Next Article in Journal
Implementing a Health and Wellbeing Programme for Children in Early Childhood: A Preliminary Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Association between Dietary Patterns of Meat and Fish Consumption with Bone Mineral Density or Fracture Risk: A Systematic Literature
Previous Article in Journal
Insights into the Hexose Liver Metabolism—Glucose versus Fructose
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Satiating Properties of Pork are not Affected by Cooking Methods, Sousvide Holding Time or Mincing in Healthy Men—A Randomized Cross-Over Meal Test Study
Open AccessReview

Broad and Inconsistent Muscle Food Classification Is Problematic for Dietary Guidance in the U.S.

1
Department of Animal Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
2
Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Nutrients 2017, 9(9), 1027; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9091027
Received: 5 August 2017 / Revised: 5 September 2017 / Accepted: 12 September 2017 / Published: 16 September 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Meat Consumption and Human Health)
Dietary recommendations regarding consumption of muscle foods, such as red meat, processed meat, poultry or fish, largely rely on current dietary intake assessment methods. This narrative review summarizes how U.S. intake values for various types of muscle foods are grouped and estimated via methods that include: (1) food frequency questionnaires; (2) food disappearance data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service; and (3) dietary recall information from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. These reported methods inconsistently classify muscle foods into groups, such as those previously listed, which creates discrepancies in estimated intakes. Researchers who classify muscle foods into these groups do not consistently considered nutrient content, in turn leading to implications of scientific conclusions and dietary recommendations. Consequentially, these factors demonstrate a need for a more universal muscle food classification system. Further specification to this system would improve accuracy and precision in which researchers can classify muscle foods in nutrition research. Future multidisciplinary collaboration is needed to develop a new classification system via systematic review protocol of current literature. View Full-Text
Keywords: muscle foods; assessment methods; nutrient content; dietary recommendations; classification; specification muscle foods; assessment methods; nutrient content; dietary recommendations; classification; specification
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Gifford, C.L.; O’Connor, L.E.; Campbell, W.W.; Woerner, D.R.; Belk, K.E. Broad and Inconsistent Muscle Food Classification Is Problematic for Dietary Guidance in the U.S.. Nutrients 2017, 9, 1027.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop