Next Article in Journal
Phase Angle as a Predictor of Mortality in Older Patients with Hip Fracture
Next Article in Special Issue
A Comparative Study on the Dietary Iodine Intake and the Contribution Rates of Various Foods to the Dietary Iodine Intake among Residents in Zhejiang in 2010 and 2022
Previous Article in Journal
Personalized Nutrition Therapy without Weight Loss Counseling Produces Weight Loss in Individuals with Prediabetes Who Are Overweight/Obese: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Previous Article in Special Issue
Design and Validation of MEDOC, a Tool to Assess the Combined Adherence to Mediterranean and Western Dietary Patterns
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 16
Issue 14
10.3390/nu16142219
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Planetary Health Diet Compared to Dutch Dietary Guidelines: Nutritional Content and Adequacy

by
Julieth Pilar Uriza-Pinzón
1,
Femke Fleur Verstraete
1,2,
Oscar H. Franco
1,
Vicente Artola Arita
1,
Mary Nicolaou
3 and
Yvonne T. Van der Schouw
1,*
1
Department of Global Public Health & Bioethics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
2
Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE Wageningen, The Netherlands
3
Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients 2024, 16(14), 2219; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142219
Submission received: 14 June 2024 / Revised: 28 June 2024 / Accepted: 5 July 2024 / Published: 11 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Role of Dietary Assessment and Nutritional Surveys in Human Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In 2019, the EAT-Lancet Commission proposed a Planetary Health Diet (PHD) to address challenges toward sustainable and healthy diets. However, its suitability within the Dutch context and a comparison with the Dutch Dietary Guidelines (DDG) needs investigation. Our study aimed to compare the PHD with DDG in terms of food groups, servings, nutritional content, and adequacy in adults. We modeled two theoretical diets, the PHD (PHD-NL) and another based on the DDG (DDG-NL), using the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey (FCS-2016) and Dutch Food Composition Database to calculate the nutritional content and compared it with the Dutch Dietary Reference Values (DRVs). The PHD included higher quantities of vegetables, fish, legumes, and nuts, while the DDG suggested more significant amounts of cereals, tubers, starchy vegetables, dairy, and red meat. We observed differences in macronutrient distribution; while both diets lacked sufficient vitamin D, calcium content was lower in the PHD-NL. The PHD-NL had higher levels of fiber, vegetable protein, unsaturated fats, and non-heme iron, while vitamins B2, B6, B12, and calcium were lower than the DDG-NL diet. The PHD-NL has nutritional adequacy in the Dutch context, except for vitamin D and calcium, although it is essential to be cautious with iron because of the bioavailability of non-heme iron in plant-based diets. These findings have implications for the adoption of a sustainable diet according to nutritional requirements, population health status, and sociocultural context, as well as compliance with specific dietary behaviors of populations.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

The interest in sustainable and healthy diets is rising due to concerns about planetary sustainability and major health issues associated with current eating habits [1,2,3,4]. As a result, The Lancet published the Planetary Health Diet (PHD) in 2019 to promote human health and environmental sustainability [2]. Furthermore, since the 20th century, many governments have developed dietary guidelines to promote health, and their evolution reflects the ongoing effort to promote healthier diets and sustainability [5,6]. According to the last, some studies have compared local dietary guidelines with the PHD proposal. For instance, in Germany, there was a broad agreement between both recommendations, with the main differences in milk and dairy products [7]. Also, some researchers have developed local indexes or scores to measure the adherence of their populations to the PHD [8,9,10,11,12,13,14].
Until now, dietary guidelines have been developed with a health focus, as sustainability was not a top priority and was challenging to quantify [15]. The development of PHD followed an increased understanding of planetary boundaries and sustainability. In terms of nutritional content, the EAT-Lancet Commission reported that only vitamin B12 is low in the PHD [2]; however, some criticism around its nutritional adequacy has arisen. Authors have reported that adhering to the PHD could cause some micronutrient shortfalls in adult populations from Denmark, Italy, Australia, France, and the United States such as vitamin D, vitamin B12, calcium, zinc, iron, iodine, magnesium, potassium, fiber, and selenium [16,17,18,19,20,21].
The reported differences between the studies are due to local diets and dietary recommendations, as both are country-specific. Additionally, diverse populations may have unique dietary patterns, including preferences, restrictions, and traditional food practices, which could impact the diet’s feasibility, acceptability, and nutritional adequacy [22,23]. Translating and comparing the Planetary Health Diet in the Dutch context can help address the gaps related to its application and adaptation while ensuring it meets nutritional adequacy in the Netherlands.
Hence, in the current study, we aim to achieve the following two objectives: (1) to compare the Dutch Dietary Guidelines (DDG) and the PHD based on recommended foods with their servings and (2) to determine their nutritional content and adequacy in relation to the Dutch Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) for the adult population. We hypothesize that the Dutch Dietary Guidelines (DDG), which incorporate sustainability aspects, will resemble the Planetary Health Diet (PHD) in most aspects and also that both diets could meet the Dutch Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) for the adult population.

2. Materials and Methods

Our methodology is summarized in Figure 1. We follow the next steps.

2.1. Planetary Health Diet and Dutch Dietary Guidelines Comparison

Two recommended dietary patterns were compared: the PHD and the DDG.
-
(Step 1) Match food groups: For both the PHD and the DDG, food groups were categorized according to food nature and compared to each other (Table 1);
-
(Step 2) Transform serving to grams: Food groups from DDG were converted from servings to grams (g) per day through the website portie-online (https://portie-online.rivm.nl/ accessed on 16 May 2023). Additionally, the amount of bread, whole grain, nuts, cheese, fish, meat, legumes, eggs, and fats was confirmed by the publications of the Dutch Nutrition Center [24,25,26]. PHD recommendations are published in grams/day (Table 1).

2.2. Model Theoretical Diets

To determine the nutritional content and adequacy of these recommendations, two theoretical diets were modeled: the Planetary Health Diet adapted with Dutch foods (PHD-NL) and the healthy diet based on the Dutch Dietary Guidelines (DDG-NL).
-
(Step 3) Model theoretical diets: Data from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2016 (FCS) [27] were used as a source of food consumption data. Then, the NOVA (Portuguese: nova classificação, “new classification”) classification [28] and nutritional criteria were used to define the food processing level and to assign foods to food groups for both diets; (Supplementary Material S1–S4 and S6)
-
(Step 4) Nutritional content: Nutritional content was analyzed using the grams per day for every food, with the Dutch food composition database (NEVO) [29], summed up, and then averaged for every food group; (Supplementary Material S7)
-
(Step 5) Nutritional adequacy: Finally, the total nutritional values of each diet were compared with the Dutch Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) for adults from 18 to 50 years [30,31]. For calcium DRVs, an average was calculated. (Supplementary Material S5)
Comparisons were made with the estimated average requirement (EAR) or, when this was not available, the Adequate Intake (AI). All attributions of products to food groups and calculations were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 for Windows version 26.0.0.1.

3. Results

3.1. Food Groups Comparisons

The PHD and DDG differ in some characteristics, like food categorization, measurement units, amounts, and flexibility parameters. The PHD contains eight food groups and fourteen subgroups, and the DDG has five food groups and eight subgroups. Concerning the measurement units, the PHD reports specific food amounts in grams and the DDG in a range of servings. Also, the amount of some animal-source foods, like dairy foods and red meat, was higher in the DDG diet. Finally, in terms of flexibility, the DDG allows the consumption of products that are not advised by the Health Council (i.e., 15% of total daily energy intake can come from products that fall outside the five food groups that are advised), whereas the PHD limits energy intake within the recommended groups.
The results indicate that there are some quantitative differences between the PHD and the DDG. The PHD recommends lower intakes, in grams per day, than the DDG for cereals, whole grains, tubers, starchy vegetables, dairy foods, red meat, and eggs. Moreover, the PHD has higher intake recommendations for vegetables, chicken, fish, legumes, and nuts. In the fats group, when differentiated by sex, PHD recommendation is higher for women and lower for men.
The PHD does not distinguish cheese from other dairy products, but the DDG does. The PHD includes added sugars as food groups, whereas the DDG does not, and the PHD does not include recommendations about beverage intake, whereas the DDG does. Thus, for added sugar and drinks, there was no equivalent group to compare both dietary patterns.

3.2. Nutritional Content and Adequacy

The average micro- and macronutrient content of both diets, as recommended, is presented in Table 2 and Table 3, together with the corresponding percentage of the Dutch Dietary Reference Values. The energy content of the two diets is similar (PHD-NL 1952 kcal and DDG-NL 1968 kcal). However, the nutrients from which this energy is derived differ between the two diets. In PHD-NL, most of the energy comes from fat, while in the DDG-NL diet, most of the energy comes from carbohydrates.
In the DDG-NL diet, 44% of energy is obtained from carbohydrates, while in the PHD-NL diet, it is 37%, and both percentages are around the recommended level of 40% of energy. Part of the carbohydrates are mono- and disaccharides, of which the levels are also higher in the DDG-NL diet than in the PHD-NL diet. On the contrary, the levels of polysaccharides and fiber are higher in the PHD-NL diet than in DDG-NL. For the PHD-NL, the amount of fiber (39 g) is approximately in line with the DRVs for both males and females, while the DDG-NL contains 30 g of fiber and is therefore in line with the recommendation for females but not with the recommendation for males.
In both diets, the percentage of energy from protein is in line with the DRV and below the recommended upper limit of 25%. However, the source of protein differs between the two diets. In the PHD-NL, most of the protein (62%) is from vegetable sources, while in the DDG-NL, 65% of protein intake is from animal-source foods (Figure 2).
Energy from fat is higher in the PHD-NL than in the DDG-NL, mainly because of polyunsaturated fat. Also, the percentage of energy from polyunsaturated fat (13%) is slightly above the recommended upper limit (12%) in the PHD-NL, while the DDG-NL diet contains 11%. For saturated fat, both diets are in line with the upper limit (10%) as they contain 9.9% (PHD-NL) and 8.9% (DDG-NL). Furthermore, the percentage of energy from trans-configured unsaturated fat is below the upper limit (1%) for both diets. For specific fatty acids, both diets are in line with most of the DRVs; however, the DDG-NL diet contains only 146 mg of marine fatty acids and is below the recommendation.
For most vitamins and minerals, the content of both diets is quite similar, but some differences were found in vitamin D, calcium, selenium, and potassium. The amounts of vitamins that are present in the PHD-NL diet and the DDG-NL diet are almost completely in line with the DRVs, but the amount of vitamin D is below the DRV. Of the 10 minerals that are assessed in this analysis, the level of calcium is below the DRV in the PHD-NL diet, while the DDG-NL contains 1652 mg and meets nutritional requirements for adults. And in both diets, sodium is below the DRV.
Additionally, based on the NEVO, water content from food and beverage sources was calculated. The DDG-NL would result in almost three liters of water (2999 g), while PHD-NL resulted in one liter (1077 g).

