Skip to main content
×
Home

Identifying whole grain foods: a comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products

  • Rebecca S Mozaffarian (a1), Rebekka M Lee (a1), Mary A Kennedy (a1), David S Ludwig (a2) (a3), Dariush Mozaffarian (a3) (a4) (a5) and Steven L Gortmaker (a1)...
Abstract
AbstractObjective

Eating whole grains (WG) is recommended for health, but multiple conflicting definitions exist for identifying whole grain (WG) products, limiting the ability of consumers and organizations to select such products. We investigated how five recommended WG criteria relate to healthfulness and price of grain products.

Design

We categorized grain products by different WG criteria including: the industry-sponsored Whole Grain stamp (WG-Stamp); WG as the first ingredient (WG-first); WG as the first ingredient without added sugars (WG-first-no-added-sugars); the word ‘whole’ before any grain in the ingredients (‘whole’-anywhere); and a content of total carbohydrate to fibre of ≤10:1 (10:1-ratio). We investigated associations of each criterion with health-related characteristics including fibre, sugars, sodium, energy, trans-fats and price.

Setting

Two major grocery store chains.

Subjects

Five hundred and forty-five grain products.

Results

Each WG criterion identified products with higher fibre than products considered non-WG; the 10:1-ratio exhibited the largest differences (+3·15 g/serving, P < 0·0001). Products achieving the 10:1-ratio also contained lower sugar (−1·28 g/serving, P = 0·01), sodium (−15·4 mg/serving, P = 0·04) and likelihood of trans-fats (OR = 0·14, P < 0·0001), without energy differences. WG-first-no-added-sugars performed similarly, but identified many fewer products as WG and also not a lower likelihood of containing trans-fats. The WG-Stamp, WG-first and ‘whole’-anywhere criteria identified products with a lower likelihood of trans-fats, but also significantly more sugars and energy (P < 0·05 each). Products meeting the WG-Stamp or 10:1-ratio criterion were more expensive than products that did not (+$US 0·04/serving, P = 0·009 and +$US 0·05/serving, P = 0·003, respectively).

Conclusions

Among proposed WG criteria, the 10:1-ratio identified the most healthful WG products. Other criteria performed less well, including the industry-supported WG-Stamp which identified products with higher fibre and lower trans-fats, but also higher sugars and energy. These findings inform efforts by consumers, organizations and policy makers to identify healthful WG products.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Identifying whole grain foods: a comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Identifying whole grain foods: a comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Identifying whole grain foods: a comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email rmozaffa@hsph.harvard.edu
References
Hide All
1.Mozaffarian D, Appel LJ & Van Horn L (2011) Components of a cardioprotective diet: new insights. Circulation 123, 28702891.
2.Ludwig DDS (2002) The glycemic index – physiological mechanisms relating to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. JAMA 287, 24142423.
3.Slavin J, Jacobs D & Marquart L (1997) Whole-grain consumption and chronic disease: protective mechanisms. Nutr Cancer 27, 1421.
4.US Department of Agriculture (2010) Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2010. http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-PolicyDocument.htm (accessed October 2011).
5.US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (2012) Nutrition Standards in the National School Lunch Programs; Final Rule. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-26/pdf/2012-1010.pdf (accessed September 2012).
6. Whole Grains Council (date not known) Whole Grain Statistics. http://www.wholegrainscouncil.org/newsroom/whole-grain-statistics (accessed December 2012).
7.European Food Information Council (2009) Whole Grain Fact Sheet. http://www.eufic.org/article/en/expid/whole-grain-fact-sheet/ (accessed September 2012).
8.Global Industry Analysts, Inc. (2011) Global Whole Grain and High Fiber Foods Market to Reach US$24 Billion by 2015, According to a New Report by Global Industry Analysts, Inc. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/1/prweb8041782.htm (accessed October 2011).
9.European Food Safety Authority (2010) Scientific opinion on the substantiation of health claims related to whole grain (ID 831, 832, 1126, 1268, 1269, 1279, 1271, 1431) pursuant to Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. EFSA Journal 8, 1766.
10.Jonnalagadda SS, Harnack L, Liu RHet al. (2011) Putting the whole grain puzzle together: health benefits associated with whole grains – summary of American Society for Nutrition 2010 Satellite Symposium. J Nutr 141, issue 5, 1011S1022S.
11.Silverglade B & Heller IR (2010) Food labeling chaos: the case for reform. http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_labeling_chaos_report.pdf (accessed May 2010).
12.Kantor LS, Variyam JN, Allshouse JEet al. (2001) Choose a variety of grains daily, especially whole grains: a challenge for consumers. J Nutr 131, 2S-1, 473S486S.
13.Latortue KY & Weber JA (2010) Taking a closer look at nutrition symbols on food labels. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 517519.
14. US Department of Agriculture (date not known) Tips to help you eat whole grains. http://www.choosemyplate.gov/food-groups/grains-tips.html (accessed December 2012).
15.US Food and Drug Administration Consumer Health Information (2009) The scoop on whole grains. http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm151902.htm (accessed November 2011).
16. US Department of Agriculture (date not known) What are ‘added sugars’? http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/added-sugars.html (accessed December 2012).
17.Lloyd-Jones DM, Hong Y, Labarthe Det al. (2010) Defining and setting national goals for cardiovascular health promotion and disease reduction: the American Heart Association's Strategic Impact Goal through 2020 and beyond. Circulation 121, 586613.
18.Chase K, Reicks M, Smith Cet al. (2003) Use of the think-aloud method to identify factors influencing purchase of bread and cereals by low-income African American women and implications for whole-grain education. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 501504.
19.Burgess-Champoux T, Marquart L, Vickers Zet al. (2006) Perceptions of children, parents, and teachers regarding whole-grain foods, and implications for a school-based intervention. J Nutr Educ Behav 38, 230237.
20.Peapod by Stop&Shop (2007) Peapod. www.peapod.com (accessed October 2007).
21.Mozaffarian RS, Wiecha JL, Roth BAet al. (2010) Impact of an organizational intervention designed to improve snack and beverage quality in YMCA after-school programs. Am J Public Health 100, 925932.
22.Cleveland LE, Moshfegh AJ, Albertson AMet al. (2000) Dietary intake of whole grains. J Am Coll Nutr 19, 3 Suppl., 331S338S.
23. US Department of Agriculture (date not known) MyPlate.gov. http://www.choosemyplate.gov/ (accessed December 2012).
24.Campos S, Doxey J & Hammond D (2011) Nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr 14, 14961506.
25.Wills JM, Schmidt DB, Pillo-Blocka Fet al. (2009) Exploring global consumer attitudes toward nutrition information on food labels. Nutr Rev 67, Suppl. 1, S102S106.
26.Mozaffarian D, Afshin A, Benowitz NLet al. (2012) Population approaches to improve diet, physical activity, and smoking habits: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 126, 15141563.
27.Jenkins DJ, Kendall CW, Augustin LSet al. (2002) Effect of wheat bran on glycemic control and risk factors for cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 25, 15221528.
28.Jenkins DJ, Kendall CW, McKeown-Eyssen Get al. (2008) Effect of a low-glycemic index or a high-cereal fiber diet on type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. JAMA 300, 27422753.
29.Danaei G, Ding EL, Mozaffarian Det al. (2009) The preventable causes of death in the United States: comparative risk assessment of dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors. PloS Med 6, e1000058.
30.Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DMet al. (2012) Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2012 update a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 125, E2E220.
31.Vesper HW, Kuiper HC, Mirel LBet al. (2012) Levels of plasma trans-fatty acids in non-Hispanic white adults in the United States in 2000 and 2009. JAMA 307, 562563.
32.Adams JF & Engstrom A (2000) Helping consumers achieve recommended intakes of whole grain foods. J Am Coll Nutr 19, 3 Suppl., 339S344S.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Mozaffarian Supplementary Material
Appendix

 Word (154 KB)
154 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 38
Total number of PDF views: 365 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1324 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 14th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.