Beyond dal and bhorta, the real cost of going vegan

When I tried eating vegan, I lost a noticeable amount of weight. I also developed skin breakouts and later wondered whether I had been eating enough fat. No doctor tested me for a deficiency, so I cannot say the diet caused either change. But the experience left me with a question I had not asked seriously enough: removing animal products from my meals was one thing; knowing what to replace them with was another.

World Vegan Day, to be observed on 1 November, usually brings familiar conversations about animal welfare, the environment and the benefits of plant-based food. There is another question worth asking in Bangladesh, where dal, bhorta, shak and vegetables have always been part of the table. What does eating vegan actually cost if the aim is not just to avoid animal products but to eat well?

A vegan diet excludes meat, fish, eggs, dairy and other animal-derived foods. It need not involve almond milk, imitation burgers or fashionable cafés. A simple meal of rice, lentils and vegetable bhorta may already be vegan, provided it is prepared without ghee or other animal products.

That makes the diet appear accessible. Yet a cheap plate and a balanced diet are not necessarily the same thing.

The pressure behind that distinction is real. The UN's State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2026 estimated that 38.6% of Bangladeshis, around 6.78 crore people, could not afford a healthy diet in 2025. This is a measure of healthy diets generally, not veganism. Still, when ordinary nutrition is already beyond the reach of so many, any promise that a different way of eating is affordable deserves scrutiny.

A familiar plate, a less familiar problem

Research published by University of Dhaka scholars in October 2025 offers a revealing look at what Bangladeshis eat.

Using dietary records collected in 2017–18 from 1,551 adults, the researchers found that 96.2% met the study's recommended range for protein as a share of total energy. Yet 65.5% obtained less than the recommended proportion of calories from fat.

More than half their protein came from cereals, roots and tubers, while pulses and legumes contributed only 6.4%.

The findings do not mean that these people had medically diagnosed deficiencies. Nor do they describe vegan diets specifically. But they raise an important question about what constitutes adequate nutrition. Getting enough calories or consuming protein in the recommended proportion does not necessarily mean that every nutritional need is being met.

A second Bangladesh study, published in September 2026 in PLOS One, analysed older national dietary surveys and raised similar concerns about variety.

Cereals contributed about 70% of daily calories in the 2017–18 data. The researchers identified low consumption of fruits, leafy vegetables, pulses, nuts and dairy products, alongside poor estimated adequacy for several vitamins and minerals.

Again, this was not research into veganism. But when dietary diversity is already limited, removing animal products without replacing the nutrients they provide can make meal planning more demanding.

Protein is possible. Planning matters.

Does that mean vegan food cannot supply enough protein?

No. Lentils, chickpeas, beans, soy products, nuts and seeds can contribute substantially. Eating varied plant proteins throughout the day can provide the essential amino acids the body needs, provided overall energy and protein intakes are sufficient.

Nor is vegan food automatically low in fat. Peanuts, seeds, soybeans and vegetable oils can provide it.

The challenge is not necessarily finding plant foods that contain protein or fat. It is eating enough of the right foods, in suitable quantities, while also meeting the body's other nutritional requirements.

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics concluded in its position paper published in March 2026 that appropriately planned vegan diets can meet adults' nutritional needs and may offer long-term health benefits.

The qualification matters. Appropriately planned is not a minor detail. It means paying attention to calories, protein quality, fats, vitamins and minerals rather than simply removing foods from an existing diet.

Vitamin B12 is one of the clearest examples. Ordinary unfortified plant foods are not reliable sources, so someone following a strictly vegan diet needs an adequate supply through fortified foods or supplements.

Calcium, iodine, iron, vitamin D and omega-3 fats also require attention. Plant-based iron is generally less readily absorbed than iron from meat, although eating vitamin C-rich foods alongside iron-rich plant foods can help.

The NHS’s guidance on vegan diets emphasises these practical requirements rather than suggesting that excluding animal products automatically improves nutrition.

In a Bangladeshi kitchen, a more varied vegan diet could include roti and chickpeas for breakfast, rice with lentils and vegetables for lunch, fruit and peanuts as snacks, and an evening meal incorporating soy or another substantial pulse dish. But even this combination needs to be assessed for quantities, energy and essential micronutrients, particularly vitamin B12.

And that brings us to the question of cost.

What does a day’s food actually cost?

To explore the difference between eating cheaply and eating well, three illustrative daily food baskets were compared using food prices reported in Dhaka in October 2026.

The first represents a basic vegan diet built around familiar, inexpensive foods. The second adds more variety, including soy products and peanuts. The third is a mixed diet containing eggs and fish alongside similar plant-based staples.

These are modelled examples rather than prescribed diets. Their purpose is to show how the cost and nutritional considerations change when different foods are included. They have not been verified as nutritionally complete or matched precisely for calories and nutrients.

All three include 300g of green papaya, 200g of cauliflower, one bundle of red amaranth, a local banana and 20-25ml of soybean oil. Quantities refer to raw or purchased ingredients, rather than cooked servings.

The calculations draw on a 22 October market survey, which reported coarse lentils at Tk90 per kilogramme, chickpeas at Tk120, green papaya at Tk30, cauliflower at Tk60, bottled soybean oil at Tk205 per litre, eggs at Tk150 per dozen and pangas at Tk200 per kilogramme. Whole-wheat flour was Tk70 per kilogramme.

