Next Article in Journal
β-Glucosidase Activity of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum: A Key Player in Food Fermentation and Human Health
Next Article in Special Issue
Comprehensive Analysis of Storage Stability of Hong-Jam Under Various Conditions: Correlation Between Lipid Oxidation Factors and Alternative Quality Parameters
Previous Article in Journal
Bioactive Lipid Compounds and Nutritional Potential of Glyceride Oils from Flower Buds and Fruits of Lagerstroemia indica L. Cultivar ‘Hopi’ Grown in Bulgaria
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/foods14091450
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Are Insect-Based Foods Healthy? An Evaluation of the Products Sold in European E-Commerce

by
Emma Copelotti
1,
Filippo Fratini
1,2,
Giulia Sforza
1,3,
Tiziano Tuccinardi
3,
Gian Carlo Demontis
3 and
Simone Mancini
1,2,*
1
Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Viale delle Piagge 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
2
Interdepartmental Research Center Nutrafood “Nutraceuticals and Food for Health”, University of Pisa, Via del Borghetto 80, 56124 Pisa, Italy
3
Department of Pharmacy, University of Pisa, Via Bonanno 6, 56124 Pisa, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2025, 14(9), 1450; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14091450
Submission received: 1 April 2025 / Revised: 10 April 2025 / Accepted: 18 April 2025 / Published: 22 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Innovative Applications of Edible Insects in Food Systems)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Over the past few years, edible insects have been recognised as potential “new” food sources in Western countries due to their sustainability and adaptability in the food production sector. To determine the distribution in Europe of insect-based food producers within each country, as well as the number and types of products, data from e-commerce were collected and analysed. The FoodEx2 classification was used to categorise the products. Data about the nutritional composition were recorded and the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) was calculated. As a result, 523 products offered by fifty-three companies located in 17 countries of Europe were found. The predominant market was based in Western Europe (55.8%), and 24 insect species were sold. Notably, four species were the most representative: Tenebrio molitor (182 products), followed by Acheta domesticus (140), Alphitobius diaperinus (54), and Locusta migratoria (34). Other species were present in lower quantities. The main commercial categories of insect-based food present in the European e-commerce were snacks, chocolate, and similar products. The results emphasise the potential benefits of incorporating insect-based food into the daily diet in terms of protein, energy, and fat intake. The RDA of the different products highlighted the importance of insects as a nutritional ingredient.

1. Introduction

One of the biggest problems of our time is to produce safe, nutritional, environmentally friendly, and affordable foodstuff. The rising global population, growing demand for protein food, escalating costs of animal–plant protein sources, food security concerns, and the environmental impact of intensive livestock and plant farming [1,2] lead to the growing interest in producing and consuming alternative protein sources all over the world. Over the last decade, the scientific community and producers have proposed several new food resources, such as micro and macro algae, single-cell proteins, and insects [3,4,5,6,7,8]. In this context, insect-based food represents an emerging and quite practical solution for the challenges that we are facing [9]. Entomophagy (the consumption of insects by humans) is an ancient dietary tradition still observed in various countries across Asia, Africa, and Latin America [10]. On the other hand, in Western countries, nowadays eating insects is related to the emotion of disgust [11], and it may appear as a threat to cultural identity since insects are not part of Western countries’ culinary traditions [12] or like a primitive or even barbaric practice [1]. Remarkably, due to sustainability and the potentiality and plasticity of the producing sector, in the last years edible insects were identified as potential “new” food sources in Western countries. Indeed, the intrinsic drivers related to the rearing of insects such as the low environmental impact and healthiness were the most important motivations to accept for Western people even though aversion and dislike were common motivations to reject insects [13]. In general, insects represent an excellent source of nutrients, particularly proteins and fats. The nutritional composition of insects varies between species and is also influenced by biotic and abiotic factors such as diet, rearing conditions, and the developmental stage [14]. In 2015, the European Food Safety Authority published its first scientific opinion on the risks of rearing and consuming insects as food and feed [15]. Edible insects and insect-based products in the European Union are classified as Novel Food, namely those products that humans had not consumed significantly in the EU before 15 May 1997 (Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, in force since 1 January 2018). Following Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, the commercialisation of Novel Food depends on the submission of an application by the company that is seeking to introduce that product to the market. The application must undergo an evaluation and authorisation process conducted by the European Commission (EC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The EFSA is responsible for confirming the safety of a product for consumers [16,17,18]. Nine Novel Food applications received a positive opinion from EFSA so far for four different insect species. The last positive opinion by EFSA was released in January 2025 regarding the safety of frozen and dried forms of whole yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor larvae) (the European Commission Implementing Regulation is still pending). Looking back, the first authorised insect-based Novel Food product was the ‘dried’ Tenebrio molitor larvae (yellow mealworm). Indeed, on 13 January 2021, EFSA published a positive opinion, which became the European Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/882 on 1 June 2021. From 22 June 2021, the place on the EU market for the dried mealworm was authorised for the applicant and the associated business partners. Still, in 2021, the application for ‘dried and frozen’ Locusta migratoria (migratory locust) was authorised (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1975). In 2022, an application for ‘frozen and freeze-dried’ formulations of the yellow mealworm, ‘whole or in powder’, was authorised (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/169). In the same year, the application for ‘dried, ground, and frozen’ Acheta domesticus (house cricket) was authorised (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/188). In 2023, applications were authorised for the commercialisation of the ‘partially defatted powder’ forms of house cricket and Alphitobius diaperinus (lesser mealworm) ‘frozen, paste, dried, and powder’ formulations (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/58). The last authorisation was released on 20 January 2025 authorising the placing on the market of UV-treated powder of whole Tenebrio molitor larvae (yellow mealworm) (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/89). Applications are still pending dealing with the following species: Gryllodes sigillatus, Hermetia illucens, Apis mellifera, Locusta migratoria, Tenebrio molitor, Alphitobius diaperinus, and Acheta domesticus. Regarding extra-EU countries, in Switzerland, since 1 May 2017, the Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (FSVO) allowed the production and the market of three species of insects (Tenebrio molitor, Acheta domesticus, and Locusta migratoria) as food or ingredient in foodstuffs. All Novel Foods that can be marketed in the EU may be sold in Switzerland without authorisation. On the other hand, Swiss Novel Foods must be authorised by the European Commission to be placed on the EU market. Meanwhile, the legislative framework pertaining to edible insects in the United Kingdom attests that from the 1 January 2024 only products that have a valid Novel Food application presented before 31 December 2023 can be sold. Furthermore, the aforementioned products may only belong to the following four species: Tenebrio molitor, Acheta domesticus, Gryllodes sigillatus, and Hermetia illucens. In Norway, Novel Foods follow the Regulation 1215 of the 25 July 2017 which implements the Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority is the competent organisation that food operators should consult for placing insect-based products on the market. Most of the companies selling insect-based products that are present in Europe are settled in France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and the Netherlands [19]. As described by IPIFF’s survey [20], whole insects are the most commonly consumed form, followed by protein bars, snacks, and pasta. However, because of their absence in European food traditions, the insect sector still faces some difficulties related to many reasons such as the idea of a bad taste or even worse that it is too risky for health. Other motivations could be related to religion and diet limitations, difficulties in easily finding products in physical shops, and high prices [9,21,22]. Indeed, the predominant method of purchasing insect-based food products in the EU market is through e-commerce [23,24]. This study aims to conduct a thorough analysis of the current European market for insect-based food products considering insect species, price, percentage of insects included in the formulations, nutritional values, production country, and food category.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Procedure, Inclusion, and Exclusion Parameters

Data were collected online between July 2021 and January 2024. The research was performed on the Google web platform using different combinations of keywords: “(Edible insect* OR Novel food) AND (Europ* OR EU) AND (e-commerce OR shop online)” to identify e-commerce platforms that gather information or production companies that sell insects-based food in Europe.

