F&N Digest -- January/February 1993

Extension Foods and Nutrition, Cooperative Extension Service, Kansas State University

January/February 1993

Food Trends: Egg*Land's Best Eggs

Food/Nutrition Policy/Legislation: New Food Labels Move Forward

Limited Resource: Medford Declaration to End Hunger; Hunger in America Increases; Health Messages for the "Hard to Reach"; "Heat or Eat" Syndrome Affects Children

Nutrition/Health: Young Children Know About Nutrition; Breastfeeding Barricades; March: National Nutrition Month; Nutrient Intakes of Women Over Age 65; Vegetarianism Considered; Tea for Health as Well as Fortune?; Nutrient Analysis Software

Resources: Food Guide Pyramid Poster

Egg*Land's Best Eggs

What the Ad Says:: "Eggs that won't increase your cholesterol! Eat up to 12 eggs a week without increasing serum cholesterol. Clinical tests demonstrate that people on a lowfat diet can eat up to 12 Egg*Land's Best eggs a week without increasing their serum cholesterol or LDL ("bad") cholesterol."

"A Statement from Egg*Lands Best: If you love eggs, you're in for a treat. Because we've done everything we can to make Egg*Land's Best the finest eggs ever produced.; Our hens are fed a special diet, including no animal fat. It is enriched with vitamin E, canola oil and a unique all natural feed supplement. The result is quite possibly the best tasting, most nutritious eggs you've ever eaten.; Only eggs meeting our exacting standards are stamped EB. This is your assurance of the finest Egg*Land's Best quality, flavor and nutrition.; If you have any questions or comments, call us, toll free: 1-800-922-EGGS."

"Nutritionally Different from Regular Eggs: Egg*Land's Best eggs have more vitamin E and iodine and a lower ratio of saturated fat to monounsaturated fat than other eggs. In addition, the nutritional quality is more consistent from season to season due to Egg*Land's quality assurance program and the hen's carefully controlled diet. And Egg*Land's Best eggs are a good source of high quality protein. Use Egg*Land's Best eggs as you would regular eggs."

Cal-Maine Foods
Egg*Land's Best eggs are produced and distributed by Cal-Maine Foods of Buhler, KS under franchise from Egg*Land's Best, Inc. of King of Prussia, PA. Chickens are fed specific feed which includes canola oil and vitamin E supplements. No animal by-products are included in the feed.

Nutritional Information
Regular eggs and Egg*Land's Best are virtually the same for calories, protein, carbohydrate, fat, cholesterol, sodium and potassium. Egg*Land's does have higher levels of iodine and vitamin E, but the importance of that is unclear. We know that Vitamin E can protect fats from oxidation, however, and that may be beneficial.

Price
The price of Egg*Land's Best at a local retailer was $2.05/doz. grade A large compared to $0.77/doz. of store brand grade A large.

Misleading Ads?
Calls to the Foods & Nutrition Extension office at KSU indicate confusion about the role of these eggs in the diet. Some people have assumed these eggs are lower in dietary cholesterol. A comparison of nutrient values in the table shows the cholesterol values are the same for Egg*Land's as for regular eggs. Other callers have concluded the eggs must be beneficial in lowering serum cholesterol. A careful reading of the ad does not support that. The ad says the eggs won't increase serum cholesterol. It does not say that if Egg*Land eggs are eaten, serum cholesterol will decrease. It is important to read the ad carefully and not assume anything more than what the ad says. A very important factor often overlooked is that a lowfat diet was consumed during the clinical tests. On a lowfat diet, no increase in serum cholesterol is expected after eating 12 Egg*Land's Best eggs in a week. That is what the ad says and what was demonstrated in a research study.

