Ready meals, especially those that are animal-based and cooked in an oven, have lower nutritional quality and higher greenhouse gas emissions and are more expensive than equivalent home-cooked meals

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether ready meals and equivalent home-cooked meals differ in nutritional quality indicators, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) and cost.

DESIGN

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of meal data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) nutrient databank (2018/19). Additional data on nutrient composition, cost and cooking-related GHGE were calculated and compared between fifty-four ready meals and equivalent home-cooked meals.

SETTING

The UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Not applicable.

RESULTS

Ready meals, overall and those that were animal-based, had significantly higher levels of free sugar compared with equivalent home-cooked meals (P < 0·0001 and P < 0·0004, respectively). Animal-based ready meals had significantly higher levels of GHGE (P < 0·001), whereas the cost of ready meals, overall, was significantly higher (P < 0·001), compared with equivalent home-cooked meals. Animal-based meals, whether ready meals or equivalent homemade meals, had significantly higher levels of protein (P < 0·0001), contained significantly more kilocalories (P = 0·001), had significantly higher levels of GHGE (P < 0·0001) and were significantly more expensive (P < 0·0001), compared with plant-based meals. Overall, plant-based meals home-cooked on the gas or electric stove had the lowest GHGE and cost, whereas animal-based oven-cooked ready meals had the highest levels of GHGE and were most expensive.

CONCLUSIONS

Ready meals have lower nutritional quality and higher GHGE and are more expensive than equivalent home-cooked meals, especially those meals that are animal-based and prepared in an oven.

An Environmental and Nutritional Evaluation of School Food Menus in Bahia, Brazil That Contribute to Local Public Policy to Promote Sustainability

Aimed at improving the quality of school meals, the Sustainable School Program (SSP) implemented low-carbon meals, twice a week, in 155 schools of 4 municipalities, reaching more than 32,000 students. This study evaluated the environmental impact and nutritional viability of this intervention for this population. The 15 most repeated meals from the conventional and sustainable menus were selected, and we considered the school age group and number of meals served per student/day. Nutritional information was calculated using validated food composition tables, nutritional adequacy was assessed using National School Feeding Program (PNAE) requirements, the level of processing was considered using NOVA classification, and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) were estimated using food life cycle assessment (LCA) validated data. We found both conventional and sustainable food menus are equivalent, in terms of nutrients, except for calcium, iron, and magnesium. Sustainable food menus were cholesterol-free. However, there was a reduction of up to 17% in GHGE, depending on the school age group analysed. Considering the greater energy efficiency and lower environmental impact of these food menus, the SSP, therefore, demonstrates that a substantial reduction in climate impact is feasible, successful, and can be an inspiration to other regions globally.