This metadata record and it's attached files make statements about the kinds of data collected as part of this research, and set out policies for governance of that data, now and in the future.Description: Protein rich foods that are alternatives to farm-grown meat have received considerable consumer attention. Whilst meat alternatives were once niche food products aimed at vegetarians, they are increasingly marketed to omnivores and "flexitarians", thus contributing to a trend for reductions in red meat intakes. Studies to date have addressed the environmental benefit, plus consumer perceptions and acceptability of meat alternatives, yet there is surprisingly a paucity of data compared the nutritional and digestive differences to meat. The aim of this trial is to compare the digestive consequences of pasture-fed and grain-finished, beef versus a plant-based meat analogue blinded meal.Healthy, young (20-34 y) participants were asked to consume three separate meals in a crossover, blinded investigation followed by five hours of blood testing and questionnaires to assess the digestive consequences of meat and a plant-based meat analogue. The three meals included either pasture-fed, or grain-finished, or laboratory based protein alternative as a mixed meal, in random order, separated by one week minimum. Plasma samples were assessed for amino acid content, neurotransmitter proteins, chylomicron fatty acid distribution and general health indices.
