CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 157Food Waste Reduction and SustainabilityAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations

Wasted food, wasted nutrients: nutrient loss from wasted food in the United States and comparison to gaps in dietary intake

Open access
Spiker, Marie L., Hiza, Hazel A.B., Siddiqi, Sameer M., Neff, Roni A.·2017·Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
DOI 10.1016/j.jand.2017.03.015
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous research has estimated that wasted food in the United States contains between 1,249 and 1,400 kcal per capita per day, but little is known about amounts of other nutrients embedded in the 31% to 40% of food that is wasted. OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to calculate the nutritional value of food wasted at the retail and consumer levels in the US food supply, and contextualize the amount of nutrient loss in terms of gaps between current and recommended intakes and estimated food recovery potential. DESIGN: Data from the National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference were used to calculate the nutritional value of retail- and consumer-level waste of 213 commodities in the US Department of Agriculture Loss-Adjusted Food Availability data series for 27 nutrients in 2012. RESULTS: Food wasted at the retail and consumer levels of the US food supply in 2012 contained 1,217 kcal, 33 g protein, 5.9 g dietary fiber, 1.7 μg vitamin D, 286 mg calcium, and 880 mg potassium per capita per day. Using dietary fiber as an example, 5.9 g dietary fiber is 23% of the Recommended Dietary Allowance for women. This is equivalent to the fiber Recommended Dietary Allowance for 74 million adult women. Adult women in 2012 underconsumed dietary fiber by 8.9 g/day, and the amount of wasted fiber is equivalent to this gap for 206.6 million adult women. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first study to document the loss of nutrients from wasted food in the US food supply, to our knowledge. Although only a portion of discarded food can realistically be made available for human consumption, efforts to redistribute surplus foods where appropriate and prevent food waste in the first place could increase the availability of nutrients for Americans, while saving money and natural resources.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In 2012, food wasted at US retail and consumer levels contained substantial per capita daily nutrients, including 1,217 kcal, 33 g protein, 5.9 g dietary fiber, 1.7 mg vitamin D, 286 mg calcium, and 880 mg potassium. The study contextualizes these losses against dietary intake gaps and food-recovery potential, finding that wasted fiber alone equaled the fiber gap for 206.6 million adult women.

Key findings

  • Retail- and consumer-level food waste in 2012 contained, per capita per day: 1,217 kcal, 33 g protein, 5.9 g dietary fiber, 1.7 mg vitamin D, 286 mg calcium, and 880 mg potassium.
  • For dietary fiber, 5.9 g/day was 23% of the RDA for women and equivalent to the fiber RDA for 74 million adult women; wasted fiber equaled the intake gap for 206.6 million adult women (women underconsumed fiber by 8.9 g/day) or 103.9 million adult men (men underconsumed by 17.7 g/day).
  • Meat, poultry, and fish waste accounted for 50% of vitamin B-12 loss, 47% of zinc, 46% of protein, 42% of niacin, 42% of vitamin B-6, and 40% of cholesterol; added fats and oils accounted for 63% of vitamin E loss; fiber loss came mainly from grains (39%), vegetables (34%), and fruits (22%); calcium loss mainly from dairy (72%); vitamin D loss mainly from dairy (53%), meat/poultry/fish (27%), and eggs (15%).
  • ReFED’s top seven cost-effective recovery activities (1.75% of wasted food) would provide 2,000 kcal/day for 3.3 million adults and the RDA for calcium for 1.6 million, potassium for 1.0 million, fiber for 1.3 million women or 0.8 million men, and vitamin D for 0.6 million adults; maximum feasible recovery (9.21%) would provide 2,000 kcal/day for 17.6 million adults.

Methods

  • Used USDA Loss-Adjusted Food Availability (LAFA) data for 213 commodities in 2012 and National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference Release 28 (SR-28) for 27 nutrients; matched commodities to 290 SR-28 food codes, excluding nonedible portions and primary-level loss to focus on retail and consumer levels.
  • Calculated per capita per year nutrient loss, divided by 365 for per capita per day, and multiplied by the 2012 US population (313,914,040) for population-level estimates; compared results with NHANES What We Eat in America 2011-2012 usual intakes for adults aged ≥20 years and Dietary Reference Intakes (RDA/AI), and applied ReFED recovery proportions (1.75% and 9.21%).
  • Data were compiled in Excel with a MATLAB script; a 5% subsample was double-checked by a second author; the study was IRB-exempt because it used publicly available data.

Limitations

  • The paper states LAFA loss assumptions may not reflect changes over time; 2012 LAFA does not include more recent wholesale/retail loss estimates indicating fresh fruit and vegetable losses may be 4.3% and 1% higher, respectively; nutrient composition varies within and across food categories and cultivars; 290 SR-28 codes for 213 commodity groups cannot capture all foods/cultivars; selected codes generally corresponded to raw foods though actual wasted food state may differ; food may lose nutritional value as it deteriorates; farm vs nonfarm recovered food was not differentiated; and ReFED recovery estimates were based on the entire supply chain, complicating comparison to retail/consumer-only estimates and serving as illustrative rather than exact projections.
  • The text also makes evident that the analysis excludes primary-level loss due to inconsistent data availability, and that not all wasted food can feasibly be recovered for human consumption because of food safety, perishability, transportation, storage, timing, quality, and social acceptability constraints; recovered food would not necessarily yield a palatable or nutritious diet.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jand.2017.03.015

Cites

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 43 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    For all nutrients presented except polyunsaturated fat and vitamin K, the majority of loss occurred at the consumer level.

    “For all nutrients presented except polyunsaturated fat and vitamin K, the majority of loss occurred at the consumer level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Wasted food at the retail and consumer levels of the US food supply in 2012 contained 33 g protein per capita per day.

    “Wasted food at the retail and consumer levels contained an average of 1,217 kcal, 146 g carbohydrates, 33 g protein, 57 g total fat, 5.9 g dietary fiber, 1.7 mg vitamin D, 286 mg calcium, and 880 mg potassium per capita per day.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Wasted food at the retail and consumer levels of the US food supply in 2012 contained 1.7 mg vitamin D per capita per day.

    “Wasted food at the retail and consumer levels contained an average of 1,217 kcal, 146 g carbohydrates, 33 g protein, 57 g total fat, 5.9 g dietary fiber, 1.7 mg vitamin D, 286 mg calcium, and 880 mg potassium per capita per day.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Added fats and oils accounted for 63% of the loss of vitamin E across the food supply.

    “Added fats and oils accounted for 63% of the loss of vitamin E across the food supply.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Adult men in 2012 consumed an average of 17.7 g less than the recommended intake of dietary fiber per day.

    “Adult women and men in 2012 consumed an average of 8.9 and 17.7 g less than the recommended intake of dietary fiber per day, respectively”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 33
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 49
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 16

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Waste of 213 commodities at the retail and consumer levels contained 5.9 g dietary fiber per capita per day, equivalent to upward of 1.8 billion g dietary fiber across the 2012 US population.

    “waste of 213 commodities at the retail and consumer levels contained 5.9 g dietary fiber per capita, equivalent to upward of 1.8 billion g dietary fiber across the 2012 US population”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    At this recovery rate, recovered food would be equivalent to the calcium RDA for 1.6 million adult women or men, the potassium RDA for 1.0 million adult women or men, the dietary fiber RDA for 1.3 million adult women or 0.8 million adult men, and the vitamin D RDA for 0.6 million adult women or men.

    “at this rate the recovered food would be equivalent to the calcium RDA for 1.6 million adult women or men, the potassium RDA for 1.0 million adult women or men, the dietary fiber RDA for 1.3 million adult women or 0.8 million adult men, and the vitamin D RDA for 0.6 million adult women or men.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Retail-and consumer-level waste of meat, poultry, and fish accounted for 50% of vitamin B-12 loss, 47% of zinc loss, 46% of protein loss, 42% of niacin loss, 42% of vitamin B-6 loss, and 40% of cholesterol loss.

    “retail-and consumer-level waste of meat, poultry, and fish accounted for a substantial portion of the loss of vitamin B-12 (50% of the total loss), zinc (47%), protein (46%), niacin (42%), vitamin B-6 (42%), and cholesterol (40%).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Daily per capita iron loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to 30% of the adult women's RDA and 66% of the adult men's RDA, averaging 48%.

    “The RDA for iron differs greatly between men and women; daily per capita iron loss in the US food supply is equivalent to 30% of the adult women's RDA and 66% of the adult men's RDA, which averages to 48%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    For other nutrients shown, differences between the RDA for men and women were not as large.

