Mycoprotein has been around since the 70s, and has been increasingly popular across the world as a healthy alternative to foods we currently have in the world since. Proposed as a meat-substitute, Mycoprotein may be the future in terms of healthy eating. Since the 1960s, concerns about food shortages for the world’s ever growing population had already started to sprout in several countries, and investigations began into “the feasibility of creating a process that turned starch into protein using fermentation”. The goal was to find a food source that was sustainable, nutritious, and was tasty. The Rank Hovis McDougall group took it upon themselves to investigate this matter, and in 1967, they discovered an organism called Fusarium venenatum in a garden in Buckinghamshire, England. In 1974, this was renamed to Mycoprotein.
Technically, Mycoprotein is a blend of minerals and Fusarium venenatum, a member of the fungi family. This blend of ingredients comes together to create a product that is supposedly “a source of excellent high quality protein”. Mycoprotein boasts other qualities such as possibly being able to maintain cholesterol levels and also being low in sodium. From these claims, it is simple to see that Mycoprotein could be the new big super food, and could be the answer to the long unsolved question of how to create a meat-substitute that can be healthy and satisfy meat eaters.
Imagine being able to eat a sustainable plant that could be a healthy alternative to meat, which would benefit the individual consuming the Mycoprotein, and also to the environment, as in 2012, it was discovered that all processes involved with cattle (burning fuel for fertilizer to grow feed, creating consumable meat, and also transport, as well as cow “emissions”) were accounting for an increasing amount of greenhouse gas contribution to the world. Mycoprotein could be the answer to cutting meat consumption, which will benefit the world in more ways than one.
But as with all revolutionary foods, Mycoprotein has come under scientific scrutiny. Two studies done in 1993 and 2002 produced results that suggested Mycoprotein had potential negative effects on certain subjects with allergies to mould. The 2002 study, conducted by S J Katona and E R Kaminski, investigated the effects of Mycoprotein consumption on subjects that had an allergy to mould. As Mycoprotein is essentially a fungus, it would make sense that people allergic to mould, which is also fungi, would see an allergic reaction. The patient in question, a 27-year-old civil servant, saw an episode of allergic reactions after eating a Quorn burger. Skin-prick tests revealed she had hypersensitivities to Quorn, however, samples of mould were also found at her home. Her symptoms were alleviated with the changing of her home windows and also long-acting antihistamines.
The 1993 study found that Mycoprotein had “similar allergenic determinants with Aspergillus fumigatus and Cladosporium herbarum and some with Alternaria alternata”, which all are different forms of fungi. To test the hypothesis, Mycoprotein production workers were monitored over a 2-year period. 2 of 10 patients who were admitted to the hospital because of Mycoprotein ingestion had skin prick tests, but none had a significantly raised RAST. These results suggest that Mycoprotein in fact may not be as serious an allergen as other fungal pathogens, and therefore bodes well for widespread Mycoprotein consumption.
With our ever-advancing technology, further and more thorough studies can be done in the realm of Mycoprotein, to hopefully one day guarantee safety for the world’s population.
Very interesting, I wonder if they design it to taste like what they want or if it has its own taste? It definitely sounds like a more environmentally friendly source but how about economically? If it is also cheaper, why are we not already eating it in place of at least some of the meat that we consume every day?