Human Nutrition

Mary Jo Feeney

8/3/2022 6:49:49 PM

Hopefully bioactives will be included in analysis for FoodData Central - and a way for the serving sizes in FDC to be adjusted beyond what is currently there.   Will some of the specialty databases (flavonoids e.g.) be merged or someway linked to FDC so there is indeed one comprehensive database resource?

Juan Landivar

8/25/2022 11:20:35 AM

This is an essential research topic.  Need to create or strengthen "Evidence Centers" where consumers and health professionals need to obtain reliable-science base information on food composition and its health benefits.  

Gregory Miller

8/25/2022 3:44:03 PM

Data provided from this work is important and utilized by many to gain important insights. Keeping it current is important.

How will you deal with food matrix, food is more than the sum of the individual components and more work is needed on this issue.

Will you work with private sector, to bring in their data on food composition and update with reformulation.

Cindy Davis

9/14/2022 12:08:50 PM

Thank you for your comment- we see food industries as important stakeholders.  We are putting increasing emphasis on whole foods and processing.  We do include data from the private sector through the branded foods database and we are seeking ways to include more data.

Academy's Council on Research

9/19/2022 1:01:10 PM

Comments from members from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Council on Research:

“These efforts will strengthen public-private partnerships….”  

How will such partnerships be strengthened while still maintaining independence of each partner?  In other words, government nutrition decisions should be guided by scientific evidence, but private industry also have commercial interests – there may be conflict.  On the other hand, government decisions are sometimes made with too much consideration for current administration policy preferences (that may or may not be universally supported across the nation), how will private industry remain viable and free of federal policy preference (that are subject to change) vs scientific-derived decisions (that should remain more constant) that can play a role in private industry innovation and discovery?

Paul M Coates

9/21/2022 2:00:46 PM

This comment actually applies to several of the areas of emphasis.

It is past time to focus attention on the dietary habits of, and dietary guidance for, underserved and underrepresented subpopulations.  This of course includes minority populations, but also rural American people who have not routinely been part of our scientific enterprise.

Cindy Davis

9/21/2022 4:53:57 PM

Thank you and we agree with your comment.

Shalene McNeill, PhD, RD

9/27/2022 3:12:02 PM

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, a contractor to the Beef Checkoff, appreciates the opportunity to provide the following considerations in response to the USDA’s request for stakeholder input on research priorities for its human nutrition research program over the next five years. In this consideration, the Beef Checkoff submits factual information to the relevant topic. As a research and promotion organization, The Beef Checkoff does not and cannot attempt to influence policy.

As evidenced by the recent White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health,(1) food and nutrition security are critical public health issues facing Americans each day. Prioritizing research to best assess the nutrient density of foods, including accurate measurement and evaluation of food composition and nutrient data, based on the current food supply and consumers’ consumption habits, is paramount to providing Americans with evidence-based, practical dietary guidance that can help improve nutrition security and reduce the risk of diet-related diseases.(2-4)

To that end, comprehensive, updated nutrient datasets for foods in USDA’s Food Data Central are necessary for accurate assessments of foods’ nutrient density and bioavailability, to effectively inform evaluations of food composition within and among food groups and dietary guidance. Accurate assessments include comprehensive macro- and micronutrient data, complete fatty acid profiles, and essential amino acids to inform protein quality measures. Research considerations in this area include:
•  Continue to conduct research to better understand and measure nutrient and micronutrient bioavailability and consider how to include these measures in Food Data Central
·  Conduct research to better understand the impact of the overall food matrix on nutrient adequacy and human health
·  Conduct research to understand the impact of food preparation and processing on nutrient bioavailability and absorption
·  Find cost efficiencies for updating nutrient data of foods in USDA Food Data Central by streamlining the sampling protocol for updating the nutrient data composition of foods and acquiring missing or expanded nutrient data aspects like amino acid composition, fatty acid composition.
·  Complete nutritional profile of all foods included in the USDA Food Data Central
o  As an example, the USDA Food Data Central added a Branded Foods Database to aid in the understanding of the basic nutritional profile of these foods. This Branded Foods Database includes basic data required for the Nutrition Facts label but provides an incomplete snapshot of the food’s composition as compared to the SR Legacy Foods which contain more complete nutritional profiles which include essential amino acid and fatty acid data. Requiring all foods in the USDA Food Data Central (including SR Legacy Foods and Branded Foods)  to have complete nutritional profile including a full amino acid profile, fatty acid profile etc. allow researchers and consumers to have a greater understanding of the nutritional quality of that food.


