In France, school canteens must offer a vegetarian meal at least once per week. The objective was to evaluate the nutritional quality of school main dishes. A database of main dishes served in primary schools was first split into non-vegetarian (n = 669) and vegetarian (n = 315) categories. The latter has been divided into three sub-categories: vegetarian dishes containing cheese, vegetarian dishes containing eggs and/or dairy products but no cheese and vegetarian dishes without any eggs, cheese or other dairy products (vegan). Categories and sub-categories were compared based on nutrient adequacy ratios for “protective” nutrients (proteins, fibres, vitamins, minerals, essential fatty acids), the contents of nutrients to be limited (saturated fatty acids (SFA), sodium, free sugars) and on two nutrient profiling systems (SAIN,LIM and Nutri-Score). The vegetarian category and the non-vegetarian category displayed “adequate” levels (≥5% adequacy for 100 kcal) on average for almost all “protective” nutrients. The three sub-categories of vegetarian dishes displayed good SAIN,LIM and Nutri-Score profiles on average, although key nutrients were lacking (vitamin B12, vitamin D and DHA) or were present in insufficient amounts (vitamin B2 and calcium) in the vegan sub-category. The sub-category containing eggs and/or dairy products other than cheese was a good compromise, as it provided protective nutrients associated with eggs and fresh dairy products, while the sub-category containing cheese provided higher levels of SFA. Nutrient profile algorithms are insufficiently informative to assess the nutritional quality of school dishes.
PurposeSchool meals have the potential to promote more sustainable diets. Our aim was to identify the best trade-off between nutrition and the environment by applying four levers to school meals: i) reducing the number of meal components, ii) complying with the French school nutritional guidelines, iii) increasing the number of vegetarian meals, and/or iv) avoiding ruminant meat. MethodsLevers were analyzed alone or in combination in seventeen scenarios. For each scenario, 100 series of 20 meals were generated from a database of 2316 school dishes using mathematical optimization. The nutritional quality of the series was assessed through the Mean Adequacy Ratio (MAR/2000 kcal). Seven environmental impacts were considered such as greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE). One scenario, close to series usually served in French schools (containing 4 vegetarian meals, at least 4 ruminant meat-based meals, and at least 4 fish-based meals) was considered as the reference scenario. ResultsReducing the number of meal components induced an important decrease of the energy content but the environmental impact was little altered. Complying with school-specific nutritional guidelines ensured nutritional quality but slightly increased GHGE. Increasing the number of vegetarian meals decreased GHGE (from -11.7% to -61.2%) but decreased nutritional quality, especially when all meals were vegetarian (MAR= 88.1% against 95.3% in the reference scenario). Compared to the reference scenario, series with 12 vegetarian meals, 4 meals containing fish and 4 meals containing pork or poultry reduced GHGE by 50% while maintaining good nutritional quality (MAR=94.0%). ConclusionUpdating French school nutritional guidelines by increasing the number of vegetarian meals up to 12 over 20 and serving non-ruminant meats and fish with the other meals would be the best trade-off for decreasing the environmental impacts of meals without altering their nutritional quality.
The USDA Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) is an estimate of a lowest-cost healthy diet that meets dietary guidelines while respecting existing eating habits. In the US, the TFP provides the basis for federal food assistance. Included in the TFP are protein foods from both animal and plant sources. The present goal was to explore the place of fresh pork among protein foods in the revised TFP 2021. Our analyses used the same databases and the same quadratic programming (QP) methods as had been used by the USDA to develop the TFP 2021. Dietary intakes came from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 2015-16); nutrient composition data came from the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS 2015-16), and national food prices came from the 2021 TFP report. Amounts and prices were for foods as consumed. Our QP Model 1 used USDA modeling categories to replicate the TFP 2021. The non-poultry meat category was then separated into pork and beef. Model 2 examined whether the TFP 2021 algorithm would select pork or beef. Model 3 sought the lowest cost healthy diet, the same as the TFP 2021. Model 4 replaced beef and poultry with pork; whereas Model 5 replaced pork and poultry with beef. Weekly costs were calculated for a family of four and eight age-gender groups. All models met the nutrient requirements. The market basket cost for a family of four in Model 1 was USD 189.88, compared to the purchase price of USD 192.84 in the TFP 2021. In Model 2, fresh pork was selected preferentially over beef. The lowest-cost healthy food plan in Model 3 increased fresh pork to 3.4 lbs/week. Replacing beef and poultry with pork in Model 4 led to a modest decrease in the weekly cost. Replacing pork and poultry with beef in Model 5 led to a major increase in the weekly cost. We conclude, based on TFP-analogous modeling, that fresh pork is the preferred meat source, providing high-quality protein at a low cost. QP methods, as used in the TFP 2021, are a valuable tool for designing food plans that are affordable, acceptable, and nutrient-rich.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.