Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Nutrieconomic model can facilitate healthy and low-cost food choices

  • Laura Primavesi (a1), Giovanna Caccavelli (a1), Alessandra Ciliberto (a1) and Emmanuel Pauze (a1)

Abstract

Objective

Promotion of healthy eating can no longer be postponed as a priority, given the alarming growth rate of chronic degenerative diseases in Western countries. We elaborated a nutrieconomic model to assess and identify the most nutritious and affordable food choices.

Design

Seventy-one food items representing the main food categories were included and their nationally representative prices monitored. Food composition was determined using CRA-NUT (Centro di Ricerca per gli Alimenti e la Nutrizione) and IEO (Istituto Europeo di Oncologia) databases. To define food nutritional quality, the mean adequacy ratio and mean excess ratio were combined. Both prices and nutritional quality were normalised for the edible food content and for the recommended serving sizes for the Italian adult population.

Setting

Stores located in different provinces throughout Italy.

Subjects

Not applicable.

Results

Cereals and legumes presented very similar nutritional qualities and prices per serving. Seasonal fruits and vegetables presented differentiated nutritional qualities and almost equal prices. Products of animal origin showed similar nutritional qualities and varied prices: the best nutrieconomic choices were milk, oily fish and poultry for the dairy products, fish and meat groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Analysing two balanced weekly menus, our nutrieconomic model was able to note a significant decrease in cost of approximately 30 % by varying animal-protein sources without affecting nutritional quality. Healthy eating does not necessarily imply spending large amounts of money but rather being able to make nutritionally optimal choices. The nutrieconomic model is an innovative and practical way to help consumers make correct food choices and nutritionists increase the compliance of their patients.

  • 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. 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.

      Nutrieconomic model can facilitate healthy and low-cost food choices
      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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Nutrieconomic model can facilitate healthy and low-cost food choices
      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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Nutrieconomic model can facilitate healthy and low-cost food choices
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

* Corresponding author: Email laura.primavesi@sprim.com

References

Hide All
1. Sofi, F, Cesari, F, Abbate, R et al. (2008) Adherence to Mediterranean diet and health status: meta-analysis. BMJ 337, a1344.
2. Burkert, NT, Rásky, E, Großschädl, F et al. (2013) The influence of socioeconomic factors on health parameters in overweight and obese adults. PLoS One 8, e65407.
3. Raynor, HA, Kilanowski, CK, Esterlis, I et al. (2002) A cost-analysis of adopting a healthful diet in a family-based obesity treatment program. J Am Diet Assoc 102, 645650.
4. Rolls, BJ (2000) The role of energy density in the overconsumption of fat. J Nutr 130, 2S Suppl., 268S271S.
5. Blundell, JE & MacDiarmid, JI (1997) Fat as a risk factor for overconsumption: satiation, satiety, and patterns of eating. J Am Diet Assoc 97, S63S69.
6. Saulle, R, Semyonov, L & La Torre, G (2013) Cost and cost-effectiveness of the Mediterranean diet: results of a systematic review. Nutr 5, 45664586.
7. Schmidhuber, J & Traill, WB (2006) The changing structure of diets in the European Union in relation to healthy eating guidelines. Public Health Nutr 9, 584595.
8. Bonaccio, M, Bonanni, AE, Di Castelnuovo, A et al. (2012) Low income is associated with poor adherence to a Mediterranean diet and a higher prevalence of obesity: cross-sectional results from the Moli-sani study. BMJ Open 2, e001685.
9. Drewnowski, A & Eichelsdoerfer, P (2009) The Mediterranean diet: does it have to cost more? Public Health Nutr 12, 16211628.
10. Darmon, N & Drewnoski, A (2008) Does social class predict diet quality? Am J Clin Nutr 87, 11071117.
11. Neff, RA, Palmer, AM, McKenzie, SE et al. (2009) Food systems and public health disparities. J Hunger Environ Nutr 4, 282314.
12. Drewnowski, A & Darmon, N (2005) Food choices and diet costs: an economic analysis. J Nutr 135, 900904.
13. Hiza, HB, Casavale, KO, Guenther, PM et al. (2013) Diet quality of Americans differs by age, gender, race/ethnicity, income and education level. J Acad Nutr Diet 113, 297306.
14. Kirkpatrick, SI, Dodd, KW, Reedy, J et al. (2012) Income and race/ethnicity are associated with adherence to food-based dietary guideline among US adults and children. J Acad Nutr Diet 112, 624635.
15. Drewnowski, A & Darmon, N (2005) The economics of obesity: dietary energy density and energy cost. Am J Clin Nutr 82, 1 Suppl., 265S273S.
16. Carlson, A & Frazão, E (2014) Food costs, diet quality and energy balance in the United States. Physiol Behav 134, 2031.
17. Rao, M, Afshin, A, Singh, G et al. (2013) Do healthier foods and diet patterns cost more than less healthy options? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 3, e004277.
18. Vieux, F, Soler, LG, Touazi, D et al. (2013) High nutritional quality is not associated with low greenhouse gas emissions in self-selected diets of French adults. Am J Clin Nutr 97, 569583.
19. Istituto di Scienza dell’Alimentazione, Università La Sapienza (2014) Piramide Alimentare. http://www.piramidealimentare.it/ (accessed November 2014).
20. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali (2013) SMS consumatori. www.smsconsumatori.it.
21. Centro di Ricerca per gli Alimenti e la Nutrizione (2014) Tabelle di composizione degli alimenti. http://nut.entecra.it/646/tabelle_di_composizione_degli_alimenti.html (accessed November 2014).
22. Istituto Europeo di Oncologia (2014) Banca dati di composizione degli alimenti per studi epidemiologici in Italia. http://www.bda-ieo.it/ (accessed November 2014).
23. Società Italiana de Nutrizione Umana (2012) LARN. Livelli di Assunzione di Riferimento di Nutrienti ed energia per la popolazione italiana. Documento de sintesi per il XXXV National Congresso Nazonale SINU, Bologna, 2223 ottobre 2012. http://www.sinu.it/documenti/20121016_larn_bologna_sintesi_prefinale.pdf (accessed November 2014).
24. World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations & United Nations University (2007) Protein and Amino Acid Requirements in Human Nutrition. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. WHO Technical Report Series no. 935. Geneva: WHO.
25. European Food Safety Authority, Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (2012) Scientific Opinion on Dietary Reference Values for protein. EFSA J 10, 2557.
26. Carlson, A & Frazão, E (2012) Are Healthy Foods Really More Expensive? It Depends on How You Measure the Price . Economic Information Bulletin no. EIB-96. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service, USDA.
27. Drewnowski, A & Specter, SE (2004) Poverty and obesity: the role of energy density and energy costs. Am J Clin Nutr 79, 616.
28. Drewnowski, A & Barratt-Fornell, A (2004) Do healthier diets cost more? Nutr Today 39, 161168.
29. Andrieu, E, Darmon, N & Drewnowski, A (2006) Low cost diets: more energy, fewer nutrients. Eur J Clin Nutr 60, 434436.
30. Drewnowski, A (2013) New metrics of affordable nutrition: which vegetables provide most nutrients for least cost? J Acad Nutr Diet 113, 11821187.
31. Drewnowski, A, Maillot, M & Darmon, N (2009) Should nutrient profiles be based on 100 g, 100 kcal or serving size? Eur J Clin Nutr 63, 898904.
32. Drewnowski, A (2009) Defining nutrient density: development and validation of the nutrient rich foods index. J Am Coll Nutr 28, issue 4, 421S426S.
33. Drewnowski, A (2010) The Nutrient Rich Foods Index helps to identify healthy, affordable foods. Am J Clin Nutr 91, issue 4, 1095S1101S.

Keywords

Nutrieconomic model can facilitate healthy and low-cost food choices

  • Laura Primavesi (a1), Giovanna Caccavelli (a1), Alessandra Ciliberto (a1) and Emmanuel Pauze (a1)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed