Evaluation of foods, drinks and diets in the Netherlands according to the degree of processing for nutritional quality, environmental impact and food costs.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates nutritional quality, environmental impact and costs of foods and drinks and their consumption in daily diets according to the degree of processing across the Dutch population. DESIGN: The NOVA classification was used to classify the degree of processing (ultra-processed foods (UPF) and ultra-processed drinks (UPD)). Food consumption data were derived from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2012-2016. Indicators assessed were nutritional quality (saturated fatty acids (SFA), sodium, mono and disaccharides (sugar), fibre and protein), environmental impact (greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and blue water use) and food costs. SETTING: The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Four thousand three hundred thirteen Dutch participants aged 1 to 79 years. RESULTS: Per 100 g, UPF were more energy-dense and less healthy than unprocessed or minimally processed foods (MPF); UPF were associated with higher GHG emissions and lower blue water use, and were cheaper. The energy and sugar content of UPD were similar to those of unprocessed or minimally processed drinks (MPD); associated with similar GHG emissions but blue water use was less, and they were also more expensive. In the average Dutch diet, per 2000 kcal, ultra-processed foods and drinks (UPFD) covered 29% (456 g UPF and 437 g UPD) of daily consumption and 61% of energy intake. UPFD consumption was higher among children than adults, especially for UPD. UPFD consumption determined 45% of GHG emissions, 23% of blue water use and 39% of expenses for daily food consumption. UPFD consumption contributed 54% to 72% to daily sodium, sugar and SFA intake. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with unprocessed or minimally processed foods and drinks, UPF and UPD were found to be less healthy considering their high energy, SFA, sugar and sodium content. However, UPF were associated higher GHG emissions and with less blue water use and food costs. Therefore daily blue water use and food costs might increase if UPF are replaced by those unprocessed or minimally processed. As nutritional quality, environmental impacts and food costs relate differently to the NOVA classification, the classification is not directly applicable to identify win-win-wins of nutritional quality, environmental impact and costs of diets.

Healthy diets with reduced environmental impact? - The greenhouse gas emissions of various diets adhering to the Dutch food based dietary guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the differences in environmental impact and nutrient content of the current Dutch diet and four healthy diets aimed at lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. METHODS: GHG emissions (as proxy for environmental impact) and nutrient content of the current Dutch diet and four diets adhering to the Dutch food based dietary guidelines (Wheel of Five), were compared in a scenario study. Scenarios included a healthy diet with or without meat, and the same diets in which only foods with relatively low GHG emissions are chosen. For the current diet, data from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2007-2010 were used. GHG emissions (in kg CO2-equivalents) were based on life cycle assessments. Results are reported for men and women aged 19-30years and 31-50years. RESULTS: The effect on GHG emissions of changing the current Dutch diet to a diet according to the Wheel of Five (corresponding with the current diet as close as possible), ranged from -13% for men aged 31-50years to +5% for women aged 19-30years. Replacing meat in this diet and/or consuming only foods with relatively low GHG emissions resulted in average GHG emission reductions varying from 28-46%. In the scenarios in which only foods with relatively low GHG emissions are consumed, fewer dietary reference intakes (DRIs) were met than in the other healthy diet scenarios. However, in all healthy diet scenarios the number of DRIs being met was equal to or higher than that in the current diet. CONCLUSIONS: Diets adhering to food based dietary guidelines did not substantially reduce GHG emissions compared to the current Dutch diet, when these diets stayed as close to the current diet as possible. Omitting meat from these healthy diets or consuming only foods with relatively low associated GHG emissions both resulted in GHG emission reductions of around a third. These findings may be used to expand food based dietary guidelines with information on how to reduce the environmental impact of healthy diets.