| Literature DB >> 25528079 |
Colin D Rehm1, Adam Drewnowski2, Pablo Monsivais3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Dietary guidance emphasizes plain low-fat and skim milk over whole, reduced-fat, and flavored milk (milk eligible for replacement [MER]). The objective of this study was to evaluate the population-level impact of such a change on energy, macronutrient and nutrient intakes, and diet cost.Entities:
Keywords: child; dairy products; diet; energy intake; obesity; policy
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25528079 PMCID: PMC4315137 DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2014.11.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nutr Educ Behav ISSN: 1499-4046 Impact factor: 3.045
Consumption of Milk by Sociodemographic Characteristics Among US Children and Adolescents From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001–2004
| Consuming Whole Milk, 2% Milk, And/or Flavored Milk With Added Sugar | Consuming Skim or Low-Fat Milk But Not Whole Milk, 2% Milk, And/or Flavored Milk With Added Sugar | Consuming No Fluid Milk | Global | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Weighted % | n | Weighted % | n | Weighted % | ||
| Total | 4,413 | 56.8 | 623 | 12.2 | 3,076 | 31.0 | – |
| Age group, y | |||||||
| 2–5 (reference) | 1,257 | 73.7 | 111 | 11.1 | 251 | 15.2 | < .001 |
| 6–11 | 1,290 | 63.3*** | 163 | 13.1 | 583 | 23.7*** | |
| 12–19 | 1,866 | 44.1*** | 349 | 12.1 | 2,242 | 43.8*** | |
| Race/ethnicity | |||||||
| Non-Hispanic white (reference) | 1,296 | 55.3 | 383 | 16.6 | 746 | 28.1 | < .001 |
| Non-Hispanic black | 1,374 | 55.4 | 52 | 1.7*** | 1,295 | 42.9*** | |
| Mexican American/other Hispanic | 1,621 | 64.8*** | 165 | 6.4*** | 944 | 28.7 | |
| Other race/mixed race | 122 | 52.5 | 23 | 8.7** | 91 | 38.7* | |
| Income-to-Poverty ratio (%) | |||||||
| < 130 | 1,960 | 64.1*** | 117 | 4.4 | 1,297 | 31.5 | < .001 |
| 130–349 | 1,512 | 57.4** | 213 | 11.5*** | 1,055 | 31.1 | |
| ≥ 350 (reference) | 709 | 47.8 | 264 | 21.9*** | 564 | 30.2 | |
| Weight status | |||||||
| Underweight | 149 | 72.1** | 12 | 5.3** | 81 | 22.6** | < .001 |
| Healthy weight (reference) | 2,770 | 58.8 | 357 | 12.2 | 1,806 | 29.0 | |
| Overweight | 637 | 50.3** | 119 | 14.9 | 499 | 34.9 | |
| Obese | 685 | 51.0*** | 111 | 11.1 | 615 | 37.9 | |
*.05 > P > .01; **.01 > P > .001; ***P < .001.
P is from a survey-weighted global chi-square test indicating differences in milk consumption by age group, race/ethnicity, ratio of income to poverty, and body mass index status.
Underweight is defined as < 5th percentile, healthy weight as 5th to 84.9th percentile, overweight as 85th to 94.9th percentile, and obese as ≥ 95th percentile based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention standard growth charts.
Observed and Modeled Energy, Nutrient Intake, and Diet Cost (SD) After Complete Replacement, 2001–2004
| Above Threshold (%) | Observed | Model 1: Skim Milk | Model 2: Low-Fat Milk | Benchmark | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy, kcal | |||||
| All children | – | 2,095 (921) | 2,031 (907) | 2,051 (921) | > 100-kcal decrease |
| MER consumers | – | 2,142 (929) | 2,029 (908) | 2,064 (911) | |
| Total fat (% energy) | |||||
| All children | 35.7 (47.9) | 32.3 (7.7) | 30.4 (8.3) | 31.2 (8.0) | > 3.5% decrease |
| MER consumers | 36.7 (48.2) | 32.7 (7.2) | 29.2 (8.0) | 30.7 (7.5) | |
| Saturated fat (% energy) | |||||
| All children | 64.8 (47.7) | 11.4 (3.5) | 10.0 (3.5) | 10.6 (3.3) | > 1% decrease |
| MER consumers | 74.1 (43.8) | 12.1 (3.2) | 9.6 (3.3) | 10.7 (3.1) | |
| Cholesterol, mg | |||||
| All children | 21.4 (41.0) | 228 (193) | 210 (191) | 218 (192) | > 30-mg decrease |
| MER consumers | 21.9 (41.3) | 234 (185) | 203 (182) | 216 (183) | |
| Added sugar, teaspoons | |||||
| All children | 39.3 (48.8) | 23.7 (17.7) | 23.0 (17.6) | 23.0 (17.6) | > 2.4-teaspoon decrease |
| MER consumers | 37.6 (48.4) | 23.3 (17.7) | 22.1 (17.6) | 22.1 (17.6) | |
| Calcium, mg | |||||
| All children | 42.0 (49.4) | 1,002 (612) | 1,027 (632) | 1,012 (619) | > 100-mg increase |
| MER consumers | 52.4 (49.5) | 1,147 (602) | 1,192 (626) | 1,165 (611) | |
| Potassium, mg | |||||
| All children | 12.9 (33.5) | 2,302 (1,152) | 2,317 (1,160) | 2,301 (1,151) | > 350-mg increase |
| MER consumers | 15.9 (36.6) | 2,483 (1,154) | 2,509 (1,163) | 2,482 (1,152) | |
| Diet cost (dollars) | |||||
| All children | – | 3.85 (1.99) | 3.88 (2.00) | 3.79 (1.97) | ± 10% |
| MER consumers | – | 3.86 (1.92) | 3.91 (1.89) | 3.76 (1.89) |
MER indicates milk eligible for replacement.
Note: P is from a 1-sided test with the exception of diet cost, which is from a 2-sided test.
Difference between modeled diets and observed diets is significantly different (P < .001) from the specified benchmark value
Threshold values correspond to the Recommended Daily Intake for each outcome of interest as follows: 35% energy from total fat, 10% energy from saturated fat, 300 mg for cholesterol, 1,000 mg for calcium, and 3,500 mg for potassium. There is no Recommended Daily Intake for added sugar, so 24 teaspoons was used as the threshold value
All children refers to all children aged 2–19 years who completed a valid 24-h recall (n = 8,112)
MER consumers refers to all children aged 2–19 years who reported consuming any type of milk eligible for replacement models, including whole-fat milk, 2% (reduced-fat) milk, and flavored milk with added sugar (n = 4,413)
Corresponds to 10% change in reference value
For children aged 2–3 years, the maximum percentage of energy from total fat is 40%. Among all children aged 2–3 years (n = 932), 14.8% (SD, 35.5%) consumed more than 40% of energy from total fat. Among children aged 2–3 years who were MER consumers (n = 736), 15.2% (SD, 36%) consumed more than 40% of energy from total fat.
Estimated Survey-Weighted Mean Energy, Nutrient Intake, and Diet Cost (SD) After Replacing Whole and Reduced-Fat Milk With Low-Fat and Skim Milk on a Proportional Basis Among Children Consuming Whole And/or Reduced-Fat Milk, 2001–2004 (n = 4,413)
| Observed | 15% Change | 25% Change | 50% Change | 75% Change | Benchmark | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy, kcal | 2,142 (929) | 2,128 (928) | 2,116 (925) | 2,094 (922) | 2,070 (918) | 100 kcal |
| Total fat (% energy) | 32.7 (7.2) | 32.3 (7.2) | 32.0 (7.3) | 31.3 (7.5) | 30.7 (7.6) | ± 3.5% change |
| Saturated fat (% energy) | 12.1 (3.2) | 11.8 (3.2) | 11.6 (3.2) | 11.2 (3.3) | 10.7 (3.3) | ± 1% change |
| Cholesterol, mg | 234 (185) | 230 (185) | 227 (185) | 221 (184) | 215 (183) | ± 30-mg change |
| Added sugar, teaspoons | 23.3 (17.7) | 23.1 (17.7) | 22.9 (17.7) | 22.7 (17.7) | 22.4 (17.6) | ± 2.4-teaspoon change |
| Diet cost (dollars) | 3.86 (1.92) | 3.85 (1.92) | 3.85 (1.92) | 3.85 (1.92) | 3.84 (1.92) | ± 10% change |
Notes: Whole and reduced-fat milk was replaced with low-fat and skim milk on a random 50–50 basis. For example, for the 15% change model, 15% of consumption reports were first randomly selected and half of those reports were replaced with low-fat milk and the other half with skim milk. Data shown correspond to survey-weighted means and SDs. P is from a 1-sided test, with the exception of diet cost, which is from a 2-sided test.
Corresponds to 10% change in daily value (see Table 1 footnote for definitions).
Difference between modeled diets and observed diets is significantly different (P < .001) from the specified benchmark value
Estimated Survey-Weighted Mean (SD) Energy, Nutrient Intake, and Diet Cost After Replacing Flavored Milka Among Those Consuming Flavored Milk,b 2001–2004
| Observed | Replacement With Skim and 1% White Milk on a 50:50 Basis | Benchmark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy, kcal | 2,194 (832) | 2,062 (813) | 100 kcal |
| Total fat (% energy) | 32.4 (5.8) | 31.8 (7.2) | ± 3.5% change |
| Saturated fat (% energy) | 12.0 (3.0) | 11.2 (3.1) | ± 1% change |
| Cholesterol, mg | 232 (172) | 217 (169) | ± 30-mg change |
| Added sugar, teaspoons | 24.6 (14.9) | 20.0 (14.2) | ± 2.4-teaspoon change |
| Calcium, mg | 1,212 (566) | 1,250 (566) | ± 100-mg change |
| Potassium, mg | 2,654 (1,121) | 2,622 (1,107) | ± 350-mg change |
| Diet cost ($) | 3.90 (1.86) | 3.82 (1.85) | ± 10% change |
Note: P is from a 1-sided test, with the exception of diet cost, which is from a 2-sided test.
Difference between modeled diets and observed diets is significantly different (P < .001) from the specified benchmark value
With skim and low-fat milk on a 50–50 basis
n = 1,159 who consumed flavored milk
Corresponds to 10% change in daily value (values are defined in the footnote to Table 1).