Featured Post from Aston University

How potato milk measures up against other plant-based milk alternatives

Mar 7, 2022

4 min

Dr Duane Mellor



It seems like almost every plant-based food is being turned into “milk” these days, the latest being potato milk.


It’s not surprising that potatoes have been chosen to be the latest plant-based milk. After all, potatoes have many health benefits because they’re full of important vitamins and nutrients. But how do they measure up to other popular plant-based milks?


Protein content


No matter the type of plant-based milk, they only contain a fraction of the ingredient they’re derived from. For example, only 10% of the volume of a carton of rice or oat milk comes from these grains. Soy drinks contain between 5%-8% of the actual soya bean, and almond milks contain as little as 2% of the actual nut. Since coconut uses the cream or milk from the fruit, it contains between 5%-13%, depending on how creamy the product is. And based on the current potato milk products out there, a one-litre carton only contains around 60g of an actual potato – a small potato.


The problem with this is that these milks now contain far fewer vitamins and nutrients than the raw ingredient would. This may make them less nutritious than they would be if you ate the ingredient whole.


Take protein, for example. Ingredients like almonds are naturally great sources of protein containing over 20g of protein per 100g of almonds.


But after processing, 100 millilitres of almond milk only contains around one gram of protein. This is actually the same amount of protein you’d find in the same amount of oat milk – even though oats contain far less protein (13.5g per 100g).


Soya milk is better as it contains more of the soya beans compared with almond milk. In fact, soya milk gives around 3-3.5g of protein per 100ml. This is about as much protein as you get in the same amount of cow’s milk. And like cow’s milk, soya milk contains essential amino acids which our body isn’t able to naturally produce. Amino acids are important as they ensure our body works properly – such as by helping our muscles keep moving.


Potatoes are already low in protein. This means that after processing, potato milk contains about as much protein as coconut and rice milk – less than 0.5g of protein per 100ml. But some potato milk brands do supplement with pea protein, which makes a 100ml serving have around 1.3g of protein.


So if you’re choosing your plant-based milk for protein content, you might be best sticking with soya or almond milk over potato milk.


Added sugars


As with cow’s milk, plant-based milks can also contain added sugars. We are encouraged to limit our added sugar intake to no more than five to six teaspoons a day. This is because eating too much sugar is linked to an increased risk of obesity as well as tooth decay. But given many products sell both sweetened and unsweetened versions, it’s easier for someone to buy a product that contains no sugar.


Sweetened potato milk contains about 1.8g of sugar per 100ml. This is a little less than other plant-based milks which contain around 2 to 3.5g of added sugar per 100ml. So in this category, potato milk comes out on top. Although some plant-based milk uses natural sugars from fruit, this is still considered added sugar and should be limited.


Fat content


Since potatoes are naturally low in fat, potato milk would have a texture more akin to water. This is why extra fat is added to it. A similar thing is done with rice and oat milk, where oil (such as sunflower oil) is added. This brings the fat content up so that it’s closer to semi-skimmed milk (about 1.5g per 100ml). For potato milk, rapeseed oil is added. Almond and soya both tend to contain fat already, so no additional oil is added.


This means that compared with other plant-based milks, potato milk is higher in monounsaturated fats, which are thought to be better for your heart. They’re also lower in saturated fats than cow’s milk, which is thought to be less healthy for our hearts.


A “barista version” of milk alternatives needs to contain a combination of both protein and fat in order for the milk to foam, so have slightly more fat added to them.


Added vitamins


When it comes to vitamins and minerals, many plant-based milks have these added to them, as they simply don’t have as many as cow’s milk naturally does.


Vitamins like riboflavin, B12 and D alongside calcium are added to potato milks. The same is also true for other plant-based milks – although organic versions may not have added vitamins often due to organic food rules and trying to keep the label clean of additives.


As many of us struggle to get enough vitamin D – which is essential for healthy bones and immune system – and many vegans and vegetarians can have low B12 levels (which is needed to keep our blood cells and nerves healthy) going for milk alternatives with these added vitamins and minerals can be a good idea.


