Study finds link between foods scored higher by new nutrient profiling system and better long-term health outcomes

The idea that what we eat directly affects our health is an old one; Hippocrates recognized this as early as 400 B.C. C. But identifying healthier foods in the grocery aisle and on restaurant menus is increasingly challenging. Now, researchers at the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy have shown that a holistic food profiling system, Food Compass, identifies better overall health and lower mortality risk.

In an article published in nature communications On November 22, researchers tested whether adults who ate more foods with higher Food Compass scores had better long-term health outcomes, and found that they did.

Introduced in 2021, Food Compass provides a holistic measure of the Nutritional value of a food, drink or mixed meal. It measures nine domains of each element, such as nutrient ratios, food-based ingredients, vitamins, minerals, degree of processing, and additives. Based on scores of 10,000 common US consumer products, researchers recommend foods with scores of 70 or higher as foods to encourage; foods with scores from 31 to 69 to eat in moderation; and anything with a score of 30 or less to eat in moderation. For this new study, Food Compass was used to score a person’s entire diet, based on Food Compass scores for all the foods and beverages they regularly consume.

“A nutrient profiling system is meant to be an objective measure of how healthy a food is. If it’s achieving its purpose, then people who eat more foods with higher scores should have better health,” said Meghan O’Hearn, doctoral candidate at the Friedman School and lead author of the study.

For this validation study, the researchers used nationally representative dietary records and health data from 47,999 US adults ages 20 to 85 who enrolled between 1999 and 2018 in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Deaths were determined through linkage with the National Death Index (NDI).

Overall, the researchers found that the average Food Compass score for the diets of the nearly 50,000 subjects was only 35.5 out of 100, well below ideal. “One of the most alarming findings was just how poor the national average diet is,” O’Hearn said. “This is a call to action to improve the quality of the diet in the United States.”

When people’s Food Compass diet scores were assessed against health outcomes, multiple significant relationships were observed, even adjusting for other risk factors such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, income, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, and diabetes status. A higher Food Compass diet score was associated with low blood pressure, sugar in the blood, blood cholesterol, body mass index, and hemoglobin A1c levels; and lower prevalence of metabolic syndrome and cancer. A higher Food Compass diet score was also associated with a lower risk of mortality: for every 10-point increase, there was a 7% lower risk of death from all causes.

“When looking for healthy foods and beverages, it can be a bit of a Wild West,” said Dariush Mozaffarian, Jean Mayer Professor of Nutrition and Dean of Policy at the Friedman School. “Our findings support the validity of Food Compass as a tool to guide consumer decisions, as well as industry reformulations and public health strategies to identify and encourage healthier food and drinks”.

Compared to existing nutrient profiling systems, Food Compass provides a more innovative and comprehensive assessment of nutritional quality, the researchers say. For example, instead of measuring levels of dietary fat, sodium, or fiber in isolation, take a more nuanced and holistic view, assessing the ratio of saturated to unsaturated fat; sodium to potassium; and carbohydrates to fiber.

Food Compass also increases scores for ingredients that have been shown to have protective health effects, such as fruits, non-starchy vegetables, beans and legumes, whole grains, nuts and seeds, shellfish, yogurt, and vegetable oils; and lowers scores for less healthy ingredients like refined grains, red and processed meats, and ultra-processed foods and additives.

The researchers designed Food Compass with the ever-evolving field of nutrition science in mind, and their multidisciplinary team, comprised of researchers with backgrounds in epidemiology, medicine, economics, and biomolecular nutrition, will continue to evaluate and adapt the tool based on changing trends. more innovative data. -cutting-edge nutrition research.

“We know that Food Compass is not perfect,” Mozaffarian said. “But it provides a more comprehensive and holistic rating of a food’s nutritional value than existing systems, and these new findings support its validity by showing that it predicts better health.”

These findings are timely given the launch of the new US National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition and Health. A pillar of this strategy is “empowering all consumers to make and have access to healthy choices” through measures such as updating food labeling and making it easier to interpret, creating healthier food environments, and creating a healthier food supply. healthy.

“This study further validates Food Compass as a useful tool for defining healthy foods. We hope that the Food Compass algorithm, publicly available to all, can help guide front-of-package labeling, on-the-spot purchase options workplace, hospital and school cafeterias; incentive programs for healthier eating in federal health and nutrition programs; industry reformulations; and government policies around food,” O’Hearn said.

The researchers plan to work on a simplified version that requires fewer nutrient inputs, as well as versions tailored to specific conditions such as diabetes and pregnancy, or to populations in other nations. The research team is also interested in adding Food Compass domains based on other aspects of food, such as environmental sustainability, social justice, or animal welfare.

“We hope to continue to find ways to improve the Food Compass system and reach more users to help clear up the confusion about healthier options,” Mozaffarian said.