» Articles » PMID: 25578928

Energy and Nutrient Intakes from Processed Foods Differ by Sex, Income Status, and Race/Ethnicity of US Adults

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2015 Jan 13
PMID 25578928
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) recommends nutrients to increase and to decrease for US adults. The contributions processed foods make to the US intake of nutrients to increase and decrease may vary by the level of processing and by population subgroup.

Objective: The hypotheses that the intakes of nutrients to increase or decrease, as specified by the DGA, are contributed exclusively from certain processed food categories and consumed differentially by population subgroups by sex, poverty-income ratio (ratio of household income to poverty threshold), and race/ethnicity was tested along with the hypothesis that specific processed food categories are responsible for nutrient intake differences between the population subgroups.

Design: The 24-hour dietary recall data from the cross-sectional 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was used to determine population subgroup energy and nutrient intake differences among processed food categories defined by the International Food Information Council Foundation Continuum of Processed Foods.

Participants/setting: Fifteen thousand fifty-three US adults aged ≥19 years.

Statistical Analyses Performed: The mean daily intake of energy and nutrients from processed food categories reported by population subgroups were compared using regression analysis to determine covariate-adjusted least square means.

Results: Processed food categories that contributed to energy and nutrient intake differences within subgroups did not uniformly or exclusively contribute nutrients to increase or decrease per DGA recommendations. The between-group differences in mean daily intake of both nutrients to increase and decrease contributed by the various processed food categories were diverse and were not contributed exclusively from specific processed food categories.

Conclusions: Recommendations for a diet adhering to the DGA should continue to focus on the energy and nutrient content, frequency of consumption, and serving size of individual foods rather than the level of processing.

Citing Articles

Socio-demographic differences in the dietary inflammatory index from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2018: a comparison of multiple imputation versus complete case analysis.

Meadows R, Paskett E, Bower J, Kaye G, Lemeshow S, Harris R Public Health Nutr. 2024; 27(1):e184.

PMID: 39327915 PMC: 11504956. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980024001800.


Ultra-processed foods and food additives in gut health and disease.

Whelan K, Bancil A, Lindsay J, Chassaing B Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024; 21(6):406-427.

PMID: 38388570 DOI: 10.1038/s41575-024-00893-5.


A Self-Guided Lifestyle Intervention for Young Men: Findings from the ACTIVATE Randomized Pilot Trial.

Reading J, Crane M, Carlyle K, Perera R, LaRose J J Mens Health. 2023; 18(9).

PMID: 36846742 PMC: 9949796. DOI: 10.31083/j.jomh1809191.


Who Likes Unhealthy Food with a Strong Flavour? Influence of Sex, Age, Body Mass Index, Smoking and Olfactory Efficiency on Junk Food Preferences.

Hartman-Petrycka M, Witkos J, Lebiedowska A, Blonska-Fajfrowska B Nutrients. 2022; 14(19).

PMID: 36235750 PMC: 9571372. DOI: 10.3390/nu14194098.


Consumption Patterns of Processed Foods in Singapore-A Cross-Sectional Study.

Gan P, Er J, Chow K, Er B, Chan J, Li A Foods. 2022; 11(18).

PMID: 36140910 PMC: 9498269. DOI: 10.3390/foods11182782.