4. Discussion

4.1. Key Findings

We aimed to assess the similarities and differences between the PHD and DDG in terms of food groups, servings, nutritional content, and adequacy in Dutch adults. We found some differences in (1) foods and food group classifications, (2) amounts per food group, (3) nutritional content, and (4) nutritional adequacy. First, regarding food classifications, there was no equivalent group to compare between added sugar included in the PHD and drinks included in the DDG. Second, in the amounts per food group, we found that PHD recommends higher amounts of vegetables, fish, legumes, and nuts, while the DDG includes higher values for cereals, tubers, starchy vegetables, dairy, and red meat. This result was similar in Germany in relation to milk and dairy product recommendations [7]. Third, when operationalized based on reported intake data from the Dutch population, the PHD-NL results in higher contents of fiber, vegetable protein, and unsaturated fats, while the DDG-NL results in higher vitamins B2, B6, B12, and calcium. And fourth, we found that the modeled diets met most of the DRVs with an exception for vitamin D in both and for calcium in the PHD-NL.
For carbohydrates, the PHD-NL is higher in fiber and lower in sugars, which could be explained by the higher amount of plant-based foods in the PHD. Also, PHD does not have an equivalent for the added sugars group in the DDG. Diets with more fiber and less sugar are healthier and contribute to the reduction in morbimortality [32,33,34,35,36,37], which is a positive aspect of the PHD and would be worth reviewing for future dietary guidelines. In the case of fat, the PHD-NL has 42% of energy intake from fats, exceeding the maximum of 40%. Despite this, PHD-NL included a higher content of polyunsaturated fatty acids above the DRV. The DDG-NL resulted in half of the polyunsaturated fats and did not reach the recommendations. This can be explained by the fact that the PHD recommends higher intakes of fish and nuts than the DDG. There is evidence that polyunsaturated fats from fish and nuts have positive effects on health [32,38,39,40]; thus, higher consumption could contribute to more sustainable and healthier diets [2].
In terms of protein, both diets were above the DRV, but they differed in their protein source. As expected, DDG-NL has less vegetable protein than PHD-NL, which aligns with their food recommendations. The DDG recommends more red meat, while the PHD recommends more vegetables, legumes, and nuts, which results in higher vegetable proteins and non-heme iron in the PHD-NL. Non-heme iron in the PHD-NL is an aspect to consider during its application because protein and iron availability are generally better in animal sources [41,42,43,44]. Indeed, Beal et al. found that PHD falls short of the iron requirements (55%) for women aged 15–49 years [20], which is essential in women of reproductive age [45]. Thus, populations like fertile women could require additional adjustments in the diet for iron adequation [46], also considering the growing food insecurity and malnutrition rates among women compared to men in some populations [47].
Our results in micronutrient adequacy are consistent with some previous research examining the EAT-Lancet diet. In an Italian study, it was found that the PHD-IT diet contained 675.6 mg of calcium and 0.0019 mg of vitamin D [17,48]. In a Danish study, 684 mg of calcium and 0.0025 mg of vitamin D were found in the PHD with Danish foods, being below the recommendations [16]. Also, in Australia, PHD falls short of the calcium requirements (71%) [18]. Vitamin D intake and status is a widespread public health issue across all age groups, and our research confirms it, so addressing this problem will need further research and public policies [49,50,51]. Likewise, our results demonstrated that even with limited intake of animal-source foods, the requirements for vitamins A, B2, B6, and B12 were met with the PHD. Also, other studies in adults and women of reproductive age reported vitamin B12, calcium, iron, and zinc below recommendations [20].

4.2. Strenght and Limitations

A strength of this study is that it provides a complete overview of the nutritional adequacy of the PHD-NL diet and DDG-NL diet and the dietary intake of the Dutch adult population. Another strength of this study is the use of the National Food Consumption Survey (FCS) and the Dutch food composition database (NEVO). In this FCS, 91.9% of the participants had a Dutch background, and 8% were from other ethnic groups [27]. As migration is growing and it could be a determinant of health [52,53,54,55,56], in further research, nutritional adequacy of PHD-NL could be assessed in first- or second-generation Dutch people with different ethnical backgrounds and dietary habits.
We had some limitations related to the inclusion, classification, or exclusion of food groups. The guidelines of the PHD from the EAT-Lancet Commission contain little detail on food nutritional composition [2]. Because of this, nutrient criteria were developed to define which products met categorization into a food group. As not all products mentioned in the FCS were in line with the nutrient criteria for being included in the PHD-NL, these were excluded. Additionally, the PHD recommendations divide fats into four groups; however, it was not possible to attribute all added fats that were consumed by the Dutch population because most of the foods have a combination of multiple fats, e.g., Dairy fats. Also, another PHD recommendation that could not be fully followed pertained to exchanging certain food items. However, only the beef, lamb, and pork subgroups were merged, as they shared the same caloric density. All of the above can result in different group classifications than the EAT-Lancet Commission intended.

