However, vegetarians have the option of consuming animal products like eggs and milk, but this option is not available to vegans; vegetarians tend to avoid the intake of all the animal proteins.
• The Impact of Vegan and Vegetarian Diets on Diabetes Vegetarian diets are popular for a variety of reasons; according to the National Health Interview Survey in the United States, about 2% of the population reported following a vegetarian dietary pattern for health reasons in […]
• Health 2 Go: Vegan Waffles for Everyone All fruits and berries are purchased daily from local suppliers and stored in a contaminant-free unit of the Health 2 Go.
• City’s Finest as a Vegan Ethical Shoe Brand The brand is focused on authenticity and transparency, producing the shoes locally and sourcing recycled and reclaimed materials that combine the principles of veganism and sustainability.
• Moral Status of Animals: Vegetarianism and Veganism The significance of acknowledging the concept of sentience in this context is the fact that vegetarians and vegans accept the idea that animals are like humans when they feel something.
• Vegan Parents’ Influence on Their Children’s Diet The first reason why a vegan diet should not be imposed on children is that every parent should pay close attention to the needs of their toddlers.
• Positive Reasons and Outcomes of Becoming Vegan Being vegan signifies a philosophy and manner of living that aims at excluding, as much as achievable, any kind of exploitation of, and cruelty against, animals for meat, clothing and other uses while promoting and […]
• Herb’aVors Vegan Drive-Thru Product Business Model As a result, the wide public will be able to receive the brand-new service with the excellent health promotion characteristics and traditional cultural implications of fast-food. The breakthrough of the offered concept is the vegan-based […]
• The Culture of Veganism Among the Middle Class According to Hooker, the culture of veganism has become so popular among the middle class that it is easy to associate it with the class. In this research, the focus will be to analyze the […]
• The Shattered Into Pieces: Veganism
• How Veganism Could Contribute to a Human’s Life
• Utilitarian Defense for Veganism
• The Myth Behind the Claim That Veganism Is a Healthy Balanced Diet
• The Definition, History, and Benefits of Veganism, a Lifestyle Choice
• The Ethical Argument for Veganism
• Veganism: Pro and Contra Arguments
• Vegetarianism and Veganism: Not Eating Meat
• Saving the Environment With Veganism
• Are Veganism Means Not Eating Meat?
• What Does Veganism Mean?
• Veganism and Vegetarianism Are Becoming a Growing Trend
• Could All People Adapt to Veganism?
• Analyzing the Pro Veganism
• The Vegan Lifestyle Article – Veganism, Vegetarianism
• Animal Products and Eating Meat: Veganism and Vegetarianism
• Protecting the Environment and Veganism
• The Origin, History, and Effects of Veganism
• Veganism Might Save Us: From One Meat Lover to Another
• Why Is Veganism an Ethical Issue?
• Is Veganism Harmful to Health?
• Why Is Veganism a Social Issue?
• What Is the Main Idea of Veganism?
• How Does the Body Change While Following Veganism?
• What Percentage of the World Is Veganism?
• What Does Veganism Allow You to Eat?
• How Many Animals Are Saved by Veganism?
• Why Do People Stop Following Veganism?
• What Country Is Mostly Veganism?
• In Which Country Is It the Hardest to Stick To Veganism?
• How Long Can People Stick To Veganism?
• What Challenges Do Vegans Face?
• Why Does Veganism Not Allow You to Eat Honey?
• When Did Veganism Originate?
• How Does Veganism Affect the Economy?
• Is Veganism a Problem?
• Why Do People Disagree With Veganism?
• What Are the Cons of Veganism?
• How Does Veganism Affect the Psychological State of a Person?
• Where Are the Largest Number of Vegan Social Events?
• Do People Who Follow Veganism Look Older?
• Does Veganism Improve Health?
• At What Age Can a Child Be Introduced to Veganism?
• Why Is Veganism Bad for Society?
• Vitamins Research Topics
• Meat Research Ideas
• Animal Rights Research Ideas
• Hinduism Topics
• Environmental Protection Titles
• Animal Welfare Ideas
• Diet Essay Topics
• Metabolic Disorders Questions
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, September 27). 54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/veganism-essay-topics/

"54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 27 Sept. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/veganism-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 27 September.

