Premium
Classification of the Items (Ingredients) in a 40‐day Rotating Menu Offered to Day‐Care Center Attendees in a Government‐Sponsored Program (SOSEP) according to the Monteiro Scale of Food‐Processing
Author(s) -
Soto-Méndez María-José,
Hernández Liza,
Solomons Noel W.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.26.1_supplement.1004.4
Subject(s) - ingredient , subsidy , government (linguistics) , day care center , business , agricultural science , medicine , food science , biology , day care , nursing , economics , market economy , linguistics , philosophy
Background It has been suggested that the advance of processing of the foods in the human diets is causally associated with increasing chronic disease risk. Objective To classify the ingredients in the menu served to Guatemalan preschoolers in a day‐care center system according to the Monteiro Scale of food‐processing, modified for ingredient scoring. Methods The menu of the SOSEP, a Guatemalan government‐subsidized community day‐care system for low‐income preschoolers prescribes breakfast, lunch and 2 snacks daily, over 5‐d weekly, within a 8‐wk (40‐d) rotation. Dishes and recipes were reduced to their ingredients. Following the Monteiro Scale (Monteiro et al, Cad. Saúde Pública 2010), we classified each ingredient item as: GI, unprocessed/minimally processed; GII, processed; or GIII, ultraprocessed, and tabulated by menu appearance, and energy and weight contributions. Any item with added fortificant nutrients is classified as a GIII item. Results We identified 102 ingredients in the menu. 60 (59%) were GI, 12 (12%) GII, and 30 (29%) GIII. The percentage of energy provided by the respective classes was: GI 24%; GII 31% and GIII 45%. In terms of the proportion of the weight of menu offering, the respective contributions were: GI 66%; GII 11%; and GIII 23%. Conclusion Menus still conserve a predominance of unprocessed items. Association of energy density with ultra‐processing clearly stands out.