4.3. Implications

The current study highlights deficiencies in vitamin D in both the PHD-NL and the DDG-NL, as well as in calcium in the PHD-NL. This is consistent with some authors that emphasize the need to monitor calcium intake status in vegetarian and vegan populations [57,58,59]. Therefore, a possible solution could be the development of an optimized version of the PHD with higher levels of these nutrients while considering planetary boundaries. Additionally, biofortification and fortification of plant-based foods could be a solution to balance sustainable diets with calcium and vitamin D consumption [60,61].
While the PHD lacks specific recommendations for beverages, the DDG addresses this gap. It could be necessary to consider water consumption within the framework of a Planetary Health Diet. Adults require an average of 2–3.7 L of water daily, as water is an essential nutrient for body hydration [62,63]. Sustainability considerations should extend to assessing future projections of water availability for hydration and its environmental implications. Moreover, there remains a knowledge gap regarding water requirements, consumption patterns, and their impacts on health and the environment [64]. Consequently, recommendations and assessments for healthy and sustainable diets should incorporate considerations for water.

4.4. New Direction for Future Research

Our findings provide an answer to the need for dietary approaches that account for diverse contexts and populations, as advocated by the World Health Organization [65]. This requires revisiting food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) in each country. Recent analysis has revealed that a significant portion of FBDG worldwide is incompatible with both the agenda on non-communicable diseases and the Paris Climate Agreement [15]. Thus, comprehensive research is needed to inform locally relevant dietary guidelines that integrate health, sustainability, food systems, and sociocultural factors.
While it is anticipated that the PHD-NL is more sustainable than the DDG-NL, further research is required to validate its environmental impact. Additionally, assessing whether adherence to this pattern effectively contributes to achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is necessary. Furthermore, it is necessary to conduct research on the nutritional adequacy of the PHD-NL for populations beyond adults aged 18 to 70 years, including children, older adults, and lactating women, who have differing nutritional requirements. Also, evaluating specific PHD-NL adaptations for vegetarian or vegan populations is required.

