使用较少加工的食品来模仿美国标准饮食并不能提高营养价值，反而可能导致食品保质期缩短，经济成本增加

IF 3.8 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS

Current Developments in Nutrition Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.104471

Julie M Hess , Madeline E Comeau , Angela J Scheett , Anne Bodensteiner , Allen S Levine

{"title":"使用较少加工的食品来模仿美国标准饮食并不能提高营养价值，反而可能导致食品保质期缩短，经济成本增加","authors":"Julie M Hess , Madeline E Comeau , Angela J Scheett , Anne Bodensteiner , Allen S Levine","doi":"10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.104471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The “clean eating” trend suggests that consuming fewer processed foods is important for healthy diets. Yet, a diet of mostly ultra-processed foods (UPFs) can meet recommendations from the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Whether a diet comprised mostly of simple ingredient foods can provide a low-quality diet remains unexplored.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The objective of this study was to compare the diet quality, shelf stability, and cost of 2 similar nutrient-poor menus, one containing primarily UPFs and the other containing less-processed foods (LPW), as defined by the Nova classification system.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A “Western” menu using LPW was developed to match the meals and recipes of a menu that contained more-processed foods (MPW). Processing level was determined using the Nova classification system. Final menus were assessed for nutrient quality and Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score. Shelf stability of foods/ingredients on both menus was determined from food storage guidance manuals. The condition of each food item when purchased (room temperature, frozen, refrigerated) was used to estimate the number of days until expiration. Food costs were determined from prices at grocery chains in Fall 2023.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The LPW had similar nutrient density and diet quality scores to the MPW (HEI scores of 44 and 43, respectively). The LPW included 20% energy (kcal) from UPFs, whereas the MPW included 67% energy from UPFs. Relative percentages of shelf-stable, frozen, and refrigerated foods were similar. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis method, median time to expiration of the LPW menu items was 35 d compared with 120 d for the MPW items. The “per person” cost reflecting only the amount of the food used in the menu was $15.91/d for the LPW and $9.85/d for the MPW.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Less-processed menus can have comparable diet quality with more-processed menus although being more costly and less shelf stable.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10756,"journal":{"name":"Current Developments in Nutrition","volume":"8 11","pages":"Article 104471"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Less Processed Food to Mimic a Standard American Diet Does Not Improve Nutrient Value and May Result in a Shorter Shelf Life at a Higher Financial Cost\",\"authors\":\"Julie M Hess , Madeline E Comeau , Angela J Scheett , Anne Bodensteiner , Allen S Levine\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.104471\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The “clean eating” trend suggests that consuming fewer processed foods is important for healthy diets. Yet, a diet of mostly ultra-processed foods (UPFs) can meet recommendations from the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Whether a diet comprised mostly of simple ingredient foods can provide a low-quality diet remains unexplored.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The objective of this study was to compare the diet quality, shelf stability, and cost of 2 similar nutrient-poor menus, one containing primarily UPFs and the other containing less-processed foods (LPW), as defined by the Nova classification system.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A “Western” menu using LPW was developed to match the meals and recipes of a menu that contained more-processed foods (MPW). Processing level was determined using the Nova classification system. Final menus were assessed for nutrient quality and Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score. Shelf stability of foods/ingredients on both menus was determined from food storage guidance manuals. The condition of each food item when purchased (room temperature, frozen, refrigerated) was used to estimate the number of days until expiration. Food costs were determined from prices at grocery chains in Fall 2023.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The LPW had similar nutrient density and diet quality scores to the MPW (HEI scores of 44 and 43, respectively). The LPW included 20% energy (kcal) from UPFs, whereas the MPW included 67% energy from UPFs. Relative percentages of shelf-stable, frozen, and refrigerated foods were similar. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis method, median time to expiration of the LPW menu items was 35 d compared with 120 d for the MPW items. The “per person” cost reflecting only the amount of the food used in the menu was $15.91/d for the LPW and $9.85/d for the MPW.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Less-processed menus can have comparable diet quality with more-processed menus although being more costly and less shelf stable.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Developments in Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"8 11\",\"pages\":\"Article 104471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Developments in Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299124024053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Developments in Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299124024053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 "清淡饮食 "趋势表明，少吃加工食品对健康饮食很重要。然而，以超加工食品（UPF）为主的膳食可以满足《美国人膳食指南》的建议。本研究的目的是比较两种类似的营养不良菜单的膳食质量、货架稳定性和成本，其中一种菜单主要包含超加工食品，另一种菜单则包含诺瓦分类系统定义的少加工食品（LPW）。加工程度根据诺瓦分类系统确定。对最终菜单的营养素质量和健康饮食指数（HEI）进行评估。两份菜单中食品/配料的保质期是根据食品储存指导手册确定的。根据每种食品购买时的状态（室温、冷冻、冷藏）来估算离过期的天数。食品成本根据 2023 年秋季连锁杂货店的价格确定。结果低标准餐的营养密度和膳食质量得分与中标准餐相似（HEI 分别为 44 分和 43 分）。低标准食品中20%的能量（千卡）来自UPF，而中标准食品中67%的能量来自UPF。货架稳定食品、冷冻食品和冷藏食品的相对比例相似。采用卡普兰-梅耶生存分析法，LPW菜单项目的中位过期时间为35天，而MPW项目的中位过期时间为120天。仅反映菜单中所用食品数量的 "人均 "成本，LPW 为 15.91 美元/天，MPW 为 9.85 美元/天。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Using Less Processed Food to Mimic a Standard American Diet Does Not Improve Nutrient Value and May Result in a Shorter Shelf Life at a Higher Financial Cost

Background

The “clean eating” trend suggests that consuming fewer processed foods is important for healthy diets. Yet, a diet of mostly ultra-processed foods (UPFs) can meet recommendations from the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Whether a diet comprised mostly of simple ingredient foods can provide a low-quality diet remains unexplored.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to compare the diet quality, shelf stability, and cost of 2 similar nutrient-poor menus, one containing primarily UPFs and the other containing less-processed foods (LPW), as defined by the Nova classification system.

Methods

A “Western” menu using LPW was developed to match the meals and recipes of a menu that contained more-processed foods (MPW). Processing level was determined using the Nova classification system. Final menus were assessed for nutrient quality and Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score. Shelf stability of foods/ingredients on both menus was determined from food storage guidance manuals. The condition of each food item when purchased (room temperature, frozen, refrigerated) was used to estimate the number of days until expiration. Food costs were determined from prices at grocery chains in Fall 2023.

Results

The LPW had similar nutrient density and diet quality scores to the MPW (HEI scores of 44 and 43, respectively). The LPW included 20% energy (kcal) from UPFs, whereas the MPW included 67% energy from UPFs. Relative percentages of shelf-stable, frozen, and refrigerated foods were similar. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis method, median time to expiration of the LPW menu items was 35 d compared with 120 d for the MPW items. The “per person” cost reflecting only the amount of the food used in the menu was $15.91/d for the LPW and $9.85/d for the MPW.