Consumer Acceptability of Low Cholesterol and Low

Fat Meatballs Replacing Beef with Texturized

Vegetable Protein and Beefless Ground

Zinaida Isakova, Elenita Cook, Estela Lapinel

Health Concerns in the U.S.

According to The Center of Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC), 36.5% of adults in the U.S. are obese.
Obesity is related to heart disease, type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and
certain types of cancer.
One in four of the major causes of death in the U.S. are due to
heart disease. (CDC, 2016)
High blood cholesterol is a major modifiable risk factor for heart
disease. Just a 10% decrease in total blood cholesterol levels can
reduce the incidence of heart disease by as much as 30%. (CDC,
2014)
 Objective of the Study:
To lower the cholesterol and the fat of a beef
meatball by replacing 50% of the meat with
TVP and 50% with BG without affecting the
sensory characteristics.

We chose meatballs since they are a good protein

source. They are tasty and a classic meal for all age
groups and socioeconomic levels.
In finding ingredients that replace beef, studies have
used legumes flours, potato puree, tomato paste,
bread crumbs, so on (Serdarolu, Yldz-Turp,
Abrodmov, 2005), (Ergezer, Akcan, & Serdarolu, 2014).

We chose Texturized Vegetable Protein and Beefless

Ground because of their high protein content and
similar taste to beef.
We made 3 samples with exactly the same ingredients:

Control: 100% Ground Beef

50% Ground Beef and 50% TVP
50% Ground Beef and 50% Beefless Ground
 Ingredients

80% Lean 20% Fat Ground Beef

Bob's Red Mill Texturized Vegetable Protein
Gardein Beefless Ground
Egg Whites
Plain Bread Crumbs
Onions
Garlic
Parsley
Salt
Pepper
Meatball Formulations
 Method/Process

First 454 grams of ground beef was weighed on a scale for the control meatballs and
227 grams for the experimental ones.
The TVP was reconstituted using 200 ml of water to 227 grams of dry TVP. It was
left out to sit for 10 minutes before being weighed on a scale.
The TVP was then put into a food processor and grinded for 40 seconds
into uniform pieces at medium speed. The beefless ground was weighed on
a scale and then put in a food processor at medium speed.
Onions, garlic, and parsley were all blended into a food processor separately.
The onions were processed for 20 seconds, the garlic for 20 seconds, and the
parsley for 3 minutes all at high speed.
120 grams of blended onions was added to each sample as well as 5 grams of
blended garlic and 5 grams of blended parsley.
 Method/Process

6 egg whites were whisked for 15 seconds and then put into a 200 ml graduated
cylinder. 130 ml of egg whites were used for each meatball sample.
60 grams of plain breadcrumbs, 1 gram of ground pepper, and 4 grams of salt was
added to each sample.
All the ingredients were mixed together by hand. Each meatball was measured as 1
tablespoon and then rolled by hand into 12 gram balls, 3 cm in diameter.
Three cookie sheets, each one designated for a different meatball sample, were
lined with parchment paper before placing the meatballs on top.
The meatballs were placed on the lined cookie sheets and were cooked in a pre-
heated oven at 350F for 25 minutes. After 25 minutes the meatballs were left to
cool for 5 minutes before being prepped for sensory evaluation.
 Sensory Evaluation
Using the Consumer Test, 50 panelists (n=50) evaluated the three meatballs
samples (12 g). They filled out a 9-Point Hedonic Scale rating the meatballs by
appearance, flavor, texture, and overall acceptability. 1 being dislike extremely and
9 being like extremely.

Each sample was served with a toothpick and placed on a white paper plate with a 3
digit identification number.

All panelists were students and faculty from Queens College. Panelists were
randomly selected and untrained.
Statistical Analysis

We analyzed the data from the sensory evaluation through:

SPSS for Windows
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Tukey's Post-hoc test
Pearson Correlation
Sensory Acceptability of Meatball Formulations
(Mean + SD)
Bar Graphs for the Sensory Acceptability of
Meatball Formulations