5. Conclusions

Overall, the PHD-NL diet is nutritionally adequate, although optimization of the diet to achieve better levels of calcium and vitamin D is necessary before it can be recommended to the Dutch population. Also, it is essential to include water recommendations in the PHD and expand research in hydration and environmental sustainability. Finally, the DDG coincides with several guidelines for PHD, indicating that current national guidelines in the Netherlands are compatible with sustainability as well as nutritional adequacy.
Finally, this work could be useful in supporting the updating and implementation of the Dutch Dietary Guidelines. Dietary advice has been given to the Dutch population since 1941, and the DDG has been updated periodically [66]. Some aspects to consider for upcoming DDG and public policies:
-
DDG could evaluate the recommended amounts of dairy products, red meat, fish, legumes, nuts, and seeds to be consistent with the PHD;
-
The DDG could emphasize consuming whole grain products and seeds beyond “brown” products to increase fiber consumption;
-
Sugar intake must be addressed in the Dutch population, with some warnings and public policies (e.g., frontal package labeling, taxes, and marketing regulations) to prevent excessive consumption. The WHO recommends limiting the daily intake of added sugars in the diet.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/nu16142219/s1, Supplementary Material S1: EAT-lancet guidelines; Supplementary Material S2: Dutch dietary guidelines; Supplementary Material S3: Nutrient criteria Dutch Dietary Guidelines DDG; Supplementary Material S4: Nutrient criteria PHD-NL diet and DDG-NL diet; Supplementary Material S5: Dutch nutrient recommendations; Supplementary Material S6: Products per food (sub)group PHDNL DDGNL Diets; Supplementary Material S7: PHD-NL DDG-NL Nutritional Content.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.T.V.d.S., F.F.V. and J.P.U.-P.; methodology, Y.T.V.d.S., M.N. and J.P.U.-P.; software, F.F.V.; validation, V.A.A., O.H.F. and M.N.; formal analysis, F.F.V. and J.P.U.-P.; investigation, Y.T.V.d.S.; resources, all authors; data curation, Y.T.V.d.S., M.N. and J.P.U.-P.; writing—original draft preparation, J.P.U.-P.; writing—review and editing, all authors; visualization, J.P.U.-P.; supervision, Y.T.V.d.S., V.A.A., O.H.F. and M.N.; project administration, Y.T.V.d.S.; funding acquisition, J.P.U.-P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation MinCiencias Colombia and Colfuturo Colombia Scholarship.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2012–2016 available at https://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/2020-0083.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2023). Dutch food data composition can be consulted at https://www.rivm.nl/nederlands-voedingsstoffenbestand (accessed on 6 January 2023). More data can be consulted in Supplementary Materials or by writing to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Springmann, M.; Wiebe, K.; Mason-D’Croz, D.; Sulser, T.B.; Rayner, M.; Scarborough, P. Health and nutritional aspects of sustainable diet strategies and their association with environmental impacts: A global modelling analysis with country-level detail. Lancet Planet. Health 2018, 2, e451–e461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Willett, W.; Rockström, J.; Loken, B.; Springmann, M.; Lang, T.; Vermeulen, S.; Garnett, T.; Tilman, D.; DeClerck, F.; Wood, A.; et al. Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 2019, 393, 447–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Clark, M.; Macdiarmid, J.; Jones, A.D.; Ranganathan, J.; Herrero, M.; Fanzo, J. The Role of Healthy Diets in Environmentally Sustainable Food Systems. Food Nutr. Bull. 2020, 41, 31S–58S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Willett, W.C.; Hu, F.B.; Rimm, E.B.; Stampfer, M.J. Building better guidelines for healthy and sustainable diets. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2021, 114, 401–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Herforth, A.; Arimond, M.; Álvarez-Sánchez, C.; Coates, J.; Christianson, K.; Muehlhoff, E. A Global Review of Food-Based Dietary Guidelines. Adv. Nutr. 2019, 10, 590–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mozaffarian, D.; Ludwig, D.S. Dietary guidelines in the 21st century—A time for food. JAMA 2010, 304, 681–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Breidenassel, C.; Schäfer, A.; Micka, M.; Richter, M.; Linseisen, J.; Watzl, B. on behalf of the German Nutrition Society (DGE). The Planetary Health Diet in contrast to the food-based dietary guidelines of the German Nutrition Society (DGE). A DGE statement. Ernahr. Umsch. 2022, 69, 56–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Knuppel, A.; Papier, K.; Key, T.J.; Travis, R.C. EAT-Lancet score and major health outcomes: The EPIC-Oxford study. Lancet 2019, 394, 213–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Trijsburg, L.; Talsma, E.F.; Crispim, S.P.; Garrett, J.; Kennedy, G.; de Vries, J.H.M.; Brouwer, I.D. Method for the Development of WISH, a Globally Applicable Index for Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems. Nutrients 2020, 13, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cacau, L.T.; De Carli, E.; de Carvalho, A.M.; Lotufo, P.A.; Moreno, L.A.; Bensenor, I.M.; Marchioni, D.M. Development and Validation of an Index Based on EAT-Lancet Recommendations: The Planetary Health Diet Index. Nutrients 2021, 13, 1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hanley-Cook, G.T.; Argaw, A.A.; de Kok, B.P.; Vanslambrouck, K.W.; Toe, L.C.; Kolsteren, P.W.; Jones, A.D.; Lachat, C.K. EAT-Lancet diet score requires minimum intake values to predict higher micronutrient adequacy of diets in rural women of reproductive age from five low- and middle-income countries. Br. J. Nutr. 2021, 126, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Kesse-Guyot, E.; Allès, B.; Brunin, J.; Fouillet, H.; Dussiot, A.; Mariotti, F.; Langevin, B.; Berthy, F.; Touvier, M.; Julia, C.; et al. Nutritionally adequate and environmentally respectful diets are possible for different diet groups: An optimized study from the NutriNet-Santé cohort. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2022, 116, 1621–1633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Stubbendorff, A.; Sonestedt, E.; Ramne, S.; Drake, I.; Hallstrom, E.; Ericson, U. Development of an EAT-Lancet index and its relation to mortality in a Swedish population. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2022, 115, 705–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Colizzi, C.; Harbers, M.C.; Vellinga, R.E.; Verschuren, W.M.M.; Boer, J.M.A.; Biesbroek, S.; Temme, E.H.M.; van der Schouw, Y.T. Adherence to the EAT-Lancet Healthy Reference Diet in Relation to Risk of Cardiovascular Events and Environmental Impact: Results from the EPIC-NL Cohort. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2023, 12, e026318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Springmann, M.; Spajic, L.; Clark, M.A.; Poore, J.; Herforth, A.; Webb, P.; Rayner, M.; Scarborough, P. The healthiness and sustainability of national and global food based dietary guidelines: Modelling study. BMJ 2020, 370, m2322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lassen, A.D.; Christensen, L.M.; Trolle, E. Development of a Danish Adapted Healthy Plant-Based Diet Based on the EAT-Lancet Reference Diet. Nutrients 2020, 12, 738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Tucci, M.; Martini, D.; Del Bo, C.; Marino, M.; Battezzati, A.; Bertoli, S.; Porrini, M.; Riso, P. An Italian-Mediterranean Dietary Pattern Developed Based on the EAT-Lancet Reference Diet (EAT-IT): A Nutritional Evaluation. Foods 2021, 10, 558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Hendrie, G.A.; Rebuli, M.A.; James-Martin, G.; Baird, D.L.; Bogard, J.R.; Lawrence, A.S.; Ridoutt, B. Towards healthier and more sustainable diets in the Australian context: Comparison of current diets with the Australian Dietary Guidelines and the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet. BMC Public Health 2022, 22, 1939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Berthy, F.; Brunin, J.; Allès, B.; Reuzé, A.; Touvier, M.; Hercberg, S.; Lairon, D.; Pointereau, P.; Mariotti, F.; Baudry, J.; et al. Higher adherence to the EAT-Lancet reference diet is associated with higher nutrient adequacy in the NutriNet-Santé cohort: A cross-sectional study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2023, 117, 1174–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Beal, T.; Ortenzi, F.; Fanzo, J. Estimated micronutrient shortfalls of the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet. Lancet Planet. Health 2023, 7, e233–e237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Frank, S.M.; Jaacks, L.M.; Adair, L.S.; Avery, C.L.; Meyer, K.; Rose, D.; Taillie, L.S. Adherence to the Planetary Health Diet Index and correlation with nutrients of public health concern: An analysis of NHANES 2003–2018. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2024, 119, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Van Horn, L. Socioeconomic, ethnic, cultural, and other influences on eating behavior: Complex considerations. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2012, 112, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Monterrosa, E.C.; Frongillo, E.A.; Drewnowski, A.; de Pee, S.; Vandevijvere, S. Sociocultural Influences on Food Choices and Implications for Sustainable Healthy Diets. Food Nutr. Bull. 2020, 41, 59S–73S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kromhout, D.; Spaaij, C.J.K.; de Goede, J.; Weggemans, R.M. The 2015 Dutch food-based dietary guidelines. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016, 70, 869–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Brink, E.; van Rossum, C.; Postma-Smeets, A.; Stafleu, A.; Wolvers, D.; van Dooren, C.; Toxopeus, I.; Buurma-Rethans, E.; Geurts, M.; Ocke, M. Development of healthy and sustainable food-based dietary guidelines for the Netherlands. Public Health Nutr. 2019, 22, 2419–2435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. The Netherlands Nutrition Centre Hoeveel en wat kan ik per dag eten? Available online: https://www.voedingscentrum.nl/nl/gezond-eten-met-de-schijf-van-vijf/hoeveel-en-wat-kan-ik-per-dag-eten-.aspx (accessed on 16 May 2023).
  27. van Rossum, C.T.M.; Buurma-Rethans, E.J.M.; Dinnissen, C.S. The Diet of the Dutch Results of the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2012–2016; Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu RIVM: Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  28. Monteiro, C.A.; Cannon, G.; Levy, R.B.; Moubarac, J.-C.; Louzada, M.L.; Rauber, F.; Khandpur, N.; Cediel, G.; Neri, D.; Martinez-Steele, E.; et al. Ultra-processed foods: What they are and how to identify them. Public Health Nutr. 2019, 22, 936–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. The Dutch Composition Database (NEVO). Available online: https://www.rivm.nl/en/dutch-food-composition-database (accessed on 6 January 2023).
  30. Spaaij, C.J.K.; Pijls, L.T.J. New dietary reference intakes in the Netherlands for energy, proteins, fats and digestible carbohydrates. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2004, 58, 191–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Health Council of The Netherlands. Dietary Reference Values for Vitamins and Minerals for Adults from the Health Council of the Netherlands. 2018. Available online: https://www.healthcouncil.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2018/09/18/dietary-reference-values-for-vitamins-and-minerals-for-adults (accessed on 6 January 2023).
  32. GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators. Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2019, 393, 1958–1972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Truswell, A.S. Meta-analysis of the cholesterol-lowering effects of dietary fiber. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999, 70, 942–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Brown, L.; Rosner, B.; Willett, W.W.; Sacks, F.M. Cholesterol-lowering effects of dietary fiber: A meta-analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999, 69, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, J.P.; Chen, G.C.; Wang, X.P.; Qin, L.; Bai, Y. Dietary Fiber and Metabolic Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Related Mechanisms. Nutrients 2017, 10, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Threapleton, D.E.; Greenwood, D.C.; Evans, C.E.; Cleghorn, C.L.; Nykjaer, C.; Woodhead, C.; Cade, J.E.; Gale, C.P.; Burley, V.J. Dietary fiber intake and risk of first stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2013, 44, 1360–1368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhang, Z.; Xu, G.; Ma, M.; Yang, J.; Liu, X. Dietary fiber intake reduces risk for gastric cancer: A meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2013, 145, 