Modeling Ovo-vegetarian, Lacto-vegetarian, Pescatarian, and Vegan USDA Food Patterns and Assessing Nutrient Adequacy for Lactation among Adult Females.

Background: Among its recommended dietary patterns for Americans, including lactating mothers, the 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) includes a Healthy Vegetarian Dietary Pattern (HVDP). However, the DGA does not provide guidance for adapting the HVDP for vegetarians who avoid dairy (ovo-vegetarian) or eggs (lacto-vegetarian), eat fish (pescatarians), or avoid all animal foods (vegan). Objective: To determine whether models of the HVDP for different vegetarian diets could provide sufficient nutrition during lactation, a life stage with unique nutrient needs. Methods: Adaptations of the HVDP were developed at the 2200 and 2400 kcal levels using similar methods to the 2020 DGA. We compared these models with both the original HVDP and Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) for women ages 19 to 30 and ages 31 to 50 during lactation mo 1 to 12. All models were developed both with and without the addition of a multivitamin and -mineral prenatal supplement, commonly consumed by women throughout lactation. Results: All models (original HVDP, ovo-vegetarian, lacto-vegetarian, pescatarian, vegan) at all energy levels met the Adequate Macronutrient Distribution Ranges. Like the original HVDP and other dietary patterns in the DGA, the vegetarian adaptations in this study did not contain enough vitamin D, vitamin E, or choline to meet DRIs across all models and energy levels. With the prenatal supplement added, the models did not contain enough sodium, vitamin D, or choline. Some models also contained < 100% of the DRIs for sodium, zinc, vitamin A, and vitamin B6. Amounts of all other micronutrients met DRIs. Conclusions: Adaptations of the HVDP can provide adequate amounts of most nutrients, including nutrients of concern, during lactation to meet the needs of mothers during this life stage.

Perspective: A Research Roadmap about Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health for the United States Food System: Proceedings from an Interdisciplinary, Multi-Stakeholder Workshop.

Our objective was to convene interdisciplinary experts from government, academia, and industry to develop a Research Roadmap to identify research priorities about processed food intake and risk for obesity and cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) among United States populations. We convened attendees at various career stages with diverse viewpoints in the field. We held a "Food Processing Primer" to build foundational knowledge of how and why foods are processed, followed by presentations about how processed foods may affect energy intake, obesity, and CMD risk. Breakout groups discussed potential mechanistic and confounding explanations for associations between processed foods and obesity and CMD risk. Facilitators created research questions (RQs) based on key themes from discussions. Different breakout groups convened to discuss what is known and unknown for each RQ and to develop sub-RQs to address gaps. Workshop attendees focused on ultra-processed foods (UPFs; Nova Group 4) because the preponderance of evidence is based on this classification system. Yet, heterogeneity and subjectivity in UPF classification was a challenge for RQ development. The 6 RQs were: 1) What objective methods or measures could further categorize UPFs, considering food processing, formulation, and the interaction of the two? 2) How can exposure assessment of UPF intake be improved? 3) Does UPF intake influence risk for obesity or CMDs, independent of diet quality? 4) What, if any, attributes of UPFs influence ingestive behavior and contribute to excess energy intake? 5) What, if any, attributes of UPFs contribute to clinically meaningful metabolic responses? 6) What, if any, external environmental factors lead people to consume high amounts of UPFs? Uncertainty and complexity around UPF intake warrant further complementary and interdisciplinary causal, mechanistic, and methodological research related to obesity and CMD risk to understand the utility of applying classification by degree of processing to foods in the United States.

Dietary Guidelines Meet NOVA: Developing a Menu for A Healthy Dietary Pattern Using Ultra-Processed Foods.

