Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » Boston, Massachusetts » Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center On Aging » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #199687
Title: Nutrient Density: Making the Pyramid Come Alive

Author
item KENNEDY, EILEEN - TUFTS UNIVERSITY
item RACSA, PATRICK - TUFTS UNIVERSITY
item Dallal, Gerald
item Jacques, Paul
item Lichtenstein, Alice
item GOLDBERG, JEANNE - TUFTS UNIVERSITY
item WILDE, PARKE - TUFTS UNIVERSITY
item HYATT JR, RAYMOND - TUFTS UNIVERSITY

Submitted to: Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology Conference
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/1/2006
Publication Date: 4/1/2006
Citation: Kennedy, E., Racsa, P., Dallal, G.E., Jacques, P.F., Lichtenstein, A.H., Goldberg, J., Wilde, P., Hyatt Jr, R.R. 2006. Nutrient Density: Making the Pyramid Come Alive. Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology Conference. 20: A1311.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA’s) and MyPyramid, which accompanies it, emphasize nutrient density as a way to choose foods within food groups. Yet, nutrient density is a difficult concept for consumers to apply to individual foods. In addition, consensus is lacking on how to measure nutrient density. Based on the 2005 DGA’s using the ratio of shortfall to avoidance nutrients, three algorithms (Food Quality Scores – FQS) for measuring nutrient density were developed and compared: (1) a universal algorithm to be applied to all foods (2) a food group specific algorithm (3) an algorithm with an expanded set of 28 nutrients. The models were modified on the basis of serving size and adolescent and children’s recommended daily intakes. Additional analyses were conducted weighting specific nutrients based on probability of inadequacy in the US population. Each algorithm was applied to two databases, the USDA Nutrient Database and a commercial database of consumer buying patterns consisting of 30 million consumers. While the absolute scores were modestly different among the three FQS’s models, the categorization of foods into good, better, or best was unchanged. The FQS’s enabled a robust and easy method for expressing nutrient density.