113–120.e3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yu, L.; Yuan, M.; Wang, L. The effect of omega-3 unsaturated fatty acids on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2017, 33, 1022–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Imamura, F.; Micha, R.; Wu, J.H.; de Oliveira Otto, M.C.; Otite, F.O.; Abioye, A.I.; Mozaffarian, D. Effects of Saturated Fat, Polyunsaturated Fat, Monounsaturated Fat, and Carbohydrate on Glucose-Insulin Homeostasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Feeding Trials. PLoS Med. 2016, 13, e1002087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Gao, X.; Su, X.; Han, X.; Wen, H.; Cheng, C.; Zhang, S.; Li, W.; Cai, J.; Zheng, L.; Ma, J.; et al. Unsaturated Fatty Acids in Mental Disorders: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses. Adv. Nutr. 2022, 13, 2217–2236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Beal, T.; Gardner, C.D.; Herrero, M.; Iannotti, L.L.; Merbold, L.; Nordhagen, S.; Mottet, A. Friend or Foe? The Role of Animal-Source Foods in Healthy and Environmentally Sustainable Diets. J. Nutr. 2023, 153, 409–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Lopez, M.A.; Martos, F.C. Iron availability: An updated review. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2004, 55, 597–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Theil, E.C. Iron, ferritin, and nutrition. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 2004, 24, 327–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Solomons, N.W.; Schumann, K. 3.2 Iron: Nutritional Deficiency and Excess. World Rev. Nutr. Diet. 2022, 124, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Stevens, G.A.; Beal, T.; Mbuya, M.N.N.; Luo, H.; Neufeld, L.M.; Addo, O.Y.; Adu-Afarwuah, S.; Alayón, S.; Bhutta, Z.; Brown, K.H.; et al. Micronutrient deficiencies among preschool-aged children and women of reproductive age worldwide: A pooled analysis of individual-level data from population-representative surveys. Lancet Glob. Health 2022, 10, e1590–e1599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Jouanne, M.; Oddoux, S.; Noel, A.; Voisin-Chiret, A.S. Nutrient Requirements during Pregnancy and Lactation. Nutrients 2021, 13, 692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. FAO; IFAD; UNICEF; WFP; WHO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2023; FAO; IFAD; UNICEF; WFP; WHO: Rome, Italy, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tucci, M.; Martini, D.; Marino, M.; Del Bo, C.; Vinelli, V.; Biscotti, P.; Parisi, C.; De Amicis, R.; Battezzati, A.; Bertoli, S.; et al. The Environmental Impact of an Italian-Mediterranean Dietary Pattern Based on the EAT-Lancet Reference Diet (EAT-IT). Foods 2022, 11, 3352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Palacios, C.; Gonzalez, L. Is vitamin D deficiency a major global public health problem? J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2014, 144 Pt A, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Heath, A.K.; Kim, I.Y.; Hodge, A.M.; English, D.R.; Muller, D.C. Vitamin D Status and Mortality: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Scott, D.; Ebeling, P.R. Vitamin D and Public Health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Rechel, B.; Mladovsky, P.; Ingleby, D.; Mackenbach, J.P.; McKee, M. Migration and health in an increasingly diverse Europe. Lancet 2013, 381, 1235–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Stronks, K.; Snijder, M.B.; Peters, R.J.; Prins, M.; Schene, A.H.; Zwinderman, A.H. Unravelling the impact of ethnicity on health in Europe: The HELIUS study. BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zimmerman, C.; Kiss, L.; Hossain, M. Migration and health: A framework for 21st century policy-making. PLoS Med. 2011, 8, e1001034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Dekker, L.H.; Nicolaou, M.; van Dam, R.M.; de Vries, J.H.; de Boer, E.J.; Brants, H.A.; Beukers, M.H.; Snijder, M.B.; Stronks, K. Socio-economic status and ethnicity are independently associated with dietary patterns: The HELIUS-Dietary Patterns study. Food Nutr. Res. 2015, 59, 26317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Yau, A.; Adams, J.; White, M.; Nicolaou, M. Differences in diet quality and socioeconomic patterning of diet quality across ethnic groups: Cross-sectional data from the HELIUS Dietary Patterns study. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2020, 74, 387–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Bickelmann, F.V.; Leitzmann, M.F.; Keller, M.; Baurecht, H.; Jochem, C. Calcium intake in vegan and vegetarian diets: A systematic review and Meta-analysis. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2023, 63, 10659–10677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Craig, W.J. Nutrition concerns and health effects of vegetarian diets. Nutr. Clin. Pract. 2010, 25, 613–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Falchetti, A.; Cavati, G.; Valenti, R.; Mingiano, C.; Cosso, R.; Gennari, L.; Chiodini, I.; Merlotti, D. The effects of vegetarian diets on bone health: A literature review. Front. Endocrinol. 2022, 13, 899375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Cormick, G.; Betran, A.P.; Romero, I.B.; Cormick, M.S.; Belizan, J.M.; Bardach, A.; Ciapponi, A. Effect of Calcium Fortified Foods on Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients 2021, 13, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. White, P.J.; Broadley, M.R. Biofortifying crops with essential mineral elements. Trends Plant Sci. 2005, 10, 586–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Campbell, S.M. Hydration needs throughout the lifespan. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2007, 26, 585S–587S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Jéquier, E.; Constant, F. Water as an essential nutrient: The physiological basis of hydration. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 64, 115–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gandy, J. Water intake: Validity of population assessment and recommendations. Eur. J. Nutr. 2015, 54 (Suppl. 2), 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; World Health Organization. Sustainable Healthy Diets: Guiding Principles; Food & Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  66. Food-Based Dietary Guidelines—The Netherlands, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available online: https://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/netherlands/en/ (accessed on 12 September 2023).
Nutrients 16 02219 g001
Figure 1. Overview of methodological steps used for the comparisons, nutritional content, and adequacy.
Figure 1. Overview of methodological steps used for the comparisons, nutritional content, and adequacy.
Nutrients 16 02219 g001
Nutrients 16 02219 g002
Figure 2. Protein distribution between animal and vegetable proteins in the theoretical diets modeled. PHD-NL: theoretical diet based on Planetary Health Diet from EAT-Lancet Commission. DDG-NL: theoretical diet based on Dutch Dietary Guidelines.
Figure 2. Protein distribution between animal and vegetable proteins in the theoretical diets modeled. PHD-NL: theoretical diet based on Planetary Health Diet from EAT-Lancet Commission. DDG-NL: theoretical diet based on Dutch Dietary Guidelines.
Nutrients 16 02219 g002
Table 1. Food groups and subgroups comparison from the Planetary Health Diet and the Dutch Dietary Guidelines.
Table 1. Food groups and subgroups comparison from the Planetary Health Diet and the Dutch Dietary Guidelines.
Food Group PHDFood Group DDGPHD
(Grams per Day)		DDG 1
(Grams per Day)		Numerical Difference (PHD-DDG)
Rice, wheat, corn, and otherBread (brown bread)23220527
Potatoes and cassavaCereal products and potatoes50105−55
All vegetablesVegetables30025050
All fruitsFruits2002000
DairyMilk and dairy products + cheese **250655−405
Beef, lamb, and porkMeat1423.8−9.8
Chicken and other poultryChicken, poultry2923.85.19
EggsEggs1323.8−10.8
FishFish2814.313.7
LegumesLegumes7517.157.9
NutsNuts (without salt)501535
SaturatedFats and oils (spreadable and cooking fats)51.840–65
Mean: 52.5		11.8 and −13.2
0.7
Unsaturated oils
Added sugarsNo equivalent group31031.0
No equivalent groupDrinks: water, coffee, or tea01500−1500
1 In the DDG, all amounts were the same for women and men, with exceptions for bread, whole cereals, and fats. ** The DDG includes cheese in a different group, and this was added to the dairy foods group to compare.
Table 2. Macronutrient contents and nutritional adequacy presented as % Dietary Reference Value (DRV) for Dutch males and females.
Table 2. Macronutrient contents and nutritional adequacy presented as % Dietary Reference Value (DRV) for Dutch males and females.
NutrientPHD-NL Nutritional ContentDDG-NL Nutritional ContentPHD-NL (%DRV)DDG-NL (%DRV)
MenWomenMenWomen
Energy (kcal) 1952 1968----
Carbohydrates (g)1792159292109109
Carbohydrates (%En)37449393110110
 Mono- and disaccharides (g)53100----
 Sugars (g)2.8733----
 Polysaccharides (g)126115----
 Fiber (g)393097–111130–15674–8599–119
Protein (g)82 91187–211169–187206–231185–206
Protein (%En)17 19189–213170–189211–238190–211
 Vegetable protein (g)5132---
 Animal protein (g)3159---
Total fat (g)92 74106–212106–21285–17085–170
Total fat (%En)42 34105–210105–21085–17085–170
 Saturated fat (g)2119---
 Saturated fat (%En)9.98.999998989
 Polyunsaturated fat (g)2924---
 Polyunsaturated fat (%En)13111081089292
 Linoleic acid (g)2318---
 Alpha linolenic acid (mg)4.65.1---
 Alpha linolenic acid (%En)2.12.3210210230230
 Eicosapentaenoic acid (mg)12067---
 Docosahexaenoic acid (mg)16079---
 Marine fatty acids (mg)2801461401407373
Monounsaturated fat (g)3524---
 Unsaturated fat, cis (mg)6349---
 Trans fat (g)0.60.5---
 Trans fat (%En)0.30.230302020
Cholesterol (mg)149134---
Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) taken from [30,31]. A total of 35 g fiber is recommended for males aged 51–70 years and 40 g for 19–50 years. A total of 25 g fiber is recommended for females aged 51–70 years and 30 g for 19–50 years. DDG-NL: theoretical diet based on Dutch Dietary Guidelines. g: grams. mg: milligrams. PHD-NL: theoretical diet based on Planetary Health Diet from EAT-Lancet Commission. %DRV: Percentage Dietary Reference Value. %En: percentage from total energy.
Table 3. Micronutrient content of the PHD-NL and DDG-NL and their Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) for Dutch adults.
Table 3. Micronutrient content of the PHD-NL and DDG-NL and their Dietary Reference Values (DRVs) for Dutch adults.
NutrientPHD-NL Nutritional ContentDDG-NL Nutritional ContentDRV
MenWomen
Vitamin A (µg) *17402374615525
Vitamin B1 (mg) **1.61.50.830.61
Vitamin B2 (mg)1.72.41.31.3
Vitamin B3 (mg) **22201511
Vitamin B6 (mg)2.12.71.11.1
Vitamin B9 (µg)455411200200
Vitamin B12 (µg)6.07.922
Vitamin C (mg)1301656050
Vitamin D (µg)4.23.21010
Vitamin E (mg)19161311
Vitamin K (µg)3032817070
Calcium (mg) ***7941652860860
Copper (mg)1.71.40.70.7
Iron (mg)141267
Iodine (µg)209175150150
Potassium (mg)3517410435003500
Magnesium (mg)463423350300
Sodium (mg)1765173924002400
Phosphorus (mg)15241735550550
Selenium (µg)93557070
Zinc (mg)1112121155
* Retinol activity equivalents for vitamin A. ** DRVs for vitamin B1 (Thiamine) and vitamin B2 (Niacin) were calculated for a diet of 2000 kcal/day for women and 2700 kcal/day for men. *** Calcium reference value averaged between 750 and 860 mg. Vitamins E, K, magnesium, phosphorus, and selenium were Adequate Intake values instead of the EAR. Sodium is the maximum intake recommended. Dietary Reference Values—DRVs (EAR/Average requirement and Adequate Intake) were taken from [31]. DDG-NL: theoretical diet based on Dutch Dietary Guidelines. g: grams. mg: milligrams. µg: micrograms. PHD-NL: theoretical diet based on Planetary Health Diet from EAT-Lancet Commission.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Uriza-Pinzón, J.P.; Verstraete, F.F.; Franco, O.H.; Artola Arita, V.; Nicolaou, M.; Van der Schouw, Y.T. Planetary Health Diet Compared to Dutch Dietary Guidelines: Nutritional Content and Adequacy. Nutrients 2024, 16, 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142219

AMA Style

Uriza-Pinzón JP, Verstraete FF, Franco OH, Artola Arita V, Nicolaou M, Van der Schouw YT. Planetary Health Diet Compared to Dutch Dietary Guidelines: Nutritional Content and Adequacy. Nutrients. 2024; 16(14):2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142219

Chicago/Turabian Style

Uriza-Pinzón, Julieth Pilar, Femke Fleur Verstraete, Oscar H. Franco, Vicente Artola Arita, Mary Nicolaou, and Yvonne T. Van der Schouw. 2024. "Planetary Health Diet Compared to Dutch Dietary Guidelines: Nutritional Content and Adequacy" Nutrients 16, no. 14: 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142219

APA Style

Uriza-Pinzón, J. P., Verstraete, F. F., Franco, O. H., Artola Arita, V., Nicolaou, M., & Van der Schouw, Y. T. (2024). Planetary Health Diet Compared to Dutch Dietary Guidelines: Nutritional Content and Adequacy. Nutrients, 16(14), 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142219

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop