Mediterranean diets are promising sustainable food models and the organic food system may provide health and environmental benefits. Combining the two models could therefore be a favourable approach for food sustainability. The aim of this study was to draw up a comparative description of four diets differing in the level of organic foods consumption and the adherence to the Mediterranean diet, using multidisciplinary indicators to assess the sustainability of these diets. Four groups of participants were defined and compared, combining the proportion of organic food in their diet (Org versus Conv) and the adherence to the Mediterranean diet (Med versus NoMed). Conv–NoMed: Conventional consumers and non-Mediterranean diet followers; Conv–Med: Conventional consumers and Mediterranean diet followers; Org–NoMed: Organic consumers and non-Mediterranean diet followers; Org–Med: Organic consumers and Mediterranean diet followers. The adherence to nutritional recommendations was higher among the Org–Med and Conv–Med groups compared to the Conv–NoMed group (using the mPNNS-GS (modified-Programme National nutrition santé guidelines score/13.5 points): 9.29 (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 9.23–9.36) and 9.30 (95% CI = 9.24–9.35) versus 8.19 (95% CI = 8.17–8.22)) respectively. The mean plant/animal protein intake ratio was 1.38 (95% CI = 1.01–1.74) for the Org–Med group versus 0.44 (95% CI = 0.28–0.60) for the Conv–NoMed group. The average cost of the diet of Org–Med participants was the highest: 11.43 €/day (95% CI = 11.34–11.52). This study highlighted the importance of promoting the Mediterranean diet combined with organic food consumption for individual health and environmental aspects but challenges with regard to the cost remain.
Background
Organic food consumption has steadily increased over the past decade in westernized countries.
Objective
The aim of this study, based on observational data, was to compare some sustainability features of diets from consumers with varying levels of organic food.
Methods
The diet sustainability among 29,210 participants of the NutriNet-Santé study was estimated using databases developed within the BioNutriNet project. Four dimensions (nutrition, environment, economy, and toxicology) of diet sustainability were assessed using: 1) nutritional indicators through dietary intakes and dietary scores, and BMI; 2) environmental indicators (greenhouse gas emissions, cumulative energy demand, and land occupation); 3) economic indicators via diet monetary costs; and 4) estimated daily food exposures to 15 pesticides. Adjusted means (95% CI) across weighted quintiles of organic food consumption in the diet were estimated via ANCOVA. Breakdown methods were used to disentangle the contribution of the production system (organic compared with conventional) from the dietary pattern in the variation of diet-related environmental impacts, monetary costs, and pesticide exposure, between the 2 extreme quintiles.
Results
Higher organic food consumption was associated with higher plant-food and lower animal-food consumption, overall nutritional quality (higher dietary scores), and lower BMI. Diet-related greenhouse-gas emissions, cumulative energy demand, and land occupation gradually decreased with increasing organic food consumption, whereas total diet monetary cost increased. Diet exposure to most pesticides decreased across quintiles.
Conclusions
Diets of high organic food consumers were generally characterized by strong nutritional and environmental benefits. The latter were mostly driven by the low consumption of animal-based foods, whereas the production system was responsible for the higher diet monetary costs, and the overall reduced dietary pesticide exposure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.