Coarse rice was calculated at Tk50 per kilogramme, the lower end of the range, by a media report in October. A 23 October market report listed red amaranth at Tk10 a bundle. A local banana was estimated at Tk5 using September fruit-market prices.

For the additional vegan ingredients, peanuts were priced at Tk275 per kilogramme from an October online retail listing, while soy chunks were estimated at Tk200 per kilogramme using online marketplace listings. These are indicative advertised prices, not independently observed market transactions.

What do the figures tell us? At the level of these selected ingredients, the vegan baskets cost less than the mixed basket. Adding soy and peanuts increases the modelled vegan cost by about Tk14, while including eggs and fish increases the mixed basket's cost.

But the comparison does not establish that a nutritionally complete vegan diet costs Tk92 a day. Nor does it prove that a balanced mixed diet must cost Tk128. Different ingredients, portions, fish varieties or sources of plant protein would change the result.

The calculations also exclude spices, cooking fuel, delivery charges, food waste, fortified products and supplements. The amounts of fish and vegetables that remain edible after preparation can differ from purchased weights.

For nutritional context, the Food Composition Tablefor Bangladesh, published by University of Dhaka researchers in 2013, provides reference information on familiar foods. However, a full assessment would require calculating the energy, protein, fat and micronutrient content of the complete menus, accounting for preparation losses and comparing them against an individual's requirements. That analysis has not been completed here.

Even so, the comparison illustrates something important: removing expensive animal products can reduce a food bill, but the savings alone tell us little about nutritional completeness.

The costs that are easy to miss

For someone eating vegan, the shopping basket is only part of the equation.

Consider vitamin B12.

The Vegan Society recommends obtaining it consistently through appropriately fortified foods or supplements. Unlike protein or fat, vitamin B12 cannot be reliably obtained from ordinary unfortified plant foods.

That means even a carefully selected basket of lentils, chickpeas, vegetables, peanuts and rice would still need a dependable vitamin B12 source. Neither vegan basket in the comparison includes one, so its total cost would be higher once suitable provision is added.

Then there is calcium. Someone who stops consuming milk needs alternative sources, such as suitable fortified plant milks or calcium-rich foods, with supplements considered when necessary.

Iodine presents another consideration, while iron absorption depends partly on the foods eaten together. The types of oils, nuts and seeds consumed also matter when considering omega-3 fats.

Some of these needs can be addressed using familiar ingredients. Others may require products that are not equally accessible or affordable everywhere.

Someone may be able to afford lentils but struggle to find fortified plant milk nearby. Another person may have ready access to peanuts, soy products and vegetables but little time to prepare meals.

There is also the question of quantities. A menu that looks balanced on paper may require someone to eat considerably larger portions of pulses or vegetables than they are accustomed to.

Time is another cost that rarely appears in discussions about affordable diets. Planning meals, shopping for different ingredients, soaking legumes and cooking separate dishes can be difficult for people with long working hours or limited kitchen facilities.

For a family cooking together, preparing separate vegan dishes may also mean additional work. A vegetable curry prepared with ghee, for example, cannot be counted as vegan simply because it contains no meat.

These are not arguments against veganism. They are practical considerations that become relevant when someone tries to maintain it consistently.

Is veganism necessarily more expensive?

The food-basket comparison suggests that familiar Bangladeshi ingredients can form the basis of relatively inexpensive vegan meals. It also shows why price alone cannot answer whether those meals meet someone's nutritional needs.

A balanced vegan diet does not necessarily require expensive imitation meat, almond milk or imported speciality products. Many requirements can be met through ordinary foods, with appropriate fortified products or supplements where necessary.

But affordability depends on more than whether those foods exist in the market.

It depends on their price, availability, the quantities required and whether people know how to combine them.

A diet that is affordable for one person may be difficult for another, particularly when income, working hours, access to shops and individual nutritional requirements differ.

There is another distinction worth remembering. Eating fish, eggs or milk does not guarantee good nutrition any more than excluding them guarantees deficiencies.

The Bangladesh studies published in 2025 and 2026 suggest that inadequate dietary variety is already a concern across the broader population. Veganism changes which foods need to be replaced; it does not create the country's wider nutrition problem.

That is also why the UN's healthy-diet affordability findings matter. For a household already struggling to afford sufficient nutritious food, even comparatively inexpensive additions can become difficult to sustain.

Perhaps that is the more useful message for World Vegan Day.

The question is not whether a bowl of dal costs less than a fish curry. Sometimes it will. Nor is it whether vegan diets can provide enough protein. Research shows that appropriately planned diets can.

The more relevant question is whether someone can put together an affordable, nutritionally adequate pattern of eating that works not just for a day, but week after week.

Bangladesh has many familiar plant-based foods that can make vegan eating possible without fashionable substitutes. The modelled comparison suggests those foods need not be expensive. But it cannot tell us the final cost of a fully adequate diet without a more detailed nutritional assessment.

Taking animal products off the plate is only the beginning. The real cost lies in knowing what belongs there instead – and being able to afford it.