2.2. Data Elaboration

Data about the products sold were recorded when consulting the available e-commerce platforms. Each producer was coded and associated with the country of production and their products. Data on the distribution of companies within each country, as well as the number and types of products, were collected and analysed to gain insight into the spread of different types of products across Europe. Countries were grouped according to the UN “Classification and definition of regions” [25] into Northern, Southern, Western, and Eastern. Data regarding products, including prices, insect species, percentage of insect inclusion in the formulations, and nutritional values, were collected from the ingredient lists and nutritional facts. This information was then used to establish a comprehensive dataset. The FoodEx2 classification [26] was used to group the products and gather them into commercial macro categories. Data about the nutritional composition such as calories (Kcal), carbohydrates, proteins, total fats, saturated fatty acids (SFAs), and salt content were recorded. To determine whether the available products could meet the daily nutritional needs of 97–98% of healthy individuals (National Institute of Health NIH), the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) was calculated based on 100g of each product. All product prices were converted to the price per kilogram (or Liter for beverages) in Euros, including those in different currencies (average exchange rate for 2023: 0.8700 EUR/GBP, 0.9720 EUR/CHF, 7.4536 EUR/DKK, 11.430 EUR/NOK, 0.04166 CZK/EUR, and 0.5111 BGN/EUR [27]).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Distribution of the Companies Across Europe

From data collection and through inclusion and exclusion criteria, 523 products proposed by fifty-three companies were found online. The production companies were located mostly in European Western (47.17%) countries, followed by Northern (26.42%), Eastern (15.09%), and Southern (11.32%) countries (Table 1). It is evident how the South of the continent still has an important under-representation of the insect food commerce. Consumers’ willingness to eat insects in Mediterranean Europe is very low as reported by Mancini et al. [28]. It could be related to the strong culinary culture and deep-rooted Mediterranean diet idea, as also highlighted, e.g., by the request of Italy to recognise its traditional cuisine as a UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage [29]. Following the data about the producer’s distribution, a wider market exists in Western (56.02% of products) and, immediately afterward, in Northern (18.93%), Eastern (15.11%), and Southern European countries (9.94%) (Table 1). Looking at the percentages reported above, it is possible to state that the distribution of food items in Europe faithfully reflects the companies’ distribution in the continent with a bigger market density in North–West countries. The results are in line with those of [23] which underlined a bigger presence of companies in Northern Europe, mostly in the United Kingdom. Indeed, as reported in Table 1, it is possible to confirm that the United Kingdom (8 companies) is the European country with the highest concentration of edible insect producers, followed by France (6), the Czech Republic (6), and Germany and Switzerland (both 5). With 60.61% of the total products, these five countries are the most active in the European insect food trade. Consumers can buy from French companies up to 115 different products (21.99% of the total). Czech Republic companies are the second one, with a wide offer of 69 products (13.19%), and the third are German companies with 67 products (12.81%). These companies compose a market that is still a niche in Western society, especially in Europe [30], but that represents a promising growing industry. It is forecasted to develop significantly in the next years (together with the North American one), with a good spread of iFBOs (Insect Food Business Operators) which, nowadays, are largely composed of micro companies (81%), followed by small (16%) and medium (3%) size companies [31]. In the past decade, in the edible insect market, several initiatives have transitioned, over time, from startups to well-established operators [17]. This process is creating many new jobs—not only direct ones (in the insect’s breeding sector or in the processing of insects for food), but also indirect ones (involved, for example, in the logistics or administrative side). In 2020, about 60% of the 33 European companies who have responded to a survey conducted by IPIFF—out of a total of 71 companies identified—had their respective national territory as a primary market target; in second place, products were sold in the European market, represented by Member States and EFTA (European free trade association) countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland). The last market target was the international market, which includes non-EU and non-EFTA countries [32].

3.2. Insect Species and Products

In general, Tenebrio molitor-based products represent most of the products found in the European e-commerce marketplace (182 products), but there are differences between the different regions (Figure 1). Indeed, in Northern and Western regions, Acheta domesticus-based products are the most widespread type of products, while in Eastern and Southern regions, many of the available products are Tenebrio molitor-based (Figure 1). In some countries, i.e., Belgium, companies offer products just with two types of insects (mealworm and house cricket), or just one as in Spain and Slovakia (mealworm) and Norway and Bulgaria (house cricket). On the other hand, France and the United Kingdom have the widest choice of insect species (Figure 1). The differences in the products offered can be related to some consumers’ preconceptions about specific insect species. In fact, as reported by Fischer and Steenbekkers [33], people in Western countries mostly prefer crickets, mealworms, and grasshopper (Locusta migratoria) products or even the preparation of these products. The market can also be influenced by the ease of large-scale production of some species and their developmental stage [34,35]. Germany and Austria are the countries in which the offer of lesser mealworm-based products (54) is the widest (Figure 1).
This limited spread could be related to the fact that lesser mealworm can be seen as a pest which is a reservoir or vector of bacteria or mycotoxins [36,37]. Even though grasshopper is the most consumed whole insect species as reported by the IPIFF 2024 report, Locusta migratoria-based products are less prevalent than all the other insect products in all the European countries (34 products). In France, three of the seven existing companies produce about half of the products on the market with grasshopper. Locusta migratoria is regarded as a significant and detrimental pest for cultures. As reported by Van Peer et al. [38] numerous unsuccessful attempts have been made to develop an artificial diet for Locusta migratoria. Both could be compelling reasons for the limited availability of grasshopper products on the market. The ‘other’ category contains products based on species that have not yet seen an implementation of the Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. The availability of these products is contingent upon transitional measures that pertain to operators who were already engaged in commercial activities within the European Union before 1 January 2018 and who had submitted a formal request for authorisation. Towards the insect-based products involving the four species reported above, in the European e-commerce marketplace, it is possible to find 113 products prepared with 20 different species mainly represented by silkworms, superworms, bamboo worms, caterpillars, termites, ants, giant wasps, and giant water bugs. In this category, cricket-based products of species other than Acheta domesticus were also included, such as Gryllus assimilis, Grylloides sigillatus, and Gryllotalpa gryllotalpa. Products without the scientific name of the species, but with the common names, on the packaging were also added to this list. Interestingly, for 90 products without the scientific names of the insect species, 70 were cricket-based. Products were available in different formulations (Table 2): whole insect, insect powder, protein products, meat products, meat substitutes, bakery products and premixes, cereal, biscuits and bars, pasta products (dried), chocolate products, snacks of various types, fermented and non-fermented alcoholic beverages, and others. The most abundant products found in the e-commerce marketplace belong to the ‘whole insect’ category, followed by the ‘sweet and candies’ and ‘insect powder’ categories (Table 2). Although insects in whole form are less easily accepted by consumers [39], whole insects represent the most readily available macro category comprising 50.67% of the total. The lack of visibility of the insect could help to minimise the disgust factor [40], and to familiarise European consumers with edible insect products, the remaining 49.33% of the available products are represented by insects in powder form, to enrich foods such as pasta, crackers, or bars. Insect-based ‘protein products’ represent 2.10% of the market and are composed primarily of ingredients derived from the lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) and the house cricket (Acheta domesticus). ‘Meat products’ are the scarcer, with only two products found that are composed of 50% beef meat and 50% insects. As evidenced by the studies conducted by Kim et al. [41,42], the incorporation of insect ingredients reduced moisture loss in meat emulsions. Likely, consumers are not yet prepared to accept this type of product, and companies are therefore testing the commercial viability of these two innovative products, which contain Tenebrio molitor larvae and crickets. ‘Bakery products and premixes’ represent 5.54% of the total products, and the most abundant products contain Tenebrio molitor (Table 2). The incorporation of insects into bakery products has been demonstrated to enhance the nutritional value of the products, particularly in terms of protein content [43]. As with bakery products, Tenebrio molitor and Acheta domesticus were the most abundant, followed by Alphitobius diaperinus and other species. ‘Pasta products’ represent 3.06% of the total, and it is possible to find the same amount of Tenebrio molitor and Alphitobius diaperinus pasta. As demonstrated by Duda et al. [44], the incorporation of insect powder in pasta did not show significant sensory differences. Of the 523 products, 32 are chocolate-based, with mealworm-based products representing much of this category. ‘Snacks of various types’, namely chips and tortillas, represent 4.21%, and they are prepared primarily with house crickets, other crickets, and mealworms ingredients. ‘Alcoholic beverages fermented and non-fermented’ (1.15%) are represented by aromatised vodka and beer. These are prepared mainly with mealworms. The ‘others’ category contains savoury sauces such as hummus and tapenade and peanut butter which represent 0.96% of the total products range.