    “For other nutrients shown, differences between the RDA for men and women were not as large.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level iron loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended iron intake for 208.5 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Iron (mg) i | 8.0 | 18.1 | - | - | 208.5 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level protein loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended protein intake for 183.7 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Protein (g) | 56.0 | 98.4 | - | - | 183.7 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level magnesium loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average magnesium gap for 606.1 million adult men.

    “| Magnesium (mg) i | 400.0 | 356.0 | e44.0 | 606.1 | 66.7 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin E loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended vitamin E intake for 75.9 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Vitamin E (mg) i | 15.0 | 10.3 | e4.7 | 242.1 | 75.9 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level dietary fiber loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended dietary fiber intake for 48.4 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Dietary fiber (g) ij | 38.0 | 20.3 | e17.7 | 103.9 | 48.4 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin E loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average vitamin E gap for 242.1 million adult men.

    “| Vitamin E (mg) i | 15.0 | 10.3 | e4.7 | 242.1 | 75.9 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level potassium loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average potassium gap for 183.6 million adult men.

    “| Potassium (mg) ij | 4,700.0 | 3,195.0 | e1,505.0 | 183.6 | 58.8 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin D loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average vitamin D gap for 57.8 million adult men.

    “| Vitamin D (mg) ij | 15.0 | 5.5 | e9.5 | 57.8 | 36.6 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin D loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended vitamin D intake for 36.6 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Vitamin D (mg) ij | 15.0 | 5.5 | e9.5 | 57.8 | 36.6 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin C loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended vitamin C intake for 123.4 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Vitamin C (mg) i | 90.0 | 92.1 | - | - | 123.4 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin A loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average vitamin A gap for 640.9 million adult men.

    “| Vitamin A (mg) i | 900.0 | 749.0 | e151.0 | 640.9 | 107.5 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level vitamin A loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended vitamin A intake for 107.5 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Vitamin A (mg) i | 900.0 | 749.0 | e151.0 | 640.9 | 107.5 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level potassium loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended potassium intake for 58.8 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Potassium (mg) ij | 4,700.0 | 3,195.0 | e1,505.0 | 183.6 | 58.8 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level calcium loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended calcium intake for 89.8 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Calcium (mg) ij | 1,000.0 | 1,116.0 | - | - | 89.8 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level magnesium loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the recommended magnesium intake for 66.7 million adult men aged 19-30 y.

    “| Magnesium (mg) i | 400.0 | 356.0 | e44.0 | 606.1 | 66.7 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The daily population-level dietary fiber loss in the US food supply in 2012 was equivalent to the average dietary fiber gap for 103.9 million adult men.

    “| Dietary fiber (g) ij | 38.0 | 20.3 | e17.7 | 103.9 | 48.4 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The estimated total caloric value of per capita per day nutrient loss from this analysis is 1,217 kcal, compared to 1,249 kcal from Buzby and colleagues, a difference of -33 kcal (-3%).

    “Total calories | 1,217 | 1,249 | e33 | e3”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Buzby, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The estimated seafood protein per capita per day from this analysis is 1.4 g, compared to 1.9 g from Love and colleagues (high estimate), a difference of -0.5 g (-37%).

    “Seafood protein -high | 1.4 | 1.9 | e0.5 | e37”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Love, 2015, Wasted seafood in the United States: Quantifying loss from production to consumption and moving toward solutions, Glob Environ Change source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The estimated seafood protein per capita per day from this analysis is 1.4 g, compared to 1.8 g from Love and colleagues (low estimate), a difference of -0.4 g (-31%).

    “Seafood protein -low | 1.4 | 1.8 | e0.4 | e31”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Love, 2015, Wasted seafood in the United States: Quantifying loss from production to consumption and moving toward solutions, Glob Environ Change source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the 32.8 g protein per capita per day embedded in food loss in the US food supply, 19% comes from dairy and 46% comes from meat, poultry, and fish.

    “Example interpretation: of the 32.8 g protein per capita per day embedded in food loss in the US food supply, 19% of those grams come from dairy and 46% of those grams come from meat, poultry, and fish.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    According to the 2012 LAFA data series, the primary weight per capita of egg was 32.65 lb/y, before accounting for any food loss.

    “According to the 2012 LAFA data series, the primary weight per capita of egg was 32.65 lb/y, before accounting for any food loss.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The estimated seafood calories per capita per day from this analysis is 7.0 kcal, compared to 9.6 kcal from Love and colleagues (low estimate), a difference of -2.6 kcal (-37%).

    “Seafood calories -low | 7.0 | 9.6 | e2.6 | e37”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Love, 2015, Wasted seafood in the United States: Quantifying loss from production to consumption and moving toward solutions, Glob Environ Change source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The estimated seafood calories per capita per day from this analysis is 7.0 kcal, compared to 11.2 kcal from Love and colleagues (high estimate), a difference of -4.2 kcal (-60%).

    “Seafood calories -high | 7.0 | 11.2 | e4.2 | e60”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Love, 2015, Wasted seafood in the United States: Quantifying loss from production to consumption and moving toward solutions, Glob Environ Change source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The estimated total caloric value of per capita per day nutrient loss from this analysis is 1,217 kcal, compared to 1,400 kcal from Hall and colleagues, a difference of -184 kcal (15%).

    “Total calories | 1,217 | 1,400 | e184 | 15”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] Hall, 2009, The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PLoS One source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The Environmental Protection Agency Food Recovery Hierarchy indicates three uses for such food that are superior to landfilling: feeding animals, industrial uses, and composting.

    “The Environmental Protection Agency Food Recovery Hierarchy indicates three uses for such food that are superior to landfilling: feeding animals, industrial uses, and composting.22”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] US Environmental Protection Agency. Food recovery hierarchy. https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food. Accessed July 27, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Some food will inevitably be discarded.

    “Some food will inevitably be discarded.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Consuming lesser-value foods and purchasing them at discount prices may become more normalized as food waste interventions spread, thereby reducing stigma and increasing use of such foods across the population.

    “Regarding food items that may be perceived as lesser value-such as misshapen or damaged produce, socially undesirable food products, food in damaged packaging, and food that is older but still safe-consuming these foods and purchasing them at discount prices may become more normalized as food waste interventions spread, thereby reducing stigma and increasing use of such foods across the population”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Not all food meets standards of quality or social acceptability for human consumption.

    “Finally, not all food meets standards of quality or social acceptability for human consumption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Although only a portion of this nutritional value can be recovered for human consumption, the magnitude of loss and the associated lost money and resources mean there is great opportunity in focusing on that effort.

    “Although only a portion of this nutritional value can be recovered for human consumption, the magnitude of loss and the associated lost money and resources mean there is great opportunity in focusing on that effort.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Some logistical challenges of perishability, transportation, storage, and timing cannot be addressed in a cost-effective manner.

    “In addition, some logistical challenges of perishability, transportation, storage, and timing cannot be addressed in a cost-effective manner.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Food safety concerns are paramount, and protecting food safety can mean setting stringent standards that err on the discard side.

    “Food safety concerns are paramount, and protecting food safety can mean setting stringent standards that err on the discard side.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Quantifying the loss can motivate related investments and support the case for engagement by registered dietitian nutritionists with these efforts.

    “Quantifying the loss can motivate related investments and support the case for engagement by registered dietitian nutritionists with these efforts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Perishable foods such as fruits and vegetables are lost at particularly high rates, leading to exceptional losses of underconsumed nutrients.

    “Perishable foods such as fruits and vegetables are lost at particularly high rates, leading to exceptional losses of underconsumed nutrients.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Cultural shifts are needed, although they cannot eliminate all waste.

    “Cultural shifts are also needed, although they cannot eliminate all waste.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The substantial amount of nutrient loss at the consumer level points to the need for interventions targeted toward consumers.

    “The substantial amount of nutrient loss at the consumer level points to the need for interventions targeted toward consumers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous research estimated that wasted food in the United States contains between 1,249 and 1,400 kcal per capita per day.

    “Previous research has estimated that wasted food in the United States contains between 1,249 and 1,400 kcal per capita per day”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [1] Buzby, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [2] Hall, 2009, The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PLoS One source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    The estimates can serve as a baseline for tracking the influence of interventions.

    “The estimates can also serve as a baseline for tracking the influence of interventions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In the United Kingdom, a broad suite of interventions including policy, retailers, and consumer behavior change communication contributed to a 21% reduction in household food waste between 2007 and 2012.

    “In the United Kingdom, a broad suite of interventions including policy, retailers, and consumer behavior change communication contributed to a 21% reduction in household food waste between 2007 and 2012.13”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [13] Quested T, Ingle R, Parry A. Household food and drink waste in the United Kingdom 2012. http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/household-food-and-drink-waste-uk-2012. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These findings should not be interpreted as implying that all lost nutrient content could be recovered and fed to people, nor that the food that could be feasibly recovered would necessarily result in a palatable or nutritious diet.

    “These findings should not be interpreted as implying that all lost nutrient content could be recovered and fed to people, nor that the food that could be feasibly recovered would necessarily result in a palatable or nutritious diet.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Food that reaches the consumer level generally cannot be recovered unless it is nonperishable and remains in sealed packaging.

    “In addition, food that reaches the consumer level generally cannot be recovered unless it is nonperishable and remains in sealed packaging.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans reported that underconsumed nutrients include dietary fiber; calcium; choline; magnesium; potassium; and vitamins A, C, D, and E for all population groups and iron for adolescent girls and women of reproductive age.

    “The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) reported that these underconsumed nutrients include dietary fiber; calcium; choline; magnesium; potassium; and vitamins A, C, D, and E for all population groups and iron for adolescent girls and women of reproductive age.21”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21] US Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture. 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 8th ed. https://health.gov/DietaryGuidelines/. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The selected SR-28 codes generally corresponded to raw foods, and the actual nutritional value of wasted food may differ according to its state at the time of discard.

    “The selected SR-28 codes generally corresponded to raw foods (eg, raw beans instead of cooked beans), although the actual nutritional value of wasted food may differ according to its state at the time of discard.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Nutrient composition varies within and across food categories, and across cultivars.
    • Rests on an assumption: Some food waste recovery efforts may involve collecting food that has become less fresh, particularly when the intent is to process the food.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    This analysis used the RDA because the RDA is intended for recommendations at the individual level.

    “this analysis used the RDA because the RDA is intended for recommendations at the individual level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Improved recovery requires multifaceted efforts from government and industry stakeholders.

    “The nature of these measures suggests that improved recovery requires multifaceted efforts from government and industry stakeholders.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    ReFED estimated that 20% of discarded food could be diverted from landfills by implementing a set of cost-effective activities with three goals: food recovery, composting, and waste prevention.

    “ReFED estimated that 20% of this discarded food could be diverted from landfills by implementing a set of costeffective activities with three goals: food recovery, composting, and waste prevention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Rethink Food Waste Through Economics and Data (ReFED). A roadmap to reduce US Food Waste by 20%. http://www.refed.com/download. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    ReFED estimated that annually in the United States, 1.7 million tons of food are recovered for distribution to those in need, 52.4 million tons are discarded in landfills, and 10.1 million tons are left in farm fields, totaling 62.5 million tons.

    “estimated that annually in the United States, 1.7 million tons of food are recovered for distribution to those in need, but still 52.4 million tons are discarded in landfills and 10.1 million tons are left in farm fields, totaling 62.5 million tons.23”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Rethink Food Waste Through Economics and Data (ReFED). A roadmap to reduce US Food Waste by 20%. http://www.refed.com/download. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    For all data transferred from one file to another, a 5% subsample was double checked by a second author, and discrepancies were resolved by referring to the original data sets.

    “For all data that were transferred from one file to another, a 5% subsample was double checked by a second author, and discrepancies were resolved by referring to the original data sets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    The difference between this analysis's seafood loss estimates and Love et al.'s may be because Love et al. included the full seafood supply chain and used multiple data sources intended to avoid underestimation.

    “The difference may be because Love and colleagues 15 included the full seafood supply chain and used multiple data sources specifically intended to avoid underestimation of seafood loss.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] Love, 2015, Wasted seafood in the United States: Quantifying loss from production to consumption and moving toward solutions, Glob Environ Change source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The discrepancy between this analysis's estimate and Buzby et al.'s estimate is likely due to food supply changes and minor methodologic differences.

    “This discrepancy is likely due to food supply changes and minor methodologic differences; for example, Buzby and colleagues 1 calculated caloric value by using food pattern equivalents (previously known as servings), whereas this analysis used weight.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Buzby, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Underlying the desirability of some dietary patterns over others is the ability to obtain a variety of nutrients in sufficient quantities.

