Low-Fat Quark vs. Skyr – Do We Have a New “Super” Dairy Product?

For as long as I can remember, low-fat quark has been one of the most popular foods among athletes. Its high protein content, low carbohydrate content, and very low fat content make it the ideal food for nearly all types of diets—whether low-carb, high-carb, or medium-carb.

For some time now, a food called “skyr” has been trying to challenge quark for its spot on the podium of the most popular foods. Social media posts featuring recipes are popping up everywhere, and it seems to be the talk of the town—so today is the perfect time to make a critical comparison.

Skyr vs. Quark – Who Wins?

Skyr – An Import from Iceland

Skyr is considered a classic dairy product, believed to have its roots in Viking culture. Traditionally, skyr comes from Iceland, where it is still produced and consumed in large quantities today.

Skyr has also been produced and sold in Germany since 2015. Since its introduction, there has been a real rush for Skyr, which is now marketed as a particularly healthy food. In terms of taste, consumers describe Skyr as slightly tangier than quark or regular yogurt.

Its consistency is reminiscent of Greek yogurt. Only skim milk is used in its production. According to manufacturer websites, producing skyr reportedly requires up to four times as much milk as conventional yogurt. This, of course, also affects the nutritional content, as the advertising claims. Originally, rennet was used to make skyr. Today, however, one reads about production methods in which only a certain amount of ready-made skyr is added to pasteurized milk.

Side Note: Rennet

Rennet is a mixture of enzymes (pepsin and chymosin) derived from the abomasum of young ruminants. Even a small dose of it is enough to cause milk to curdle. Although there are alternatives to traditional rennet—such as plant-based rennet ferments derived from rennet herbs, as well as microbial or biotechnologically produced substitutes—in most cases, rennet in its original form is still used today. For vegans, products processed with rennet are certainly out of the question.

Conclusion

First of all, both skyr and quark are classic dairy products. Now let’s take a look at exactly what the differences are.

 

Skyr vs. Quark – The Facts

Let’s start with the obvious and compare the nutritional values of skyr and quark. I should note that various analyses of both low-fat quark and skyr can be found online, so there may be minor deviations from the data provided here depending on the manufacturer.

Compared to skyr, low-fat quark contains a few more calories per 100 g, which, as shown in the table, stem from a slightly higher protein content. With 11 g and 13.5 g of protein per 100 g, both foods are definitely considered excellent sources of protein.

In terms of protein content, quark has a slight edge.

The fat content in both low-fat quark and skyr is negligible, as it is well below 1 gram per 100 grams and thus amounts to less than 10 kcal per 100 g. The carbohydrate content, at 4 g per 100 g, is also within a range that—even with a larger serving size of, say, 250 g—does not have a significant impact on digestion or the body. In plain language, this means that at 4 g per 100 g, neither blood sugar nor insulin levels will rise significantly as a result of carbohydrates. The emphasis here is on “carbohydrate-induced,” since skyr, as a “yogurt-like” food, has a very high insulin index of 115 points. Quark is also expected to have an insulin index that should not be underestimated, although it is not quite as high.

While the carbohydrate content—and thus the impact on blood sugar levels—is relatively similar for skyr and quark, skyr is expected to cause a slightly greater rise in insulin levels.

People with lactose intolerance should exercise caution with both skyr and quark. Depending on individual tolerance, larger portions may well lead to intolerance reactions.

Skyr is heavily touted as an exceptional source of calcium. It should be noted, however, that quark is in no way inferior to this Irish dairy product in this regard; in fact, it provides slightly higher amounts per 100 g (again, there are varying figures, but no significant difference is apparent).

Both skyr and quark provide high amounts of calcium.

Conclusion
: Is skyr the new superfood? – Based on an analysis of its macronutrients and calcium content, hardly. There is no discernible significant difference from the well-known and tried-and-true low-fat quark.

 

	Plain skyr per 100 g	Low-fat quark per 100 g
Calories	62 kcal	75 kcal
Protein	11 g	13.5 g
Carbohydrates of which sugar (lactose)	4 g 4 g	4 g 4 g
Fat	0.2 g	0.2 g
Calcium	84 mg	120 mg
Price	approx. 0.26 € / 100 g	approx. 0.15 € / 100 g

 

 

Is skyr a better deal?

Far from it—it’s going to be tough for skyr to ever beat low-fat quark, a mass-market product. After a quick search, I found that 450 g of plain skyr costs about 1.19 euros. Half a kilo (500 g) of low-fat quark, on the other hand, costs only about 0.75 euros. Converted to per 100 g, this means you save 9 cents when buying low-fat quark. It might not sound like much, but even this “not much” will add up over the course of months and perhaps even years: “Every little bit counts.”

Conclusion
: You have to dig deeper into your wallet for skyr than for quark. So far, it’s not clear why you’d want to do that.

 

Taste

“There’s no accounting for taste”—so I won’t presume to judge whether skyr or low-fat quark tastes better. Since skyr is often compared to Greek yogurt in terms of consistency, it’s certainly a bit easier to eat than low-fat quark. A little trick with regular quark is to stir a splash of water into your serving—and just like that, you get a texture similar to yogurt, but with a better macronutrient profile.

Conclusion
: If you’re looking for variety in flavor or enjoy a slightly tangy taste, skyr is a great alternative to quark.

 

Probiotics

Let’s move on to the last supposed advantage of skyr compared to low-fat quark. This one concerns a potentially higher content of probiotics. What can be said about this…

Probiotics are live bacteria (microorganisms) that are primarily found in fermented dairy products and are generally marketed as “health-promoting.” There is no clear consensus on what probiotics can actually do, yet they are incorporated into numerous foods, dietary supplements, and even medications. It is problematic to prove that individual bacterial strains have a genuine effect. Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus, Streptococcus thermophilus, and Lactobacillus helveticus, for example, are considered ineffective because they do not survive the gastrointestinal tract intact. However, there are also numerous strains for which it can be assumed that they are absorbed intact. Areas of application with, in some cases, a solid evidence base include gastrointestinal inflammation, lactose digestion, and even high blood pressure. In its 2012 opinion, the EFSA reports on both pathogenic and non-pathogenic strains. Probiotics are used therapeutically for chronic constipation, various infections, dental caries, and diarrhea. This is particularly the case following antibiotic therapy or for the prevention of allergies or atopic dermatitis. Here, however, bacterial strains are used in high doses that are not comparable to—or achievable with—the amounts found in yogurt.

There is only partial agreement on the exact mechanism of action of probiotics. Among the theories being discussed are a boost to the immune system—thanks to increased levels of immunoglobulin A—and the inhibition of the growth of bacterial strains with potentially negative effects. Provided the probiotic contains at least 100 million—or better yet, 1 billion—live bacteria, probiotics appear to improve the metabolism of carbohydrates. Studies clearly show that daily intake is necessary for a genuine and lasting effect, since bacterial strains from probiotic foods do not permanently colonize the gut.

Anyone who truly wants to benefit from probiotics must consume them regularly.

Foods marketed as “probiotic” have the desired bacterial strains added after they’ve been produced using standard starter cultures. It’s unclear to what extent these strains are more effective than the lactic acid bacteria found in regular products. According to some experts, it would be sufficient to consume two to three cups of plain yogurt or another dairy product daily, as long as you make sure to buy a product that has not been heat-treated. At the University of Vienna, no significant difference was found in a comparison between regular yogurt and Actimel. Actimel had a stronger effect only on cholesterol metabolism (higher HDL levels accompanied by lower LDL levels). Another study also found slight benefits for probiotic yogurt in the treatment of diarrhea.

Evidence suggests that probiotic foods with added bacterial strains may offer at least some benefits. Be wary, however, of the simple sugars often added to them! Probiotic foods are often no longer “suitable for athletes.”

There is also evidence regarding the specific effects of probiotics for athletes. One example is provided by Nichols’ study, which considers it likely that probiotics have an indirect effect on recovery, improved immune function, and a healthy digestive tract in athletes. Kekonnen et al. investigated the influence of probiotics on gastrointestinal symptoms and upper respiratory tract infections in marathon runners. The results showed that regular intake did not reduce the number of illnesses, but a shortening of episodes of gastrointestinal problems associated with marathon running was observed. Gleeson et al. demonstrated a positive effect of regular probiotic intake on the immune system in conjunction with a 4-month training program during the winter months. Cox et al. also ultimately demonstrated a reduction in the incidence of upper respiratory tract infections over a 30-day trial period in trained runners using Lactobacillus fermentum VRI-003.

Probiotics appear to be beneficial for athletes. However, it is not possible at this point to draw conclusions about positive effects based on the regular consumption of quark or skyr, as studies on this topic have been conducted using very specific bacterial strains in high doses.

Neither skyr nor regular low-fat quark are intended to be foods with specifically added bacterial strains. It is known that skyr’s probiotic properties closely resemble those of Greek yogurt, which is why the proportion of probiotic bacteria is likely to be slightly higher than in quark due to the manufacturing process. To what extent this is an advantage or not cannot be conclusively determined. As we have read, regular consumption of moderate amounts is essential to achieve any benefit at all. High-temperature heating is considered detrimental to the number of live bacteria, which is another point of criticism regarding the probiotics contained in skyr (see production via pasteurization). This is yet another questionable aspect arising from the production of skyr.

Conclusion
: Compared to quark, skyr most likely contains higher amounts of probiotic bacteria. Anyone who sees this as a reason to switch from quark to skyr must, conversely, commit to regular, daily consumption of moderate amounts in any case, since otherwise any supposed positive effect will be lost.

 

Summary

A somewhat disappointing conclusion for all those who had hoped skyr would revolutionize the dairy product lineup. Compared to quark, skyr offers, at most, comparable levels of protein and calcium. The carbohydrate and fat content is identical. Yet skyr costs more than conventional quark. Those who wish to benefit from the effects of probiotics can expect slightly more from skyr than from quark, provided they are willing to start consuming moderate amounts of it daily. However, probiotic-enriched foods would be even better suited for this purpose, provided a formulation without added artificial sugars can be found. The bottom line is that the only real argument in favor of skyr is the difference in taste. Fans of that “slightly tangy” flavor now have an alternative to quark on the refrigerated shelf.

For my part, I’ll definitely give skyr a try, but it won’t be able to replace good old quark in my diet.

Best regards
, Holger Gugg

www.body-coaches.de

 

 

Sources:

https://www.arlafoods.de/uber-uns/presse/2015/pressrelease/islaendisches-traditionsprodukt-neu-entdeckt-arla-r-skyr-ab-juni-auch-in-deutschland-1167433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2666378
https://www.na2w.de/glossary/view/212?language=en
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17618005
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17962710
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21411836
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18181732
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20885319
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23249742
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23922468
http://vegetarian.lovetoknow.com/Foods_that_Contain_Probiotics
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/3020
http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/3/106/106ra106
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2184848