| Let's look some data: [edit: Soy Milk protein require 2.9x less water than Caw Milk protein, DIAAS adjusted: 1 / (0.28 * 1.25)] PDCAAS [0]
Soy 0.92 - Beef at 0.94 (Beef 2% better)
DIAAS [1]
Soy 0.91 - Beef 1.116 - Whole milk 1.14 (Beef 23% better, Caw milk 25% better)
WATER footprint [2]
Soy Milk is 28% of caw milk (Soy 257% better)
Soy Burger is 28% of caw milk (Soy 1329% better)
CALORIC / PROTEIN fed population [3]
MAD (mean American diet) 341m - Plant-Based 531m (plant 56% better)
0: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digestible_Indispensable_Amino... No data for Soy PDCAAS in that page and Beef has a different number as the first source. The difference isn't significative though. 2: > The water footprint of the soy milk product analysed in this study is 28% of the water footprint of the global average cow milk. The water footprint of the soy burger examined here is 7% of the water footprint of the average beef burger in the world. https://www.waterfootprint.org/resources/Ercin-et-al-2012-Wa... 3: > [caloric and protein] At 3% in both metrics, beef is by far the least efficient [...] legume-dominated plant-based diets substitute beef with a dietary shift potential of ≈190 million [current US] individuals. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/1... Obviously the production method of soy/burger/milk is significant, however others sources show rougtly the same order of magnitude: https://watercalculator.org/water-footprint-of-food-guide/ > depends on your body's protein needs. For an higher protein/calorie ration, Quinoa is in range of soy' water footprint, and legume protein concentrates fit as well. |
- lacks methionine. So eat more soybean or complementary proteins such as grains, legumes.
- contains Phytates, which reduce mineral absorption such as iron, zinc.
- contains Trypsin inhibitors that reduce protein digestion.
- contains Lectins
- comtains genistein and daidzein inducing estrogen while maintaining testosterone in male.
- a known allergen for 0.4-0.6% of population
- is overly used as ultra-processed filler instead of more expensive natural ingredients.
Then there is land-use issues and monoculture.
The number you gave while accurate ignores the overall issues.