Potato milk is yet another option for those wanting an alternative to cow’s milk or other plant-based milks, or those looking for a more environmentally friendly milk product. Nutritionally, it may not contain the protein of soya milk, but many products are fortified, so they still contain important vitamins and minerals.


But since it contains several refined ingredients, such as oils and protein isolates (proteins extracted from foods), it may technically count as an ultra-processed food. There are some concerns about ultra-processed foods, which have been linked to chronic disease – so it is yet to be seen whether potato milk has similar risks.

Connect with:
Dr Duane Mellor

Dr Duane Mellor

Visiting Academic

Dr Mellor is an award-winning dietitian, science communicator, medical educator and researcher.

Food ScienceDieteticsDiabetesObesityNutrition
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Aston University

3 min

New research partnership to develop biodegradable gloves from food waste for healthcare sector

Knowledge Transfer Partnership between Aston University and PFE Medical to develop a biodegradable clinical glove from food waste The gloves will provide a low-cost, convenient and sustainable alternative to the 1.4bn disposable gloves used in the NHS each year The innovation will reduce clinical waste and costs and help the NHS reach its net zero goals. Aston University and Midlands-based company PFE Medical are teaming up to create biodegradable gloves made from food waste for use in the NHS. They will offer a low-cost, convenient alternative to disposable gloves without compromising patient safety. More than 1.4bn disposable gloves are used by the NHS each year. They create large volumes of clinical waste which has both an environmental and economic cost. The Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) project will develop a more sustainable alternative made from polymers derived from food waste such as orange peel, able to degrade naturally. The gloves will initially be for use during low-risk tasks such as ultrasound scans, rather than in more critical situations such as operating theatres. The gloves would be designed to not only reduce clinical waste and costs in the NHS, but also carbon emissions, helping the NHS reach its goal to be the world’s first net-zero health service. With most personal protective equipment (PPE) currently sourced from Chinese manufacturers, the goal is to develop a biodegradable glove that can be manufactured using a UK supply chain. The challenging project draws on Aston University’s expertise in sustainable polymer chemistry, centred at Aston Institute for Membrane Excellence (AIME). Aston University has one of the largest research groups of polymer chemists in the UK. The project will be led at the University by Professor Paul Topham, director of AIME, and Dr James Wilson, AIME associate member. The research team have chosen to focus on polymers from food waste in order to ensure that the final product can be manufactured sustainably. Most polymers are currently made from petroleum. Polymers made from food waste, ranging from fruit waste to corn or dairy products, have the potential for antioxidant and antibacterial properties if designed appropriately. The team will manipulate the polymer molecules so that they include the right monomers (the smaller units which make up the molecules) in the right location to achieve the properties they require. Critical to the success of the project will be PFE Medical’s commercial and clinical experience of taking new innovations into medical use. It will be the third KTP between Aston University and PFE, following on from successful projects to develop an automated endoscope cleaner, now in use across University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHB). Professor Topham said: “At Aston University, we have a long history of working with industry, of translating fundamental research into solutions for real world problems. This project with PFE Medical provides us with that route, to take our science and engineering and make a difference to peoples’ lives. That’s exactly where, as researchers, we want to be.” Rob Hartley, CEO of PFE Medical, said: “Our previous KTP with Aston University was a phenomenal success, thanks to the brilliant team we had on board. I’m just as excited by this project, which is looking to solve an equally long-standing problem. If we can achieve our goal, then the implications are huge, going far beyond the NHS to all the other situations where people are wearing disposable gloves.” KTPs, funded by Innovate UK, are collaborations between a business, a university and a highly qualified research associate. The UK-wide programme helps businesses to improve their competitiveness and productivity through the better use of knowledge, technology and skills. Aston University is a sector-leading KTP provider, ranked first for project quality, and joint first for the volume of active projects. For further details about this KTP, visit the webpage: www.aston.ac.uk/business/collaborate-with-us/knowledge-transfer-partnership/at-work/pfe-medical.

2 min

Aston University’s Professor Gina Rippon wins British Psychological Society book award for The Lost Girls of Autism

Gina Rippon, professor emeritus of cognitive neuroimaging at Aston University, has won an award for her book, The Lost Girls of Autism The book won the 2025 British Psychological Society Popular Science Award It explores the emerging science of female autism, and examines why it has been systematically ignored and misunderstood for so long. The Lost Girls of Autism, the latest book from Gina Rippon, professor emeritus of cognitive neuroimaging at Aston University Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment (IHN), has won the 2025 British Psychological Society (BPS) Popular Science Award. The annual BPS Book Awards recognise exceptional published works in the field of psychology. There are four categories – popular science, textbook, academic monograph and practitioner text. With the subtitle ‘How Science Failed Autistic Women and the New Research that’s Changing the Story’, The Lost Girls of Autism explores the emerging science of female autism, and examines why it has been systematically ignored and misunderstood for so long. Historically, clinicians believed that autism was a male condition, and simply did not look for it in girls and women. This has meant that autistic girls visiting a doctor have been misdiagnosed with anxiety, depression or personality disorders, or are missed altogether. Many women only discover they have the condition when they are much older. Professor Rippon said: “It's such a pleasure and an honour to receive this award from the BPS. It’s obviously flattering to join the great company of previous winners, but I’m also extremely grateful for the attention drawn to the issues raised in the book. “Over many decades, due to autism’s ‘male spotlight’ problem, autistic girls and women have been overlooked, deprived of the help they needed, and even denied access to the very research studies that could widen our understanding of autism. This book tells the stories of these girls and women, and I’m thrilled to accept this prize on their behalf.”

3 min

New book from Aston University academic shows that Christmas tasks mostly fall on women

New book by Dr Emily Christopher shows differences in how household tasks are divided by men and women Book highlights that women tend to buy the Christmas presents and send cards Men often see women as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. A new book from Aston University’s Dr Emily Christopher reveals that when it comes to sending Christmas cards and buying Christmas presents, women are still mostly doing the work as they are perceived to have better knowledge of what people would like. Dr Emily Christopher, a lecturer in sociology and policy at Aston School of Law and Social Sciences, has recently published her book Couples at Work: Negotiating Paid Employment, Housework and Childcare, which look at how household tasks are divided by men and women and the reasons behind these divisions. The data for the book has been collated over an eight-year period with couples being interviewed twice to provide a robust set of results. It looks at how different sex parent couples combined paid work, housework and childcare. The research revealed how gender norms continue to shape how certain daily household jobs are divided. Women were more likely than men to clean the house, especially bathrooms, wash clothes and put clothes away. Men still tend to do tasks like mowing the lawn and DIY but now are also more likely to do the cooking and the grocery shopping. The research shows that the key to understanding how household tasks are divided lies in the meaning they hold for partners. With the festive season upon us, the book reveals that woman are largely responsible for the Christmas present buying and sending cards with 100% of those taking part in the research saying that women mostly carried out these tasks. This also included buying for the male partner's relatives. In instances where men had a 'helping' role in these tasks, this included being involved in the discussion or consulting on choice of presents, especially for children, with only a small minority buying presents for their own family. The data revealed that where women didn't choose and buy presents for their partners family, they were still involved in reminding their partners that this needed to be done or advising on choice of gifts, showing that women were still taking on the mental load of planning for the festive season. The book reveals that when men were questioned about why they didn't get involved in present buying, they drew on gender norms. Women were often described, by the men, as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. Men often described how family members wouldn’t receive presents at all if it relied on them. Although much of the gift giving and organising represented love and affection for the women, which many found enjoyable, many still saw it as work and expressed that they would like their partners' to be more involved. Dr Christopher said: “This book takes an in-depth look at the way in which everyday roles around the household are divided between men and women. “The research shows that over a period of eight years fathers increased their role in childcare tasks but this did not always extend to housework. “The pandemic was an opportunity to change how couples share housework but women were still more likely to carry out tasks like cleaning, washing clothes and putting clothes away and overwhelmingly remained responsible for the mental orchestration of family work.”

View all posts
Powered by