*Mean values of 50 consumers

using a 9-point hedonic scale.
 Sensory Acceptability of Meatball Samples
There was no significant difference (p<0.05) between all three meatball samples in
respect to appearance, flavor, texture, and overall acceptability.
The 100% beef meatball had the highest mean for all sensory characteristics except
the appearance.
For appearance, the 50% beef 50% beefless ground meatball had a mean of 7.24
while the 100% beef meatball had a mean of 7.06.
The consumers liked all other sensory characteristics of the 100% beef meatball, in
particular the flavor.
The 100% beef meatball had a mean of 7.30 for flavor which was the highest value
for all meatballs samples and sensory characteristics.
 Sensory Acceptability of Meatball Samples
The 50% beef 50% TVP meatball had
the lowest consumer acceptability for
all sensory characteristics.
The mean for the appearance was
6.80, the flavor was 6.48, texture was
6.54, and overall acceptability was
6.56.
The flavor of the TVP meatball
was low because 50% TVP was used.
When about 20% of soybean protein
is used, it hinders the flavor of a
beef meatball.
For the 50% beef 50% beefless
ground meatball the mean for the
flavor was 6.90, texture was 7.06, and
the overall acceptability was 7.10.
The mean for the beefless ground
meatball was higher than the TVP
meatball and this can be attributed to
the added ingredients that are used to
make beefless ground.
Overall, the sensory acceptability
showed that the 100% beef meatball
was more preferred than the TVP
and beefless ground meatball by the
consumers in respect to flavor,
texture, and overall acceptability.
Pearson Correlation for the Sensory Acceptability of
Meatball Formulations
 Nutrition Fact Labels

The ingredients for the three 12 gram meatball samples were

analyzed using the software program The Food Processor.
 Nutrient Analysis
Total Calories and Calories from Fat
The three samples had around the
same amount of calories with the
beefless ground meatball having the
least.
Beefless Ground: 20 calories and
10 calories from fat
TVP: 25 calories and 5 calories from
fat
100% Ground Beef: 25 calories and
15 calories from fat
Fat and Cholesterol
Beefless Ground: 1 gram of fat, 0
grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of
trans fat, and 0 mg of cholesterol
TVP: 1 gram of fat, 0 grams of
saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, and
0 mg of cholesterol
100% Ground Beef: 1.5 grams of fat,
0.5 grams of saturated fat, no trans
fat, and 5 mg of cholesterol
 Discussion
According to the results we concluded that our experiment was a
success.
Flavor:
Panelists rated flavor the highest for the control sample, although there was no significant
difference with the TVP and BG samples. We assumed that one of the reasons was that the
other ingredients had strong flavors that masked the differences among the samples.
TVP is almost flavorless compared to beef, but has a similar consistency. When TVP was
mixed with beef the final product had a softer texture, but adopted the flavor of the rest of the
ingredients.
Appearance:
We also observed that consumers rated the BG sample the highest. This is probably due to
the fact that the beefless ground is darker in color than cooked ground beef and consumers
like a darker colored meatball.
 Texture:
Although the differences are not significant, we observed that BG had a minimal
difference meaning that most of the panelists did not perceive any difference in
texture with the control sample. We considered that this is due to the similarities
in texture and consistency of BG with beef.

Overall Acceptability:
50% TVP meatballs were very well accepted. However, BG was highly rated in
overall acceptability with almost no difference with the control sample. This
meant that people liked 50% BG meatballs almost as much as 100% beef
meatballs.
We also found that the top amount of beef replacement was 50%. We
experimented with larger percentages to replace beef and the final product lost
the beef taste of the meatballs.

However, decreasing 50% of meat is important since it means 50% less

cholesterol, 50% less saturated fat, and 20% less calories for BG.

The decrease of animal product consumption was our goal. Especially for
people who like the taste of meat.

Even more, maintaining the protein intake was fundamental for all age groups.
TVP and BG are equivalent in protein to meat.
 Prosperous Outcomes
Ground beef can be replaced in other recipes up to 50% as well.
Hamburgers, pies, meatloaves, lasagnas, etc.

50% less red meat in our diet can make a positive difference in lowering
calories, saturated fat, and cholesterol which will lead to the decrease of
obesity and cardiovascular disease.
 Conclusion
TVP and BG are excellent sources to replace ground beef in meatballs.
People who have to eat diets that are lower in cholesterol, and fat can still enjoy
meatballs without hindering the sensory qualities that are important to its appeal.
It is a traditional recipe, high in protein, tasty, adaptable for all age groups, and
affordable.
References:
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Adult Obesity Facts.
https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html, Last reviewed 09/01/16.
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). National Center for Chronic Disease
Prevention and Health Promotion, Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention. State
Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Programs Address High Blood Cholesterol.
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_state_cholesterol.htm, Last reviewed
07/22/14.
Serdaroglu, M., Yildiz-Turp, G., & Abrodimov, K. (2005). Quality of low-fat
meatballs containing legume flours as extenders. Journal of Meat Science, 70, 99-105.
Ergezer H., Akcan T., & Serdarolu M. (2014). The effects of potato puree and bread crumbs
on some quality characteristics of low fat meatballs. Korean journal for food science of animal
resources, 34, 561-569.