    “Yet, underlying the desirability of some dietary patterns over others is the ability to obtain a variety of nutrients in sufficient quantities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends consuming fiber in its food form as opposed to dietary supplements.

    “Adequate fiber intake is inversely associated with chronic disease, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends consuming fiber in its food form (as opposed to dietary supplements), 32”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Dahl, 2015, Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Health implications of dietary fiber, J Acad Nutr Diet source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The Dietary Guidelines for Americans emphasize the benefit of a whole-diet perspective for promoting good eating patterns, rather than focusing too heavily on component nutrients.

    “The DGA emphasize the benefit of a whole-diet perspective for promoting good eating patterns, rather than focusing too heavily on component nutrients.21”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21] US Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture. 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 8th ed. https://health.gov/DietaryGuidelines/. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Food may lose nutritional value as it deteriorates.

    “Another challenge is that food may lose nutritional value as it deteriorates.35”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [35] Gil, 2006, Quality changes and nutrient retention in fresh-cut versus whole fruits during storage, J Agric Food Chem source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The estimates are for illustrative purposes and are not exact projections of the potential for food recovery and its influence on nutrition.

    “It should be emphasized that these estimates are for illustrative purposes and are not exact projections of the potential for food recovery and its influence on nutrition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Food that is wasted is not necessarily inferior; apples with scabs may have higher levels of phenolic compounds.

    “That said, food that is wasted is not necessarily inferior; for example, apples with scabs-which may be more likely to be discarded due to aesthetic standards, or to not be harvested at all-may have higher levels of phenolic compounds.36”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [36] Ana, 2010, Response of the phenylpropanoid pathway to Venturia inaequalis infection in maturing fruit of ‘Braeburn’apple, J Hortic Sci Biotech source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    This research was reviewed and classified as exempt by the institutional review board at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health because all data were derived from existing, publicly available sources and no original research involving human subjects was conducted.

    “This research was reviewed and classified as exempt by the institutional review board at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health because all data were derived from existing, publicly available sources and no original research involving human subjects was conducted.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    This analysis allows for a nuanced view of nutrient loss, including proportions of loss by food group and by supply chain level.

    “This analysis allows for a nuanced view of nutrient loss, including proportions of loss by food group and by supply chain level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The three most cost-effective measures for increasing food recovery are donation tax incentives, standardized donation regulations, and improved donation matching software.

    “According to ReFED, the three most cost-effective measures for increasing food recovery are donation tax incentives, standardized donation regulations (eg, local and state food safety laws), and improved donation matching software.23”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Rethink Food Waste Through Economics and Data (ReFED). A roadmap to reduce US Food Waste by 20%. http://www.refed.com/download. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Recovering surplus food plays an essential mitigation role by filling nutrition gaps while diverting food from landfills, but it does not address the root causes of food insecurity, malnutrition, or wasted food.

    “Although recovering surplus food plays an essential mitigation role by filling nutrition gaps while diverting food from landfills, it does not address the root causes of food insecurity, malnutrition, or wasted food.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    ReFED highlighted standardized date labeling and consumer education as being particularly cost effective.

    “ReFED highlighted two consumer oriented interventions-standardized date labeling and consumer education-as being particularly cost effective.23”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Rethink Food Waste Through Economics and Data (ReFED). A roadmap to reduce US Food Waste by 20%. http://www.refed.com/download. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    These estimates are provided for context, recognizing that not all wasted food can feasibly be recovered for human consumption.

    “These estimates are provided for context, recognizing that not all wasted food can feasibly be recovered for human consumption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    NHANES data are gathered from 24-hour dietary recalls and are a useful indicator of consumption.

    “NHANES data are gathered from 24-hour dietary recalls and are a useful indicator of consumption, given that the USDA Food Availability and LAFA data series reflect food availability and losses but not dietary consumption.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Nutrient intakes from food and beverages: Mean amounts consumed per individual, by gender and age, What We Eat in America, NHANES 2011-2012. www.ars.usda.gov/nea/bhnrc/fsrg. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    This analysis is subject to the limitations of its primary data sources.

    “This analysis is subject to the limitations of its primary data sources.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Nutrients such as trans fats, for which data were not consistently available for all commodities, are not reported.