3.3. Level of Insect Inclusion, Prices and Packaging

Table 3 shows the percentages of inclusion of insects in the various products, the prices, and the quantities. Insect powders consisted of 100% insects, while in the case of whole insect products, if flavoured with salt and spices, the percentages dropped to 70–75%. Products differ also in weight and, consequently, in price. Whole insect products can be purchased in packs containing from 5 to 50 g of product, while larger packages of whole insects (from 200 g to 1 kg) are designed for sale to the catering sector. Whole and flavoured insects are mainly intended to be eaten as a snack and are enriched with spices that allow the Asian culinary tradition, which has integrated entomophagy for centuries, to be mixed with the flavours of other traditions and spice up the curiosity of European consumers. The powder formulations of buffalo worms, mealworms, house crickets, and grasshoppers were available in packs of 100 g, 200 g, 500 g, or 1 kg. In this way, they can be stored like common wheat flour and be used for domestic preparation. Our results showed that the average price in EUR/Kg for grasshopper’s whole insects and powder products were the highest (Table 3). When the insect—in pieces or powder—was employed in the formulation of bars, pasta, or crackers, for example, the percentage of inclusion was quite low, between 14% (as in pasta with lesser mealworm) and almost negligible percentages such as 5.6% for chocolate grasshoppers. In general, if compared to other conventional products, prices for insect-based products are often higher. For example, if the price of house cricket powder is compared with that of common durum wheat semolina, the first has a cost of 149.92 EUR/Kg and the second of 0.52 EUR/Kg [45]. Due to its different composition, insect powder cannot completely replace wheat flour but can be used to increase the protein content of carbohydrate-based food products as demonstrated by Duda et al. [44]. Indeed, to improve the nutritional value of pasta, they made three formulations of spaghetti with durum wheat semolina and cricket powder in ratios of 95:5, 90:10, and 85:15. Pasta containing insect powder resulted in enrichment of proteins, lipids, and minerals and depletion of carbohydrates proportionally to the increase in cricket powder used. They also registered changes regarding the colour of spaghetti (darker with the inclusion of cricket powder), the cooking time, and the firmness after cooking (which increases as the percentage of cricket powder increases). A greater firmness gives the product compactness appreciated by consumers, unlike the dark colour which would seem to discourage the consumption of pasta. Even García-Segovia et al. [46] showed that regardless of the species and amount of Tenebrio molitor and Alphitobius diaperinus powder used to replace 5% and 10% of soft wheat flour in bread, the rheological properties of the dough as an index of extensibility and swelling are not modified. As reported, the perception of consumers is influenced positively by high prices which were associated with high-quality products [47]. Hard candies, especially lollipops, always contained a whole single insect inside; as for alcohol, these products focused a lot on the visual effect, here given by the bright dyes and the presence of whole arthropods. In alcoholic products, the percentage of alcohol varies between 37.5 and 40%, while the bottles available were designed for a single size or are larger, from 100 to 750 mL. Prices should adapt to those of conventional products to be more competitive in the market [48]. Looking at product packaging, there is a noticeable trend where the use of vibrant, eye-catching colours stands out, and it is interesting to note that these packages often do not display images of the insects used in the products’ formulation. Instead, they typically include visual references to other ingredients opting to emphasise its nutritional contribution through descriptive language and the ingredients list. Many companies place a strong emphasis on clearly communicating the high protein content that insects offer, underscoring the significance of proteins as the most prevalent nutrients in the nutritional profile of edible insects [49]. Furthermore, some producers display food certifications on the packaging as proof of the high quality and safety of the products [50].

3.4. Nutritional Value

The minimum, maximum, and average values for the nutritional values (in terms of Kcal, macronutrients, and micronutrients) referring to 100 g of product are reported in Table 3.

3.4.1. Energy Content

Edible insect-based products provide a satisfactory share of energy and protein, containing a good amount of mono and polyunsaturated fatty acids, micronutrients (such as vitamins riboflavin, pantothenic acid, biotin, cobalamin, and ascorbic acid), and mineral salts (e.g., microelements such as iron and selenium and macroelements such as phosphorus and magnesium) [14]. The analysis of 78 insect species conducted by Ramos-Elorduy [51] revealed an energy content ranging from 293 to 762 kcal per 100 g of dry matter, mostly attributable to protein content. As shown in Kouřimská and Adámková [52], lipid content also plays an important role in determining the total energy content of insects. It is important to underline that the nutritional profile, in this specific case being energy, is subject to important variations that can occur both between different species and between individuals of the same species (which are in a different metamorphic stage or have been fed with a different feed) [53,54]. In Table 3, the products with the highest Kcal content were in the ’chocolate and similar’ category for all species except grasshoppers, which had the highest Kcal value for ’insect powder’. While the lowest Kcal values were ‘savory sauces’ for mealworms and other species, ‘hard candies’ for crickets, and ‘meat imitates’ for lesser mealworms. The %RDA Kcal values for 100 g of ’insect powder’ and ‘whole insect’ ranged between 29.75% for the grasshopper powder and 21.30% for the whole house cricket (Table 4). Therefore, 100 g of products, mostly composed of insects, could contribute from one-third to one-fifth of the recommended daily allowance of energy. Interestingly, 100 g of Tenebrio molitor ‘dried pasta’ provides an energy content of 387.6 Kcal (Table 3), which is higher than the 341 Kcal/100 g of conventional pasta [55]. Therefore, comparing the %RDA Kcal values of the Tenebrio molitor pasta, the insect-based food resulted more energetic (19.36% and 17.05%, respectively, for mealworm and conventional pasta). This could be related to the protein content of Tenebrio molitor pasta which is significantly higher than the protein content of pasta (19.24 g and 13.5 g, respectively).

3.4.2. Protein Content

A noteworthy aspect of the nutritional profile of these products is the commendable protein content, which is highest in whole insects and decreases in processed products (e.g., biscuits, pasta, and crackers) in proportion to the percentage of insect inclusion (Table 3). Feng et al. [56] reported that the protein content of insects constitutes approximately 50% of the total weight of insects. Analysing 236 insect species, Rumpold and Schlüter [49] reported that protein content in different insect orders varies, ranging from an average of 35.34% for the order Isoptera to an average of 61.32% on a dry matter basis for the order Orthoptera. Similarly, Xiaoming et al. [57], analysing 100 species from all the insect orders, established a wider range (13–77% of proteins on a dry matter basis). The nutritional composition of the products (Table 3) showed that the highest average protein content belonged to the lesser mealworm ‘isolated proteins and other protein products’, followed by the other species ‘isolated proteins and other protein products’ and house cricket powder. On the other hand, the lowest values were registered in all species for ‘hard candies’. Introducing insect-based products into the diet, and in particular whole and powdered insects, can amply satisfy the recommended daily protein intake. Indeed, Table 4 reveals that 100 g of Acheta domesticus powder provides 67.53 g of proteins, corresponding to 90.03% of the average nutrient intake levels given in the RDAs. The highest ‘whole insect’ protein content in 100 g was in lesser mealworm with 59.25 g of protein equal to 79.00% of the RDA.

3.4.3. Carbohydrates and Sugars Content

The exoskeleton of insects is mainly composed of carbohydrates, even if their quantity in the whole composition of the insect body, compared to fat and protein, is low [58]. In the reviewed ‘meat burgers’ and ‘preserved and partially preserved sausages’ categories, the carbohydrate portion is almost negligible (Table 3). A low level of carbohydrates could also be found in both ‘whole insects’ and ‘insects powder’ (Table 3). As expected, high carbohydrate content products were ‘dried pasta’, ‘biscuits’, and ‘dry premixes for baked products’, these values could be mainly ascribed to the other ingredients present in the original recipes. Similar results were reported for sugar content for ‘chocolate and similar’ products and in lesser mealworm ‘sweet bars and other sweet masses’ products. Hard candies had the highest carbohydrate content and %RDA on a 100 g portion because they are made of sucrose, a low-molecular-weight carbohydrate. Sugar content is very low in ‘insects powder’ with values near to 0. The %RDA follow the same trends as reported Table 4.

3.4.4. Lipid Content

The content of saturated fatty acids is specified for most products, while there are not always indications referring to mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs and PUFAs). Despite this, there is evidence from the literature that the predominant component of the lipid profile of the species employed in insect-based food is made up of unsaturated fatty acids (around 65%, in which MUFAs represent the 40% and PUFAs 25%) [59]. In general, the saturated fatty acids most present in the composition of insect lipids are palmitic acid (C16:0) and stearic acid (C18:0); oleic acid (C18:1) is the most represented MUFA, while linoleic (C18:2n6) and linolenic (C18:3n3) fatty acids represent the majority of PUFAs [53]. Tzompa-Sosa et al. [60] reported that eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, C20:5n3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, C22:6n3) are present only in some species and not in elevated quantities. The fattiest product was the lesser mealworm ’peanut butter’, followed by the lesser mealworm and mealworm ’chocolate and similar’ products, which also had higher saturated fatty acids (SFA) content due to the natural fat content of chocolate (Table 3). Therefore, the %RDA is affected by the ingredient list, e.g., the house cricket ‘biscuits’ that contains from 6 to 10% insect have a total fat of 35.60 g / 100 g portion, which corresponds to 45.64% of the RDA of total fats (Table 4). The fatty acids profile of each insect species affect the nutritional values of the products. Indeed, as it is widely reported that mealworm and grasshopper have a high content of total fat (on dry bases), Tenebrio molitor is particularly rich in MUFA and oleic acid, while Locusta migratoria has a high content of SFA [59,60,61,62]. These characteristics reflect the high content of both fat per 100 g of mealworm products (30.23 g ‘insect powder’ and 28.43 g ‘whole insect’) and grasshopper products (38.1 g for ‘insect powder’ and 24.42 g for ‘whole insect’). Then, due to the fatty acids profile of the two species, the SFA %RDA for mealworm products are 75.08% and 81.56% (respectively, for ‘insect powder’ and ‘whole insect’) and 163.75% for grasshopper powder and 100.69% for 100 g of whole grasshopper (Table 4).