Research Results
Subjects in both groups significantly reduced their serum total cholesterol (p <.001), ldl cholesterol p and hdl cholesterol p over the week study. no significant differences were found between diet groups. the authors concluded that the study eggs egg*lands) did not adversely affect measured lipid concentrations b>when added to a lowfat diet that favorably alters lipid profiles in hypercholesterolemic subjects." (Garwin et al, 1992). In other words, people who have high cholesterol levels, when eating a lowfat diet, did not have increased blood cholesterol levels when 12 Egg*Land's Best eggs were included in their lowfat diets. The lowfat diet was the important factor.

The important points are:: 1) People on a lowfat diet whether or not they consumed eggs, experienced decreased serum cholesterol levels.; 2) Twelve Egg*Land's Best eggs/week did not increase serum cholesterol in people on a lowfat diet.

Another question:
What would happen to serum cholesterol levels if 12 generic eggs were eaten instead of Egg*Land's Best eggs?

The researchers stated: "Whether these results can be generalized to generic eggs or to dietary studies of longer duration are subjects for future investigations." (Garwin et al 1992)

Since lowfat diets with 0 eggs per week and with 12 Egg*Land's Best eggs per week did not increase serum cholesterol, it seems reasonable to expect that consumption of a lowfat diet with 12 generic eggs per week also would not increase serum cholesterol level.

The research was reported in the November Journal of Nutrition. Garwin et al. 122:2153-2160, 1992. (KP)

New Food Labels Move Forward
On Dec. 1, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Louis Sullivan announced that a compromise had been reached between the Food and Drug Administration (under HHS) and USDA regarding new food labels. The announcement of final food labeling regulations had been held up in early November.

Details of the new regulations were not yet available at the newsletter deadline. (The regulations are 4,000 pages long!)

Medford Declaration to End Hunger
Tufts University School of Nutrition's Center on Hunger, Poverty and Nutrition Policy has drafted an initiative known as the "Medford Declaration to End Hunger in the U. S." The document is designed to raise consciousness and direct efforts to battle hunger. The declaration endorses the commitment to end hunger by 1995 through the use of existing programs, forums, and allocation of more resources.

More than 2,000 local, state and national leaders and over 1,000 organizations representing 100 million people have indicated their support of this effort. (MS)

Source: Tufts University Diet and Nutrition Letter, Vol. 10, No. 7, Sept. 1992

Hunger in America Increases
Three recent studies of domestic hunger have concluded that hunger in the U.S. is increasing.

One study surveyed 1,000 households and asked whether individuals knew someone who had gone hungry in the last year. On the basis of the results of this survey, researchers estimated that there are 32.4 million hungry people in the U.S. The survey had wide margins of error, but overall it showed a 50% increase in hunger over a similar survey conducted in 1984.

Another study analyzed national poverty statistics, food stamp participation rates, nutrition survey findings, and data on food spending. Results of this study showed 28.1 million Americans are hungry.

Finally, in the most recent Community Childhood Hunger Identification Project researchers surveyed communities thought to be at risk from hunger. This study suggested that 31.6 million people suffer from hunger.

The studies, each using different methodologies, are important because they show very similar results. (MS)

Source: CNI Sept. 11, 1992.

Health Messages for the "Hard to Reach"
The Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion recently conducted 24 focus groups to determine why health messages have had little impact on lower socioeconomic Americans. The groups included white, African American, and Hispanic men and women, ages 25 to 64 with 12 or fewer years of education and a family income between the national median and the poverty level.

According to the participants in the study, health is an important priority, but lack of time, money, family and environmental support, willpower, and "just plain laziness" often interfere with making healthy changes in life-style. Many held misconceptions especially about the difference between fat and cholesterol. Half of the subjects considered themselves overweight but did not relate obesity with poor health.

The groups preferred nutrition information that showed how all foods can fit into a healthy diet rather than the "good foods, bad foods" approach.

Most focus group participants indicated they wanted to improve their health. There was a strong belief, however, that genetics and fate played an important role in chronic disease. The study concluded with the following suggestions for reaching "hard to reach" audiences:

Acknowledge the role of heredity in disease but indicate how healthy behaviors can have an impact too.
Be sensitive to strong religious beliefs.
Provide practical, personalized instructions.
Stress the importance of health screening.
Recognize the limits of radio and TV.
Target print messages to specific audiences.
Work with local support systems to increase participation. (MS)

Source: Food Insight, Sept./Oct., 1992

"Heat or Eat" Syndrome Affects Children
The "heat or eat" syndrome -- paying heating bills takes precedence over buying groceries -- may have an impact on the health of low income children. The Pediatric Nutrition Surveillance Study examined the prevalence of low weight for age in over 7,000 children aged 6 months to 2 years who were admitted to the emergency room of Boston City Hospital between July, 1989 and June, 1992. In the three months following the record cold temperatures of December, 1989, the prevalence of low weight for age increased significantly. A similar trend was found in the winter of the following year.

Researchers ruled out AIDS and sickle cell anemia, the two most common causes of growth delays seen at Boston City Hospital. They concluded that a decrease in food intake caused by poor families having to pay higher heating bills led to this trend. (MS)

Source: CNI Sept. 25, 1992

Young Children Know About Nutrition
In June 1992, a survey of over 400 children ages 6 to 9 years was conducted across the country. Each child was interviewed personally about their attitudes, perceptions, and sources of nutrition information. They were also asked about after-school activities, involvement in food selection, and family dining patterns.

The survey revealed that 6 to 9 year olds have a good understanding and awareness of nutrition and health. Almost three fourths of them defined nutrition as either foods that are good for you or something that is healthful to eat. Sixty-five percent of them knew that what they eat could affect their health when they grew up and almost all of them said that eating lots of fruits and vegetables was good.

The children were also familiar with the food groups. Half of them could name the five food groups, while 59 percent could name at least three groups. Although there were no differences between races and areas of the country, children who ate dinner with their families at least three to four times per week had better knowledge of the food groups.

These young children were also able to apply nutrition knowledge to food selection. The majority of them could identify foods that should be eaten at least every day and foods that should be eaten less frequently.

Many families shared meals together and parents still had a great deal to say about what their children ate at this age. Over 90 percent said that they ate dinner with their family at least three to four times per week, and almost 70 percent did so every day. The majority of parents decided what their children ate for lunch and dinner, while breakfast and snacks were more often chosen by the child.

Nearly all of the children knew that it was more healthy to run and play than to watch television after school and on Saturdays. Most of them even agreed that running and playing was more fun, but almost a fourth of them reported that they seldom played outside, even when the weather was nice.

The major sources of nutrition information for 6 to 9 year olds were school and family. A few also received information from doctors/nurses, books, television, friends, and magazines.

The results of this survey show that we as teachers and parents are doing a pretty good job of educating children in basic nutrition principles. We need to continue to build on this knowledge, but even more importantly we need to help them to apply this knowledge when they choose what to eat or what activity to do. The survey reveals that parents do have an influence on what their 6 to 9 year old eats. By setting good examples at meal time and providing a wide selection of healthy food from which our children can choose, we can help them choose a balanced diet and develop healthy eating habits that will last a lifetime. We can also encourage our children by example to participate in physical activities that will improve their fitness. (PP)

Source: "Kids Make the Nutritional Grade," IFIC Review, International Food Information Council, Oct., 1992.

Breastfeeding Barricades
We know that "breast is best" in most cases, and many health professionals are now encouraging breastfeeding. We, as a society, approve of the practice of breastfeeding, as long as it is private and behind closed doors. The social acceptability of nursing in public has been largely unaddressed except that women should be "discreet". The inconvenience of breastfeeding in the workplace and other public places is often cited as a barrier to breastfeeding and is probably a major reason many women discontinue nursing before their baby is 5 to 6 months. The national statistics on breastfeeding for the first half of 1992 show that we have quite a way to go to reach the goals of Healthy People 2000 which include increasing breastfeeding rates during the early postpartum period to at least 75 percent, and to at least 50 percent for the first 5-6 months. The current national facts are:

56% of first time mothers breastfeed in the hospital, but less than 18% are still breastfeeding at 5-6 months.
55.5% of mothers working full-time away from home initiate breastfeeding, but only 12.5% continue at 5-6 months.
Women with family incomes under $15,000 are least likely to breastfeed, and showed the largest decrease in breastfeeding rates between 1980 and1990.
Among WIC participants, 38.4% initiate breastfeeding, while 66.1% of non-WIC mothers do. (In Kansas the percentage of WIC mothers who initiate breastfeeding and continue to 5-6 months is higher than the national average, largely due to a breastfeeding promotion project) (PP)

Sources: Nutrition Week, Community Nutrition Institute, Nov. 27, 1992. Statistics from The Maternal and Child Health Bureau of the Health Resources and Services Administration, 1992.

March: National Nutrition Month
March will soon be here again which means a time to recognize National Nutrition Month. The American Dietetic Association is continuing the same slogan as last year "Eat Right America" and introducing promotional materials that include the new Food Guide Pyramid. Materials available from them include:

posters
buttons
magnets
bookmarks
table tents
snack packs
sports bottles
stickers
aprons
traymats
placemats
promotional guide
T-shirts
reproducible slicks for handouts for various age groups (including materials in Spanish and large print)

Some suggested activities that you may want to do during March include:: Offer nutrition classes at schools, libraries, parents' groups or worksites. Use the handouts, magnets, buttons, bookmarks, etc. as take-home materials.

Sponsor cafeteria or lunchroom contests to eat lower fat foods. Give aprons or t-shirts as prizes.

To order the items, call 1-800-877-1600 to request an order form or write: The American Dietetics Association, P. O. Box 97215, Chicago, IL 60678-7215. Many of these materials are reasonably priced. (PP)

Nutrient Intakes of Women Over Age 65
One hundred healthy women over age 65 were recruited to determine differences in nutrient intakes by living arrangement and to examine the effect of demographic characteristics, health habits, and social contacts on nutrient intakes. The subjects were probably more active, motivated, and health-conscious than the average woman over age 65.

The Health Habits and History Questionnaire (HHHQ) was the instrument used to collect data on the women. It covered demographic data, smoking, height and weight, physical activity, social networks and diet. The daily nutrient intake and percentage of the 1989 RDA were determined for energy, protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, vitamin A, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and vitamin C. The levels of nutrient intake were judged as inadequate if one-fourth of the participants received less than 75 per-cent of the RDA.

RESULTS. The means for all the nutrients, except energy, were about the RDA for both groups of women. While in general, there are no great differences between women living alone and women living with a spouse with respect to the distribution of nutrient intake, the mean intakes for calcium and riboflavin did show a statistically significant difference. For both of these nutrients women living alone had slightly higher mean intakes.

The number of women in this group with positive health habits was very high. More than two-thirds of them were lifelong nonsmokers, physically very active, and maintained a desirable body weight for height. Nine percent of the women were thin (BMI less than 20) and 12 percent of the women would be considered obese (BMI greater than 27).

Of the eight variables (age, education, income, living arrangements, smoking, physical activity, BMI, and social contacts) considered education, physical activity, and smoking were the most important predictors of nutrient intakes. As educational level increased so did the intake of specific nutrients. As a group there were fewer smokers and obese individuals than would be found in a cross-sectional cohort. The level of physical activity was a significant predictor of the intake for seven of the nine nutrients analyzed. Smoking was inversely correlated with intake for energy, iron, vitamin A, thiamin, and riboflavin.

Age, income, living arrangement and social contacts were not significant predictors of nutrient intakes in this study. This is consistent with findings from recent nationwide examinations of dietary patterns, eating behavior and nutrient intake of older adults in the U.S.

Considering the finding that 43 percent of the group was consuming an inadequate intake of energy, it is remarkable that so few nutrients were inadequate. Of concern is the fact that only one-half of the participants in the present study received at least 800mg of calcium from their diet. It is encouraging, however, that education and physical activity have such an important influence on nutrient intake in older women. (JD)

Source: "Living Arrangements and Nutrient Intakes of Healthy Women Age 65 and Older: A Study in Manhattan, KS., Zipp and Holcomb, Journal of Nutrition for the Elderly, Vol. 11(3): 1-18, 1992.

Vegetarianism Considered
A good way to start an argument is to advocate that everyone become a vegetarian. In the news has been the case of the very young child who was removed from her parent's custody, at least temporarily, because the child was hospitalized for being malnourished. Her parents following some strict religious beliefs had been feeding her a vegan diet only plant-derived foods and no milk or eggs.

Most vegetarians are not this extreme but include generous amounts of eggs and dairy products and are known as ovolactovegetarians. A growing class of eaters are those health-conscious individuals who partake of fish and/or poultry but shun red meats or at least eat them infrequently. They are not truly vegetarian but have certainly cut down on their intakes of certain animal proteins.

A review of the scientific literature comparing vegetarian and non-vegetarian diets indicates that neither extreme-vegan (the very limited macrobiotic diets of yesteryears are still around) or unlimited consumption of animal foods -- is the yellow brick road to health. Reports from the First International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition summarized the strength of the evidence and findings regarding the benefits of vegetarianism as follows:

Good to excellent evidence

Vegetarians are leaner and have lower rates of constipation, lung cancer, and alcoholism. The last two problems likely reflect the fact that many vegetarians also refrain from tobacco and alcohol.

Good to fair evidence

Vegans (plant foods only) have markedly lower blood pressures; fewer deaths from coronary artery disease; less type II, mature-onset diabetes and gallstones but vegetarians (using milk and eggs) generally have lower rates of these health problems, also. Of course, other factors (leanness, no smoking or alcohol, more exercise, and perhaps other dietary aspects such as mineral intakes) may be responsible.

Fair to poor evidence

The evidence for several other chronic degenerative diseases is less clearcut. These include breast cancer, diverticular disease of the colon, colon cancer, calcified kidney stones, osteoporosis, dental caries and dental erosion.

Most of these diseases are actively being investigated and future studies will likely provide better answers than are currently available. What is clear is that vegetarian diets do not have special curative powers. In fact, following some of the unproven treatments, often including fasts and vegetarian regimens, can be harmful if effective and more conventional medical treatments are postponed or avoided altogether.

While there is strong evidence to suggest that vegetarian diets, if properly followed, are healthful similar health benefits can also be obtained from carefully planned nonvegetarian diets. Implementing the new Food Guide Pyramid with its emphasis on 6 to 11 servings of grains, 2 or 3 fruits and 3 to 5 vegetables is highly recommended. Consume moderate amounts of dairy and meat group foods: 2 cups or the equivalent of lowfat milk products and 5 to 7 ounces of lean meats, fish or poultry foods or alternates including eggs, dried peas and beans, nuts and seeds. Above all, control intakes of low nutrient sources of calories, fats, sweets, and alcohol. The fewer calories consumed daily, the more important it is to choose nutritious foods. Present evidence suggests you can promote health either way: being vegetarian or omnivorous. Just be sure you eat a wide-variety of nutrient-dense foods limited in fats, sweets and alcohol. (MC)

Tea For Health as Well as Fortune?
Taking a good look at tea leaves is what scientists are doing these days. In fact, tea drinking could become even more popular as researchers probe the health benefits and lack of problems with drinking tea.

Of course, many different kinds of plants and plant products are used to brew beverages but by far the most popular is the beverage made from the plant whose technical name is Camellia sinensis (tea). After water, it's the world's favorite beverage with some groups annually drinking gallons of the stuff. Ireland tops the list with annual use of 6.7 pounds of tea leaves per person followed by the United Kingdom with 6.2 pounds and Turkey with 4.8 pounds. Consumption in the rest of the world falls below 3.5 pounds with the U.S. averaging about three quarters of a pound_on a par with the Chinese who use two-thirds of a pound to make their brews.

This popular beverage is now showing up as having special health benefits. Scientists have already had a few meetings and more are planned to report on the role of tea components regarding cancer and cardiovascular disease. Most of the studies have looked at tea and various kinds of cancer, notably stomach, esophagus, colon and lung cancers. Tea contains polyphenols, the so-called tannins, known to be antioxidants and protectors against cancer initiation and promotion. So far the studies indicate the tea has a beneficial effect as a cancer preventor. Animal work also suggests that tea extracts might inhibit liver, skin and lung cancer. Much more work is necessary, of course, before such findings are known to apply to humans.

But not all teas are equally protective. So fat, it's the green, unfermented teas that appear to offer the most cancer protection. Black tea has some but not as much potency. The semi-fermented, oolong teas, generally fall between the greens and the blacks. Green teas are not readily available in all markets but can be found in stores featuring Oriental products.

According to animal studies and a few human studies, tea may have some protective effect regarding cardiovascular disease. Total cholesterol levels are lowered slightly and the HDL cholesterols (the protective kind) are not effected. Tea may also have a protective role in hypertension. These studies are all of a preliminary nature.

On the down side, steaming hot tea can injure the upper part of the throat and a higher rate of esophageal cancer has been observed in people who prefer such hot tea. While tea has some caffeine, it has about half that of most cups of coffee. And it's the caffeine that is mostly responsible for tea's added diuretic effect above the effect of just drinking liquids. Some voice cautions about drinking tea with meals because tannins can bind iron and make it unavailable. Current evidence suggests that tea and iron is not a practical problem. (MC)

Nutrient Analysis Software
A recent article compares four computer programs, including Food Processor II and USDA's Dietary Analysis Program (DAP), two of the programs that we currently recommend for your Extension programs.

The study compared energy and nutrient values using intake data from 60 dietary recall records of homeless children. The other two programs were Nutritionist III and Food Intake Analysis System. There were no significant differences in mean intakes of energy and nutrients between each of the commercial data bases and USDA's official data base (used as the reference standard for this study). Although the number of foods in the data bases are different, the results were comparable between programs. Each of the four programs is suitable for analyzing dietary records for this study population.

Still, computerized dietary analysis isn't perfect with any software. Users of computer software should be aware of the following limitations:

The nutrient content of foods can vary considerably as a result of differences in growing conditions, stage of ripeness, and food preparation techniques.
The state of methodology for chemically assessing the nutrient content of food items varies widely.
Errors may be introduced when data are transferred from the original source to the computerized format.
Calculated values are only approximations of nutrient content and nutritional requirements differ from individual to individual.
Dietary analysis is only one part of assessing the nutritional status of an individual; it should be used with caution when recommendations are made based on a computerized dietary analysis. (MC)

Sources: Wisconsin Cooperative Extension monthly mailing, Dec., 1992 and R.P. LaComb, M.L. Taylor, J.M. Noble. 1992. Comparative evaluation of four microcomputer nutrient analysis software packages using 24-hour dietary recalls of homeless children. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 92(11):1391-1392.

Food Guide Pyramid Poster
Free copies of the Food Guide Pyramid poster are available from the Kansas Beef Council. Call or write: 913-273-5225, Kansas Beef Council, P. O. Box 4567, Topeka, KS 66604-0567. LIMIT ONE PER PERSON. (JD)

K-State Research and Extension is a short name for the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, a program designed to generate and distribute useful knowledge for the well-being of Kansans. Supported by county, state, federal and private funds, the program has county Extension offices, experiment fields, area Extension offices and regional research centers statewide. Its headquarters is on the K-State campus, Manhattan.