BACKGROUND: A proposed topic for the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) Scientific Advisory Committee to address is the relationship between dietary patterns with ultra-processed foods (UPF) and body composition and weight status. Implementing the NOVA system, the most commonly applied framework for determining whether a food is "ultra-processed," in dietary guidance could omit several nutrient-dense foods from recommended healthy diets in the DGA. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this proof-of-concept study was to determine the feasibility of building a menu that aligns with recommendations for a healthy dietary pattern from the 2020 DGA and includes ≥80% kcal from UPF as defined by NOVA. DESIGN: To accomplish this objective, we first developed a list of foods that fit NOVA criteria for UPF, fit within dietary patterns in the 2020 DGA, and are commonly consumed by Americans. We then used these foods to develop a 7-d, 2000 kcal menu modeled on MyPyramid sample menus and assessed this menu for nutrient content as well as for diet quality using the Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015). RESULTS: In the ultra-processed DGA menu that was created, 91% of kcal were from UPF, or NOVA category 4. The HEI-2015 score was 86 out of a possible 100 points. This sample menu did not achieve a perfect score due primarily to excess sodium and an insufficient amount of whole grains. This menu provided adequate amounts of all macro- and micronutrients except vitamin D, vitamin E, and choline. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy dietary patterns can include most of their energy from UPF, still receive a high diet quality score, and contain adequate amounts of most macro- and micronutrients.

Biochemical Validation of a Self-Administered Carotenoid Intake Screener to Assess Carotenoid Intake in Nonobese Adults.

Background: Epidemiological studies have demonstrated an association between carotenoid intake and health. However, an accurate measurement of carotenoid intake is challenging. FFQ is the most commonly used dietary assessment method and is typically composed of 100-200 items. However, the greater participant burden that accompanies a more detailed FFQ provides only a marginal gain in accuracy. Therefore, a brief validated carotenoid intake screener is needed. Objectives: To conduct secondary analysis evaluating the validity of a newly developed 44-item carotenoid intake screener from The Juice Study: Sensitivity of Skin Carotenoid Status to Detect Change in Intake (NCT03202043) against corresponding plasma carotenoid concentrations (primary) and skin carotenoids (secondary) in nonobese Midwestern American adults. Methods: Healthy adults (n = 83; 25 men and 58 women) aged 18-65 y (mean age, 32 ± 12 y) with a BMI (in kg/m2) of 18.5-29.9 (mean BMI, 25 ± 3) were recruited between 25 April 2018 and 28 March 2019. Participants completed the carotenoid intake screener weekly during the 8-wk parent study. Plasma carotenoid concentrations were assessed at weeks 0, 4, and 8 using HPLC. Skin carotenoids were assessed weekly using pressure-mediated reflection spectroscopy (RS). Correlation matrices from mixed models were used to determine the correlation between carotenoid intake and plasma and skin carotenoids over time. Results: The total carotenoid intake, as determined by the carotenoid intake screener, correlated with both the plasma total carotenoid concentration (r = 0.52; P < 0.0001) and the RS-assessed skin carotenoid concentration (r = 0.43; P < 0.0001). Correlations between reported intake and plasma concentrations of α-carotene (r = 0.40; P = 0.0002), cryptoxanthin (r = 0.28; P = 0.0113), and lycopene (r = 0.33; P = 0.0022) were also observed. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate an acceptable relative validity of the carotenoid intake screener to assess total carotenoid intake in adults classified as those having a healthy body or those with overweight.

Disparity in Dairy Servings Intake by Ethnicity and Age in NHANES 2015-2018.

Background: Dairy products, especially milk, provide vital nutrients including several under consumed nutrients and nutrients of public health concern to the American diet. However, milk and dairy intake has been decreasing in recent years. Objectives: The goal of this study was to provide an update of current milk and dairy intakes across the lifespan and to stratify these data by race/ethnicity. Methods: The NHANES cycles 2015-2016 and 2017-2018 were used to determine dairy intake from foods included in USDA-defined dairy food groups as well as from "other foods," such as mixed dishes (for example, pizza) and nonmilk and dairy foods containing dairy (for example, desserts). Results: Total dairy intake in cup equivalents per day decreased across the lifespan (2-8 y: 1.93; 14-18 y: 1.74; 19-50 y: 1.55; and 71+ y: 1.35 cup eq/d). Milk intake also decreased across the lifespan from 2 y to 51-70 and 71+ y, where milk intakes increased slightly than those of 19-50 y (0.61, 0.75, and 0.58 cup eq/d, respectively). Non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic Asian children and adults consumed the least dairy servings compared to other race/ethnic groups. "Other foods" contributed large percentages of dairy intake and accounted for more intake by adults (47.6%) than young children (25.9%) and adolescents (41.5%). Conclusions: This study showed total dairy intake decreased across the lifespan, but "other foods" make a significant contribution to dairy intake, indicating their importance in helping Americans to meet DGA recommendations and nutrient needs. Further research is warranted to identify why these decreases and differences between ethnicities in dairy intake occur during childhood and throughout adulthood.

Sensitivity of Pressure-Mediated Reflection Spectroscopy to Detect Changes in Skin Carotenoids in Adults Without Obesity in Response to Increased Carotenoid Intake: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of commercially available devices to detect changes in skin carotenoids is not known. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the sensitivity of pressure-mediated reflection spectroscopy (RS) to detect changes in skin carotenoids in response to increasing carotenoid intake. METHODS: Nonobese adults were randomly assigned to a control (water; n = 20; females = 15 (75%); mean age: 31 ± 3 (SE) y; mean BMI: 26 ± 1 kg/m2) or one of 3 carotenoid intake levels: 1) LOW - 13.1 mg; n = 22; females = 18(82%); age: 33 ± 3 y; BMI: 25 ± 1 kg/m2; 2) MED - 23.9 mg; n = 22; females = 17 (77%); age: 30 ± 2 y; BMI: 26 ± 1 kg/m2); or 3) HIGH - 31.0 mg; n = 19; females = 9 (47%); age: 33 ± 3 y; BMI: 24 ± 1 kg/m2. A commercial vegetable juice was provided daily to ensure that the additional carotenoid intake was achieved. Skin carotenoids (RS intensity [RSI]) were measured weekly. Plasma carotenoid concentrations were assessed at wk 0, 4, and 8. Mixed models were used to test the effect of treatment, time, and their interaction. Correlation matrices from mixed models were used to determine the correlation between plasma and skin carotenoids. RESULTS: A correlation was observed between skin and plasma carotenoids (r = 0.65; P < 0.001). Skin carotenoids were greater than baseline starting at week 1 in the HIGH (290 ± 20 vs. 321 ± 24 RSI; P ≤ 0.01), week 2 in the MED (274 ± 18 vs. 290 ± 23 RSI; P ≤ 0.03), and week 3 in the LOW (261 ± 18 vs. 288 ± 15 RSI; P ≤ 0.03). Compared with control, differences in skin carotenoids were observed starting at week 2 in the HIGH ([268 ± 16 vs. 338 ± 26 RSI; P ≤ 0.01] except for week 3 [287 ± 20 vs. 335 ± 26 RSI; P = 0.08]) and week 6 in the MED (303 ± 26 vs. 363 ± 27 RSI; P ≤ 0.03). No differences were observed between the control and LOW. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that RS can detect changes in skin carotenoids in adults without obesity when daily carotenoid intake is increased by 13.1 mg for a minimum of 3 wk. However, a minimum difference in intake of 23.9 mg of carotenoids is needed to detect group differences. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03202043.

Modeling lacto-vegetarian, pescatarian, and "pescavegan" USDA food patterns and assessing nutrient adequacy for healthy non-pregnant, non-lactating adults.

Introduction: The 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) includes a Healthy Vegetarian Dietary Pattern (HVDP) with dairy foods and eggs as one of its three recommended dietary patterns for non-pregnant, non-lactating healthy adults. This study evaluates whether pescatarian, lacto-vegetarian, and "pescavegan" adaptations of the HVDP can be nutritionally adequate if modeled with foods recommended by the DGA. Methods: The nutrient composition of these three alternative models of the HVDP were assessed at 1, 800-, 2, 000-, 2, 200-, and 2,400- kcal/day using similar food pattern modeling procedures as the 2020 DGA. For the pescatarian and pescavegan models, 0.5 ounce-equivalent of refined grains per day was replaced with seafood. For the lacto-vegetarian and pescavegan models, eggs were replaced with equal proportions of the other vegetarian protein foods. In the pescavegan model, dairy foods were replaced by a dairy alternative group comprised of fortified soy milk and soy yogurt. Results: All models at all energy levels were within Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Ranges (AMDRs) for all macronutrients, contained ≤5% of total kcal from saturated fat, and met recommendations for most micronutrients. Nutrients provided below the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) in these models included iron, sodium, vitamin D, vitamin E, and choline. Micronutrients provided at less than 50% of their respective DRIs included vitamin D and choline. Discussion: Adapting the HVDP for lactovegetarian, pescatarian, and pescavegan dietary patterns provided adequate amounts of macronutrients and most micronutrients.

Understanding the link between frequency of eating and cardiometabolic health outcomes in Americans who "snack".

On average, Americans ages 2 yr and older eat 5 or more times per day and consume nearly a quarter of their daily energy outside of breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Frequency of eating (FOE) has been identified by both the 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans Scientific Advisory Committee and the American Heart Association as an important area of study to improve the dietary patterns and overall health of the American public. However, the current evidence on FOE is conflicting; it does not indicate whether eating more frequently is a healthful behavior or not. Clinical and prospective studies have shown that FOE has an inverse relationship with some cardiometabolic health markers, including total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations, but the relationship between FOE and other health markers such as high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations, blood pressure, obesity, and coronary heart disease incidence remains unclear. Several factors may affect the relationship between FOE and cardiometabolic health including the types of foods consumed, time of day, motivation to eat, cultural background, age, sex, and food security status. Another factor affecting both the relationship between FOE and health as well as the research on FOE and health is how eating occasions are labeled. Many definitions have been proposed and used in research to delineate between meals and snacks, but a consistent definition is not currently used for "snacks," even in official dietary guidance. With the current limitations in the body of research, conclusions about the healthfulness of frequent eating cannot be drawn. In addition, conclusions cannot be drawn on the healthfulness of eating snacks (as an eating occasion) or more than 3 meals per day. More directed research is required to understand the relationships between the labels used for an eating occasion and cardiometabolic health outcomes as well as the health impacts of frequent food and beverage consumption and how and why they may vary among different population groups.

Application of dairy-free vegetarian and vegan USDA food pattern models for non-pregnant, non-lactating healthy adults.

The 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) recommends a Healthy Vegetarian Dietary Pattern (HVDP) but does not provide guidance for dairy-free vegetarian (ovo-vegetarian) or vegan diets. A recent study from our lab modeled ovo-vegetarian and vegan HVDPs for healthy adults and found minimal impacts on nutrient content. However, since these models provide only recommendations for food group amounts, the objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of implementing the 2000 kcal ovo-vegetarian and vegan models by developing sample menus and evaluating them for nutrient adequacy and diet quality. We implemented a search strategy for ovo-vegetarian and vegan recipes on the MyPlate.gov website, using the most frequently consumed foods from each food group as a guide. We then developed 5-day sample menus for each model and analyzed these menus for diet quality using the Healthy Eating Index Score-2015 (HEI-2015) and nutrient content. The HEI-2015 scores were 99.4 and 98.4 for the vegan and ovo-vegetarian menus, respectively. These sample menus did not achieve a perfect score of 100 due to sodium and refined grains (both menus), added sugars (ovo-vegetarian menu only), and fatty acid profiles (vegan menu only). Mean total energy was 1860 kcal (vegan) and 1880 kcal (ovo-vegetarian). Amounts of all macronutrients were within the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Ranges, but amounts of some micronutrients were below 90% of recommended levels. Healthy adults may be able to follow ovo-vegetarian and vegan diets with careful planning, but this study reveals challenges in meeting micronutrient needs with these eating patterns. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: This study assessed the quality and nutrient adequacy of sample vegan and dairy-free vegetarian menus developed based on adaptations of the 2000 kcal vegetarian dietary pattern from the 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. We found that our sample vegan and dairy-free vegetarian menus, created with publicly available resources, contained enough servings of fruits, vegetables, grains, protein foods, dairy, and oils, but did not provide enough vitamin D, vitamin E, choline, zinc (for males), and iron (for females). Following vegan and ovo-vegetarian diets requires careful planning to ensure sources of these micronutrients are included in adequate amounts.

Modeling Dairy-Free Vegetarian and Vegan USDA Food Patterns for Nonpregnant, Nonlactating Adults.

BACKGROUND: The 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (2020 DGA) recommend 3 dietary patterns for Americans, including a Healthy Vegetarian Dietary Pattern (HVDP). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess whether nutritionally adequate dairy-free and vegan adaptations to the HVDP can be modeled with foods already in the DGA. METHODS: Using similar food pattern modeling procedures as the 2020 DGA, the nutrient composition of 2 alternative models-dairy-free and vegan-of the 1800-, 2000-, 2200-, and 2400-kcal/d HVDPs was assessed. The dairy food group was replaced with a dairy alternative group comprised of soy milk and soy yogurt fortified with calcium, vitamin A, and vitamin D. For the vegan model, eggs were replaced with equal proportions of vegetarian protein foods. RESULTS: Dairy-free and vegan models required minimal changes to the HVDP. Cup-equivalents and/or ounce-equivalents of vegetables, fruits, grains, oils, and discretionary calories remained unchanged. Content of total fat, polyunsaturated fat, linoleic acid (18:2n-6), linolenic acid, iron, copper, vitamin D, riboflavin, vitamin B-12, and vitamin K increased in both models by ≥10% (all comparisons relative to the original HVDP). Choline increased ≥25% in the dairy-free models. Protein decreased 11% in both 1800-kcal/d models and 10% in both 2000-kcal/d models. Sodium, cholesterol, zinc, and phosphorus decreased across all energy levels in both models, and selenium decreased in the vegan model. Carbohydrate, fiber, saturated fat, EPA, DHA, calcium, magnesium, potassium, vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin C, thiamin, folate, and vitamin B-6 changed ≤10%. Both models contained adequate nutrients to meet Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) for most age and sex groups for which 1800-, 2000-, 2200-, and 2400-kcal/d diets are appropriate. Zinc was the only nutrient below the DRI for males. CONCLUSIONS: The dairy-free and vegan HVDP models could help adults who do not consume dairy foods and/or other animal products to meet nutrition recommendations.

Exploring the Links between Diet and Inflammation: Dairy Foods as Case Studies.

Systemic chronic inflammation may be a contributing factor to many noncommunicable diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and obesity. With the rapid rise of these conditions, identifying the causes of and treatment for chronic inflammation is an important research priority, especially with regard to modifiable lifestyle factors such as diet. An emerging body of evidence indicates that consuming certain foods, including dairy foods like milk, cheese, and yogurt, may be linked to a decreased risk for inflammation. To discuss both broader research on diet and inflammation as well as research on links between individual foods and inflammation, the National Dairy Council sponsored a satellite session entitled "Exploring the Links between Diet and Inflammation: Dairy Foods as Case Studies" at the American Society for Nutrition's 2020 LIVE ONLINE Conference. This article, a review based on the topics discussed during that session, explores the links between diet and inflammation, focusing most closely on the relations between intake of dairy fat and dairy foods like milk, cheese, and yogurt, and biomarkers of inflammation from clinical trials. While there is currently insufficient evidence to prove an "anti-inflammatory" effect of dairy foods, the substantial body of clinical research discussed in this review indicates that dairy foods do not increase concentrations of biomarkers of chronic systemic inflammation.

Modeling the Impact of Fat Flexibility With Dairy Food Servings in the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans Healthy U.S.-Style Eating Pattern.

Background: The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) recommends consuming low-fat or fat-free dairy foods due to concerns about energy and saturated fat intake. It also recommends consuming no more than 10% of daily calories from saturated fat. Objective: The objective was to assess the impact of replacing one serving of fat-free dairy foods in the Healthy U.S.-Style Eating Pattern (HUSEP) from the DGA with one serving of whole- or reduced-fat dairy foods. We hypothesized that this replacement would keep the HUSEP within calorie, saturated fat, and sodium limits. Methods: Utilizing the same modeling procedures as the 2015-2020 DGA, we assessed the nutrient composition of seven alternative models of the 2000-calorie HUSEP. These models replaced all three servings of dairy foods in the HUSEP with an updated fat-free dairy composite (Model 1) or one of three fat-free dairy servings in the HUSEP with: a whole-fat dairy food composite, a reduced-fat/low-fat dairy food composite, whole milk, reduced-fat milk, whole-fat cheese, or reduced-fat cheese (Models 2-7). Results: In all models, the amount of saturated fat did not exceed 10% of total calories, but the amount of energy increased by 45-94 calories. While still lower than current average intake (3,440 mg/d), sodium amounts in four of the seven models exceeded the 2,300 mg/d recommended intake level. Conclusions: Some reduced- and whole-fat dairy foods, especially milk, can fit into calorie-balanced healthy eating patterns that also align with saturated fat recommendations. Allowing some flexibility in fat level of dairy food servings aligns with the recommendations that calories from solid fats and added sugars are best used to increase the palatability of nutrient-dense foods.

Energy and Nutrient Intake of Americans according to Meeting Current Dairy Recommendations.

Most Americans do not meet dairy food recommendations from the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA). This study assesses differences in nutrient intake between Americans who meet recommendations for dairy intake and those who do not, using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2013-2014 and 2015-2016 (n = 5670 children ages 2-18 years and n = 10,112 adults ages 19+). Among children and adults, those meeting dairy food recommendations were significantly more likely to have adequate intake (% above Estimated Average Requirement (EAR)) of calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, riboflavin, vitamin A, vitamin B12, and zinc and consume above the Adequate Intake (AI) for potassium and choline than Americans not meeting dairy recommendations, regardless of age, sex, or race/ethnicity. Americans meeting dairy recommendations were also more likely to exceed recommendations for sodium and saturated fat but consume less added sugars. Nearly 60% of Americans 2 years and older not meeting dairy recommendations consumed calcium and magnesium below the EAR. Only about 20% of Americans who did not meet dairy recommendations consumed above the AI for potassium. Dairy foods make important and unique contributions to dietary patterns, and it can be difficult to meet nutrient needs without consuming recommended amounts of dairy foods.

Toward Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems.

This article is based on a session at ASN 2019 entitled "Addressing the Four Domains of Sustainable Food Systems Science (Health, Economics, Society and the Environment): What Will It Take to Harmonize the Evidence to Advance the Field?" A summary of presentations is included. The presentations addressed the 4 principal domains of sustainability defined as nutrition/health, economics, environment, and society and the ways in which they are represented in current research. The session also introduced metrics and measures that are specific to each domain. Participants discussed next steps to move toward consensus and collaboration among scientific communities, especially those of health/nutrition science and environmental science. Food systems may need to be restructured to ensure that the global food supply provides adequate calories and nutrients at an affordable cost. Finally, the session addressed strategies to implement research concepts and move toward policies that encourage consumers to choose healthy diets from sustainable food systems.

Comparing the cost of essential nutrients from different food sources in the American diet using NHANES 2011-2014.

BACKGROUND: One reason that some Americans do not meet nutrient needs from healthy eating patterns is cost. Food cost affects how people eat, and healthy diets tend to be more expensive. Cost is also important for diet sustainability. Sustainable eating patterns must be both nutritionally adequate and affordable. The objective of this study was to compare the cost of obtaining shortfall nutrients from different food groups to help identify cost-effective ways Americans can move towards healthy and sustainable eating patterns. METHODS: This analysis used dietary intake data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2011 to 2012 and 2013-2014 (n = 5876 children 2-18 years and n = 9953 adults 19-99 years). Americans' nutrient intake from food categories in "What We Eat in America" and the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans was determined using the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies. Food cost and the cost of nutrients were obtained from Center for Nutrition Promotion and Policy food cost database 2001-2002 and 2003-2004 (adjusted for inflation). RESULTS: The daily mean cost of food was $4.74 ± 0.06 for children and $6.43 ± 0.06 for adults. "Protein foods" and "mixed dishes" were the two most expensive food categories (43-45% of daily food costs), while "grains," "fruits," and "vegetables" combined accounted for ~ 18% of the daily cost, and "milk and dairy" accounted for 6-12% of total daily food costs in both adults and children. "Milk and dairy" were the least expensive dietary sources of calcium and vitamin D in the American diet, while "grains" were the least expensive sources of iron and magnesium, and "protein foods" were the least expensive sources of choline. "Fruits" and "vegetables" were the least expensive sources of potassium and vitamin C, respectively, and "snacks and sweets" were the least expensive sources of vitamin E. CONCLUSION: "Milk and dairy" were inexpensive sources of three of the four nutrients of public health concern (calcium, vitamin D, and potassium), while "grains" were the least expensive source of fiber. The results of this work reinforce the importance of consuming a variety of nutrient-rich foods for cost-effective, sustainable eating patterns.

Modeling the Impact of Adding a Serving of Dairy Foods to the Healthy Mediterranean-Style Eating Pattern Recommended by the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

OBJECTIVE: The Healthy Mediterranean-Style Eating Pattern (HMEP) in the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) recommends that adults eating less than 2400 kcal a day consume only two daily servings (or cup-equivalents) of low-fat or fat-free dairy foods like milk, cheese, and yogurt, which does not provide enough calcium, potassium, and vitamin D to meet dietary reference intakes (DRIs). Our objective was to assess the impact of additional servings of dairy foods on the nutrient adequacy of the 1600, 2000, and 2400 kcal HMEP in the 2015 DGA. METHODS: Using the same food pattern modeling procedures as the 2015 DGA, we assessed the nutrient composition of three alternative models of the 1600, 2000, and 2400 kcal HMEP. For Model 1, we increased servings of dairy foods (77 kcal/serving). For Model 2, we added one serving of dairy foods and removed one serving of refined grains (85 kcal/serving), and for Model 3 (2400 kcal HMEP only), we added one-half serving of dairy foods and removed one-half serving of refined grains. We then assessed these models for nutrient adequacy and compared them to the Healthy U.S.-Style Eating Pattern and the HMEP. RESULTS: The changes to the HMEP with these models increased the amounts of several nutrients to encourage, including calcium, vitamin D, potassium, vitamin A, phosphorus, riboflavin, vitamin B12, zinc, and magnesium. For instance, Model 1 increased the calcium (by 295 mg), vitamin D (by 59.3 IU), potassium (by 235 mg), vitamin A (by 98 mcg), and phosphorus (by 232 mg) content of the original HMEP, and Model 3 increased the amounts of these nutrients by half of those amounts. Model 2 increased the calcium content by 266 mg, vitamin D by 58 IU, potassium by 202 mg, vitamin A by 88 mcg, and phosphorus by 193 mg. Notably, Models 1 and 2 increased the vitamin D content of the HMEP to about 62% of the DRI (average across all calorie levels) and the potassium content to 78% of the DRI (average across all calorie levels), from 52% and 73%, respectively, in the original HMEP. Most of our models increased the saturated fat (0.5 g in Model 1 and 0.2 g in Model 2) and sodium (202 mg in Model 1 and 101 mg in Model 2) content as well. The amounts of these nutrients to limit remained within the ranges recommended in the 2015 DGA. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a dairy food serving to the 1600, 2000, and 2400 kcal HMEP brings their nutrient profiles closer to the DRIs for several nutrients to encourage, including calcium, vitamin D, and potassium.