Estimating the Healthiness of Internet Recipes: A Cross-sectional Study

Abstract

A government’s response to increasing incidence of lifestyle-related illnesses, such as obesity, has been to encourage people to cook for themselves. The healthiness of home cooking will, nevertheless, depend on what people cook and how they cook it. In this article, one common source of cooking inspiration—Internet-sourced recipes—is investigated in depth. The energy and macronutrient content of 5,237 main meal recipes from the food website are compared with those of 100 main meal recipes from five bestselling cookery books from popular celebrity chefs and 100 ready meals from the three leading UK supermarkets. The comparison is made using nutritional guidelines published by the World Health Organization and the UK Food Standards Agency. The main conclusions drawn from our analyses are that Internet recipes sourced from are less healthy than TV chef recipes and ready meals from leading UK supermarkets. Only 6 out of 5,237 Internet recipes fully complied with the WHO recommendations. Internet recipes were more likely to meet the WHO guidelines for protein than other classes of meal (10.88 v 7% (TV), p < 0.01; 10.86 v 9% (ready), p < 0.01). However, the Internet recipes were less likely to meet the criteria for fat (14.28 v 24 (TV) v 37% (ready); p < 0.01), saturated fat (25.05 v 33 (TV) v 34% (ready); p < 0.01), and fiber (compared to ready meals 16.50 v 56%; p < 0.01). More Internet recipes met the criteria for sodium density than ready meals (19.63 v 4%; p < 0.01), but fewer than the TV chef meals (19.32 v 36%; p < 0.01). For sugar, no differences between Internet recipes and TV chef recipes were observed (81.1 v 81% (TV); p = 0.86), although Internet recipes were less likely to meet the sugar criteria than ready meals (81.1 v 83% (ready); p < 0.01). Repeating the analyses for each year of available data shows that the results are very stable over time.

Ultra-processed Food Intake and Obesity: What Really Matters for Health—Processing or Nutrient Content?

“…The types of foods that are ultra-processed (e.g., baked goods, savory snacks) tend to have poor nutritional profiles; however, ultra-processed foods with more favorable nutrient content (e.g., whole-grain packaged bread, unsweetened breakfast cereals) are available, suggesting that processing itself may not be a causal determinant of the nutritional quality of foods [79-81]. Individuals with higher consumption of ultra-processed food may be more likely to select products with less healthful nutritional profiles, potentially contributing to the relationship with obesity.There is also wide variability in the nutrient content of foods prepared at home from minimally processed foods and processed culinary ingredients, due to variation in the types of foods that are home-cooked and the methods used to prepare them [82, 83]. Many foods (including bread, grain-based desserts such as cookies, or mixed dishes such as lasagna or soup), can be purchased as ultra-processed products or prepared at home from less-processed ingredients.…”

“…For any given food item, it remains unknown whether the ultra-processed version necessarily has lower nutritional quality than its home-cooked counterpart. Although limited, evidence suggests that home-cooked foods and home recipes are not consistently higher in nutritional quality, and may even be worse, than ultra-processed alternatives [83-87]. Some researchers propose that the type of food and its ingredients might be more important determinants of nutritional quality than whether the food is industrially-prepared or home-prepared [79, 83-85].…”

“…Although limited, evidence suggests that home-cooked foods and home recipes are not consistently higher in nutritional quality, and may even be worse, than ultra-processed alternatives [83-87]. Some researchers propose that the type of food and its ingredients might be more important determinants of nutritional quality than whether the food is industrially-prepared or home-prepared [79, 83-85]. There is a need for experimental research as well as randomized controlled trials to examine the causal effect of consuming ultra-processed foods on weight gain independent from differences in nutrient content or the types of foods consumed.…”

Exploiting Food Choice Biases for Healthier Recipe Recommendation

“…Elsweiler et al and Trattner et al identi ed the need for a trade-o between recommending recipes that will be appreciated by users and recipes that can be considered healthy using quanti able metrics [13,34]. Experiments show that the trade-o can be improved to some extent using post-ltering [34], but little is yet known regarding how such algorithmic approaches may in uence the food decisions people make [35] and whether users will accept the healthier alternatives pro ered.…”

“…As such, systems which provide access to online recipes or make personalised recommendations have been touted as a means to help people nourish themselves more healthily [14,17]. Nevertheless, despite o ering access to healthy content [34], analyses of the systems being used in practice indicate that they tend to promote unhealthy meals [35]. Metrics such as recipe ratings, recipe bookmark frequency and the sentiment scores of recipe comments all tend to correlate positively with recipes that are high in fat, sugar and calorie content [34].…”