3.4.5. Salt and Fibre Content

The World Health Organization recommends that adults should consume less than 2 g of sodium (5 g of salt) per day [63]. Products with the lowest average amount of salt were lesser mealworm ‘muesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals’ and mealworm ‘cereal bars’ and ‘dried pasta’ (Table 3). While products with the highest average salt content in 100 g of products were other species in the ‘preserved and partially preserved sausages’ category and ‘whole’ house crickets. Insect fibres are mainly represented by chitin, a long-chain polymer of N-acetyl-glucosamine that can regulate human and animal gut microbiota, improving health [64]. Products with the lowest fibre content were mealworm ‘biscuits’, and those with the highest were other species ‘sweet bars and other sweet masses’ and ‘crackers and breadsticks’ and house crickets ‘chips/crisps’ (Table 3). Nevertheless, insect-based products have an excellent fibre content which help to achieve the recommended 25 g of fibre per day [65].

4. Conclusions and Future Perspectives

The available edible insect-based products in the European e-commerce market are mainly snacks, chocolate, and similar products. These categories of products are well-known by European consumers and present the insect in an invisible way (powder); moreover, they can be linked to pleasant taste experiences. They are undoubtedly the easiest form to accept and consume edible insects but also the most difficult to include in daily diets. Therefore, these categories could be considered as occasionally experimental consumption products. To overcome negative attitudes towards insect-based food, it is important to raise the consumers’ awareness of the health benefits derived from insect consumption. An inclusion of insects in common food could increase the protein as well as the energy and fat contents affecting the nutritional value of the final product. Of note, this depends on the product typology, insect species, processing, and the quantity of insects included in the food. It would be beneficial to focus future efforts from scientists and producers on divulging accurate information about the potential health benefits of incorporating edible insects into diets. Furthermore, to reach a wider segment of the population, a tailormade communication strategy should be developed suggesting the consumption of insects through social media, e.g., proposing catching recipes and breaking down the misconception against entomophagy. The producer’s mission should include a wider variety of ingredients in product formulations, both with plant- and animal-based products, not only focusing on already employed species but increasing the diversification of the productions. In particular, for this sector, they should explore and test various recipes in order to enhance the variety of insect-based food products. Policymakers should focus on developing policies that support and promote a sustainable transition to a green economy. In relation to the insect sector, specific regulations are attended in order to increase the exploitation of the true potential of edible insects. Meanwhile, consumers should go beyond their established habits and try to change their lifestyles by choosing goods that come from sustainable production. All those actions, among others, could contribute to the advancement of the insect sector, encouraging the development of innovative new products and ingredients that could help to reinforce the insect producers’ position as a promising avenue for the future of the food system.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, S.M. and F.F.; methodology, S.M. and F.F.; formal analysis, E.C. and G.S.; investigation, E.C. and G.S.; data curation, E.C.; writing—original draft preparation, E.C. and G.S.; writing—review and editing, T.T., G.C.D., S.M. and F.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. van Huis, A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 563–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. van Huis, A.; Oonincx, D.G.A.B. The Environmental Sustainability of Insects as Food and Feed. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Falcon, W.P.; Naylor, R.L.; Shankar, N.D. Rethinking Global Food Demand for 2050. Popul. Dev. Rev. 2022, 48, 921–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Mosibo, O.K.; Ferrentino, G.; Udenigwe, C.C. Microalgae Proteins as Sustainable Ingredients in Novel Foods: Recent Developments and Challenges. Foods 2024, 13, 733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Koukoumaki, D.I.; Tsouko, E.; Papanikolaou, S.; Ioannou, Z.; Diamantopoulou, P.; Sarris, D. Recent Advances in the Production of Single Cell Protein from Renewable Resources and Applications. Carbon Resour. Convers. 2024, 7, 100195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Jankowski, W.M.; Przychodniak, D.; Gromek, W.; Majsiak, E.; Kurowski, M. Edible Insects as an Alternative Source of Nutrients: Benefits, Risks, and the Future of Entomophagy in Europe—A Narrative Review. Foods 2025, 14, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Malila, Y.; Owolabi, I.O.; Chotanaphuti, T.; Sakdibhornssup, N.; Elliott, C.T.; Visessanguan, W.; Karoonuthaisiri, N.; Petchkongkaew, A. Current Challenges of Alternative Proteins as Future Foods. npj Sci. Food 2024, 8, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sogari, G.; Amato, M.; Palmieri, R.; Saadoun, J.H.; Formici, G.; Verneau, F.; Mancini, S. The Future Is Crawling: Evaluating the Potential of Insects for Food and Feed Security. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 2023, 6, 100504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Valesi, R.; Andreini, D.; Pedeliento, G. Insect-Based Food Consumption: Hedonic or Utilitarian Motives? Moderation and Segmentation Analyses. Food Qual. Prefer. 2024, 118, 105193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Olivadese, M.; Dindo, M.L. Edible Insects: A Historical and Cultural Perspective on Entomophagy with a Focus on Western Societies. Insects 2023, 14, 690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Batat, W.; Peter, P. The Healthy and Sustainable Bugs Appetite: Factors Affecting Entomophagy Acceptance and Adoption in Western Food Cultures. J. Consum. Mark. 2020, 37, 291–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Looy, H.; Dunkel, F.V.; Wood, J.R. How Then Shall We Eat? Insect-Eating Attitudes and Sustainable Foodways. Agric. Hum. Values 2014, 31, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tzompa-Sosa, D.A.; Sogari, G.; Copelotti, E.; Andreani, G.; Schouteten, J.J.; Moruzzo, R.; Liu, A.; Li, J.; Mancini, S. What Motivates Consumers to Accept Whole and Processed Mealworms in Their Diets? A Five-Country Study. Futur. Foods 2023, 7, 100225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Finke, M.D. Nutritional Value of Insects and Ways to Manipulate Their Composition. J. Insects Food Feed 2020, 7, 639–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. European Food Safety Authority Scientific Committee (EFSA). Risk Profile Related to Production and Consumption of Insects as Food and Feed. EFSA J. 2015, 13, 4257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lähteenmäki-Uutela, A.; Marimuthu, S.B.; Meijer, N. Regulations on Insects as Food and Feed: A Global Comparison. J. Insects Food Feed 2020, 7, 849–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mancini, S.; Sogari, G.; Diaz, S.E.; Menozzi, D.; Paci, G.; Moruzzo, R. Exploring the Future of Edible Insects in Europe. Foods 2022, 11, 455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Żuk-Gołaszewska, K.; Gałęcki, R.; Obremski, K.; Smetana, S.; Figiel, S.; Gołaszewski, J. Edible Insect Farming in the Context of the EU Regulations and Marketing—An Overview. Insects 2022, 13, 446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Barbera, F.L.; Verneau, F.; Amato, M.; Grunert, K. Understanding Westerners’ Disgust for the Eating of Insects: The Role of Food Neophobia and Implicit Associations. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 64, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. IPIFF (International Platform of Insects for Food and Feed). EU Survey on the Consumer Acceptance of Insect Food Products. Available online: https://ipiff.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Report_Survey_Results_12Mar2024.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  21. Alhujaili, A.; Nocella, G.; Macready, A. Insects as Food: Consumers’ Acceptance and Marketing. Foods 2023, 12, 886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rozin, P.; Fallon, A.E. A Perspective on Disgust. Psychol. Rev. 1987, 94, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Pippinato, L.; Gasco, L.; Vita, G.D.; Mancuso, T. Current Scenario in the European Edible-Insect Industry: A Preliminary Study. J. Insects Food Feed 2020, 6, 371–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Spatola, G.; Giusti, A.; Mancini, S.; Tinacci, L.; Nuvoloni, R.; Fratini, F.; Iacovo, F.D.; Armani, A. Assessment of the Information to Consumers on Insects-Based Products (Novel Food) Sold by e-Commerce in the Light of the EU Legislation: When Labelling Compliance Becomes a Matter of Accuracy. Food Control 2024, 162, 110440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. United Nations. Classification and Definition of Regions. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/desa/ (accessed on 10 October 2023).
  26. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). TheFood Classification and Description System FoodEx2 (Revision 2). EFSA Support. Publ. 2015, 12, 804–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Exchange Rate. Available online: https://www.exchange-rates.org (accessed on 18 December 2023).
  28. Mancini, S.; Moruzzo, R.; Riccioli, F.; Paci, G. European Consumers’ Readiness to Adopt Insects as Food. A Review. Food Res. Int. 2019, 122, 661–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Italian Ministry of Culture of Italian Cuisine Candidate for UNESCO Heritage. Available online: https://cultura.gov.it/comunicato/24360 (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  30. Lange, K.W.; Nakamura, Y. Edible Insects as Future Food: Chances and Challenges. J. Futur. Foods 2021, 1, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. IPIFF (International Platform of Insects for Food and Feed). Edible Insects on the European Market. Available online: https://ipiff.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/10-06-2020-IPIFF-edible-insects-market-factsheet.pdf (accessed on 16 November 2023).
  32. IPIFF (International Platform of Insects for Food and Feed). Commercialisation of Edible Insects in the EU. Available online: https://ipiff.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/INFO-SHEET-01-THE-COMMERCIALISATION-OF-EDIBLE-INSECTS-IN-THE-EU.pdf (accessed on 16 November 2023).
  33. Fischer, A.R.H.; Steenbekkers, L.P.A.B. All Insects Are Equal, but Some Insects Are More Equal than Others. Br. Food J. 2018, 120, 852–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ghosh, S.; Jung, C.; Meyer-Rochow, V.B. Edible Insects in Sustainable Food Systems; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 331–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kröger, T.; Dupont, J.; Büsing, L.; Fiebelkorn, F. Acceptance of Insect-Based Food Products in Western Societies: A Systematic Review. Front. Nutr. 2022, 8, 759885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wynants, E.; Crauwels, S.; Verreth, C.; Gianotten, N.; Lievens, B.; Claes, J.; Campenhout, L.V. Microbial Dynamics during Production of Lesser Mealworms (Alphitobius diaperinus) for Human Consumption at Industrial Scale. Food Microbiol. 2018, 70, 181–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Rumbos, C.I.; Karapanagiotidis, I.T.; Mente, E.; Athanassiou, C.G. The Lesser Mealworm Alphitobius diaperinus: A Noxious Pest or a Promising Nutrient Source? Rev. Aquac. 2019, 11, 1418–1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. van Peer, M.V.; Frooninckx, L.; Coudron, C.; Berrens, S.; Álvarez, C.; Deruytter, D.; Verheyen, G.; Miert, S.V. Valorisation Potential of Using Organic Side Streams as Feed for Tenebrio molitor, Acheta domesticus and Locusta migratoria. Insects 2021, 12, 796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Ros-Baró, M.; Sánchez-Socarrás, V.; Santos-Pagès, M.; Bach-Faig, A.; Aguilar-Martínez, A. Consumers’ Acceptability and Perception of Edible Insects as an Emerging Protein Source. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Mina, G.; Peira, G.; Bonadonna, A. The Potential Future of Insects in the European Food System: A Systematic Review Based on the Consumer Point of View. Foods 2023, 12, 646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Kim, H.-W.; Setyabrata, D.; Lee, Y.J.; Jones, O.G.; Kim, Y.H.B. Pre-Treated Mealworm Larvae and Silkworm Pupae as a Novel Protein Ingredient in Emulsion Sausages. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 38, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kim, H.; Setyabrata, D.; Lee, Y.; Jones, O.G.; Kim, Y.H.B. Effect of House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) Flour Addition on Physicochemical and Textural Properties of Meat Emulsion Under Various Formulations. J. Food Sci. 2017, 82, 2787–2793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. González, C.M.; Garzón, R.; Rosell, C.M. Insects as Ingredients for Bakery Goods. A Comparison Study of H. Illucens, A. Domestica and T. Molitor Flours. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2019, 51, 205–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Duda, A.; Adamczak, J.; Chełmińska, P.; Juszkiewicz, J.; Kowalczewski, P. Quality and Nutritional/Textural Properties of Durum Wheat Pasta Enriched with Cricket Powder. Foods 2019, 8, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. ISMEA Durum Wheat Semolina Markets—Prices per Wholesale Square. Available online: https://www.ismeamercati.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/1195 (accessed on 15 December 2023).
  46. García-Segovia, P.; Igual, M.; Martínez-Monzó, J. Physicochemical Properties and Consumer Acceptance of Bread Enriched with Alternative Proteins. Foods 2020, 9, 933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Puteri, B.; Jahnke, B.; Zander, K. Booming the Bugs: How Can Marketing Help Increase Consumer Acceptance of Insect-Based Food in Western Countries? Appetite 2023, 187, 106594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Delicato, C.; Schouteten, J.J.; Dewettinck, K.; Gellynck, X.; Tzompa-Sosa, D.A. Consumers’ Perception of Bakery Products with Insect Fat as Partial Butter Replacement. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 79, 103755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rumpold, B.A.; Schlüter, O.K. Nutritional Composition and Safety Aspects of Edible Insects. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2013, 57, 802–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Entrotrust. Available online: https://www.entotrust.org/ (accessed on 5 December 2023).
  51. Ramos-Elorduy, J.; Moreno, J.M.P.; Prado, E.E.; Perez, M.A.; Otero, J.L.; de Guevara, O.L. Nutritional Value of Edible Insects from the State of Oaxaca, Mexico. J. Food Compos. Anal. 1997, 10, 142–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kouřimská, L.; Adámková, A. Nutritional and Sensory Quality of Edible Insects. NFS J. 2016, 4, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Meyer-Rochow, V.B.; Gahukar, R.T.; Ghosh, S.; Jung, C. Chemical Composition, Nutrient Quality and Acceptability of Edible Insects Are Affected by Species, Developmental Stage, Gender, Diet, and Processing Method. Foods 2021, 10, 1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mattioli, S.; Fratini, F.; Cacchiarelli, C.; Martinis, V.; Tuccinardi, T.; Paci, G.; Bosco, A.D.; Mancini, S. Chemical Composition, Fatty Acid Profile, Antioxidant Content, and Microbiological Loads of Lesser Mealworm, Mealworm, and Superworm Larvae. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2024, 23, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. CREA Food Composition Tables. Available online: https://www.alimentinutrizione.it/tabelle-nutrizionali/000800 (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  56. Feng, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhao, M.; He, Z.; Sun, L.; Wang, C.; Ding, W. Edible Insects in China: Utilization and Prospects. Insect Sci. 2018, 25, 184–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Chen, X.; Feng, Y.; Zhang, H.; Chen, Z. Review of the Nutritive Value of Edible Insects. In Forest Insects as Food: Humans Bite Back; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  58. Zhou, Y.; Wang, D.; Zhou, S.; Duan, H.; Guo, J.; Yan, W. Nutritional Composition, Health Benefits, and Application Value of Edible Insects: A Review. Foods 2022, 11, 3961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Perez-Santaescolastica, C.; de Pril, I.; van de Voorde, I.; Fraeye, I. Fatty Acid and Amino Acid Profiles of Seven Edible Insects: Focus on Lipid Class Composition and Protein Conversion Factors. Foods 2023, 12, 4090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tzompa-Sosa, D.A.; Yi, L.; van Valenberg, H.J.F.; van Boekel, M.A.J.S.; Lakemond, C.M.M. Insect Lipid Profile: Aqueous versus Organic Solvent-Based Extraction Methods. Food Res. Int. 2014, 62, 1087–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Mancini, S.; Fratini, F.; Turchi, B.; Mattioli, S.; Bosco, A.D.; Tuccinardi, T.; Nozic, S.; Paci, G. Former Foodstuff Products in Tenebrio molitor Rearing: Effects on Growth, Chemical Composition, Microbiological Load, and Antioxidant Status. Animals 2019, 9, 484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Riekkinen, K.; Väkeväinen, K.; Korhonen, J. The Effect of Substrate on the Nutrient Content and Fatty Acid Composition of Edible Insects. Insects 2022, 13, 590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. World Health Organization WHO. Guideline: Sodium Intake for Adults and Children. 2012. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241504836 (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  64. Kipkoech, C. Beyond Proteins—Edible Insects as a Source of Dietary Fiber. Polysaccharides 2023, 4, 116–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. EUFIC Recommended Daily Intake of Fibre and Fibre-Rich Foods to Help You Achieve It. Available online: https://www.eufic.org/en/?ACT=115&path=global%2Fpdf%2Frecommended-daily-intake-of-fibre-and-fibre-rich-foods-to-help-you-achieve-it (accessed on 20 November 2023).
Foods 14 01450 g001
Figure 1. Distribution of products across Europe and prevalence of insect species per country.
Figure 1. Distribution of products across Europe and prevalence of insect species per country.
Foods 14 01450 g001
Table 1. Insect food products sold online in the Europe continent.
Table 1. Insect food products sold online in the Europe continent.
CountryCompanies %N°
Tenebrio
molitor		N°
Acheta
domesticus		N°
Alphitobius
diaperinus		N°
Locusta
migratoria		N°
Other Species		N°
Products		Products
%
Eastern
Bulgaria1.89%-1---10.19%
a-1---1
Czech Republic11.32%43191-66913.19%
a10---515
b133--117
c76---13
d13----13
e-71--8
f-3---3
Slovakia1.89%9----91.72%
a9----9
Northern
Denmark5.66%11105-3295.54%
a11----11
b--5-38
c-10---10
Finland1.89%8111--203.82%
a8111--20
Lithuania1.89%-9--2112.10%
a-9--211
Norway1.89%-1---10.19%
a-1---1
UK15.09%964316387.27%
a-3---3
b-1---1
c6-1119
d1-11710
e2-2116
f-1---1
g-1--45
h----33
Southern
Italy7.55%67-217326.12%
a13---4
b5----5
c-1-21720
d-3---3
Portugal1.89%1332--183.44%
a1332--18
Spain1.89%2----20.38%
a2----2
Western
Austria1.89%139--132.49%
a139--13
Belgium7.55%1111--12346.50%
a4----4
b1----1
c-11--112
d6---1117
Germany9.43%123514516712.81%
a-4---4
b311-1116
c--7--7
d81373-31
e17-1-9
France11.32%38910164211521.99%
a102--214
b92-1214
c----55
d74108-29
e7--72438
f51--915
The Netherlands7.55%848412366.88%
a-31--4
b4122312
c----44
d4-52516
Switzerland9.43%1111-42285.35%
a-3---3
b93-1215
c14-3-8
d1----1
e-1---1
Total
17531821405434113523
Table 2. Main product commercial categories.
Table 2. Main product commercial categories.
Commercial
Categories		FoodEx2
Codes		Food CategoryN° Products% of
Products		N°
Tenebrio molitor		N°
Acheta
domesticus		N°
Alphitobius
diaperinus		N°
Locusta
migratoria		N°
Other Species
Whole insectA06HLSnacks other than chips and similar26550.67%9373122859
Sweet and candiesA034XHard candies6512.43%201113318
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses
Insect powderA06HLSnacks other than chips and similar366.88%118629
Chocolate productsA0EQDChocolate and similar326.12%167115
Bakery products and premixesA005YCrackers and breadsticks295.54%1394-3
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products
Cereal, biscuits and barsA009VBiscuits295.54%11116-1
A00EYCereal bars
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals
A00ENPorridge
Snacks of various typesA0EQXChips/crisps224.21%69--7
A00FDTortilla chips
Pasta products (dried)A007LDried pasta163.06%545-2
Protein productsA0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products112.10%-25-4
Meat substitutesA03TEMeat imitates71.34%151--
Fermented and non-fermented alcoholic beveragesA03MABeer61.15%31--1
A03PDUnsweetened spirits
OthersA01BNPeanut butter50.96%2-1-2
A043VSavoury sauces
Meat productsA03XFMeat burger20.38%1---1
A0EYPPreserved or partly preserved sausages
Total523 1821405434113
Table 3. Nutritional values of the insect-based food products.
Table 3. Nutritional values of the insect-based food products.
FoodEx2 CodeFood CategoryN° Products Average Price Insect %KcalProteinsCarbohydrates SugarsTotal Fats SFA SaltFiber
Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor)
A03MABeer and beer-like beverage1NANANANANANANANANANA
A009VBiscuits860.704.8–6.0391.0–472.0 (434.2)9.1–9.9 (9.6)57.0–65.0 (59.8)22.0–22.0 (22.0)14.0–21.0 (17.3)0.7–1.7 (1.2)0.40–1.50 (0.90)1.1–3.0 (2.1)
A00EYCereal bars272.0010.0–10.0462.4–468.0 (465.2)14.7–15.8 (15.3)43.9–50.3 (47.1)27.0–27.0 (27.0)21.1–23.0 (22.1)2.9–4.4 (3.7)0.07–0.08 (0.07)5.9–7.4 (6.7)
A0EQXChips/crisps5101.2010.0–18.0417.0–472.0 (451.0)8.3–15.0 (11.0)55.0–61.0 (58.8)0.6–3.3 (1.3)14.0–21.2 (18.3)2.1–2.4 (2.2)2.10–2.80 (2.60)2.2–5.2 (3.2)
A0EQDChocolate and similar16120.890.2–50.0503.0–575.0 (542.2)5.7–32.0 (10.9)29.0–55.6 (40.5)4.0–54.7 (31.1)31.0–41.9 (37.2)4.7–25 (17.1)0.03–4.00 (1.20)6.5–14.0 (11.0)
A005YCrackers and breadsticks972.4910.0–10.0346.0–618.0 (463.4)12.0–23.9 (18.2)2.0–78.0 (47.1)0.7–5.1 (2.2)3.0–42.0 (20.2)1.1–15 (7.9)1.10–2.90 (1.80)2.2–11.0 (5.1)
A007LDried pasta532.2010.0–10.0386.2–391.0 (387.1)18.8–21.0 (19.2)56.1–62.0 (57.3)3.1–5.0 (3.5)6.3–7.9 (7.6)1.9–1.9 (1.9)0.09-0.09 (0.09)7.7–9 (8.0)
A034XHard candies14191.88NA234.0-234.0 (234.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)95.0-95.0 (95.0)0.0-0.0 (0.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)0.10-0.10 (0.10)1.0-1.0 (1.0)
A03XFMeat burgers149.7650.0–50.0263.0-263.0 (263.0)19.7-19.7 (19.7)1.3-1.3 (1.3)1.3-1.3 (1.3)19.4-19.4 (19.4)6.6-6.6 (6.6)0.60-0.60 (0.6)NA
A03TEMeat imitates136.0030.0–30.0275.0-275.0 (275.0)16.6-16.6 (16.6)19.6-19.6 (19.6)3.8-3.8 (3.8)13.5-13.5 (13.5)2.4-2.4 (2.4)1.30-1.30 (1.30)4.6-4.6 (4.6)
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals123.33NA431.0-431.0 (431.0)12.0-12.0 (12.0)51.4-51.4 (51.4)17.9-17.9 (17.9)17.7-17.7 (17.7)7.2-7.2 (7.2)0.20-0.20 (0.20)8.4-8.4 (8.4)
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products459.18NA475.0–618.6 (546.7)20.1–23.9 (22.0)29.0–34.2 (31.6)0.7–1.0 (0.9)26.2–42.0 (34.1)2.9–7.9 (4.5)0.50–1.10 (0.90)7.9–11.0 (9.5)
