Comparison of Healthfulness of Conventional Meats and Edible Insects in Sub‑Saharan Africa Using Three Nutrient Profiling Models

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorWeru, Johnson
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-30T06:48:53Z
dc.date.available2023-06-30T06:48:53Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.descriptionarticleen_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Meat and meat products have been blamed for a myriad of problems facing human kind like lifestyle illnesses, environmental degradation, and climate change. Edible insects have been suggested as the suitable alternatives to conventional meats in order to ameliorate these drawbacks. Healthfulness is the ability for a given food to impart health benefits to the consumer. Evidence is however scanty on the healthfulness of both the meats and edible insects in order to have grounds for replacing meats with insects in the diet. This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the healthfulness of meats and edible insects in Sub-Saharan Africa using modern nutrient profiling models. Materials and methods: Nutritional data for meats and edible insects were obtained from Food Composition Tables (FCTs) and a systematic review, respectively. The data was applied to three nutrient profiling models: the WXYfm (Ofcom) model that was designed to regulate advertising of foods to children, the RRR (Ratio of Recommended to Restricted) model that assesses the ratio of positive to negative nutrients in foods, and the GDA (Guideline Daily Amounts) model which has been used to regulate health claims on foods. Tukey’s Studentized Range (HSD) Test (The SAS System) was used to check for significance in differences of healthfulness using mean scores. Results: The WXYfm model classified all foods as healthful, and Nasutitermes spp. was significantly more healthful than duck (P = 0.05). The RRR classified all foods as healthful, and Nasutitermes spp. was significantly more healthful than all other foods except Macrotermes bellicosus and tilapia (P = 0.05). Duck (for women and men) and pork (for women), were classified as unhealthful by the GDA scoring system, and duck was significantly less healthful than all other foods (P < 0.0001), except for pork and mutton. Conclusion: Edible insects are promising alternatives to conventional meats, but the choice should be on a speciesto- species basis. This would be significant in broadening the choice of protein sources to cater for an ever-increasing world population.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipDAADen_US
dc.identifier.citationWeru, J., Chege, P., Wanjoya, A., & Kinyuru, J. (2022). Comparison of healthfulness of conventional meats and edible insects in Sub-Saharan Africa using three nutrient profiling models. Bulletin of the National Research Centre, 46(1), 1-14.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-022-00726-y
dc.identifier.urihttp://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/26011
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBulletin of the National Research Centreen_US
dc.subjectMeaten_US
dc.subjectEdible insectsen_US
dc.subjectHealthfulnessen_US
dc.subjectNutrient profilingen_US
dc.subjectScoresen_US
dc.titleComparison of Healthfulness of Conventional Meats and Edible Insects in Sub‑Saharan Africa Using Three Nutrient Profiling Modelsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Comparison of healthfulness of conventional.pdf
Size:
1.13 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Full text Article
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
RP-Department of Foods, Nutrition & Dietetics