As noted above, accurate assessments of essential amino acid intake are increasingly important, particularly with the growing prevalence of plant-based meat and dairy alternatives in the marketplace, and as dietary guidelines recommend greater inclusion of incomplete, plant-based proteins in the diet.(5-7) While Food Data Central includes amino acids in the collected nutrients, amino acids do not appear to be included in the USDA ARS What We Eat in America (WWEIA), Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS) and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) – which are all critical assessment tools used to inform dietary guidance. Research considerations in this area include:
•  Continue to collect amino acid data -- and ensure that data is incorporated within all the appropriate food component and nutrient databases utilized to analyze national dietary intake surveys, to help assess Americans’ adequate intake of essential amino acids for health
·  Add protein quality scoring to Food Data Central, including scoring consistent with both the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) and the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) approaches
·  Monitor and report essential amino acid intake of Americans to accurately assess trends in intake that could inform future public health guidance

Evidence-based dietary guidance must be informed by an accurate assessment of Americans’ current consumption trends (for both foods and nutrients), the nutritional impact of those foods on their overall diet quality, and the role of those foods in dietary patterns and human health. Dietary guidance informed by these measures assumes foods are clearly and consistently defined in nutrition research, including dietary assessment tools, observational evidence, and clinical trials.

Currently, there are significant inconsistencies and inaccuracies in how red meat is defined, grouped, and analyzed, which may affect the accuracy of red meat-focused dietary pattern recommendations.(8-9) For example, more granular meat group patterns, including subgroup specificity, as well as more consistent terminology and classification of red meat in research (observational and clinical trials) has been proposed to provide a more accurate perspective of dietary patterns and nutrient contributions, to better inform public health guidance.(9-10) In addition, clear and descriptive meat terminology is essential to accurately compare studies and findings in systematic evidence reviews, which inform public health guidance.(9)

To that end, there is a need to prioritize the develop consistent definitions for meat terminology that is utilized in human nutrition research, dietary pattern modeling and dietary assessment methods such as the What We Eat in America survey,(10) including:
•  Definitions for meat, red meat, poultry, and processed meat
•  Definition and recognition of the broader category of processed meats, especially given that processed meats are more varied than cured meats
•  Disaggregation of meat item clusters to represent differences more accurately across cured, processed, and fresh meat and poultry products


References
1.  White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health. health.gov/.../white-house-conference-hunger-nutrition-and-health
2.  Drewnowski A, Dwyer J, King JC, Weaver CM. A proposed nutrient density score that includes food groups and nutrients to better align with dietary guidance. Nutr Rev. 2019 Jun 1;77(6):404-416.
3.  Neale EP, Tapsell LC. Perspective: The Evidence-Based Framework in Nutrition and Dietetics: Implementation, Challenges, and Future Directions. Adv Nutr. 2019 Jan 1;10(1):1-8.
4.  Thorndike AN, Gardner CD, Kendrick KB, Seligman HK, Yaroch AL, Gomes AV, Ivy KN, Scarmo S, Cotwright CJ, Schwartz MB; American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee. Strengthening US Food Policies and Programs to Promote Equity in Nutrition Security: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2022 Jun 14;145(24):e1077-e1093.
5.  Lim MT, Pan BJ, Toh DWK, Sutanto CN, Kim JE. Animal Protein versus Plant Protein in Supporting Lean Mass and Muscle Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2021 Feb 18;13(2):661.
6.  Park S, Church DD, Schutzler SE, Azhar G, Kim IY, Ferrando AA, Wolfe RR. Metabolic Evaluation of the Dietary Guidelines' Ounce Equivalents of Protein Food Sources in Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Nutr. 2021 May 11;151(5):1190-1196.
7.  Gwin JA, Carbone JW, Rodriguez NR, Pasiakos SM. Physiological Limitations of Protein Foods Ounce Equivalents and the Underappreciated Role of Essential Amino Acid Density in Healthy Dietary Patterns. J Nutr. 2021 Nov 2;151(11):3276-3283.
8.  Gifford CL, O'Connor LE, Campbell WW, Woerner DR, Belk KE. Broad and Inconsistent Muscle Food Classification Is Problematic for Dietary Guidance in the U.S. Nutrients. 2017 Sep 16;9(9):1027.
9.  O'Connor LE, Gifford CL, Woerner DR, Sharp JL, Belk KE, Campbell WW. Dietary Meat Categories and Descriptions in Chronic Disease Research Are Substantively Different within and between Experimental and Observational Studies: A Systematic Review and Landscape Analysis. Adv Nutr. 2020 Jan 1;11(1):41-51.
10.  More Than Meats the Eye: Accuracy and Precision in Modeling and Classifying Red Meat Consumption to Inform Meaningful Public Health Guidance (Symposium hosted by American Society for Nutrition on September 21, 2022, recording available at eventscribe.net/2022/ASN/index.asp)

IHA

9/28/2022 11:18:35 AM

Expanding data on composition of foods, including variance in food components, for publicly accessible databases, such as Food Data Central is an important objective of the USDA-ARS NP 107.  The Foundation Foods database is of particular importance.  Currently, Foundation Foods still relies on Legacy foods which they make up the bulk of core foods or single, minimally processed food data—data that is used as the building blocks of more complex foods in FNDDS or the Survey Foods.  The additional metadata (geographic location, sampling and analytics, processing, genotype, production data and other agricultural information) in the new Foundation Foods database is essential to advance the science around food as it relates to health, especially as the research around precision nutrition evolves. While the variability of food components is important to capture, single-reference values are critical to evaluate trends over time in changes in the food supply.  Variability in food components may have important health implications especially in the area of metabolomics and as the science around precision health evolves.  However, single-average values for food components that reflect the populations studied, food availability, and/or market share are critical in epidemiological research. These factors have the potential to disrupt the ability of the USDA database to inform not only research, but also monitoring and policy applications (e.g. the Dietary Guidelines).

It is also important to consider scientific relevant bioactive (broader nutrition exposures) as key components to FNDDS and other databases.  Evidence-based inclusion or exclusion of the food components (nutrients, bioactives) as is available should be a priority.  “Specific Component Data Sets” are available through USDA’s Methods and Application Food Composition Laboratory as smaller datasets of many of the bioactives (e.g., pro-anthocyanidins, isoflavones, glucosinolates) from specific foods but these components are not included in the larger databases (e.g., FNDDS). Updates and expansion of these limited datasets such that they could be more easily applied to WWEIA survey data and other epidemiological research is needed.  Linkages to other available bioactive and food chemical data could potentially enhance and streamline these updates and the development of these should be considered.  

The USDA Branded Food Product Database continues to grow and expand as an invaluable resource.  It provides a plethora of data that is centrally located, and its strengths are full ingredient lists and label nutrient values.  Full ingredient lists have been important for identifying allergens and other components of considerable research interest (e.g., chemicals used in processing such as stabilizers, preservatives, colorings, flavor enhancers etc.).  Future enhancements to the database should include more nutrient and other bioactive food components, many of which are available on product websites.  Feasibility of using the Branded Food Product Database to update other applications using this data should be explored.  While the Branded Food Product Database is an invaluable resource with important detailed information, it is particularly vulnerable to outdated data as the marketplace changes rapidly.  Processes and procedures to ensure that data are current and reflective of the current market are critical.  While USDA and its partners cannot require the food industry to participate, it can put procedures in place to remove and ensure the regular updates occur for industry contributors.

The USDA databases are not only a strength of our US based dietary research but are used globally and, in many cases, form the basis of food composition databases in other global food systems or countries.  It is important to consider the impact that changes, updates, and additions to the USDA databases and the research on food composition has on global databases.

Finally, better communications around how to use the various food composition databases and how to interpret available data is needed for the research community.  For example, what value to use when multiple values exist for a food or if there is new experimental data available that contradicts what is available. Researchers better information about the purpose of the data available to understand what research questions it can help answer.  

Mary Ellen Sanders, Maria Marco, Chris Cifelli, Bob Hutkins

9/28/2022 5:15:13 PM

Strong associative data relates consumption of live dietary microbes with health endpoints, beyond the nutrients ordinarily present in the food (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-020-00390-5). Lines of investigation are underway, researching the role of live dietary microbes in health (https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxac074; https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxaa323). Preliminary results of an NHANES analysis suggest that several health indicators are associated with consumption of foods with higher live dietary microbe contents (manuscript in preparation). This finding is consistent with research that has shown that the microbiome affects human health across all life stages, from infancy to late adulthood (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-022-00768-z). To better understand the role of live dietary microbes in health, we encourage USDA to explore research that will:
-  Quantify the numbers of live microbes in the foods of Americans, which may require methods development
-  Determine the genera and species of live microbes that are in the foods of Americans
-  Determine how diversity of live microbes in foods relates to the diversity of the microbiota of people eating those foods
-  Utilize prospective databases to determine impact of fermented foods/live microbe foods on long term health outcomes

Grain Foods Foundation

9/29/2022 12:33:23 PM

The Grain Foods Foundation is an organization committed to nutrition education programming that is firmly rooted in sound science. Thus, we appreciate the opportunity to provide the following considerations, in response to the USDA’s request for stakeholder input on research priorities for its human nutrition program over the next five years.

Grain foods – including whole, enriched, and refined grains – are a foundational source of several essential nutrients that optimize health and wellbeing, including many nutrients that are under-consumed by Americans each day. Almost 40% of dietary fiber, a shortfall nutrient, comes from refined grain foods; while enriched grains are the largest contributor of folic acid in the American diet. Yet, the nutrient profiles for enriched and refined grains are not provided in the Foundation Foods database in Food Data Central and only two whole grains are included (i.e., oat flour and spelt flour). Furthermore, enriched and refined grains are not delineated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)’s What We Eat in America (WWEIA) or subsequently the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS). In addition, food category sources of whole grains are not captured in WWEIA for infants. WWEIA and FNDDS are critical assessment tools used to evaluate dietary intakes among Americans and to inform dietary guidance. Thus, it is vital that these databases are inclusive of more grains foods. Research recommendations in this area include:
- Expanding the Foundation Foods database to include enriched and refined grains and to incorporate more whole grains
- Categorizing grains as whole, refined, and enriched within WWEIA and capturing intake from all grains across the lifespan
- Continuing monthly updates to the Branded Foods database that include whole, enriched, and refined grain products

Leslie Wada

9/29/2022 1:03:59 PM

We support continued work in expanding data on the composition of foods and we would like to see updated information on bioactives such as total anthocyanins and other flavonoids.  Information from the USDA database is extremely important to a commodity group such as USHBC because communications regarding the composition of blueberries depend upon USDA data.  Until more data is added to Food Data Central, we have been relying on older values in the Legacy database.  
We also support continued work in determining food/nutrient consumption and dietary patterns of Americans, but this too requires a comprehensive food composition database.

Cindy Davis

9/29/2022 1:18:52 PM

Thank you for your comments.

Institute of Food Technologists

9/29/2022 1:49:35 PM

The Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) appreciates the opportunity to provide input to the USDA ARS research priorities.  IFT agrees that there is a need to expand and update the current data on composition of foods, such as what is found in Food Data Central. IFT would also recommend using the most up-to-date methodologies for determining nutrient content and food composition. As an example, there are new, approved AOAC methodologies for determining dietary fiber content of foods and these should be employed to update food composition databases. USDA should also consider how to align laboratory methods with new regulatory definitions applied to nutrients, such as dietary fibers added to foods (which require a physiological benefit in addition to analytical detection) and added sugars (which require manufacturer documentation as there is no analytical method) to create a database that can more accurately reflect the nutrient content of foods.

IFT also agrees that the What We Eat in America survey is critical for understanding food consumption in the US. We also recommend that future surveys increase sampling of diverse groups, such as different ethnicities, low-income populations, SNAP and WIC participants, pregnant or lactating women, vegetarians, vegans, etc. It is critical to understand intake patterns in these populations to inform dietary guidance unique to these populations. We would also suggest USDA ARS consider additional research into real-time dietary assessment tools, such as wearable sensors, that might be able to be piloted as a potential survey tool in WWEIA. This could yield more reliable intake data than tools based on memory alone. It could also potentially yield multiple days of intake which would more accurately reflect typical intake than a 24 h recall.

IFT also suggests that USDA ARS consider opportunities to work with the ERS and leverage data from private organizations, such IRI/NPD to merge food composition data with data on purchasing habits and consumption frequency across geographies and diverse groups of individuals.

Chris Cifelli

9/29/2022 2:22:00 PM

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (1) is instrumental to nutrition science and public health. Besides traditional research studies, the data from the nutrition component of NHANES, What We Eat in America, is used by the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (2) to help inform the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (3).

A current limitation of NHANES is that it does not consistently collect all health outcomes and/or biomarkers across every 2-year cycle that are pertinent to health today (4). For example, depression, anxiety, cognitive function in children, adolescents, and young adults, cardiovascular fitness, grip strength, muscle strength are key health and wellness outcomes that have not been measured consistently. This lack of consistent data collection forces researchers to rely on older NHANES data that have the outcome of interest to test their hypothesis. Unfortunately, older NHANES data do not reflect current food and diet intakes nor is the data separated into the same racial/ethnic groups as the most recent data. Therefore, it is crucial that this important resource is adequately supported to allow for a more consistent measurement of health outcomes across each cycle. This support will help NHANES continue to fulfill its goal of assessing the current health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United States and allow for up-to-date research and education opportunities.

About National Dairy Council: NDC, a non-profit organization founded by U.S. dairy farmers in 1915, is committed to research and education about dairy’s role in the diet and its contributions to nutrition and health within a sustainable food system. The U.S. dairy community is working to be an environmental solution to enhance natural resources and ecosystems and has set environmental sustainability goals to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality and improve water usage and quality by 2050.

References:

1.  National Center for Health Statistics: About NHANES. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm. Accessed September 26, 2022.
2.  Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. 2020. Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee: Advisory Report to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC. Available at: https://doi.org/10.52570/DGAC2020.
3.  U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025. 9th Edition. December 2020. Available at DietaryGuidelines.gov.  
4.  National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: 1999 – 2020 Survey Content Brochure. wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/survey_contents.pdf. Accessed September 26, 2022.

Cindy Davis

9/29/2022 4:45:12 PM

Thank you for your comments.  We would encourage you to share your concerns with CDC who handles the data collection for NHANES.

Matthew Pikosky

9/29/2022 5:38:25 PM

National Dairy Council supports the commitment of ARS to continue to expand data on composition of foods for publicly accessible databases such as Food Data Central. As consumers continue to become more conscious of, and interested in, the nutrition and health impacts of the food they eat, it is important to have the most complete and up-to-date information available to help them make informed decisions.

One area to consider adding to Food Data Central is protein quality values. Protein quality in the nutrition labeling of food is currently considered in FDA’s Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 (21 CFR 101.9(c)(7), hereby acknowledging that it impacts the nutritional value of a food.

Protein contains essential amino acids (EAA) that are needed for growth, development, and other physiological functions across all life stages (1). Foods and dietary patterns differ in protein and amino acid (AA) content and thus in their overall protein quality (2). Protein quality is defined as the ability of a food protein to meet the body’s metabolic demand for AA and nitrogen. It is based on AA composition, digestibility of the dietary protein and bioavailability of the AA derived from that dietary protein (3,4). Protein quality is therefore critical to consider when assessing nutrient adequacy of the food supply and dietary intake at the individual- and population-level. Given the ongoing dialogue on sustainability/sustainable dietary patterns and the recommendations by some to shift to a more plant-based or plant-exclusive diet, considerations for protein quality may be of even greater importance.

There is significant variation in protein quality across foods, which is important to consider when recommending shifts in dietary patterns (5).  Animal sourced foods (ASF) like dairy, eggs, and meat are highly digestible (>90%); depending on the processing method and/or presence of antinutrients, plant-based foods (PBF) like maize, oat, bean, and pea typically have lower digestibility (45-80%) (6). There may also be differences in how the protein is metabolized and utilized by the body. For example, amino acids from soy and wheat are more readily converted to urea than those from milk, which results in a lower potential of these PBF to stimulate muscle protein synthesis (6). Dietary patterns that include a diverse mixture of ASF and PBF often have high protein quality as the AA profiles of these different foods complement one another. It is also possible to consume complete protein through a combination of different types of PBF that have complementary AA compositions; however, doing so may be challenging among population groups with higher protein requirements and/or are not accustomed to consuming a diverse variety of PBF as part of their typical diet.

Research has demonstrated that consideration for dietary protein quality can significantly impact protein adequacy. An analysis of protein intake among adults across 103 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia found that when analyzed on a gross or crude protein basis the average daily protein intakes for most of the countries exceeded the current requirement. However, when total protein intake was corrected for protein quality, all the 103 country’s average daily protein intakes fell below the requirement (7). While total protein intakes in these countries, along with the amount of animal protein consumed, is lower than average per capita intakes in the U.S., this data can serve as a model of what might happen if recommendations to substitute ASF with PBF do not consider how such dietary shifts can impact protein quality. This may be particularly important in at-risk populations such as older adults, who some experts have recommended higher protein intakes with considerations for protein quality due to the “anabolic resistance” of aging and risk of sarcopenia (8,9). Such recommendations should specify the types and quantities of foods that can be swapped without compromising overall protein adequacy.

Few studies have assessed the impact of diets differing in protein quality on health outcomes in different populations. A recent systematic review concluded that higher-quality protein was beneficial for muscle protein synthesis at rest and following resistance exercise in older and young adults, and that it was associated with greater gains in strength when combined with resistance exercise training (10). However, it is important to note that most studies included in the review used isolated protein ingredients or whole foods that are of high protein quality (e.g., milk, whey, soy). Studies that employ a broader range of foods and protein quality values in the context of mixed dietary patterns are needed.

Currently, there is no single, publicly accessible database that contains protein quality values for all foods. As such, scientists are left with searching the published literature and identifying individual papers, some of which have variability in the protein quality values reported for an individual food (3). Adding protein quality measurements to the Food Data Central would serve as a valuable, credible, transparent database from which scientists could access to allow them consider protein quality in their research in a standardized fashion. It could also help health and nutrition professionals to make more informed recommendations to the public on developing dietary patterns to support health.

About National Dairy Council: NDC, a non-profit organization founded by U.S. dairy farmers in 1915, is committed to research and education about dairy’s role in the diet and its contributions to nutrition and health within a sustainable food system. The U.S. dairy community is working to be an environmental solution to enhance natural resources and ecosystems and has set environmental sustainability goals to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality and improve water usage and quality by 2050.

References
1.  Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Planning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2003.
2.  Millward DJ, Layman DK, Tomé D, Schaafsma G. Protein quality assessment: impact of expanding understanding of protein and amino acid needs for optimal health. Am J Clin Nutr 2008;87(5):1576s-81s.
3.  Boye J, Wijesinha-Bettoni R, Burlingame B. Protein quality evaluation twenty years after the introduction of the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score method. Br J Nutr (2012) 108:S183-211. doi: 10.1017/S0007114512002309.
4.  FAO. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition. Report of an FAO expert consultation. FAO food and nutrition paper 92. Rome, Italy: FAO, 2013.
5.  Gwin JA, Carbone JW, Rodriguez NR, Pasiakos SM. Physiological limitations of protein foods ounce equivalents and the underappreciated role of essential amino acid density in healthy dietary patterns. J Nutr 2021;151(11):3276-83.
6.  van Vliet S, Burd NA, van Loon LJ. The skeletal muscle anabolic response to plant- versus animal-based protein consumption. J Nutr (2015) 145(9):1981-91. doi: 10.3945/jn.114.204305.
7.  Moughan PJ. Population protein intakes and food sustainability indices: The metrics matter. Global Food Security 2021;29:100548.
8.  Deutz NE, Bauer JM, Barazzoni R, Biolo G, Boirie Y, Bosy-Westphal A, Cederholm T, Cruz-Jentoft A, Krznariç Z, Nair KS, et al. Protein intake and exercise for optimal muscle function with aging: recommendations from the ESPEN Expert Group. Clin Nutr 2014;33(6):929-36.
9.  Bauer J, Biolo G, Cederholm T, Cesari M, Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Morley JE, Phillips S, Sieber C, Stehle P, Teta D, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for optimal dietary protein intake in older people: a position paper from the PROT-AGE Study Group. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2013;14(8):542-59.
10.  Morgan PT, Harris DO, Marshall RN, Quinlan JI, Edwards SJ, Allen SL, Breen L. Protein source and quality for skeletal muscle anabolism in young and older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nutr. 2021; 151(7):1901 – 1920.

Rod Wallace

9/29/2022 9:51:02 PM

Individuals at the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) provided members of the Coalition for Grain Fiber (CGF) (see https://fihf.org/coalition-for-grain-fiber/) the link for these comments. This information is related to a longer comment in “Prevention of Diet Related Chronic Diseases” about the research that needs to be done.

For agriculture and the food system to support increasing delivery of under-consumed nutrients of concern, especially for fiber, we need efficient, effective, and appropriate measurement methods, data sets about those nutrients, and progress measures. Research is also needed to evaluate the efficacy of the nutrients as they are delivered in different agricultural products.

Wheat is the most-consumed food ingredient in America and the source of 1/3 of fiber intake. As such, increasing the level of targeted nutrients, notably fiber in wheat, along with other grains, provides a promising route to deliver meaningful increases in US fiber intake. All socioeconomic groups may benefit with no change in consumer behavior. Similar nutrient-oriented projects related to other crops, nutrients, and disease combinations may also provide very high benefit -to-cost.

Cindy Davis

9/30/2022 10:54:10 AM

Thank you for your comments.

Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) Office of Policy Support (OPS)

9/30/2022 12:51:42 PM

FNS-OPS supports the expansion of food composition data to better understand the existing and emerging components available in human milk and the food supply as well as the impact of those components on human development and nutrition. FNS also supports the examination of new tools, processes, and technologies to better inform dietary intake assessment and food pattern modeling.

IAFNS

9/30/2022 2:25:36 PM

"IAFNS Stakeholder Comment on Monitoring Food Composition and Nutrient Intake of the Nation”

The Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences (IAFNS) is a nonprofit research organization with academic, industry and government members that drives, funds and leads actionable science.

We are proud to serve as one of six partners leading the USDA Global Branded Foods Database. This database contains over 380,000 entries covering 85% of the U.S. food supply. With its broad reach and scope, the database serves as a foundation for science-based decision-making across sectors.

For example, university researchers use the database to track ingredients and nutrition information. Government scientists rely on the database to inform school lunch programs and survey food intakes. And industry can use the database to inform nutrition labeling and track the nutrient composition of foods over time. IAFNS strongly supports continued prioritization (and global expansion) of this database. Given that individuals obtain a significant proportion of nutrients and energy from foods prepared outside of the home (restaurants and other venues with food service), IAFNS supports efforts to expand the database to include these foods.

IAFNS also strongly supports research in analytic measurement and data management of nutrients & other food components and amounts in foods. Such investments will expand food composition databases to quantify and report priority dietary components of relevance to health beyond macro and micronutrients. This is particularly true for, but not limited to, Foundational Foods in USDA’s FoodData Central.

Proposed dietary component priorities include: new categories of fiber based on their differing physiologic and health effects (specifically fermentable and non-fermenting categories; uniquely metabolized sugars; and bioactive compounds (such as carotenoids, anti-inflammatory compounds and live dietary microbes). Additionally, digestibility factors for protein foods are highly relevant given the changing food supply.

Mollie Van Lieu

9/30/2022 2:57:49 PM

In addition to monitoring food composition and nutrient intake, it is imperative to identify what barriers exist and how to overcome them so that a healthy eating pattern, that meets nutrient needs, can be achieved. It is also key to ensure nutrient needs are being met at different life stages as outlined in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Utilizing national data sets like What We Eat in America as well as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey are useful in examining consumption patterns, including nutrient intake, but further data, including purchasing data, may be helpful when determining what is purchased and what is consumed. When nutrient shortfalls are identified, USDA should work collaboratively with other government agencies and the private sector to improve nutrient intake through food processing, promotion of a healthy eating pattern, and others.