A043VSavory sauces234.594.0–5.069.8–200.9 (135.4)3.4–4.1 (3.8)5.7–9.0 (7.4)3.7–6.6 (5.2)3.1–15.4 (9.3)0.5–2.0 (1.3)0.20–0.50 (0.40)2.1–2.2 (2.2)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar–insect powder11143.77100.0473.0–550.0 (507.7)45.1–59.6 (54.2)0.9–6.7 (4.1)0.0–2.0 (0.5)25.0–37.3 (30.2)6.34–9.0 (7.7)0.00–9.90 (1.80)0.5–7.1 (4.6)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar–whole insect93260.5312.0–100.0417.0–581.0 (495.2)14.2–60.3 (48.9)0.0–41.0 (8.9)0.0–28.4 (2.1)14.5–43.0 (28.4)1.7–14.5 (6.9)0.00–10.50 (2.80)0.5–15.0 (6.2)
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses653.946.3–10.0428.0–541.0 (452.5)15.0–27.0 (20.0)25.0–50.0 (36.2)18.0–30.0 (24.3)17.0–35.0 (23.5)1.8–6.2 (3.4)0.10–1.19 (0.30)4.4–12.0 (7.9)
A00FDTortilla chips177.1338.0–38.0244.0-244.0 (244.0)13.8-13.8 (13.8)36.2-36.2 (36.2)2.2-2.2 (2.2)6.6-6.6 (6.6)1.6-1.6 (1.6)2.20-2.20 (2.20)3.4-3.4 (3.4)
A03PDUnsweetened spirits2101.80NANANANANANANANANA
House cricket (Acheta domesticus)
A009VBiscuits580.046.0–10.0431.0–598.0 (537.0)11.3–18.0 (15.4)28.0–54.3 (36.2)1.0–30.8 (12.3)24.1–39 (35.6)6.0–21.9 (10.8)0.30–1.00 (0.80)3.2–3.2 (3.2)
A00EYCereal bars361.685.0–5.0388.0–434.0 (407.3)14.0–15.4 (14.5)31.0–41.4 (35.5)6.9–13.1 (9.4)17.0–25.4 (20.5)2.6–8.6 (4.7)0.04–0.44 (0.23)8.0–28.0 (21.0)
A0EQXChips/crisps951.97.0–7.0338.0–393.9 (375.5)23.0–25.1 (24.5)41.2–51.0 (44.9)3.1–9.8 (4.6)10.0–14.9 (13.1)1.6–2.2 (1.9)2.60–2.90 (2.70)8.3–23.0 (13.6)
A0EQDChocolate and similar7159.3340.0–56.0415.0–587.3 (522.2)6.3–37.0 (23.5)16.0–39.0 (29.0)14.0–38.4 (28.6)26.0–41.1 (33.2)17.0–24.0 (19.5)0.10–4.00 (0.86)8.1–8.1 (8.1)
A005YCrackers and breadsticks849.9312.0–17.0399.5–507.0 (458.2)21.0–25.4 (22.1)20.0–63.1 (41.4)1.0–5.6 (3.4)8.1–36.0 (21.5)1.4–6.3 (3.2)1.60–3.00 (2.27)3.3–12.0 (7.6)
A007LDried pasta423.8415.0–17.0321.0–360.0 (345.8)19.6–41.0 (35.2)32.0–58.2 (40.8)0.4–2.3 (1.08)4.5–6.3 (5.5)1.5–1.9 (1.7)0.00–1.00 (0.7)3.5–5.1 (4.3)
A034XHard candies2149.5NA234.0-234.0 (234.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)95.0-95.0 (95.0)0.0-0.0 (0.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)0.10-0.10 (0.10)1.0-1.0 (1.0)
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products263.765.1–10.0361.0–375.0 (368.0)32.0–74.0 (53.0)3.5–33.0 (18.3)0.1–2.7 (1.4)5.2–16.0 (10.6)1.7–12.0 (6.85)0.20–2.80 (1.50)7.2–7.7 (7.5)
A03TEMeat imitates538.2920.0-20.0219.0–407.0 (293.8)15.2–77.0 (40.3)0.0–9.9 (4.7)0.0–0.69 (0.3)10.0–13.5 (11.4)2.6–10.0 (6.6)1.32–1.80 (1.54)NA
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast319.975.0-5.0432.8–451.9 (443.0)12.4–14.6 (13.7)47.9–52.3 (49.5)12.4–16.3 (13.9)18.9–21.1 (20.2)2.3–5.5 (3.5)0.06–0.60 (0.25)8.4–10.6 (9.1)
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products122.8615.0-15.0336.0–336.0 (336.0)22.0-22.0 (22.0)55.0-55.0 (55.0)0.8-0.8 (0.8)4.5-4.5 (4.5)1.5-1.5 (1.5)1.92-1.92 (1.92)4.9-4.9 (4.9)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder8108.01100.0-100.0400.0–505.0 (448.0)63.0–75.9 (67.52)0.5–18.0 (6.9)0.0–0.6 (0.14)6.8–26.4 (17.3)2.3–10.3 (6.4)0.50 -0.80 (0.72)4.0–9.5 (6.2)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect73316.4440.9–100.0291.0–525.0 (444.2)22.2–72.4 (53.5)0.0–51.2 (9.0)0.0–51.1 (3.75)7.2–33.0 (22.3)2.7–12.4 (7.9)0.30–9.61 (3.06)0.9–18.0 (5.1)
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses953.2310.0–20.0356.0–535.0 (424.3)12.7–33.3 (22.0)10.0–42.9 (26.8)7.2–42.6 (20.64)14.0–36.5 (21.9)5.8–12.2 (9.4)0.07–0.45 (0.24)2.7–30.0 (14.1)
A03PDUnsweetened spirits1111.10NANANANANANANANANA
Lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus)
A0EQDChocolate and similar169.08NA580.0-580.0 (580.0)8.8-8.8 (8.8)35.0-35.0 (35.0)29.0-29.0 (29.0)43.0-43.0 (43.0)26.0-26.0 (26.0)0.25-0.25 (0.25)NA
A007LDried pasta518.583.9–14.0371.0–374.0 (373.2)15–18.7 (17.8)64.0–72.0 (66.2)1.8–3.2 (2.74)1.9–4.4 (3.74)0.8–1.2 (1.02)0.10–0.13 (0.12)2.0–3.8 (3.4)
A034XHard candies1149.5NA234.0-234.0 (234.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)95.0-95.0 (95.0)0.0-0.0 (0.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)1.0-1.0 (1.0)0.10-0.10 (0.10)NA
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products560.7920.0–35.0416.0–437.6 (428.7)68.5–71.5 (70.2)3.43–11.1 (6.5)0.6–8.3 (3.6)10.0–17.8 (14.2)4.0–6.92 (4.9)0.30–1.05 (0.92)3.0–7.1 (5.3)
A03TEMeat imitates115.0024.9-24.9195.0-195.0 (195.0)15.6-15.6 (15.6)5.2-5.2 (5.2)0.3-0.3 (0.3)9.7-9.7 (9.7)6.4-6.4 (6.4)1.70-1.70 (1.70)NA
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals423.965–10391.0–453.0 (413.0)13.0–14.0 (13.7)45.2–57.0 (52.8)15.0–22.2 (17.1)11.0–22.6 (15.15)2.1–4.1 (2.75)0.05–0.13 (0.09)4.1–7.3 (5.2)
A01BNPeanut butter119.9415.0–15.0582.0-582.0 (582.0)31.5-31.5 (31.5)8.9-8.9 (8.9)6.2-6.2 (6.2)46.8-46.8 (46.8)6.9-6.9 (6.9)0.42-0.42 (0.42)7.6-7.6 (7.6)
A00ENPorridge (dry form—to be diluted)232.3820.0–20.0395.8–411.8 (403.8)20.4–21.4 (20.9)41.8–45.2 (43.5)15.3-15.3 (15.3)12.86–15.38 (14.12)4.8–5.7 (5.3)0.25-0.25 (0.25)10.3-10.3 (10.3)
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products425.465.5–12.0342.0–369.0 (356.5)11.0–23 (16.5)44.0–69.0 (58.0)4.1–40.0 (16.0)2.6–7.9 (4.725)0.5–1.3 (1.0)0.04–4.40 (1.58)NA
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder6122.2399.9–100.0510.0–511.0 (510.5)59.6–62.0 (60.8)2.7–8.0 (5.4)0.5–0.5 (0.5)24.3–29 (27)8.4–10.1 (9.6)0.50–0.90 (0.71)3.7–7.0 (5.6)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect12265.55100.0-100.0484.0–510.0 (501.0)56.3–60.0 (59.3)2.6–6.7 (3.8)0.5–0.7 (0.62)24.2–28.7 (27.06)9.4–10.1 (9.6)0.01–3.60 (1.03)3.3–5.2 (4.0)
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses1276.725.0–13.0343.0–503.0 (408.2)13.0–20.0 (16.7)33.0–55.0 (42.6)29.0–44.0 (37.7)4.5–31 (16.76)1.4–5.7 (3.0)0.10–0.50 (0.23)5.3–11.0 (8.8)
Grasshopper (Locusta migratoria)
A0EQDChocolate and similar1790.0059.0-59.0371.0-371.0 (371.0)43.0-43.0 (43.0)21.0-21.0 (21.0)17.0-17.0 (17.0)10-10 (10)4-4NANA
A034XHard candies3NANANANANANANANANANA
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder2499.00100.0595.0-595.0 (595.0)48.2-48.2 (48.2)NANANANANANA
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect28614.0056.5–100.0322.0–599.0 (454.8)24.9–70.0 (46.03)0.1–24.0 (6.9)0.0–2.4 (1.5)11–38.1 (24.95)0.0–9.8 (8.1)0.20–40 (1.24)6.5–11.5 (8.3)
Other species
A009VBiscuits184.22NANANANANANANANANA
A0EQXChips/crisps758.658.0–10.0399.0–476.3 (434.5)20.0–24.0 (21.5)40.7–50.6 (44.8)1.8–3.9 (3.0)10.1–19.1 (15.3)1.4–1.7 (1.6)0.40–3.70 (1.94)8.8–14.6 (12.1)
A0EQDChocolate and similar5113.798.0-8.0420.0–587.3 (503.1)6.3–16.6 (13.2)30.6–41.0 (38.1)27.6–38.4 (35.1)19.6–41.1 (30.58)5.7–24 (15.5)0.10–0.38 (0.25)8.9–8.9 (8.9)
A005YCrackers and breadsticks340.068.0–10.0383.0–495.0 (420.3)23.0–25.1 (24.4)23.0–39.0 (33.7)1.0–2.7 (2.1)12.7–32 (19.13)1.9–4.8 (2.9)1.20–2.90 (2.33)12.0–14.3 (13.5)
A007LDried pasta214.2810.0–10.0338.0-338.0 (338.0)12.8-12.8 (12.8)60.0-60.0 (60.0)2.6-2.6 (2.6)3.21-3.21 (3.21)1.0-1.0 (1.0)0.39-0.39 (0.39)8.9-8.9 (8.9)
A034XHard candies10164.60NANANANANANANANANA
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products450.5420.0–34.0393.0–527.0 (491.8)64.7–76.0 (69.1)2.7–16.4 (7.48)0.4–6.3 (2.2)7.1–11.6 (9.58)1.3–4.5 (3.1)0.90–2.00 (1.18)2.7–3.4 (2.9)
A01BNPeanut butter112.08NANANANANANANANANA
A0EYPPreserved or partly preserved sausages138.78NA444.0–444.0 (444.0)63.9–63.9 (63.9)4.7-4.7 (4.7)0.0-0.0 (0.0)18.3-18.3 (18.3)5.6-5.6 (5.6)6.66-6.66 (6.66)0.1-0.1 (0.1)
A043VSavory sauces128.9514.0-14.0328.0–328.0 (328.0)6.5-6.5 (6.5)6.1-6.1 (6.1)2.9-2.9 (2.9)31-31 (31)2.9-2.9 (2.9)1.300-1.3 (1.30)NA
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder9120.00100.0-100.0259.0–505.0 (427.2)21.9–74.4 (57.2)1.0–51.7 (13.2)0.0–0.8 (0.4)2.6–26.4 (15.83)1.7–10.3 (6.52)0.10–8.10 (2.27)2.7–9.5 (6.1)
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect59183.62100.0-100.0245.0–670.0 (450.8)14.0–64.8 (43.7)0.1–39.0 (8.5)0.0–28 (4.9)6–49 (20.73)0–29 (6.98)0.00–8.8 (1.78)3.7–6.9 (5.1)
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses884.6410.0-10.0311.0–446.0 (338.0)13.0–33.0 (29.0)43.0–46.0 (43.6)4.9–40.0 (11.9)9.8–22 (12.24)2–4 (3.6)0.09–0.24 (0.21)4.0–31.0 (25.6)
A03PDUnsweetened spirits251.62NANANANANANANANANA
The average price is expressed in EUR/Kg or L per beverage. Insect %, Kcal, Proteins, Carbohydrates, Sugar, Total fats, Saturated Fatty Acid (SFA), Salt, and Fiber values are reported as minimum—maximum and (average). Nutritional values refer to 100 g. NA: not available information.
Table 4. Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) of insects-based food products.
Table 4. Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) of insects-based food products.
FoodEx2 CodeFood CategoryKcal Per Serving%RDA KcalProteins per Serving (g)%RDA ProteinsCarbohydrates per Serving (g)%RDA CarbohydratesSugars per Serving (g)%RDA SugarsTotal fats per Serving (g)%RDA Total FatsSFA per Serving (g)%RDA SFA
Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor)
A03MABeer and beer-like beverageNANANANANANANANANANANANA
A009VBiscuits434.2521.719.5812.7759.7523.9022.0058.6717.2522.121.2315.31
A00EYCereal bars465.2023.2615.2520.3347.1018.8427.0072.0022.0528.273.6545.63
A0EQXChips/crisps451.0022.5510.9814.6458.8023.521.323.5218.3223.492.2027.50
A0EQDChocolate and similar542.2327.1110.9014.5340.5416.2231.1082.9337.2147.7117.05213.13
A005YCrackers and breadsticks463.4423.1718.2224.3047.1318.852.175.7820.1725.857.8998.61
A007LDried pasta387.1619.3619.2425.6557.2822.913.489.287.589.721.5219.00
A034XHard candies234.0011.701.001.3395.0038.000.000.001.001.281.0012.50
A03XFMeat burger263.0013.1519.7026.271.300.521.303.4719.4024.876.6082.50
A03TEMeat imitates275.0013.7516.6022.1319.607.843.8010.1313.5017.312.4030.00
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals431.0021.5512.0016.0051.4020.5617.9047.7317.7022.697.2090.00
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products546.6527.3322.0029.3331.6012.640.852.2734.1043.724.5356.56
A043VSavory sauces135.356.773.755.007.352.945.1513.739.2511.861.2515.63
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder507.6725.3854.2172.284.081.630.511.3630.2338.766.0175.08
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect495.1624.7648.9365.248.853.542.045.4428.4336.456.5281.56
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses452.5022.6320.0026.6736.1714.4724.3364.8923.5030.133.3742.08
A00FDTortilla chips244.0012.2013.8018.4036.2014.482.205.876.608.461.6020.00
A03PDUnsweetened spiritsNANANANANANANANANANANANA
House cricket (Acheta domesticus)
A009VBiscuits537.0026.8515.4220.5636.2414.5012.2632.6935.6045.6410.80135.00
A00EYCereal bars407.3320.3714.4719.2935.4714.199.3724.9820.4726.244.7359.17
A0EQXChips/crisps375.4518.7724.4732.6244.9217.974.6112.3013.0616.741.8623.19
A0EQDChocolate and similar522.1726.1123.5331.3729.0411.6224.5065.3333.1742.5316.73209.11
A005YCrackers and breadsticks458.1922.9122.0929.4541.4016.563.409.0721.4827.533.2440.47
A007LDried pasta345.7517.2935.1546.8740.8016.321.082.875.507.051.7021.25
A034XHard candies234.0011.701.001.3395.0038.000.000.001.001.281.0012.50
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products368.0018.4053.0070.6718.257.301.403.7310.6013.596.8585.63
A03TEMeat imitates392.8019.6440.3453.794.741.900.260.6911.4014.626.5682.00
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast442.9722.1513.7318.3149.5019.8013.9037.0720.1725.853.5344.17
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products336.0016.8022.0029.3355.0022.000.802.134.505.771.5018.75
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder448.0022.4067.5390.036.882.750.130.3417.3322.226.3579.36
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect425.9821.3051.2768.368.533.413.499.3121.3527.377.1989.91
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses424.3321.2222.0429.3926.7810.7120.6455.0521.9428.139.41117.64
A03PDUnsweetened spiritsNANANANANANANANANANANANA
Lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus)
A0EQDChocolate and similar580.0029.008.8011.7335.0014.0029.0077.3343.0055.1326.00325.00
A007LDried pasta373.2018.6617.8223.7666.2226.492.747.313.744.791.0212.75
A034XHard candies234.0011.701.001.3395.0038.000.000.001.001.281.0012.50
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products357.2317.8658.4977.995.392.153.028.0611.8415.184.0550.56
A03TEMeat imitates195.009.7515.6020.805.202.080.300.809.7012.446.4080.00
A00EJMuesli and similar mixed breakfast cereals413.0020.6513.6818.2352.8021.1217.0545.4715.1519.422.7534.38
A01BNPeanut butter582.0029.1031.4641.958.993.606.2016.5346.8460.056.9687.00
A00ENPorridge (dry form—to be diluted)403.7820.1920.8727.8243.5217.4115.3040.7914.1218.105.2765.88
A0CSKPre-mixes (dry) for baked products356.5017.8316.5022.0058.0023.2016.0342.734.736.061.0012.50
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder510.5025.5360.7781.025.352.140.501.3327.0034.629.63120.31
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect501.0025.0559.2579.003.801.520.621.6527.0634.709.63120.42
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses408.1720.4116.7322.3142.6317.0537.71100.5616.7621.492.9837.29
Grasshopper (Locusta migratoria)
A0EQDChocolate and similar371.0018.5543.0057.3321.008.4017.0045.3310.0012.824.0050.00
A034XHard candiesNANANANANANANANANANANANA
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder59529.7548.264.271.10.44NANA38.148.8513.1163.75
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect449.1622.45845.94861.2646.9322.771.965.2424.4231.318.05100.69
Other species
A009VBiscuitsNANANANANANANANANANANANA
A0EQXChips/crisps434.5421.7321.5428.7244.8417.943.008.0015.3019.621.6020.00
A0EQDChocolate and similar503.1225.1613.1617.5538.0815.2335.0893.5530.5839.2115.46193.25
A005YCrackers and breadsticks420.3321.0224.4032.5333.6713.472.135.6919.1324.532.8735.83
A007LDried pasta338.0016.9012.7517.0060.0024.002.647.043.214.121.0012.50
A034XHard candiesNANANANANANANANANANANANA
A0EVDIsolated proteins and other protein products491.7524.5969.0892.107.482.992.155.739.5812.283.1339.06
A01BNPeanut butterNANANANANANANANANANANANA
A0EYPPreserved or partly preserved sausages444.0022.2063.9085.204.701.88NANA18.3023.465.6070.00
A043VSavory sauces328.0016.406.508.676.102.442.907.7331.0039.742.9036.25
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—insect powder428.1421.4157.1476.1913.995.590.601.6015.4719.846.5381.63
A06HLSnacks other than chips and similar—whole insect434.3021.7243.3557.809.323.737.5120.0420.4826.268.14101.77
A0EQRSweet bars and other formed sweet masses338.0016.9029.0038.6743.6017.4411.9231.7912.2415.693.6045.00
A03PDUnsweetened spiritsNANANANANANANANANANANANA
Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs): 2000 Kcal/day, 75 g proteins/day, 250 g carbohydrates/day, 37.5 g sugars/day, 78 g total fats/day, 8 g saturated fatty acids/day. Values per serving calculated on 100 g of portion. NA: not available information.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Copelotti, E.; Fratini, F.; Sforza, G.; Tuccinardi, T.; Demontis, G.C.; Mancini, S. Are Insect-Based Foods Healthy? An Evaluation of the Products Sold in European E-Commerce. Foods 2025, 14, 1450. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14091450

AMA Style

Copelotti E, Fratini F, Sforza G, Tuccinardi T, Demontis GC, Mancini S. Are Insect-Based Foods Healthy? An Evaluation of the Products Sold in European E-Commerce. Foods. 2025; 14(9):1450. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14091450

Chicago/Turabian Style

Copelotti, Emma, Filippo Fratini, Giulia Sforza, Tiziano Tuccinardi, Gian Carlo Demontis, and Simone Mancini. 2025. "Are Insect-Based Foods Healthy? An Evaluation of the Products Sold in European E-Commerce" Foods 14, no. 9: 1450. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14091450

APA Style

Copelotti, E., Fratini, F., Sforza, G., Tuccinardi, T., Demontis, G. C., & Mancini, S. (2025). Are Insect-Based Foods Healthy? An Evaluation of the Products Sold in European E-Commerce. Foods, 14(9), 1450. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14091450

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop