Consumers may not realize they are being impacted by a health halo effect, which creates false perceptions of whether a certain food product is healthy or unhealthy based on unrelated factors like keywords used on the product’s labeling or in marketing campaigns.

This concept plays a significant role in the success of some of the largest plant-based meat alternative (PBMA) companies because consumers purchase PBMA items assuming they are healthier. In reality, consumer assumptions about PBMA products can lead to misconceptions about nutritional value, environmental factors, dietary meal planning and caloric content.

“You have all these meat substitute products on the shelves already, but Beyond Meat and Impossible Meat were the first products to imitate actual meat and came to market with the explicit promotion of being similar to a traditional beef burger; essentially, they claim they are the ‘meat without the meat’ for their consumers,” Bret Leary, Associate Professor of Marketing in the College of Business, said. “From this type of promotion strategy, they’re contributing to this health halo by convincing their customers it’s a healthier option than actual meat when in reality, it’s not.”

This spring, Leary, alongside researchers, Gabriel Gonzales, Christopher Berry and Matthew D. Meng, published research regarding PBMA products and their correlation with the health halo concept.

The researchers began their work in 2019 to better understand the perceptions of meat substitutes and how to resolve misinformation or false assumptions regarding plant-based products. They also provided ways in which companies and their customers can become more knowledgeable about the nutritional value of PBMA products.

“Ultimately, we want to provide this information to the public so that consumers know what they might be unintentionally acting upon; we want consumers, as well as companies, to be more knowledgeable,” Leary said. “There is a significant imbalance of information provided to consumers, and often, customers won’t always compare labels and instead make intuitive decisions that are based upon previous assumptions.”

In addition to customers’ lack of awareness of the nutritional value of PBMA products on the shelves of supermarkets, the health halo concept also impacts popular chain restaurants. According to the Food and Drug Association’s official policies, chain restaurants and retail food establishments that have obtained 20 or more separate locations are legally obligated to provide customers with the nutritional value and calorie content of every product they serve at every location. Leary said this requirement did not change people’s perceptions of which products were healthier even if calorie count and nutritional value is the same.

“We conducted a study to see if giving customers this information makes a difference, and surprisingly, it did not decrease or overcome this health halo concept,” he said. “Customers still viewed PBMA products as healthier options, even if the calorie content of a meat substitute showed similarity to the nutritional value of a traditional beef burger; it really speaks to the persistence of this health halo that individuals live with these naïve perceptions of food that require a change to live an authentic and truly healthier lifestyle.”

While consumers recognize the positive environmental factors of choosing PBMA products, their perceptions of healthfulness, related to PBMAs, compared to beef, are potentially inaccurate.

“When people are buying these PBMA products at the grocery store, thinking they are getting something healthy, they’re really just making a trade-off from a traditional burger,” Leary said.

To combat the health halo effect, the researchers recommended consumers evaluate PBMA health claims and compare them to the scientific evidence before making choices about their food consumption. They also suggested that waitstaff at restaurants inform their customers of the nutrition values and calorie counts of items they are ordering off the menu.