3.9 Article

Comparing the Nutrient Rich Foods Index with Go, Slow, and Whoa Foods

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
Volume 111, Issue 2, Pages 280-284

Publisher

AMER DIETETIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2010.10.045

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Dairy Council, a member of the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute has grouped foods and beverages into three classes: Go, Slow, and Whoa, as part of a children's guide to eating right. Using nutrient composition data in the 2004 Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies, this descriptive study compared the Go, Slow, and Whoa food classes to tertiles of food rankings generated by the Nutrient Rich Foods Index. A total of 1,045 foods and beverages were first assigned into Go, Slow, and Whoa classes and then ranked by the Nutrient Rich Foods Index nutrient profile model. The Nutrient Rich Foods Index model was based on nine nutrients to encourage: protein, fiber, vitamins A, C, and E, calcium, iron, magnesium, and potassium; and on three nutrients to limit: saturated fat, added sugar, and sodium, all calculated per 100 calories. Both the Go, Slow, and Whoa and the Nutrient Rich Foods Index models readily distinguished between energy-dense and nutrient-rich beverages and foods, and the three Go, Slow, and Whoa classes closely corresponded to tertiles of Nutrient Rich Foods Index scores. There were some disagreements in the class assignment of fortified cereals, some dairy products, and diet beverages. Unlike the Go, Slow, and Whoa model, the Nutrient Rich Foods Index model produced continuous scores that could be used to rank foods within a given class. The study provides an illustration of how diverse nutrient profiling systems can be used to identify healthful foods and beverages. J Am Diet Assoc. 2011;111:280-284.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available