Hong Kong’s Consumer Council has revealed startling findings from its latest test of 39 pre-packaged plant milk samples, uncovering that over 60% of products failed to meet nutritional labeling requirements, while one soy milk brand tested positive for a pesticide and two samples claiming to contain vitamin D showed none at all. The comprehensive investigation, published in the Council’s monthly magazine Choice issue 564, aimed to answer whether plant-based alternatives can truly replace traditional dairy in terms of nutrition.
The test covered seven almond milks, five coconut milks, five rice milks, ten oat milks, and twelve soy milks, purchased from supermarkets and department stores across Hong Kong. Prices ranged from HKD 6 to HKD 62.9 per pack, translating to HKD 1 to HKD 8.5 per 100 milliliters. The analysis examined nutrients, mycotoxins, metal contaminants, and glyphosate levels—a common herbicide.
Nutritional Gaps Raise Concerns for Lactose-Intolerant Consumers
With an increasing number of consumers choosing plant milks due to lactose intolerance or environmental concerns, the Council’s findings underscore a critical gap. Dr. Lee Wai-man, a registered dietitian consulted for the report, explained that many shoppers assume these products are nutritional equivalents to cow’s milk. “The reality is far more complex,” he stated. “For example, 16 samples qualified as high-calcium products based on energy content, but when measured per milliliter, some contained less than half the calcium of low-fat milk.”
A striking example: four almond and coconut milk brands—including “Glico,” “Blue Diamond,” “UFC,” and “Mighty”—offered only 23.92 to 51.17 milligrams of calcium per 100 milliliters. To match the 300 milligrams of calcium found in one 240-milliliter glass of low-fat milk, a consumer would need to drink approximately 3.6 cups of these plant milks.
Protein Disparities and Fortification Failures
On a positive note, six soy milk samples—including “Kikkoman,” “Maeil,” “Vitasoy,” “Tung Yang,” “Tofuism,” and “First Product”—met the definition of high-protein foods, offering 6.28 to 9.01 grams of protein per 100 kilocalories. Another six soy milks actually surpassed the protein content of low-fat milk (about 3.37 grams per 100 milliliters), with “Kikkoman,” “Sunrise,” “Pak Fook,” “Vitasoy,” “Maeil,” and “Vitasoy” ranging from 3.40 to 4.92 grams.
However, fortification promises fell short for some. Two oat milk brands, “Havredals” and “Dirty Clean Food,” added vitamin B2 and achieved levels similar to low-fat milk. Yet two coconut milk samples—”UFC” and “Dream”—that listed added vitamin D on their ingredient labels contained zero detectable vitamin D in laboratory tests. This discrepancy may mislead health-conscious buyers seeking essential nutrients.
Metal Contaminants and Pesticide Residue Detected
Ten samples showed detectable levels of nickel, a heavy metal. These included two oat milks (“Oatside” and “Amandin”) and eight soy milks such as “Sunrise,” “Pak Fook,” “Vitasoy,” and “Maxim’s.” The highest nickel concentration, found in “Vitasoy,” reached 1.08 milligrams per kilogram. For a 60-kilogram adult, consuming three cups (720 grams) of this product daily would approach the tolerable daily intake limit of 0.78 milligrams.
More alarming was the discovery of glyphosate, a widely used herbicide, in one soy milk brand—”Kikkoman”—at 0.025 milligrams per kilogram. While this level is far below the legal limit for dry soybeans and poses no immediate health risk under normal consumption, its presence raises questions about agricultural practices in the supply chain.
Labeling Inconsistencies and Practical Advice
Over 60% of all samples—26 products—had nutritional labeling discrepancies exceeding the guidelines set by the Consumer Council’s Technical Guidance. The Council noted that separation and sedimentation during storage could cause some nutrient loss at the bottom of cartons, meaning consumers might actually ingest less than the labeled amounts. “This is a wake-up call for both manufacturers and shoppers,” said Council spokesperson Wong Ka-ching. “Labels should be accurate, and consumers should shake cartons thoroughly before pouring.”
Top Performers and Broader Implications
Despite the issues, 19 samples earned overall ratings of four stars or higher, demonstrating that quality does not always correlate with price. Notably, five products received 4.5 stars: “Woolworths Unsweetened Almond Milk,” “Califia Farms Almond Milk – Barista Blend,” “Topvalu Almond Milk Sugar-Free,” “Havredals Oat Milk – Barista Edition,” and “Kikkoman Soymilk Unsweetened,” along with “Sunrise Original Soy Beverage.”
Looking ahead, the Consumer Council urges the food industry to improve quality control and labeling accuracy. For consumers, especially those relying on plant milks due to dietary restrictions or ethical choices, the report offers a clear takeaway: read labels carefully, prioritize fortified options, and understand that plant milks may not fully replace dairy’s nutritional profile without careful selection. The Council plans to share its findings with health authorities and consider recommending tighter regulations on product claims.
For further reading, the Council suggests exploring its past reports on milk, rice-based noodles, and other staple foods to make informed dietary choices in Hong Kong’s diverse marketplace.