Which Is Better For You, Lamb Or Beef?

When you think of meat, chances are that the first thing that springs to your mind is beef. The wide selection of the cuts of steaks alone means that an enthusiastic meat-eater can go through their lives without ever looking into other animal proteins, except of course the odd dose of bacon. Of course, that approach means that this person would miss all sorts of other red meat treats, including the ever-delightful delicacy that is lamb. Cooking lamb can be a tricky thing, but the end result can be a flavor explosion like no other.

Still, when push comes to shove, which of these meats is better for you? Obviously, no one turns to red meat expecting it to be the be-all and end-all of healthy foods, but it's always a bonus if that delicious protein also happens to be comparatively good for the old health. So, without further ado, let's take a look at which is better for you – lamb or beef? 

Lamb is better for you, per Mel Magazine.  Neither it nor beef come close to, say, fish or shellfish when it comes to pure healthiness. Despite being fattier than beef, lamb tends to be grass-fed, and as such, it tends to have plenty of omega-3 fatty acids – in fact, even more than grass-fed beef does, according to Cafe Evergreen. 

In moderation, lamb can be a good source of stuff like vitamin B, zinc, iron, and selenium. Being a red meat, it's also a great source of protein – and though it's quite fatty, it has less marbling than beef. As such, the majority of lamb's fat is on the outside, and can easily be trimmed off. 

Despite its comparative healthiness, lamb is tragically underrepresented in the American diet, seeing as the average U.S. citizen only wolfs down an estimated 0.7 pounds of the stuff every year. While no one's saying that you should quintuple that amount overnight or anything, if you're going for red meat anyway, you might want to consider giving those lamb chops a chance.