Protein gets a lot of attention in conversations about healthy eating. But getting enough of it does not necessarily mean the rest of your diet is working well.
A University of Maine study found that students generally scored well on protein intake while their overall diet quality remained low. The study, published in the Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, looked at how students eat, cook and think about food as researchers considered a future campus meal-kit program. The research was funded by the National Pork Board.
That makes the findings a useful reminder that nutrition is not just about hitting one target. Among these students, protein did not appear to be the biggest problem. Students were more likely to describe trouble finding foods they actually wanted to eat, along with concerns about cost, time, limited kitchen access and the realities of campus dining.
Researchers surveyed 501 undergraduates in February 2025 and later held virtual focus groups with 20 students. The average participant was about 20 years old. About half lived on campus and about half had a dining plan.
Students scored 4.8 out of 5 on the protein portion of the Short Healthy Eating Index, a tool used to look at how closely eating patterns match dietary recommendations. That suggests the group was generally doing well when it came to protein foods.
But the bigger picture looked different.
The students’ average overall diet-quality score was 47.7 out of 100. Scores were lower for several other parts of the diet, including vegetables, whole grains, seafood and plant proteins, dairy and measures related to sodium, added sugars and saturated fat.
The study also found that many students regularly consumed sugary drinks, salty snacks and sweet snacks. About 40% reported having sugary beverages at least once a day, 43% said the same for salty snacks and 34% for sweet snacks. The questionnaire only asked about those three categories, so it did not capture every ultraprocessed food students may have eaten.
Food access was another major concern. About 34% of students reported low or very low food security, meaning they had limited or uncertain access to enough food.
For some students, having a dining plan did not solve the problem.
In focus groups, students repeatedly described campus dining as a source of frustration. One participant referred to “the slim pickings for healthy foods that are protein-rich in the dining halls.” Another said that even when protein-rich foods were available, “a lot of the times they're just not appetizing.”
Students also talked about limited variety and foods they saw as overly greasy or heavily processed.
That helps explain why the issue may be less about whether protein is technically available and more about whether students actually want to eat the options in front of them.
Cooking came with its own set of problems.
Some students said they felt comfortable in the kitchen. Others were still learning. But skill was only part of the story. Students described living with little more than a microwave, sharing crowded kitchens, lacking transportation to grocery stores and struggling to find time to cook.
Those challenges are part of why researchers were interested in whether meal kits might help.
Most students had never used a commercial meal kit. About 27% said they were interested in trying one, and 43% agreed or strongly agreed that meal kits could help them eat healthier.
Students liked the idea of convenience and pre-portioned ingredients. Some also liked being able to try new foods without buying a full bottle of a spice or a large package of an ingredient they might not use again.
But cost was a sticking point.
As one student put it, “I think it's more affordable just to get the stuff and do it yourself.”
The study found that students who ate more ultraprocessed foods, cooked more often or had greater food insecurity were somewhat more likely to express interest in meal kits. But those relationships were small, so they should not be taken as strong clues about who would actually use a campus meal-kit program.
And the researchers did not test a meal-kit program itself.
That means the study cannot tell us whether meal kits would improve students’ diets, help with food insecurity or reduce reliance on ultraprocessed foods.
There are other limits to keep in mind. The study took place at one rural university, relied on self-reported information and had a survey response rate of 6.4%. The sample was also mostly White and female, which means the findings may not reflect the experiences of students on other campuses. Only 20 students took part in the focus groups.
Even with those caveats, the study highlights a simple point: getting enough protein does not automatically add up to a good diet.
For these students, healthy eating was shaped by much more than one nutrient. Cost, convenience, food access, kitchen space and whether the available food was actually appealing all mattered too.