Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, Bilthoven, 3721 MA, The Netherlands.
Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
BMC Public Health. 2022 May 3;22(1):877. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13282-x.
This study investigates nutritional quality, environmental impact and costs of foods and drinks and their consumption in daily diets according to the degree of processing across the Dutch population.
The NOVA classification was used to classify the degree of processing (ultra-processed foods (UPF) and ultra-processed drinks (UPD)). Food consumption data were derived from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2012-2016. Indicators assessed were nutritional quality (saturated fatty acids (SFA), sodium, mono and disaccharides (sugar), fibre and protein), environmental impact (greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and blue water use) and food costs.
The Netherlands.
Four thousand three hundred thirteen Dutch participants aged 1 to 79 years.
Per 100 g, UPF were more energy-dense and less healthy than unprocessed or minimally processed foods (MPF); UPF were associated with higher GHG emissions and lower blue water use, and were cheaper. The energy and sugar content of UPD were similar to those of unprocessed or minimally processed drinks (MPD); associated with similar GHG emissions but blue water use was less, and they were also more expensive. In the average Dutch diet, per 2000 kcal, ultra-processed foods and drinks (UPFD) covered 29% (456 g UPF and 437 g UPD) of daily consumption and 61% of energy intake. UPFD consumption was higher among children than adults, especially for UPD. UPFD consumption determined 45% of GHG emissions, 23% of blue water use and 39% of expenses for daily food consumption. UPFD consumption contributed 54% to 72% to daily sodium, sugar and SFA intake.
Compared with unprocessed or minimally processed foods and drinks, UPF and UPD were found to be less healthy considering their high energy, SFA, sugar and sodium content. However, UPF were associated higher GHG emissions and with less blue water use and food costs. Therefore daily blue water use and food costs might increase if UPF are replaced by those unprocessed or minimally processed. As nutritional quality, environmental impacts and food costs relate differently to the NOVA classification, the classification is not directly applicable to identify win-win-wins of nutritional quality, environmental impact and costs of diets.
本研究根据荷兰人口的加工程度,调查食品和饮料的营养质量、环境影响和成本及其在日常饮食中的消费情况。
使用 NOVA 分类法对加工程度(超加工食品 (UPF) 和超加工饮料 (UPD))进行分类。食物消费数据来自 2012-2016 年荷兰国家食物消费调查。评估的指标包括营养质量(饱和脂肪酸 (SFA)、钠、单糖和双糖(糖)、纤维和蛋白质)、环境影响(温室气体 (GHG) 排放和蓝水使用)和食物成本。
荷兰。
4313 名年龄在 1 至 79 岁的荷兰参与者。
每 100 克 UPF 的能量密度高于未加工或最低限度加工的食品 (MPF),且健康程度较低;UPF 与更高的温室气体排放和更少的蓝水使用有关,而且价格更便宜。与未加工或最低限度加工的饮料 (MPD) 相比,UPD 的能量和糖含量相似;与类似的温室气体排放有关,但蓝水使用较少,价格也更高。在荷兰人的平均饮食中,每 2000 千卡,超加工食品和饮料 (UPFD) 占日常消费的 29%(456 克 UPF 和 437 克 UPD),占能量摄入的 61%。儿童比成年人的 UPFD 消费更高,尤其是 UPD。UPFD 消费决定了每日食物消费的 45%的温室气体排放、23%的蓝水使用和 39%的费用。UPFD 消费占每日钠、糖和 SFA 摄入量的 54%至 72%。
与未加工或最低限度加工的食品和饮料相比,UPF 和 UPD 的能量、SFA、糖和钠含量较高,因此被认为不太健康。然而,UPF 与更高的温室气体排放有关,并且蓝水使用量较少,食物成本也较低。因此,如果用未加工或最低限度加工的食品代替 UPF,每日蓝水使用量和食物成本可能会增加。由于营养质量、环境影响和食品成本与 NOVA 分类的关系不同,因此该分类不能直接用于确定饮食的营养质量、环境影响和成本的双赢。