IvyPanda . 2023. "54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 27, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/veganism-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 27, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/veganism-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "54 Veganism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 27, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/veganism-essay-topics/.

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Lifestyle & Interests — Vegetarianism

Essays on Vegetarianism

Vegetarianism is a lifestyle choice that has gained popularity in recent years due to its many health and environmental benefits. The decision to become a vegetarian is often based on ethical, environmental, and health concerns. As a result, there are many different aspects of vegetarianism that can be explored in an essay. In this article, we will discuss a wide range of essay topics related to vegetarianism, including the importance of the topic, advice on choosing a topic, and a.

The Importance of the Topic

Vegetarianism is an important topic because it has the potential to have a significant impact on both our health and the environment. Many people choose to become vegetarians because they believe it is a more ethical and sustainable way of living. By reducing or eliminating the consumption of animal products, individuals can help reduce the demand for factory farming, which is a major contributor to environmental degradation and animal cruelty.

In addition to the ethical and environmental benefits, vegetarianism has also been linked to improved health outcomes. Research has shown that a plant-based diet can lower the risk of chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancer. By exploring essay topics related to vegetarianism, individuals can gain a better understanding of the potential benefits and challenges of this lifestyle choice.

Advice on Choosing a Topic

When choosing a topic for an essay on vegetarianism, it is important to consider the specific aspects of the lifestyle that are of interest. Some potential essay topics include the health benefits of a vegetarian diet, the environmental impact of animal agriculture, the ethical considerations of consuming animal products, and the challenges of maintaining a vegetarian lifestyle. By choosing a topic that is personally meaningful, individuals can create a more compelling and well-researched essay.

In addition to choosing a topic that is of personal interest, it is also important to consider the audience for the essay. For example, if the essay is intended for a general audience, it may be beneficial to choose a topic that provides an overview of vegetarianism and its potential benefits. On the other hand, if the essay is intended for a more specialized audience, such as individuals interested in nutrition or environmental sustainability, it may be beneficial to choose a more specific topic that delves into the science or policy implications of vegetarianism.

In conclusion, vegetarianism is an important topic that has the potential to have a significant impact on both our health and the environment. By exploring a wide range of essay topics related to vegetarianism, individuals can gain a better understanding of the potential benefits and challenges of this lifestyle choice. Whether the essay focuses on the health benefits of a vegetarian diet, the environmental impact of animal agriculture, the ethical considerations of consuming animal products, or the challenges of maintaining a vegetarian lifestyle, there are many different aspects of vegetarianism that can be explored. By choosing a topic that is of personal interest and considering the audience for the essay, individuals can create a compelling and well-researched essay that contributes to the ongoing conversation about vegetarianism.

Why Everyone Should Choose to Become Vegetarian: a Research Paper

Vegetarianism as a way of life, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Why The Consumption of Meat for Human Enjoyment is Immoral

The benefits of plant-based diet over one which involves meat, vegetarianism: introduction, positive and negative sides, vegetarianism and an argument against factory farming, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

The Benefits of Vegetarianism in Contrast to Meat Eating

Research of the health benefits of vegetarianism, why vegetarianism is better than meat eating: health, environmental, and ethical reasons, research paper on the benefits of the vegetarian lifestyle, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Research Paper on Vegetarian Diet for Adults

Research paper on the motivations for becoming a vegetarian, han kang’s the vegetarian review – a remarkable tale of family fallout, the physiological and psychological implications of a vegetarian/vegan diet on endurance athletes, the cost of meat eating vs the benefits of vegetarianism, how invaders influenced indian cuisine and its common elements and spices, heal the world: the benefits of vegetarian diet, vegetarians eat animal crackers, relevant topics.

• Healthy Lifestyle
• Superstition
• Being a Man

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Tax Incidence Anomalies

This paper reviews the literature on the incidence of consumption and labor taxes and focuses on the empirical results that show stark departures from the canonical model of tax incidence, which I refer to as anomalies. In particular, there is mounting evidence questioning three fundamental implications of the canonical model: (1) that statutory incidence is irrelevant for economic incidence, (2) that the relative magnitude of the demand and supply elasticities is a sufficient statistic for tax incidence, and (3) that incidence is symmetric for increases and decreases. I review this empirical evidence and draw implications for the canonical model’s relevance.

The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

More from NBER

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .