Plant-based eaters are known to reap nutritional benefits due to their dietchoice, but it is important to evaluate dietary differences that may put them at a disadvantage compared to omnivores. Stark differences exist in daily intakes of protein between vegans and omnivores, which may lead to several risks including decreased strength and bone density. The purpose of this study was to analyze the differences in protein intake, lean mass, strength, and bone density in vegans versus omnivores in order to support the argument for an increased recommended daily allowance (RDA) for protein for plant-based eaters. Participants in this study were assigned to groups based on omnivorous (n = 25) or vegan (n = 19) dietary pattern. Nineteen matched pairs were created based on age and BMI. Data was collected at a single lab visit and included health history and physical activity readiness questionnaires, 24-hr food recall, and anthropometric measures. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured using DEXA and strength was assessed using hand and Biodex dynamometers. Statistical analyses were conducted using independent samples t-tests and Pearson’s correlation tests to evaluate differences in body composition, bone density, strength, and dietary intake between the two groups with significance set at p.05. Differences were seen in daily calorie (p=.007), protein (p<.001), fat (p<.001), and fiber (p=.009) intake. Lean mass (p=.282) and bone density (p=.651) were not different between groups, but lower body strength was different (p=.008). There was a correlation between lower body strength and protein intake (p<.001), and lean mass was correlated with lower body strength (p<.001), grip strength (p<.001), and bone density (p<.001), but not i LBM (p=0.158). Correlations were also observed between BMD and lower body strength (p=.004). These data suggest that there is a significant difference between protein intake in vegans versus omnivores, which appears to have a positive association with strength. BMD also has a positive association with strength as well as lean mass. Cumulatively, the results suggest that it may be beneficial for vegans to increase daily protein intake.

Food waste is gaining considerable attention from researchers in terms of its sources, its causes, and its potential effects on the environment, economy, and population health. To date, few instruments exist that allow researchers to measure food waste at the household level in reliable ways. This study aimed to assess the reliability of a newly developed self-assessment tool to measure household food waste, among participants living in Mexico. The survey tool consisted of 11 items which ask participants (N = 22) to estimate the amount of food per category that generally gets thrown away instead of eaten in the average week. Two tests of reliability were conducted, including Cronbach's Alpha for test-retest reliability, and Intra-class Correlation for internal reliability. Results varied across food categories evaluated by individual items. Items related to fresh fruit and bread products did not show reliability when testing for internal reliability or test-retest reliability. Fresh vegetables, meat and poultry products, meat alternative products, fish and seafood products, leftovers, and shelf stable foods were shown to be reliable when testing Cronbach's alpha and ICC. However, dairy products, eggs and frozen foods were inconclusive when testing for reliability. The study suggests future testing with larger sample sizes should be conducted to demonstrate reliability of the food waste self-assessment tool.

Background: Adequate consumption of fruit and vegetables has been shown to prevent chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, and type two diabetes. The majority of Americans still consume inadequate daily servings of fruit and vegetables, which include women. Inadequate consumption of fruit and vegetables can be contributed to multiple barriers that hinder consumption in both urban and non-urban areas. The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) has been shown to positively influence fruit and vegetable consumption by providing healthy foods, such as fruit and vegetables. This study aims to compare the fruit and vegetable consumption of WIC and non-WIC participants between urban and non-urban Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional, secondary analysis of a single time point from the Snuggle Bug/Acurrucadito Study, which had a sample size of (n=53) participants. The participants were separated into two groups, WIC participants, and non-WIC participants, and then further divided based on their respected RUCA code for comparison purposes. The assessment of fruit and vegetable consumption assessment derived from the participant’s 3-day food record. Results: The average consumption of fruit and vegetable consumption among participants was 3.8±2.5 servings There was an inverse relationship between WIC participation and fruit and vegetable consumption among all categories (fruit no juice -0.79, vegetables -0.32, vegetables no potato -0.32, fruit no juice and vegetables -1.1, and fruit no juice and vegetables no potato -1.1). However, none of the results were considered statistically significant. In addition, our study was unable to identify an association between fruit and vegetable consumption and locale due to the small sample size. Conclusions: There was no link observed between fruit and vegetable consumption and WIC participation. Further research of high quality is needed to confirm the relationship between fruit and vegetable consumption of WIC and non-WIC participants in urban and non-urban populations.

Objective: This research examined the impact of daily ingestions of commercial high protein nutrition bars (with or without added fiber) on 24-h energy intake and satiety for one week among free-living young healthy adults. Design: In a 4-week double-blind, randomized crossover trial, 21 normal and overweight participants (Mean BMI 23.9 ± 2.7 kg/m²), free of chronic diseases, were randomized assigned to HP (high protein: 21 g protein) or HPHF (high protein high fiber: 20g, 14 g fiber) nutrition bars. Participants were included in the trial if they meet the criteria for non-smoking, and not taking prescribed medication for chronic diseases. Participants were instructed to consume commercial nutrition bars daily for seven consecutive days. Body composition was measured with a bioelectrical impedance scale at weeks 1, 3, and 5. Dietary data was recorded by the MyFitnessPal app on Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday of each week. Results: The mean energy intake for the weeks HPHF bars were consumed is significantly higher compared to baseline (1998 ± 534 vs. 1806 ± 537 respectively; p = 0.035). The mean fat mass following one week of HPHF bar consumption was significantly higher than the baseline value (18.8 ± 6.8 vs. 18.3 ± 6.7 respectively; p = 0.023) and trended higher (18.8 ± 6.8 vs. 18.3 ± 6.7 respectively; p = 0.057) in comparison to the value following one week of HP bar consumption. For the high physical activity level group (n = 10), the mean energy intakes for the baseline week and the weeks the HP and HPHF bars were consumed were 1883 ± 597 kcal, 2154 ± 712 kcal, and 2099 ± 603 kcal respectively (p ˂ 0.04; energy intakes for both bars were significantly different from baseline). Nutrient intakes differed significantly mirroring the nutrient profile for each specific bar. There are significant effects after both bars on satiety, but there were no differences between each bar. Conclusions: Sales of nutrition bars gained rapid growth and may represent a unique source for specific nutrients. However, ingestion of commercial high protein nutrition bars may increase the risk of gaining fat mass and eventual body mass over time.

Background: College students face a particularly high prevalence of body dissatisfaction and weight instability increasing the risk of being unhappy and having a poor quality of life. Time-restricted feeding, a type of intermittent fasting, has gained popularity recently for sustainable weight loss without the characteristic dietary restrictions of most fad diets. A limited number of randomized control trials have looked at the effects of time-restricted feeding in humans, but none have looked at how this dietary regimen impacts happiness and quality of life. Objective: The goal was to examine the effects of an 18-hour daily fasting regimen compared to an 8-hour daily fasting regimen on happiness and quality of life in college students in Arizona. Methods: Participants included 29 healthy, non-smoking, non-vaping students attending college in Arizona between October 2020 to March 2021. Of the 16 participants allocated to the time-restricted feeding intervention, 8 completed the trial. Of the 13 participants allocated to the control group, 10 completed the trial. The eating window began within one hour of waking up with a 6-hour eating window for the intervention group and 16-hour window for the control group. They could do one cheat day per week. No dietary restrictions were enforced. Participants completed the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and the WHOQOL-BREF quality of life questionnaire at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Week 8 data were not reported due to data collection changes and cancellations related to the new safety protocols for the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Quality of life related to social relationships improved significantly in the intervention group (p=0.026). There was a trend favoring the intervention group as well showing a possible improvement in happiness related to perceived energy levels (p=0.088). No other significant data were reported. Conclusion: Adherence to an 18-hour time-restricted feeding regimen for 8 weeks may improve quality of life related to social relationships in college students in Arizona. The results of this trial do not suggest a significant impact on overall quality of life or happiness in this population.

Chronic diseases place a financial burden on the United States and claim the lives of nearly 2 million Americans every year. Among the chronic diseases that plague American people, type 2 diabetes is particularly prevalent and injurious. Thus, action is warranted to improve prevention and management of this disease. Nutrition plays a significant role in prevention and management of type 2 diabetes and other chronic diseases. Registered dietitians, as nutrition experts, are qualified to use medical nutrition therapy as a method of prevention and treatment for chronic diseases using a nutritional approach. However, there is no consensus as to which eating pattern is the most efficacious. The aim of this review of research was to examine how plant-based eating patterns impact chronic disease conditions, with an emphasis on type 2 diabetes mellitus, as compared to omnivorous eating patterns. A literature search was conducted through the ASU Library, PubMed, and CINAHL using terms related to plant-based diets and chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. The results revealed that a plant-based eating pattern may be beneficial in the prevention and treatment of certain chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. Specifically, adults who have type 2 diabetes and consume a plant-based diet may exhibit enhanced glycemic control as evidenced by less insulin resistance, increased incretin and insulin secretion, greater insulin sensitivity, and improved HbA1c levels. There is sufficient evidence for registered dietitians to recommend a plant-based approach to patients with type 2 diabetes who would like to achieve enhanced glycemic control.

First year college students have been identified as a vulnerable population for weight gain and the onset of overweight and obesity. Research regarding the gut microbiome has identified differences in the microbial composition of overweight and obese individuals compared to normal weight individuals. Dietary components like dietary fibers, act as prebiotics, or fermentable substrate, that the gut microbiota use for metabolic functions including the production of short-chain fatty acids. The objective of this longitudinal, observational study was to assess changes in the gut microbiota over time in relation to changes in fiber consumption in healthy college students at a large a southwestern university (n=137). Anthropometric and fecal samples were collected at the beginning and end of the fall and spring semesters between August 2015 and May 2016. Both alpha, within sample, diversity and beta, between sample, diversity of participant gut microbes were assessed longitudinally using non-parametric pairwise (pre-post) comparisons and linear mixed effect (LME) models which also adjusted for covariates and accounted for time as a random effect. Alpha and beta diversity were also explored using LME first difference metrics and LME first distance metrics, respectively, to understand rates of change over time in microbial richness/phylogeny and community structure. Pre-post comparisons of Shannon Diversity and Faith’s PD were not significantly different within participant groups of fiber change (Shannon diversity, p=0.96 and Faith’s PD, p=0.66). Beta diversity pairwise comparisons also did not differ by fiber consumption groups (Unweighted UniFrac p=0.182 and Bray Curtis p=0.657). Similarly, none of the LME models suggested significant associations between dietary fiber consumption and metrics of alpha and beta diversity. Overall, data from this study indicates that small changes in fiber consumption among a free-living population did not have an impact on gut microbial richness, phylogeny or community structure. This may have been due to the low intake (~15 g/d) of fiber. Further study is needed to fully elucidate the role that fiber plays in the diversity and composition of the gut microbiota, especially when delivered from a variety of food sources rather than fiber supplements.

The true number of food borne illness occurrences that stem from the home is largely unknown, but researchers believe the number is much greater than represented in national data. The focus on food safety has generally been directed at food service establishments, which have made great strides at improving the methods of how their food is prepared. However, that same drive for proper food safety education is lacking in home kitchens, where the majority of food is prepared. Young adults are among some of the riskiest food preparers, and limited research and education methods have been tested on this vulnerable population. This study examined the effect of a basic food safety intervention on consumer food safety knowledge in young adults in the United States (U.S.) over a week period. The study had a pre/post survey design, where participants answered a survey, watched a short 10-minute video, and then recompleted the same survey a week later. Ninety-one participants age 18-29 years completed the initial food safety knowledge questionnaire. Twenty-six of those participants completed both the pre- and post-intervention food safety knowledge questionnaires. A paired t-test was used to analyze changes in questionnaire scores pre/post intervention. The majority of participants were female (78.9%), Arizona State University (ASU) students (78.0%), did not have any formal food safety education (58.2%), prepared a minimum of one meal per week from home (96.7%), and had completed 0-1 college nutrition courses (64.8%). The average overall score for all participants who completed the initial questionnaire was 62.6%. For those that took both the initial questionnaire and the follow up questionnaire (n=26), their scores shifted from 66.8% to 65.5% after the intervention. Scores increased significantly only for one question post-intervention: 38.5% (n=10) to 53.8% (n=14) for the safest method for cooling a large pot of hot soup (p = 0.050). This was the first study of its kind to test a video intervention in attempts to increase food safety knowledge in young adults, and additional studies must be done to solidify the results of this study. Other means of education should be explored as well to determine the best way of reaching this population and others.

Intermittent Fasting (IF) is defined as a cyclical eating pattern where an individual will fast for a specific increment of time, followed by caloric intake periods. Fasting is a crucial part of our ancestors’ adaptation to the stresses of famine in order to maintain mental acuity and physical abilities during food deprivation. IF influences physiological changes such as: triggers protective metabolic pathways, increases metabolic flexibility and resilience, promotes DNA repair and autophagy, increases microbiome diversity and restores the natural cyclical fluctuations of the gut, increases BDNF expression in mood regulating neuronal circuits, and enhances synaptic plasticity of the brain. Research on the underlying causes of mood disorders has linked impairments in neuroplasticity and cellular resilience to this pathophysiology, which fasting could mitigate. Depression and anxiety are reported as the top impediments to academic performance. Thus, an easily implemented treatment such as intermittent fasting may be an option for combating impaired mental health in college students. This research study tested time restricted feeding (TRF) and its impact on mood states. It was hypothesized that: if college students follow a time restricted feeding pattern, then they will be less moody due to TRF’s effects on the metabolism, brain, and gut. The study consisted of 11 college students: 5 following a four-week adherence to TRF (8am-4pm eating window) and 6 in the control group. The POMS questionnaire was used to measure mood states. The participants height, weight, BMI, body fat %, and POMS scores were tested at the beginning and end of the 4 week intervention. The results were as follows: weight p=0.112 (statistical trend), BMI p=0.058 (nearly significant), body fat % p=0.114 (statistical trend), POMS p=0.014 (statistically significant). The data suggests that following a TRF eating pattern can decrease moodiness and improve mood states.

Background: Healthy eating plays critical roles in the prevention of many chronic diseases, but there are many barriers in life that prevent people from adopting and maintaining healthy diets. Thus, identifications of barriers that people perceive they have in trying to eat healthy can guide the strategies for dietary behavior change interventions by taking account of the barriers. Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify and quantify the perceived barriers to healthy eating (PBHE), to investigate the relationship between socioeconomic factors and PBHE, and to explore the associations between PBHE and dietary intake among parents of elementary-school aged children living in South Phoenix, AZ. Methods: Socioeconomic factors and PBHEs were obtained via survey and diet was assessed by two interviewer-assisted 24 h diet recalls. The associations between employment and PBHEs, education and PBHEs, and household monthly income and PBHEs were analyzed by Mann-Whitney Test, Kruskal Wallis Test, and Spearman’s correlation test, respectively. The relationship between PBHEs and dietary intake were analyzed by Spearman’s correlation test. Linear regression was used to assess the associations between total PBHE, and dietary intake (including added sugar, fruit and vegetable), adjusted by covariates (including socioeconomic status, birth country, age and gender). Results: Of 149 participants who completed the survey (mean age = 38.47±7.08 y), 136 completed the 24 h diet recalls. The mean reported total, social support, emotions and daily mechanics PBHE scores were 2.63±0.91, 2.52±1.16, 2.71±1.06, and 2.58±0.95, respectively, out of a 5-point scale. Daily fruit, vegetable, sugar-sweetened beverage, sweetened foods, and added sugar intake were reported as 1.66±1.56 servings, 2.45±1.43 servings, 1.19±1.30 servings, 2.02±2.12 servings and 49.93±31.17 g, respectively. Employment status was significantly associated with total PBHE (Z = -2.28, p=0.023), and support PBHE (Z = -2.623, p=0.009). Education was significantly related to total PBHE (χ2 = -7.987, p=0.046), and daily mechanics PBHE (χ2= 11.735, p=0.008). Household monthly income levels were significantly correlated to daily mechanics PBHE (r = -0.265, p=0.005). Added sugar was positively correlated with total PBHE (r=0.202, p=0.020), emotions PBHE (r=0.239, p=0.006), and daily mechanics PBHE (r=0.179, p=0.040). Sugar sweetened beverage intake was significantly related to emotions PBHE (r=0.183, p=0.035). When adjusting for socioeconomic factors in the regression analysis, there was no significant association between PBHE and diet intake. Conclusion: Overall, results suggest PBHEs listed in this study are mainly associated with socioeconomic factors, but they are not related to diet intake. Future studies will focus on the precise role of overcoming some identified barriers in improving healthy eating behaviors, and the causality between barriers and healthy eating.