    “Nutrients such as trans fats, for which data were not consistently available for all commodities, are not reported.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    No nutrient data exist for the LAFA data series, so current figures overestimate nutrient availability in the food supply because they include the nutrient content of 133 billion pounds of food loss unavailable for human consumption.

    “No such nutrient data exist for the LAFA data series, so current figures overestimate nutrient availability in the food supply because they include the nutrient content of 133 billion pounds of food loss unavailable for human consumption.1”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Buzby, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    This analysis did not differentiate between nutrition content of food recovered directly from farms and food recovered from nonfarm donations.

    “In addition, this analysis did not differentiate between nutrition content of food recovered directly from farms (likely to consist primarily of fruits and vegetables) and food recovered from nonfarm donations (likely to consist of additional food groups).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    27% of recovered food comes from farms.

    “For context, it has been estimated that 27% of recovered food comes from farms.23”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Rethink Food Waste Through Economics and Data (ReFED). A roadmap to reduce US Food Waste by 20%. http://www.refed.com/download. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The higher consumer-level losses potentially reflect food perishability over time, among other factors.

    “potentially reflecting food perishability over time, among other factors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Adequate fiber intake is inversely associated with chronic disease.

    “Adequate fiber intake is inversely associated with chronic disease, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends consuming fiber in its food form (as opposed to dietary supplements), 32”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Dahl, 2015, Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Health implications of dietary fiber, J Acad Nutr Diet source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The research is built on the USDA's most current estimates of food losses at the retail and consumer levels, which allow for the exclusion of inedible components of food.

    “In addition, the research is built on the USDA's most current estimates of food losses at the retail and consumer levels, which allow for the exclusion of inedible components of food.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    This analysis was based on 290 SR-28 food codes representing 213 commodity food groups.

    “this analysis was based on 290 SR-28 food codes representing 213 commodity food groups”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Reducing food waste benefits consumers by reducing food costs and minimizing the loss of important nutrients.

    “Reducing food waste benefits consumers by reducing food costs and minimizing the loss of important nutrients.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationcitation

    This study has broad significance as a demonstration of how the magnitude of nutrient loss can be calculated at a national level.

    “Researchers have called for better national-level metrics of nutrient quality as a dimension of food security, and this study has broad significance as a demonstration of how the magnitude of nutrient loss can be calculated at a national level.37”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [37] Coates, 2013, Build it back better: Deconstructing food security for improved measurement and action, Glob Food Sec source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The US total population on July 1, 2012, was 313,914,040.

    “The US total population on July 1, 2012, was 313,914,040.27”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [27] US Census Bureau, Population Division. Table 1. Monthly Population Estimates for the United States: April 1, 2010 to November 1, 2013 (NA-EST2012-01). http://www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/demo/popest/nation-total.html. Accessed June 6, 2016.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Efforts to redistribute surplus foods where appropriate and prevent food waste in the first place could increase the availability of nutrients for Americans while saving money and natural resources.

    “Although only a portion of discarded food can realistically be made available for human consumption, efforts to redistribute surplus foods where appropriate and prevent food waste in the first place could increase the availability of nutrients for Americans while saving money and natural resources.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The codebook was developed based on similar research efforts, for improved comparability to previous studies.

    “The codebook was developed based on similar research efforts, for improved comparability to previous studies.1,28”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [1] Buzby, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [28] Kantor, 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Previous research has shown that 31% to 40% of food in the United States is wasted before it reaches consumers and that this waste contains between 1,249 and 1,400 kcal per capita per day.

    “previous research has shown that that 31% to 40% of food in the United States is wasted before it reaches consumers and that this waste contains between 1,249 and 1,400 kcal per capita per day”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
82 of 82

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Nutrient composition varies within and across food categories, and across cultivars.

    “Nutrient composition varies within and across food categories, and across cultivars”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Some food waste recovery efforts may involve collecting food that has become less fresh, particularly when the intent is to process the food.

    “Some food waste recovery efforts may involve collecting food that has become less fresh, particularly when the intent is to process the food.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The United States has established a target of halving food loss and waste by 2030.

    “The United States has established a target of halving food loss and waste by 2030.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little is known about the composition of other nutrients embedded in wasted food.

    “little is known about the composition of other nutrients embedded in wasted food”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Most discarded food at the retail and consumer levels, especially at the retail level, is likely to be raw.

    “under the assumption that most discarded food at the retail and consumer levels (more so at the retail level) is likely to be raw.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The LAFA data series provides accurate estimates of retail and consumer level food loss for the commodities used.

    “The LAFA data series contains estimates of retail and consumer level loss for 213 commodities”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The SR-28 nutrient values accurately represent the nutrient content of the foods lost.

    “The table contains the codebook that matches the commodities identified in the LAFA data series to food items in SR-28.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mapping between LAFA commodities and SR-28 food codes is valid.

    “The table contains the codebook that matches the commodities identified in the LAFA data series to food items in SR-28.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Loss at the consumer level from the non-edible portion does not reflect preventable food waste and is not relevant to the research question.

    “This loss does not reflect preventable food waste and is therefore not relevant to the research question.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The US Department of Agriculture conceptualizes all loss from nonedible portions as occurring at the consumer level.

    “Note that the US Department of Agriculture conceptualizes all loss from nonedible portions as occurring at the consumer level.”
10 of 10

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Results presented in this study support previous findings identifying wasted food as having a high influence on the availability of important micronutrients.

    “Results presented in this study also support previous findings identifying wasted food as having a high influence on the availability of important micronutrients (59).”

    From Valuing the multiple impacts of household food waste (2019) · cites this paper as [59]

  • According to Spiker et al., focusing only on the caloric value of food waste risks over representing the influence of calorie-dense foods that typically carry fewer health benefits.

    “According to Spiker et al. (59), focusing only on the caloric value of food waste risks over representing the influence of calorie-dense foods that typically carry fewer health benefits.”

    From Valuing the multiple impacts of household food waste (2019) · cites this paper as [59]

  • US food waste accounts for 760-790 kcal per person per day.

    “over 20% of food is lost or wasted at the consumer level each year,[24] accounting for 225–290 pounds per person per year[16, 24, 25] and 760–790 kcal per person per day.[16, 24–26]”

    From Relationship between food waste, diet quality, and environmental sustainability (2018) · cites this paper as [26]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

  • Riboflavin retail and consumer shares exceed 100%

    Minor

    Table 10 assigns 33% of riboflavin loss to retail and 71% to consumers. Their 104% total cannot be explained by rounding whole-number percentages.

    Reported 100 · recomputed 104

  • Egg consumer-level loss is miscalculated

    Minor

    The stated consumer-level egg loss is 29.26 − 19.02 = 10.24 lb, not 10.45 lb. The 10.45-lb value is then used to divide the loss into edible and nonedible portions.

    Reported 10.45 · recomputed 10.24

  • Fish protein share is understated in Table 5

    Minor

    Fish accounts for 1.4 g of the table's 32.8 g total protein loss, or about 4.3%, rather than the reported 1%.

    Reported 1 · recomputed 4.268293

  • Vitamin B6 retail and consumer shares exceed 100%

    Minor

    Table 10 assigns 27% of vitamin B6 loss to retail and 80% to consumers, totaling 107% rather than 100%.

    Reported 100 · recomputed 107

  • Total egg loss does not match initial and final weights

    Minor

    Starting with 32.65 lb and leaving 19.02 lb available implies 13.63 lb lost across all levels, not the stated 10.45 lb.

    Reported 10.45 · recomputed 13.63

5 of 5

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 25 · Cited by 157

Authors
Spiker, M. L., Hiza, H. A. B., Siddiqi, S. M., & Neff, R. A.
Affiliations
  • Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Neff, Roni A.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
117
Issue
7
Pages
1031-1040.e22
ISSN
2212-2672 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jand.2017.03.015
OpenAlex
W2612101082
Semantic Scholar
4805cf30e498d355b992eb1652c84fc9515d9c17
Cited by
157
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 4
FWCI
20.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • Johns Hopkins University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Keywords
food waste, nutrient loss, dietary fiber, dietary intake, food recovery, retail food waste, consumer food waste, vitamin D, calcium, potassium, proteins, women's nutrition, food redistribution, United States food supply
MeSH terms
Adult, Energy Intake, Conservation of Natural Resources, Consumer Behavior, Diet, Dietary Fiber, Dietary Proteins, Female, Food Supply, Humans, Nutritive Value, United States, United States Department of Agriculture, Recommended Dietary Allowances

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review