Download Comparison of nutrients in the food composition tables

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1999) 53, 60±79
ß 1999 Stockton Press. All rights reserved 0954±3007/99 $12.00
http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/ejcn
Comparison of nutrients in the food composition tables available
in the nine European countries participating in EPIC
G Deharveng1, UR CharrondieÁre1, N Slimani1, DAT Southgate2 and E Riboli*1
1
International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CeÂdex 08, France; 28 Penryn Close, Norwich,
Norfolk NR4 7LY, UK
Food composition tables were studied from nine European countries participating in the European Prospective
Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Great Britain, Italy, The
Netherlands, Spain and Sweden. They were compared from the point view of availability, de®nition, analytical
methods, and mode of expression of the nutrients of interest for EPIC, and it was seen that most of the nutrients
in the tables are analysed and expressed in a compatible way. For some nutrients, however, common methods
and de®nitions (folate, dietary ®bre), or modes of expression (energy, protein, carbohydrates, carotenes, vitamin
A and E) have not yet been agreed upon, so values are not comparable. For vitamin C a wide range of values are
found due to the high natural variation in foods. For compiled tables, an additional problem is the use of several
sources which may mean that the nutritional values are not comparable within the same table; and these values
cannot be converted if the source is not stated. In addition, some tables were compiled using food composition
values produced over 20 years ago with outdated analytical methods. In view of the inconsistent values for some
nutrients and due to the large amount of foods reported within EPIC, it was concluded that standardised food
composition tables have to be developed for the nine European countries involved in EPIC in order to provide
comparable nutrient intake data.
Descriptors: comparison; Europe; dietary; food analysis; food composition
Introduction
The assessment of dietary exposure is critical for the
interpretation of the relationship between nutrition and
health. Food intake may be measured with several dietary
methods, which assess either recent diet (for example, 24 h
recall, 7-d-diary), or long-term intake (for example, food
frequency questionnaire). All dietary assessment methods
have potential sources of errors which need to be identi®ed
and controlled in order to obtain dietary intake estimates as
close as possible to the true food intake (Bingham, 1987).
Once data have been collected on the foods consumed,
these are in general aggregated to match the items available
in food composition tables, which introduces additional
imprecision in nutrient intake estimation. Further potential
error lies in the tables which use different systems to name,
group and describe foods, and different de®nitions and
chemical analytical methods for nutrients, which do not
always provide comparable nutrient values. Furthermore
the nutrient values are not always expressed consistently,
and little or no information is available on the sampling of
foods and on the extent of variation of the analysed values
(Slimani, 1993). The sum of the above errors may result in
an incorrect estimation of nutrient intake, especially at the
individual level though possibly less at the group level. In
studies on diet and health this measurement error may
*Correspondence: Elio Riboli, IARC, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372
Lyon Cedex 08, France.
Received 4 February 1998; revised 1 August 1998; accepted 18 August
1998
In this paper the term `table(s)' will be used both for tables of food
composition and for nutritional databases.
affect the observed relationship with disease risk, which
may appear arti®cially strengthened or weakened.
In order to obtain comparable nutrient intake values,
especially in an international, multi-centre study, it is
important that all methods and tools be standardised
between each participating centre. The standardization
has to be done at every level of the study such as the
data collection, aggregation and coding of foods, and when
applying the tables.
This is one of the aims of the European Prospective
Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) with its
460 000 subjects from nine European countries (Denmark,
France, Germany, Greece, UK, Italy, The Netherlands,
Spain, Sweden). Standardised protocols have been developed to collect data on previous illness, current medication,
several lifestyle factors, anthropometry, diet, and collection
of blood samples. For the dietary assessment, study subjects are requested to complete a centre-speci®c dietary
questionnaire on their usual eating pattern. Additionally, a
representative subgroup is interviewed by trained interviewers using EPIC-SOFT, a software programme specially designed to collect standardised 24 h diet recalls of
foods consumed during the preceding day (Riboli & Kaaks,
1997; Slimani et al, 1998). Once simpli®ed, reported foods
will ®rst be analysed at the food group level, comparing the
quantities of foods consumed per food group. A second
stage will consist in carrying out analyses at the nutrient
level. Within EPIC, a large volume of nutritional data will
soon be ready for analysis, and the question arises whether
national tables can be used as such, or whether standardised
EPIC tables need to be developed.
This paper describes a detailed comparison Ð carried
out at the International Agency for Research on Cancer
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
(IARC) in 1997 Ð of the nutrients present in the tables
available in the nine EPIC countries. It focuses on the
de®nitions and analytical methods of nutrients after a short
description of the tables. This should be of assistance to
compilers of nutritional values and users of food composition tables who wish to have an overview of the availability
and comparability of nutrient values in the European tables
studied.
Materials and methods
The tables included in this comparison are those commonly
used in the nine European countries participating in EPIC.
Additional tables do exist but they are either inadequate
because of limited coverage or have been replaced by more
recent data. The information presented in this review is
Table 1
mostly taken from the introductory texts of the tables and
from additional information provided by EPIC collaborators and by the local nutritionists in charge of compiling the
tables.
We shall ®rst describe the individual tables in general
terms (Table 1) and secondly the coverage of major
nutrients (Table 2). Thereafter, we shall present the results
of the comparability and the reliability of nutritional values
in terms of de®nitions and analytical methods. The comparison is focused on a selected number of nutrients of
interest for the EPIC study with respect to a possible
etiological relationship between cancer and nutrition. Additional tables describing the methods of analysis, de®nitions,
modes of expression and units used to gather the information are not included in this article and can be obtained
from the authors upon request.
List of food composition tables as reported by the EPIC countries
Country=year
Denmark
1996 ± 4th ed.
England
1991 ± 5th ed
9 supplements:
1988 ± 4th ed
1989 ± 4th ed
1991 ± 4th ed
1992 ± 5th ed
1992 ± 5th ed
1993 ± 5th ed
1994 ± 5th ed
1995 ± 5th ed
1996 ± 5th ed
France
1995 ± 2nd ed
3 supplements:
1987 ± 1st ed
1987 ± 1st ed
1993 ± 1st ed
Germany
1979
1992
1993
1994 ± 5th ed
1996
Greece
1992
Italy
1994
1998
The Netherlands
1996
Spain
1988
1990
1992
1993
1996
Name of the food composition tables
Shortname used
in the tables
Availability:
Presence of Range of
P ˆ printed
Number of
cooked
nutrient
D ˆ disk
foods=recipes
foods
values
Levnedsmiddeltabeller
DK96
P‡D
826
‡
McCance and Widdowson's `The composition of foods'
GB 91
P‡D
1188
‡
Cereals and Cereal products, third supplement
Milk products and Eggs, fourth supplement
Vegetables, Herbs and Spices, ®fth supplement
Fruits and Nuts, ®rst supplement
Vegetable dishes, second supplement
Fish and Fish products, third supplement
Miscellaneous Foods, fourth supplement
Meat, Poultry and Game, ®fth supplement
Meat products and dishes, supplement, sixth supplement
GB cereal
GB milk
GB veg
GB fruit
GB vdish
GB ®sh
GB foods
GB meat
GB mdish
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
P‡D
360
335
463
340
347
308
418
429
286
‡
‡
‡
‡
‡
‡
‡
‡
‡
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments
F 95
P‡D
800
‡
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments - Tome 1 Table de composition des corps gras
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments - Tome 2 Table de composition des produits laitiers
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments - Tome 3 Table de composition des `Fruits exotiques, fruits de
cueillette d'Afrique'
F fat
P
83
‡
F milk
P
110
‡
F fruit
P
186
‡
Energie und NaÈhstoffgehalt von Lebensmitteln
Nutrition composition tables of milk and dairy products
NaÈhstoffe in Lebensmittel
Food composition and Nutrition tables
BLS - Bundeslebensmittel-schluÈssel II-2
D 79
D milk
D 93
D SFK
D BLS
P
P
P
P
D
841
930
1450
741
11 000
‡
Greek Food Composition Table
GK 92
P‡D
764
‡
Tabelle di composizione degli alimenti
Banca dati italiana di composizione degli alimenti
per studi epidemiologici
IT 94
IT 98
P
P‡D
ca. 400
ca. 800
‡
‡
NEVO Tabel - Nederlands voedingsstoffenbestand
NL 96
P‡D
1476
‡
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos
La composicioÂn de los alimentos
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos espanÄoles
Contenido de carotenoides en verduras y frutas de mayor
consumo en EspanÄa
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos espanÄoles
E 88
E 90
E 92
E 93
E carot
P
P
P
P
P
543
294
234
413
60
‡
‡
E 97
P
68
‡
S 94
S 96
D
P‡D
1900
1100
‡
‡
1997
Sweden
1994 being updated DBNY94: recipe and food database
1996
Food composition table ± Nutrients and Energy
‡
‡
‡
‡
61
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
62
National food composition tables included in the review
In all countries involved in EPIC, at least one table is
available. Table 1 gives the title and the year of publication
of the tables studied together with the abbreviations used in
this article and some general information on the tables. The
Appendix gives the addresses of the responsible institutes
and the contact persons for queries on the data and for
orders.
Seven countries have one national table, some with socalled supplements on speci®c food groups. In this case one
national institute is responsible for the analysis, compilation, update and publication of the table (Denmark, UK,
France, Greece, Italy, The Netherlands and Sweden).
In Denmark, the national table contains 826 raw and
cooked foods, of which most have been analysed. The
sources of the data are well documented, so values can
easily be traced.
In the UK, the complete National Nutritional Database
is provided by the nine supplements on 3286 foods. The
main table, GB 91, is in fact only an interim table
prepared when the 4th edition was out of print. The
majority of values are based on local chemical analysis
or are calculated in a standardised way; some values
have been carried on from the 4th edition using incompatible analytical methods; other values have been
compiled from other sources, especially in two supplements (on ®sh and on herbs and spices). The British
tables cover the widest range of cooking methods,
including those using fat, such as frying. For the purpose
of this review, the supplements are regarded as the
national database, and GB 91 is used as the reference
for the de®nitions and analytical methods.
In France, the main table (F 95) covers about 800 raw
and cooked foods; it includes the main data of the three
previously published supplements (fat, milk, and exotic
fruits). When comparing the nutritional values, care
must be taken: in the fat and milk supplements the
values are expressed per kg of food, whereas all the
other tables express them per 100g of food. These two
supplements are under revision and should be released
by the end of 1998.
In Greece, the of®cial printed table GK 92 is based on
the 4th edition of the British table (1978) and includes
only a selected number of nutrients from this table. GK
92 contains 764 foods and recipes; Greek recipes have
been calculated using the British nutritional values. The
national School of Public Health in Athens has developed a computerised food database based on GB 91 and
on ®ve British supplements, it is extended and updated
regularly.
In Italy, a well-documented compilation was published
mid 1998 (IT 98) with about 800 raw foods. About 32%
of the nutritional values are taken from the national
table published in 1989 (IT 89) which contains 400 raw
foods and about 3% from the national table revised in
1994 (IT 94). As IT 98 covers more nutrients and foods
than IT 89, some values are derived from other sources
(British, American and German data) which are identi®ed at the nutrient level.
In the Netherlands, the data on most of the 1476 raw
and cooked foods have been analysed locally. The
sources of data are coded at the nutrient level and are
available on request. The complete computerised database is available to a very limited public; it contains
varying numbers of nutrients depending on the food.
In Sweden, the printed and PC-version of the national
table do not cover exactly the same nutrients. They
contain analytical and compiled data from local and
foreign sources, but do not indicate the sources of values
at the food or nutrient level. The MalmoÈ Diet and
Cancer Study has developed a table (S 94) containing
1900 raw and cooked foods and recipes based on the
1993 PC-version of the national table, with some recipes
added in MalmoÈ. Since then the national table containing some 1100 raw and cooked foods has been updated
and published in 1996 (S 96 refers to the printed version
of the national table).
Germany and Spain have several independent tables.
In Germany, the Bundeslebensmittelschluessel (D
BLS) is widely used in epidemiological studies; it
includes about 11 000 raw and cooked foods and recipes
for which nutritional values have been mostly calculated. About 90% of the analysed nutritional data of the
D BLS derive from the D SFK table, which contains 741
analysed raw foods. The D SFK is dif®cult to use
because of its open-ended format and the fact that it is
only available on paper.
In Spain, most tables are based on rather old data.
Sources of data and de®nitions of nutrients are not well
documented, which means that the data are neither
really reliable nor comparable. In E 90, for example,
nutritional values are copied as such from different
sources and are not compatible within the table itself
because they do not follow common criteria in terms of
mode of expression or method of analysis=mode of
calculation. In 1997, a table (E 97) was published
including 68 raw foods for which all nutrients were
analysed locally, and de®nitions and methods of analysis are indicated. This is a ®rst attempt to produce up-todate and reliable Spanish data.
All tables are available as printed versions, except two
databases (S 94 and D BLS). A large number of tables are
available on diskette and, generally speaking, these versions are more complete and up-to-date than the printed
ones. The Spanish, most German tables (except D BLS)
and IT 94 only exist on paper.
All tables are published in the national language and
most have an English translation; a few also have a French
one (D milk and D SFK) or indicate Latin names (British
tables, D SFK, IT 94, DK 96, E carot and S 96). The
LANGUAL description system (Pennington et al, 1991) is
not yet extensively used: F 95 gives the description of each
food according to this system, while DK 96 uses it to
describe only certain foods.
Most computerised tables as well as the French supplements and D SFK have an open-ended format, that is, a
varying list of nutrients depending on the food. With this
type of format it is not obvious whether values are missing
because the nutrients have not been analysed or because
they are not present in the food item (zero value). The other
printed tables use a ®xed format, that is, the same list of
nutrients for all foods. The printed British tables indicate
X
X
X
X
6
X
X
2,3
X
X
X
X
X
X
9
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
6
±
X
X
X
X
X
P
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4
4
4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
T, P
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GB
X
DK 96
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
P
±
±
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
±
±
±
±
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
F 95
3
3,6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
±
±
3
3
3
3
3
±
3
±
3
3
3
3
3
3
±
±
±
±
X
±
X
X
±
±
±
±
X
4
4
4
3
±
X
F fat5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 (P)
±
3,7
3
3
3
3
3
±
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
±
3
3
3
X
±
X
6
±
±
3
±
X
4
4
4
X
±
X
F milk5
3
3
±
±
3
±
3
3
3 (P)
±
3
3
3
3
3
3
±
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
±
3
±
3
X
±
X
X
±
3
±
X
X
3,4
3,4
3,4
±
±
X
COUNTRY=TABLE
F fruit
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
6
±
X
±
Xcrude
X
X
±
X
X
±
X
D 79
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
6
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
±
X
D milk
Availability of food nutrients in the food composition tables. (The list is not exhaustive for some countries.) Unless indicated, nutrient values stand for 100 g food
Energy
Macro nutrients
Water
Total nitrogen
Protein
Total CHO1
Sugars1
Starch1
Lactose
Dietary ®bre
Fat
Total saturated FA
Total monounsat. FA
Total polyunsat. FA
Cholesterol
Alcohol
Minerals
Na
K
Fe
Ca
P
Mg
Cu
Zn
Se
I
Cl
Mn
Vitamins
Vitamin C
Vitamin E, total
Vitamin A, total
Retinol fraction1
Carotene fraction1
Vitamin D
Thiamin (B1)
Ribo¯avin (B2)
Niacin, total (T), preformed (P)
Tryptophan=60
Tryptophan
Vitamin B6
Vitamin B12
Folates (B9)
Pantothenates
Biotin
Vitamin K1
Table 2
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
T
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
9
X
D 93
3
3,6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 (P)
±
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
X
±
3
3
3,6
3
3
3
3
3
±
±
3
3
X
D SFK
Table 2 continued
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
T, P
±
X
X
X
6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
6
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D BLS
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
63
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
2
2
2
2
3,9
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
X
±
X
±
±
±
X
X
P
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
9
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
±
±
±
±
X
±
±
X
X
±
X
X
T
±
±
X
±
±
±
±
±
IT 94
X
GK 92
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P
±
±
X
±
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
±
±
±
±
X
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
IT 98
X
X
X
3,8
±
X
X
X
P
±
±
X
3,8
3,8
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3,8
±
±
X
3,8
X
6
X
X
3,8
X
X
X
6
X
X
X
X
NL 96
X
±
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
±
X
±
X
X
±
±
±
±
X
±
±
±
±
±
X
E 88
X
±
X
±
±
X
X
X
P
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
±
X
±
±
±
±
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COUNTRY=TABLE
E 90
X
±
X
X
±
X
X
X
T
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
±
X
±
X
±
X
±
±
X
±
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
3
3
3
3
X
X
E 92
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
T
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
±
X
±
±
±
±
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
E 93
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
±
±
X
X
±
X
±
X
±
X
±
±
X
X
±
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
E 97
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
T,P
±
X
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
±
±
±
X
±
X
6
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S 94
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
X
T,P
±
±
X
X
X
±
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
±
X
X
±
±
±
X
±
X
X
X
±
±
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S 96
64
X ˆ nutrient present in the table; ± ˆ nutrient not present in the table.1 refer to detailed table for de®nition and=or term used. 2 given in appendix for some foods. 3 only for some foods. 4 also in % total fatty acids. 5 nutrient
values are for 1 kg of food in this table (instead of 100 g of food). 6 refer to detailed table for additional fractions. 7 maybe in mg=gN. 8 not in the printed version, available only in the database. 9 expressed in g=100ml.
Energy
Macro nutrients
Water
Total nitrogen
Protein
Total CHO1
Sugars1
Starch1
Lactose
Dietary ®bre
Fat
Total saturated FA
Total monounsat. FA
Total polyunsat. FA
Cholesterol
Alcohol
Minerals
Na
K
Fe
Ca
P
Mg
Cu
Zn
Se
I
Cl
Mn
Vitamins
Vitamin C
Vitamin E, total
Vitamin A, total
Retinol fraction1
Carotene fraction1
Vitamin D
Thiamin (B1)
Ribo¯avin (B2)
Niacin, total (T), preformed (P)
Tryptophan=60
Tryptophan
Vitamin B6
Vitamin B12
Folates (B9)
Pantothenates
Biotin
Vitamin K1
Table 2 (continued)
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
for all nutrients either a value, or that no value is available,
or mark `in trace amounts'.
Nutrients included in the review
The nutrients studied in this review are those of interest
from a scienti®c point of view for research on the relationship between cancer and nutrition. This includes water,
total N, protein, fat, total carbohydrates and some fractions
(lactose and starch), energy, FAs (fractions and individual),
cholesterol, alcohol, dietary ®bre, calcium, iron, potassium,
free retinol, b-carotene, vitamin D, total vitamin E, individual tocopherols and tocotrienols, thiamin (B1), ribo¯avin
(B2), vitamin B6, folates=vitamin B9, vitamin B12 and
vitamin C. Other nutrients may be added to this list in the
future.
As shown in Table 1, a few tables systematically state
the range of the analysed nutritional values, which is a
guide for evaluating the natural variation of a given
nutrient, and the number of analysed samples (French
supplements, DK 96, D SFK); some do so occasionally
(GB, IT 94). As the values depend on the sampling of foods
and on what is regarded as the edible part of the food, it is
helpful that all tables indicate the edible part. Sampling is
extremely important in the process of producing nutritional
values, and at the moment only the British tables provide
some information on the sampling of foods.
The source of the nutritional values (laboratory, table,
literature, etc.) is indicated at the nutrient level in DK 96,
IT 98 and NL 96; at the food level in the British tables and
only in broad terms in the other tables. The source at the
nutrient level is the only way to identify correctly the food
being analysed and to verify the de®nition, analytical
method, and mode of expression originally used. It enables
the user to trace whether nutrient values are derived from
different samples, for a given food, and=or from different
methods which may not be compatible within a given table,
for a given nutrient; and to correct them if possible and
necessary. When all values have been analysed locally
according to common criteria (for example, IT 94, E 97),
information on sampling should be given in addition to that
on analytical methods and modes of expression.
For commercial foods, some tables utilize information
from the manufacturers, either given directly to the compiler or taken from labels. As information on de®nitions
and methods of analysis is not always provided, it is
dif®cult to make the nutritional values compatible with
the values from other sources, whenever necessary, before
they are included in the food composition table.
Results of the comparison of food composition tables for
terminology, methods of analysis, availability and
compatibility of nutrients
Table 2 summarizes the coverage of the selected nutrients
in the European tables studied. It shows that most tables
state energy, water and all macronutrients (carbohydrates,
protein, fat, alcohol, dietary ®bre), most vitamins and the
important minerals such as sodium (Na), potassium (K),
calcium (Ca), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg) and phosphorus
(P).
1. Water
The water content of foods is not included in some Spanish
tables (Table 2). Although water has no nutritional value, it
is needed to identify and compare foods correctly. For
example, when, for the same food, different tables state
incomparable values for a given nutrient it is necessary to
check whether the foods are in fact different, based on
different water and=or fat contents, or whether the values as
such are different because of natural variation. It is also
useful to know the water content in order to estimate water
loss due to cooking. Water content is calculated by drying.
Several drying methods are in use, which give comparable
results.
2. Macronutrients and energy
2.1 Protein Protein values are usually calculated based
on the total-nitrogen (N) content of the food, which is
measured by the Kjeldahl-type methods (HAOAC, 1980).
Total-N values are given in GB, NL 96 (PC-version) and in
E 97. In fact, E 97 is the only table giving both total- and
protein-N values for all foods without calculating protein
values; however protein is accounted for in the energy
value by multiplying protein-N values by 6.25 for all foods.
Calculation: Total-N values are multiplied by fooddependent conversion factors to obtain the protein content. The reference protein conversion factors given in
Table 3 are those published by the FAO=WHO in 1973.
They are mostly used as such (GB 91, GK 92, IT 98) or
slightly modi®ed for some foods that are rarely consumed (F 95, S 94, S 96, IT 94, DK 96, D 93, D BLS
and D SFK). For example, in some tables, the N value of
cereal products is multiplied by 5.80, instead of 5.83,
5.70, 5.95 and 6.31 for speci®c cereal items.
For foods that contain a signi®cant amount of non-proteinN (5 ± 10%), such as mushrooms, cartilaginous ®sh and
molluscs, the British tables have applied protein conversion
factors to protein-N values, rather than to total-N values.
The German tables adjust for non-protein-N by multiplying
the total-N of mushrooms by 4.17.
Compatibility: The use of the FAO=WHO conversion
factors, or slight modi®cations of them, has only a minor
impact on the ®nal values for protein and on the global
protein intake. This means that protein contents are
comparable between the European tables that have
stated the protein conversion factors, except in the
Dutch table where a bigger impact on protein content
is expected, as simpli®ed factors are used (6.38 for milk
products and 6.25 for all other foods). The Dutch protein
values should therefore be higher for cereals, cereal
products and nuts.
Table 3 Protein conversion factors
FAO=WHO (1973):
Milk and milk products 6.38
Nuts Almonds 5.18
Peanuts, brazil nuts 5.41
Other nuts, Seeds 5.30
Cereals Wholemeal wheat 5.83
Wheat bran 6.31
Other wheat ¯ours, pasta 5.70
Barley, oat, rye 5.83
Rice 5.95
Soya 5.70
Gelatin 5.55
Other foods 6.25
65
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
66
On the other hand, some German and Spanish tables do not
mention the protein conversion factors used. Thus, for the
latter tables, it is not possible to judge whether the protein
values are exactly comparable with those of the other
countries and they cannot be made comparable either.
2.2 Fat All tables mention the total fat content of foods
in g except D BLS which expresses it in mg.
De®nition: Although not mentioned in European tables,
total fat is usually considered to be a mixture of
triglycerides, phospholipids, sterols and related compounds.
Methods: The result of the lipid analysis depends
largely on the extraction medium and the method used
for hydrolysis. Speci®c analytical methods have been
developed for some food groups.
The standard methods used in Europe are those of WernerSchmidt, Weibuhl-Stoldt described in Egan et al, 1981 and
the AOAC (1980), which are broadly similar; they are
utilised by GB, Italy and E 97. They use acid hydrolysis
and an extraction with mixed solvent (ether and petroleum
spirit) and do not allow further FA analysis. These methods
can be used for most food groups but dairy products require
alkaline hydrolysis instead of acid hydrolysis.
The Folch-type methods (Folch et al, 1957) mentioned
by NL 96 and Italy use extraction with chloroform and
methanol. Compared to the standard methods they usually
lead to higher but comparable values, and they directly
provide the fat fraction for analysis of FAs.
Soxhlet-type methods which use extraction with ether
give lower values for cereals, because of incomplete
extraction, but give comparable values for meat (excluding
liver) and many meat products (Kinsella et al, 1975).
Compatibility: Almost half of the tables do not mention
the method used for fat and=or FA analysis. However,
total fat values provided by recent analyses should be
comparable, as agreements on extraction and hydrolysis
procedures have been reached in Europe in recent years.
2.3 Carbohydrates (CHO) (Table 4) The carbohydrate
values in the tables show possibly the most heterogeneity in
nomenclature, de®nition, mode of expression and methods
used, in addition to the level of detail with regard to the
coverage of the different CHO fractions (Table 4).
In all tables, total CHO and ®bre are listed as separate
nutrients and expressed in g, except in D BLS.
De®nitions:
(a) Total CHO: Many tables use the term `available
carbohydrates' which is usually de®ned as the sum of the
free sugars and complex carbohydrates (starch, dextrins and
glycogen)(Cummings et al, 1997). D BLS also includes
sugar alcohols in the total CHO values. This leaves the data
compatible with those of the other tables because sugar
alcohols are very minor components of foods. The British
tables use the term `carbohydrate' although the introductory text de®nes this as `available carbohydrate' which
includes oligosaccharides. The German tables use `carbohydrate' in a similar way.
Several countries use the term `carbohydrates' in the
classical proximate analysis sense, that is, determined `by
difference', to different extents.
(b) Starch: Some tables explicitly include dextrins and
glycogen within the starch values (DK 96, GB, GK 92, IT
94) whereas others (D 93 and D BLS) disregard or exclude
these minor components although technically they are
measured together with starch. In D 79, D 93, D BLS,
NL 96, the starch fraction is called `polysaccharides'. No
de®nition of `starch' is given in F 95. Starch values are not
included in the Swedish and the Spanish tables.
(c) Sugars: This term refers either to the sum of monosaccharides (called `soluble sugar' in IT 98), or to the sum
of mono- and disaccharides (GB, GK 92, IT 94), or to the
sum of mono-, di- and trisaccharides (DK 96). No de®nition can be found for F 95, NL 96. Some tables state monoand disaccharides separately (D 79, D BLS and S 94). The
Spanish tables do not mention this CHO fraction.
(d) Lactose: This is a disaccharide present in milk and
milk products (Passmore et al, 1986). Values for lactose are
available in g or mg in most tables, if relevant, except in the
Spanish, Swedish, and Italian tables, and in D 79, D 93, GK
92 and F 95.
Modes of expression:
Two modes of expression are in use: as monosaccharides
and in the anhydrous form. Values expressed as monosaccharides come straight from the analysis of the CHO.
Values expressed in the anhydrous form are usually determined `by difference', which is the mode of expression
chosen for labeling purposes in the European Community.
Carbohydrate weights Ð in the anhydrous form Ð may
be converted to monosaccharide equivalents using conversion factors depending on the length of the carbohydrate
chain. Carbohydrate values expressed as monosaccharides
are 1.05 times higher for disaccharides and 1.10 times for
starch (GB 91).
(a) Total CHO: Total CHO are expressed as monosaccharides in the British, French, Italian, Greek and all
Spanish tables except E 88 and E 90. F 95 has chosen to
express total CHO in both forms. The other tables express
CHO in the anhydrous form.
(b) CHO fractions: The British, Greek and IT 98 tables
express `sugars' and `starch' as monosaccharides. The
other tables express them in the anhydrous form. The
sum of `sugars' and `starch' values is therefore lower
than the value for `total CHO, in monosaccharides' in F
95 and in IT 94 because of the difference in modes of
expression.
Analytical methods:
(a) Total CHO: There are two methods of obtaining
values for total CHO. Either they are obtained `by difference' [100 7 (fat ‡ protein ‡ ash ‡ water)] which accumulates errors of the analysis of the other food components;
dietary ®bre is further deducted in Sweden, but never in
Denmark and not systematically in the Netherlands. Or the
preferred approach is to add up the sum of the analysed
CHO fractions. This is the reference method in England,
France, Italy, the Netherlands and Germany (Table 4).
Most of the tables do not describe the methods used for
carbohydrates. The method `by difference' is used systematically in the Scandinavian countries and, to a lesser
extent, in the French, German and Dutch tables.
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Carbohydrates
±
Carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Idem GB
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates ‡
F 95
F fat
F milk
F fruit
D 79
D milk
D 93
D SFK
D BLS
GK 92
IT 94
IT 98
DK 96
Carbohydrate
Carbohydrates, total
Country
GB
Terms used for
total
carbohydrates
`Soluble sugars'#:
sum of monosaccharides
`Starch' #: starch and
dextrins
‡
Idem GB
±
±
±
±
±
‡
‡ (g=kg)
‡ (g=kg)
‡ and 7
‡
±
Expressed as
monosaccharides
‡ ˆ Yes, 7 ˆ No
Other fractions
available
Sum of main fractions
By difference
No method mentioned
No method mentioned
No method mentioned
Mostly sum of analysed fractions,
sometimes by difference
Mostly sum of analysed fractions,
sometimes by difference
Sum of main fractions
No method mentioned.
No method mentioned.
±
±
No method mentioned
Starch: Dean, 1978: enzymatic
hydrolysis and measurement of glucose;
Egan et al., 1981: polarimetry
Sugars: Egan et al., 1981: Boehringer
enzyme kit;
Southgate et al, 1978a; Dean, 1978: HPLC;
Southgate, 1976: colorimetry
No method mentioned.
No method mentioned.
Methods used for carbohydrate
fractions
±
Idem GB
Table 4 continued.
Refer to 4th ed of GB
Starch: Dean, 1978: enzymatic or acid
hydrolysis and measurement of glucose;
Sugars: Dean, 1978: HPLC
Sugars: Southgate, 1976: colorimetry
Starch: enzymatic hydrolysis
Some individual carbohydratesy Sum of main fractions
No method mentioned.
By difference
Many individual carbohydrates Sum of all carbohydrates and sugar No method mentioned.
`Starch' (alone)
alcohol fractions
By difference
±
Glucosey
Fructosey
Saccharosey
Starchy
±
Lactosey
±
Sum of analysed fractions
By difference (®bre included)
Methods used for total
carbohydrate
`Soluble sugars': sum of mono- and
±
Sum of analysed fractions
di-saccharides
`Starch': starch, dextrins and glycogen
±
Usually, sum of main fractions Idem IT 94
`Monosaccharides'
`Disaccharides'
`Polysaccharides
Lactose
Other carbohydrates
`Mono-=disaccharides': sum of
glucose, fructose,
saccharose and maltose
`Polysaccharides': starch,
but not glycogen, nor maltodextrins
`Sugars'y
`Starch'y
`Monosaccharides' , `Disaccharides'
`Oligosaccharides' (3 ± 10)
`Polysaccharides' ( > 10)
`Sugar alcohols'
Idem GB
± (too much variability)
`Starch'
`Sugars'
±
±
`Starch': starch, dextrins and glycogen dSugar added (label info)
`Sugars': sum of mono-, di- and
trisaccharides
`Starch' #: starch, dextrins (if in very The list depends on the
small quantity) and glycogen
supplement
`Total sugars' #: sum of monoand disaccharides
Main fractions ± De®nitions
# if expressed as monosaccharides
Table 4 Total carbohydrates: Terms, de®nitions and methods used
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
67
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
By difference
±
GLC
No method mentioned.
No method mentioned.
No method mentioned.
No method mentioned.
Padmore, AOAC, 1990
By difference
±
±
±
±
±
Sucrose
±
±
±
±
±
`Monosaccharides': glucose, fructose
and galactose
`Disaccharides': sucrose, lactose, maltose
`Mono-, disaccharides'z
Glucose, fructose, maltose, lactose, saccharose.
Given in appendix (that is, for some foods only).
y
for some foods only.
z
for the PC-version, see S 94.
x
S 96
d
Carbohydrates, total
E 88
E 90
E 92
E 93
E 97
S 94
Compatibility: CHO fractions are stated in various
degrees Ð from none in the Spanish tables to many
fractions in certain tables (Table 4). They are not
always grouped in the same way Ð for example,
simple sugars Ð and under the same term Ð `starch' vs
`polysaccharides'. The fact that different groupings,
de®nitions and modes of expression are in use makes
it dif®cult to compare values for total CHO and CHO
fractions precisely between countries (sometimes even
within the same table).
In a pragmatic sense the methods in use are probably
compatible. The major incompatibilities arise from the
modes of expression, the methods used to get the values
(analysis vs `by difference') and whether or not `dietary
®bre' values are included in `total CHO' values.
2.4 Alcohol Alcohol is included in all tables except in
some Spanish tables (see Table 2). It is most frequently
expressed in g=100g except in GB 91, D 93, GK 92, IT 94
and IT 98, where it is expressed in g=100 ml, and in S 96
where two modes of expression are used: % vol and
g=100g. As the density of spirits and liqueurs is 0.95 and
1.10, respectively, the values need to be converted to a
common mode of expression before they can be compared.
Distillation is the standard method, although most tables do
not mention the method used.
±
Glucids
Carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Available carbohydrates
Carbohydrates
Carbohydrates, total
NL 96
?
?
‡
‡
‡
±
GLC
Sugars: Enzymatic, HPLC and Luff-Schoorl
=Kruisheer method
Polysaccharides: Acid hydrolysis and
optical rotation.
Mostly by difference,
sometimes sum
of analysed fractions
In the databasey:
d
and
galactose
`Mono- and disaccharides, total'
`Polysaccharides, total'
Total carbohydrates
Country
±
Methods used for carbohydrate
fractions
Methods used for total
carbohydrate
(b) CHO fractions: The carbohydrate fractions are analysed
in three main steps (except for mono- and some disaccharides which do not require hydrolysis): extraction into
aqueous alcohol, then hydrolysis (acid and=or enzymatic)
followed by the measurement of glucose (or saccharose) by
colorimetry, reductiometry, polarimetry, or High-Pressure
Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), depending on the food. If
the hydrolysis is done solely with acid, some of the nonstarch polysaccharides (NSP) are included in the starch
value (NL 96). In the British tables a range of methods has
been used for both sugars and starches, representing the
development in carbohydrate analyses since the 1970s.
Most tables giving starch values have used enzymatic
hydrolysis followed either by a glucose-speci®c method
(GB) or polarimetry (NL 96). Most recent values for sugars
are obtained using HPLC (GB, NL 96).
Terms used for
total
carbohydrates
Table 4 continued
Expressed as
monosaccharides
‡ ˆ Yes, 7 ˆ No
Main fractions ± De®nitions
# if expressed as monosaccharides
Other fractions
available
68
2.5 Energy Energy may be expressed in kcal or in kJ (1
kcal ˆ 4.18 kJ). Most tables state both units, except the
Danish and S 94 tables which express energy only in kJ,
and some Spanish tables only in kcal. The energy content
of foods in the tables has not been measured, but calculated.
Calculation: Metabolisable energy may be obtained
easily by adding up the relative energy contributions
of CHO, fat, protein and alcohol, which are obtained by
multiplying the respective weights of these nutrients by
conversion factors. The traditionally applied conversion
factors are the so-called `Atwater' factors, that is, 4, 9,
4, 7 kcal=g, or 17, 37, 17, 29 kJ=g (Atwater, 1910)
applied to protein, fat, total CHO and energy contents,
respectively. Whenever carbohydrates are expressed in
monosaccharides, the so-called `Southgate and Durnin'
factor of 3.75 kcal=g or 16 kJ=g is used, instead of
4 kcal=g or 17 kJ=g (Southgate & Durnin, 1970). F 95,
D 93, D SFK, D BLS and NL 96 additionally include the
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
energy contribution of polyols and=or organic acids by
applying a conversion factor of 13 kJ=g for organic acids
(in general) and of 10 kJ=g for polyols. D 79, D milk and
E 88 do not state how energy values are obtained.
Compatibility: DK 96 has three particularities: the
energy conversion factors applied are 38 kJ=g for fat
and 30 kJ=g for alcohol instead of 37 and 29 kJ=g used
in all other tables; in addition, ®bre is included in the
calculation of energy whereas the other countries
exclude it. Danish energy values should therefore be
slightly higher than those in other tables.
E 90 indicates that energy values have been copied as such
from different sources (mainly USDA, GB 78, and French
tables) which use different energy conversion factors.
Energy values could therefore not be comparable within
the table itself.
Energy values are broadly similar whether obtained
using the `Southgate and Durnin' or the `Atwater' coef®cients (F 95). Additionally, as most foods contain very
small amounts of polyols and organic acids, their inclusion
or exclusion does not have a major impact on the energy
value.
followed by some British tables, D SFK, and D BLS. The
other tables give relatively low coverage, and it should be
noted that in IT 94 more fractions are stated than in IT 98.
Although analytical methods for FAs are not always
stated, they are comparable.
2.7 Cholesterol
For foods containing cholesterol, this
nutrient is reported in all tables except E 88. The mode of
expression is mg or g.
Analytical methods: Cholesterol is analysed using GC
(E 97) and GLC (GB 91, Italy, and NL 96). The British
tables also state that some values have been calculated but
do not provide the algorithm nor indicate which values
were calculated and which analysed.
In DK 96, cholesterol values are calculated as follows:
(protein a)+fat
where a ˆ 2.65 for pork and beef; a ˆ 3.25 lamb
None of the other tables state the analytical method or
whether the values were calculated.
Compatibility: Cholesterol values, either obtained
through analysis, or by calculation, may be used with
reasonable con®dence.
2.6 Fatty acids (FA)
Terminology: Fatty acids are named after their Latin
names, their chemical names or chemical formulas for
speci®c isomers of fatty acids (for example, C18:1, n-9).
Modes of expression The usual mode of expression of
FAs is in g=100 g food. In D BLS it is in mg=100 g; in F
milk and F fat in g=kg food. In addition, the French
supplements, DK 96 and the PC-version of NL 96 state
them as a percentage of total FAs. The latter mode of
expression is needed to correlate the percentage of FAs
seen in blood with the pro®le of consumed foods.
Analytical methods: After extraction by Folch-type
methods or the Bligh and Dyer (1959) method (using
chloroform and methanol), FAs are converted to their
methyl esters, separated by GLC and their amounts calculated from GLC peak areas. They are expressed as quantitative percentages of the total FA area. This percentage can
then be converted into g=100 g food by applying FA
conversion factors to the total amount of fat in the food.
These conversion factors are sometimes stated in the tables
(for example, GB 91, S 96) and are comparable between
each other.
Compatibility: Almost all tables indicate the sums of
saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated FAs,
whenever applicable. E 88 does not mention any of these,
and D 79, D milk and D SFK do not cover all fractions.
The individual FAs are found for some foods only, often in
appendices. The most frequently reported are the saturated
FAs C12 : 0 to C18 : 0, the monounsaturated FAs C14 : 1 to
C22 : 1, and the polyunsaturated FAs C18 : 2 to C22 : 6. The
oleic acid C18 : 1 and docosenoic acid C22 : 1 are sometimes stated as such, or by their isomers (for example,
C18:1, n-9 alone) with or without the indication of the
location of the double bond. The most complete coverage
seems to be present in the French fat and milk supplements,
2.8 Dietary ®bre
The study of the European tables
illustrates the problems that have arisen in agreeing on a
de®nition of `dietary ®bre' and translating this de®nition
into an analytical method. As a consequence there are
profound incompatibilities between the values in the different tables, which are virtually impossible to solve.
Therefore `®bre' shows varying relations to colorectal
cancer depending on the de®nition=method used (Kaaks
& Riboli, 1995).
Fibre is expressed in g, except in D BLS (mg), and
reported, whenever relevant, in all tables except in E 88.
De®nitions: `Crude ®bre' is the sum of plant substances
resistant to hydrolysis by acids and subsequently by alkali.
It is not relevant to human nutrition and values are
substantially lower than for dietary ®bre but it is still
used in D 79 and partly in F fruit. It is measured by the
Weende method (AOAC, 1984).
The de®nitions adopted for `dietary ®bre' are determined
by the methods used. Most tables de®ne it as `the indigestible components of the plant cell wall' (Trowell, 1972). It
can be divided into water-insoluble (cellulose, hemicellulose and lignins) and water-soluble (pectins, gums and
mucilages). It is often described as unavailable CHOs
plus lignin (which is not a CHO), whereas Trowell et al
(1976) advocated de®ning it as the polysaccharides that are
not digested by the endogenous secretions of the gastrointestinal tract.
Analytical methods: There are four types of methods
for obtaining values for total ®bre and=or ®bre fractions:
(a) Total dietary ®bre (TDF) measured by the AOAC
methods (based on the indigestibility of the components)
is widely found. The AOAC reference method is Prosky et
al, 1985, other related methods are also in use (Candlish et
69
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
70
al, 1987; Anderson et al, 1988, Mongeau & Brassard, 1989,
Schweizer & Wuersch, 1979, Meuser et al, 1985) which
give similar but not strictly identical results. They measure
non-starch polysaccharides, lignin and resistant starch
(Southgate, 1995).
AOAC-type methods are used in DK 96, NL 96, E 97, F
95 and in the Italian, Swedish, German tables.
(b) Dietary ®bre, de®ned as non-starch polysaccharides
(NSP), is measured by the Englyst-type methods (Englyst
et al., 1982; Englyst and Cummings, 1988). Lignin, waxes,
cutins and resistant starch are excluded from this food
fraction. The NSP de®nition is used in the British tables
for all foods, and partially in F fruit, D SFK, and IT 98.
(c) `By difference': total dietary ®bre ˆ 100 7
(water ‡ protein ‡ fat ‡ ash ‡ available CHO). It includes
resistant starch. This method is used only in D SFK for
some foods.
(d) Dietary ®bre measured by Southgate-type methods
is used in GK 92 (where values are expressed as monosaccharides); it is still mentioned in the recent UK tables
and in IT 98 to some extent even though the method is no
longer used nowadays. It is a colorimetric method measuring NSP, lignins and some starch as described by Southgate
(1969), Southgate et al (1978b) and Wenlock et al (1985).
(e) Dietary ®bre fractions. The dietary ®bre fractions
depend on the chemical=analytical method used. The
AOAC method provides values for the soluble and insoluble
fractions, and the NSP method for more detailed fractions
(for example, cellulose). Other methods not mentioned
above also give dietary ®bre fractions, which are used in
D BLS (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992).
The British tables, D BLS and D SFK state `dietary ®bre'
and its fractions. In the English tables the sum of the
fractions is not equal to the value indicated for `dietary
®bre' for the same food, as these fractions have been
assayed in different samples. This is not the case in D
BLS where `dietary ®bre' is calculated as the sum of the
fractions.
Compatibility: E 88 does not give ®bre values and
most Spanish tables do not state the method or de®nition
used.
In compiled tables it may not always be possible to
determine which method was used to measure the values
unless a source code is given at the nutrient level. The use
of several incompatible methods makes it extremely dif®cult to compare ®bre intake between countries and even
within a given country using the same table (for example, F
95, IT 98).
The values obtained by Southgate-type methods should
in principle be similar to those measured by AOAC-type
methods. The AOAC and related methods give higher
values than the Englyst method because ®bre values
obtained by AOAC-type methods include lignin and resistant starch. Values of TDF depend on food processing
(Englyst et al, 1988). In foods where lignin levels are low
and resistant starch has not been formed (fruits, vegetables,
and low extraction cereal ¯ours) the NSP and AOAC ®bre
values should be similar. In high extraction cereal ¯ours,
most processed cereal products and potatoes, the AOAC
values may be several g=100 g higher than the NSP values
(Mongeau et al, 1989).
3. Vitamins
3.1 Vitamin A=Retinol=Carotene
(Table 5) Vitamin A
activity derives from retinol and some carotenoids, of which
b-carotene is the most active. In epidemiological studies,
there is an increasing interest in the 600 or so identi®ed
carotenoids because of their suspected cancer-preventing
effects, which are independent of their vitamin A activity.
The cancer protection is related to their capacity to trap
singlet oxygen and free radicals. Carotenoids are also used
increasingly as markers of dietary intake, especially of
vitamins. It should be remembered, however, that carotenoid serum levels depend strongly on individual differences
in terms of intestinal absorption and enzymatic transformation within the body (Riboli et al, 1987).
De®nitions=Modes of expression: Vitamin A, retinol
and carotenoids are usually expressed in mg=100 g. In F
milk and F fat the unit is mg=kg and in D 79, D milk, E 88, E
90 and the Swedish tables it is mg or UI=100 g.
The following are the de®nitions given of total vitamin A,
retinol and carotenes. Indices of the de®nitions are used in
Table 5.
(a) Total vitamin A=retinol equivalents (RE): Total vitamin
A activity is stated in retinol equivalents accounting for the
different vitamin activities of retinol and carotenes (Table
5).
a
: 1 retinol equivalent ˆ 1 mg retinol
(DK 96, D BLS, D SFK, ‡ 6 mg b-carotene
IT 98, E 97, S 94, S 96) ‡ 12 mg other pro-vitamin
A carotenoids
‡ 6 mg b-carotene equivalents
b
: 1 retinol equivalent ˆ 1 mg retinol
(GB cereal, NL 96)
‡ 6 mg b-carotene (i.e., do
not include other carotenoids)
c
: 1 retinol equivalent ˆ 1 mg retinol
(F fat, F milk, E 92, E 93) ‡ 6 mg non-dairy b-carotene (exclude other carotenoids)
‡ 2 mg dairy b-carotene
d
: 1 retinol equivalent ˆ 1 mg retinol
(IT 94)
‡ 6 mg non-dairy b-carotene
‡ 2 mg dairy carotenoids
(b) Retinol:
k
: all-trans retinol equivalents ˆ all-trans retinol ‡ 0.75
13-cis retinol ‡ 0.90 retinaldehyde
l
: all-trans retinol equivalents ˆ all-trans retinol ‡ 0.75
13-cis retinol ‡ 0.90 retinaldehyde ‡ 0.40 dehydroretinol
m
: retinol ˆ trans-retinol ‡ cis-retinol
(c) Carotenes:
r
: b-carotene alone, in principle (depends on the source
and the date of analysis)
s
: 1 b-carotene equivalent ˆ
b-carotene
‡ 2 b-carotene
‡ 2 -cryptoxanthin
‡ 2 b-cryptoxanthin
s1
: 1 b-carotene equivalent ˆ 1 b-carotene
‡ 2 -carotene
‡ 2 b-cryptoxanthin
t
: total carotene: no precise de®nition (presumably sum
of different carotenoids as analysed by HPLC or result of
±
Retinol (vitamin A) (mg)
±
Retinol (mg)
Vitamin A (retinol)x (mg)
Retinol (mg)
Retinol (mg)
±
Retinolk (mg)
Retinolx, z (mg)
±
±
Retinol (mg)
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
Vitamin A activityc, x
(mg=kg)
Vitamin A activityc, x
(mg=kg)
±
±
Vit A (mg)
±
Retinol eq.a, x (mg)
Retinol eq.a (mg)
±
Vitamin Ad (mg)
Retinol eq.a (mg)
Retinol eq. b (mg)
Vitamin A (UI)
Vitamin A (mg)
Vitamin A: retinol
eq.c (mg)
GB fruit
GB vdish
GB ®sh
GB foods
GB meat
GB mdish
F 95
F fat
D BLS
GK 92
IT 94
IT 98
NL 96
E 88
E 90
E 92
F fruit
D 79
D milk
D 93
D SFK
F milk
x
(mg=kg)
±
±
±
±
b-carotenes (mg)
±
±
carotener (mg)
b-carotene eq.s, x (mg)
Retinol (b-carotene) (mg)
carotene (mg)
Pro-vitamin A carotenoidst (mg)
Total carotenoidst, x (mg)
Total carotenet,
carotenes (mg)
b-carotene eq.s (mg)
Total carotenet, x (m=mg=kg)
Retinoll (mg)
Retinol (mg)
Retinolx (mg=kg)
Retinolx (mg=kg)
carotenes (mg)
carotenes (mg)
carotenes (mg)
carotenet (mg)
Retinol (mg)
Retinol (mg)
Retinol (mg)
Retinol (mg)
carotenes (mg)
carotenes (mg)
Retinolk (mg)
±
GB veg
Retinol (mg)
±
carotener (mg)
±
Retinolk (mg)
DK 96
GB 91
Retinol equivb (mg)
±
carotenes (mg)
Carotene fraction
GB cereal
GB milk
m
Retinol fraction
Retinol (mg)
Retinolk (mg)
a
Term used for total
vitamin A (unit)
Vitamin A: Total activity and fractions ± availability, terms, de®nitions and methods used
vitamin A (RE)
±
Country
Table 5
x, z
b-carotene
b-carotene Other carotenoids
x
-carotene
b-carotene cryptoxanthin
g-carotene mutatochrome
b-carotene
b-carotenex
b-carotenex
`retinol fractions':
all-trans retinol retinaldehyde
13-cis retinol dehydroretinol
y
`retinol fractions':
all-trans retinol dehydroretinol
13-cis retinol total retinol
retinaldehyde
y
y
`retinol fractions':
all-trans retinol 13-cis retinol
y
: `carotenoid fractions':
-carotene carotene equivalent
b-carotene retinol equivalent
b-cryptoxanthin
y
`carotenoid fractions':
-carotene carotene equivalent
b-carotene retinol equivalent
cryptoxanthins
b-carotene
Fractions available
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
Not mentioned
Extraction, chromatographic separation
and spectrophotometry
Chromatography: Carr & Price,
1926, HPLC
Chromatography: Carr & Price,
1926, HPLC
Reverse phase HPLC
Not mentioned
Not mentioned
Not mentioned
Not
Not
Not
Not
Not
Not mentioned
Idem GB 91
Not mentioned
Not mentioned
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Not mentioned
Reverse phase HPLC
Chromatographic separation and
absorption spectrophotometry
Method used
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
71
Analytical methods: Nowadays, two methods are used to
analyse retinol and carotenoids: colorimetry and HPLC
(Green®eld & Southgate, 1992). Hart & Scott (1995)
have found that recent improvements in the HPLC
technique lead to an increase in carotenoid recovery
ranging from 60% to 90% in foods. Colorimetry can
measure retinol and only total carotenoids, the detected
fraction is then erroneously called `b-carotene'. In
particular, values derived from the old method of
`Carr & Price, 1926' give incompatible results compared to the newer method. Only the Italian tables state
this old method.
for some foods only y given in appendix (that is, for some foods only) z in the PC-version only a tot refer to main text.
x
±
Retinol (mg) (all-trans)
Retinol eq.a (mg)
S 96
±
Retinol (mg) (all-trans)
S 94
±
±
Vitamin A: retinol
eq.a (g)
Retinol eq.a (mg)
E 97
Retinol eq.
E carot.
Vitamin A: retinol
eq.c (g)
E 93
the analysis of `total carotene'). This expression gives the
weight of carotenes, but does not adjust for relative vitamin
A activities.
b-carotene
b-carotene
(g)
±
±
s1
Carotene fraction
Retinol fraction
Term used for total
vitamin A (unit)
Country
Table 5 continued
HPLC: Granado et al, 1992,
Olmedilla et al., 1993
lutein -carotene
zeaxanthin b-carotene
licopene b-cryptoxanthin
Not mentioned
Fractions available
Method used
72
retinol: HPLC: Brubacher, 1986
carotenoids: HPLC: Shearer, 1986
retinol: HPLC, normal phase
carotene: HPLC, reverse phase
retinol: HPLC, normal phase
carotene: HPLC, reverse phase
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
Compatibility: The tables generally report total vitamin
A, except most French and British tables, D 79, D 93
and GK 92 which distinguish the retinol and carotene
fractions. All four de®nitions of RE are similar and
should give comparable values. The two major differences are: ®rst, whether they include the vitamin activity
of carotenes other than b-carotene; second, whether the
better availability of dairy carotenoids is taken into
account. D milk, E 90 and E 88 do not state whether
it is expressed in RE, so values may not be comparable.
All tables except IT 94 and most Spanish tables state
retinol. Some British supplements (GB milk, GB ®sh
and GB meat) provide values for cis- and trans-retinol
for certain foods. Most tables do not state the de®nition
of retinol. The values of the ®rst and second de®nitions
of retinol cited above should be similar, as the amount
of dehydroretinol is minor. The third de®nition should
give slightly higher, but still comparable values. Values
for carotene are available as carotene equivalents in the
British tables, F 95, F fruit and IT 98. In F fat, F milk, D
93 and D SFK, the carotene fraction refers to total
carotenoids, that is, not adjusted for the relative activities of the different carotenoids. E carot expresses the
carotenes in RE even though fruits and vegetables
contain no retinol. So the different means of calculations
for the carotene fraction lead to very different values.
Values for single carotenoids are available either for bcarotene alone (F fat, F milk, D BLS, E 92, S 94 and S
96), or also for other carotenoids (E carot, D SFK, and
as appendixes in GB veg and GB fruit).
Care should be taken when comparing vitamin A values
between tables. For dairy products, total vitamin A
activity differs depending on the factors used to express
it in retinol equivalents and, for foods rich in carotenes,
total carotene values depend on the analytical method
and=or the mode of expression. Moreover the handling
of food samples before analysis is extremely important
(Green®eld & Southgate, 1992) and the natural variation
in b-carotene is very high (ENG 91).
3.2 Vitamin D (Calciferol) In the tables, it is expressed
in mg except in D 79 and E 90 (in mg). It is synthesised from
cholesterol when UV rays from the sun are absorbed
through the skin.
De®nition: Vitamin D occurs naturally in animal
foods as cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), while ergocalciferol
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
(vitamin D2) is manufactured. Both are added as forti®cation and have the same vitamin activity. Small amounts of
25-hydroxy-vitamin D, which has ®ve times more vitamin
activity, are present in some animal foods (ENG 91).
In the tables, the de®nition of vitamin D is generally not
given. GB 91 and IT 98 de®ne vitamin D as the sum of
vitamins D2 and D3; DK 96 and E 97 as vitamin D3. GB
meat and GB ®sh are the only tables to state that vitamin D
activity is the sum of the weight of cholecalciferol and ®ve
times the weight of 25-hydroxy-vitamin D.
Analytical methods: Most tables do not state the method
used. In recent years, HPLC has mainly been used to
measure vitamin D as it allows the three fractions to be
separated (in GB 91, F 95, NL 96 and E 97). Older methods
such as biological assay (GB 91) or colorimetry give
unreliable data.
Table 6
Country
DK 96
GB 91
Total vit E (unit)
2
-TE (in mg)
mg1
mg1
mg1
GB veg
mg1
1
GB fruit
mg
GB vdish
GB ®sh
mg1
mg1
GB foods
mg1
GB meat
GB mdish
F 95
F fat
mg1
mg1
mg1
mg=kg4
F milk
F fruit
D 79
D milk
D 93
D SFK
mg=kg4
mg
mg
mg
mg1
mg=mg1,4
D BLS
GK 92
IT 94
IT 98
NL 96
mg TE1
±
±
mg1 (as -TE)
mg3
1
De®nitions: Alpha-tocopherol equivalents (-TE) are
de®ned in slightly different terms among tables giving comparable values. All recent tables except DK 96 and NL 96
apply the ®rst de®nition. The de®nition is however not stated
in all tables. Indices of the de®nitions are used in Table 6.
±
±
±
mg
mg
mg1
mg1
Fractions available
Methods used
-tocopherol
±
No method mentioned
Normal phase HPLC
Reverse phase HPLC
Colorimetry combined with GLC, Christie et al, 1973
Colorimetry combined with GLC, Christie et al, 1973
Colorimetry combined with GLC, Christie et al, 1973
HPLC
HPLC
±
For some foods: amounts of major tocopherols and
tocotrienols on request
-tocopherol d-tocopherol
b-tocopherol g-tocopherol
±
5
-tocopherol d-tocopherol
b-tocopherol g-tocopherol
5
-tocopherol d-tocopherol
b-tocopherol g-tocopherol
±
±
±
4
Total tocopherols
-tocopherol7 -tocotrienol7
b-tocopherol7 b-tocotrienol7
g-tocopherol7 g-tocotrienol7
d-tocopherol7 d-tocotrienol7
±
±
±
±
±
Total tocopherols4 Total tocotrienols4
-tocopherol4 -tocotrienol4
b-tocopherol4 b-tocotrienol4
g-tocopherol4 g-tocotrienol4
d-tocopherol4
-tocopherol
5
±
: -tocopherol g-tocopherol
b-tocopherol d-tocopherol
6
D--tocopherol (mg)
-tocopherol (mg)
±
±
D--tocopherol (mg)
D--tocopherol (mg)6
to3 refer to the main text.
for some foods only.
5
: in appendix, that is, for some foods only.
6
in the PC-version.
7
expressed in % total tocopherols and in mg=kg.
4
3.3 Vitamin E (Table 6) Vitamin E activity is the sum of
the activities of tocopherols and tocotrienols. Each fraction
has a different vitamin E activity and -tocopherol is the
component with the highest vitamin E activity (Passmore &
Eastwood, 1986).
Vitamin E: Total activity and fractions: Availability, de®nitions and methods used
GB cereal
GB milk
E 88
E 90
E 92
E 93
E 97
S 94
S 96
Compatibility: Vitamin D activity is given in all tables
except GK 92, IT 94 and E 88. It would be helpful to assert the
link between vitamin D values and the method used in order to
determine the relative quality of these values and to use only
recently analysed data for dietary analysis.
HPLC
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
Idem GB 91
HPLC
HPLC
No
No
No
No
No
No
method
method
method
method
method
method
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
mentioned
No method mentioned
Not applicable
Not applicable
No method mentioned
HPLC
Not applicable
No method mentioned
No method mentioned
No method mentioned
HPLC, Shearer, 1986
HPLC
HPLC
73
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
74
1
Total
activity
in
-TE ˆ -tocopherol ‡ 0.4
btocopherol ‡ 0.1 g-tocopherol ‡ 0.01 d-tocopherol ‡ 0.3
-tocotrienol ‡ 0.05 b-tocotrienol ‡ 0.01 g-tocotrienol
2
-TE as used in DK 96: d--tocopherol ‡ 0.5 btocopherol ‡ 0.1 g-tocopherol ‡ 0.3 mg -tocotrienol
3
-TE as used in NL 96: -tocopherol ‡ 0.4 btocopherol ‡ 0.1 g-tocopherol ‡ 0.01 d-tocopherol
Analytical methods: The usual analytical method for
vitamin E is HPLC. Only GB 91, GB cereal and GB
milk state that colorimetry combined with gas chromatography (Christie et al, 1973) was used in addition to
HPLC. Most tables do not state the method used.
Compatibility: The Spanish and some German tables
express vitamin E in mg=100 g without de®nition, and
some French supplements in mg=kg, whereas the usual
mode of expression is in -TE mg. All tables include
vitamin E, except GK 92, IT 94 and most Spanish
tables. E 90 and E 92 indicate values only for tocopherol. Single tocopherols are listed by about half
of the tables, single tocotrienols only by F fat, D SFK,
and in GB veg (on request).
Most vitamin E values present in recent European
tables were analysed using HPLC during the 1970's.
However only vitamin E values obtained recently by
HPLC are valuable.
3.4 Thiamin (B1), Ribo¯avin (B2), Vitamin B6
Thiamin
is reported in all tables and is expressed in mg except in D
BLS and E 88 (mg). Thiamin is heat unstable and damaged
in alkaline conditions (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992).
Ribo¯avin is reported in all tables and is expressed in mg
except in D BLS and E 88 (mg). It is also destroyed by heat,
and by light (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992).
Vitamin B6 is the sum of pyridoxal, pyridoxamine, their
phosphates and pyridoxine, which all have the same activity (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992). It is included in all
tables except in IT 94 and E 88; it is expressed in mg except
in D BLS (mg) and partially in D SFK (mg=mg).
Analytical methods: Three methods are in use for vitamins
B1 and B2 (microbiological, ¯uorimetry and HPLC)
which give similar values. For vitamin B6, the major
problem is not the method (HPLC and microbiological
assay) but the extraction. However, few tables state the
analytical methods used for these three vitamins.
Compatibility: Vitamins B1, B2 and B6 values are
globally comparable between countries.
3.5 Vitamin B12 (Cyanocobalamin)
Vitamin B12 is
present in small amounts in animal foods, especially in
liver and egg yolk (Passmore & Eastwood, 1986). It is
expressed in mg and reported in all tables except the Greek
and Italian tables and E 88. Microbiological assay is the
only method in use for measuring vitamin B12, and the
same bacterium is used in all assays in Europe, resulting in
a very standardised method. The problem with vitamin B12
values arises from the potentially high measurement error,
as the concentrations in foods are so low.
3.6 Folates = Folic acid (B9) Folate activity in foods
derives from a number of compounds, which are reduced
forms of pteroyl glutamic acid (folic acid). Most naturally
occurring folates are conjugates with 2 or more g-glutamyl
residues (often called bound forms or polyglutamates).
Folates are water-soluble and readily oxidised, and are
therefore labile (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992). In order
to be absorbed and metabolically active, the glutamyl
residues must be deconjugated; the availability of folate
varies between 25 ± 96% depending on the food (Passmore
& Eastwood, 1986).
De®nitions: There are considerable differences and lack
of clarity in the terminology and the de®nitions used in
the tables. Many tables use the term `folic acid' as a
synonym for folates and de®ne it as the sum of the `free'
and `bound' forms. D BLS applies the factor 0.20 to the
`bound' forms to adjust for its lower bio-availability and
gives total folate values in `free folic acid equivalent'.
The amount of `bound' folate is calculated by difference
between the amounts of `total' folic acid (measured
after deconjugation) and of `free' folic acid (measured
before deconjugation). Some tables (F fat, D BLS, E 90)
give values for `free' folic acid.
Analytical methods: Microbiological assay is currently
the standard method for measuring folate activity in
foods (Phillips & Wright, 1983). Several bacteria are in
use, of which Lactobacillus caseii (rhamnosus) provides
the most satisfactory values for total folate after deconjugation (GB, F 95, NL 96). The bacterium Streptococcus faecalis, used in the AOAC method, is only valid for
measuring folic acid which is used for food forti®cation
but which does not naturally occur in foods (Green®eld
& Southgate, 1992). Unfortunately, in most tables the
bacteria used are not stated. Additionally, a problem of
quality control seems to occur between laboratories,
especially mentioned by Denmark, where two laboratories use the same microbiological assay but obtain
dramatically different values.
HPLC methods (for example, Shearer, 1986) provide
the possibility to measure the different fractions but
their performance in collaborative trials has so far been
unsatisfactory. HPLC is used by E 97 and partially by D
SFK where its use is indicated in footnotes.
The radio-immune assay used in Sweden, which
derives from blood analysis, has not yet been validated
for foods where different folate forms are present and
the results are kit-dependent.
Compatibility: All tables state `total folate' except GK
92, IT 94 and E 88 and the printed version of NL 96
(Table 2). It is expressed in mg except in D 79 (in mg). F
fat, D BLS and E 90 also give values for `free folic
acid'. According to Wright & Phillips (1985), it is
desirable to obtain values for `total folates', and the
concept of measuring `free folates' before deconjugation is invalid.
It seems that the analytical methods used at present are
neither inter-compatible nor consistent, resulting in
incomparable values. In DK 96, folate values are generally higher than those of other countries using the
same microbiological method; values obtained by
HPLC are in general higher than those from microbiological assays; in Sweden the method has not yet been
validated, and the AOAC method sometimes used in
compiled tables gives lower responses than the microbiological assay used in Europe. In all cases, the
sensitivity of folate compounds to temperature, pH
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
and oxidation causes problems in the analysis of this
nutrient. Valuable data can be found in GB, F 95 and
NL 96. This means that folate intake cannot be estimated con®dently at present using all European tables.
3.7 Vitamin C Vitamin C is vested in L-ascorbic (AA)
and L-dehydroascorbic acids (DHAA), both of which are
highly unstable. AA is degraded into DHAA during cooking, and DHAA, which is even less stable, is then degraded
to an inactive form. In general there is over 10 times more
AA than DHAA in fresh foods, but DHAA levels may be
increased by food processing to 25 ± 50% of AA (Vanderslice et al, 1990).
De®nitions: Vitamin C activity is usually de®ned as the
sum of AA and DHAA. Although only six tables state
this de®nition, in four tables it can be derived from the
analytical method used.
The Swedish tables explicitly report solely AA. This
means that the values of raw foods should be comparable, but that values for processed or cooked foods
should be lower than those in the other tables.
Analytical methods: Three methods are in use to measure
total vitamin C amounts (HPLC, ¯uorimetry Ð preferable method Ð and colorimetry). Titrimetry measures
only AA (Green®eld & Southgate, 1992).
Compatibility: All tables state vitamin C activity and use
different de®nitions and=or methods. All analytical
methods currently used are broadly comparable. However, titrimetry should give somewhat lower values for
processed foods (used partially in GB 91, GK 92 and IT
98).
The vitamin C values have to be regarded with caution
because the handling of food samples before analysis is
extremely important due to its low stability. Vitamin C
content decreases rapidly with storage time (Vanderslice
et al, 1990). The natural variation of vitamin C in foods
is very high.
4 Minerals (Ca, Fe, K)
Calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and potassium (K) are included in
all tables apart from K in E 97. They are usually expressed
in mg. In D milk, Ca and K values are given in g, in D SFK
and D BLS Fe is in mg and in E 92 K is in g.
Analytical methods: All minerals are measured by
atomic absorption spectrometry (Osborne & Voogt,
1978), ¯ame spectrophotometry (Dvorak et al, 1971),
or emission spectrophotometry (Suddendorf & Cook,
1984) and controlled with standards. In Britain, colorimetry (Paul & Southgate, 1978) is also in use for iron,
and titrimetry (Paul & Southgate, 1978) for calcium.
Compatibility: All methods give similar results. However, care has to be taken for iron values as the samples
can easily be contaminated by dust resulting in a high
variability.
Discussion
Comparability of values
Before comparing nutritional values, it is necessary to
check that the food stated in the different tables is the
same. It should refer to a similar edible part, water and fat
contents. General knowledge about the foods consumed in
the different countries is helpful, for example, some foods
may have the same name in different countries but contain
different ingredients.
Concerning the comparability of values, it should be
noted that the activities of the EUROFOODS-ENFANT
programme, founded in 1982, resulted in more comparable
modes of expression, analytical methods and de®nitions
throughout European food composition tables. However
values obtained by old analytical methods remain in
newly published tables and usually cannot be identi®ed.
Furthermore, the HPLC technique, used to analyse vitamin
A and E components for example, has been improved
considerably over the past 5 years or so, which means
that HPLC values analysed before are incomparable.
In the tables studied, the nutrients can be separated into
three groups. The ®rst set of nutrients groups those with
comparable values, although the de®nition and analytical
methods may be slightly different (nitrogen, lactose, alcohol, water, cholesterol, fat, FAs, retinol, vitamin D, tocopherols, tocotrienols, thiamin, ribo¯avin, vitamins B6 and
B12, calcium, iron and potassium). Work in progress on the
American table means that it will soon indicate total fat
contents as the sum of FAs and will no longer include
phospholipids, sterols and related compounds. The inclusion of American fat values in European tables should
therefore be avoided in future. The second set of nutrients
concerns those which are not readily comparable due to the
calculation or mode of expression but which may be easily
converted to a comparable mode of expression (protein,
carbohydrates, starch, sugars, energy, carotenes, vitamin A
and vitamin E). For example, in order to eliminate arti®cial
differences in protein contents, the total-nitrogen values of
the foods should be collected or calculated back using the
protein conversion factors indicated in the tables before
applying a set of conversion factors common for all
countries, to the total-nitrogen contents of foods. And for
energy values, the ®rst step should be to express the total
CHO values in the same way and then to calculate the
energy values choosing one set of energy conversion
factors for all tables, for example, 16, 37, 17, 29 kJ=g
(3.75, 9, 4, 7 kcal=g) for CHO, fat, protein, and alcohol.
An alternative approach for estimating vitamin E intake for
most foods is to use the -tocopherol fraction alone as its
marker. The third set of nutrients includes those which are
not comparable between all the tables studied due to the
methods or de®nition used (folate and ®bre). Use of the
values for the last set of nutrients is not recommended at
the moment unless the source of the value is documented
and it meets the chosen criteria. For dietary ®bre, conversion is possible within a limited range of TDF values,
which excludes extreme low and high values. Mongeau &
Brassard
(1989)
give
a
regression
equation
(TDF ‡ 0.02)=1.28 ˆ NSP for linking values obtained by
AOAC-type methods (TDF) with those obtained by Englyst-type methods (NSP). When constructing a standardised
table, it may be useful to express `dietary ®bre' both as
75
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
76
NSP and as TDF so that local comparison can be carried
out.
Additional problems concern the comparability of
values in compiled tables. Firstly, for one food, values
might be copied from different sources which do not refer
to the same food sample. Secondly, for a given nutrient, the
values might be copied from several sources using incompatible methods, de®nitions and=or modes of expression. If
they are copied without conversion or recalculation and
without excluding incomparable values, the values become
incomparable even within the same table. Conscientious
compilers, however, should avoid these problems either by
recalculating the nutritional values to meet common criteria, or by indicating the source of the values. A third
problem is that, in several tables, old values produced with
outdated analytical methods are included in recent versions
without the source being indicated, and that compilers copy
this `new' value into their database.
Natural variability
In some foods the natural variation of nutrients, for example,
vitamin C and carotenes, may be higher than the variation
due to the use of different de®nitions or methods. In the
tables, no or almost no information is available on the
sampling scheme. This makes it impossible to judge whether
natural variation was accounted for when foods were
selected for analysis and whether the sample represents the
range of the local food available throughout the year.
Availability of nutrients and foods
In general, the northern and central European tables cover
more nutrients and foods than the southern European tables.
The most important macronutrients and minerals are well
covered in all the food composition tables studied, but
fractions of nutrients and vitamins are stated less extensively in the Southern European tables. The nutrients of
interest for EPIC are not available in all tables (particularly
in Spain and Greece), or only for raw foods (Italy).
Additional problems arise in Spain and Greece where
most values are old. In Spain the mode of compilation is
doubtful, so it might be better to use more recent data from
the other countries in addition to the newly analysed foods
of E 97.
Conclusions and recommendations
The comparison of food composition tables shows that for
some nutrients there are important differences in the
de®nitions, methods of analysis and modes of expression
between the tables studied. This applies to common foods,
as well as less common foods. Thus, within a given
country, local tables might be used, but they are not
suitable as such for comparison of nutrient intake at an
international level. Additionally, many foods reported
within the EPIC study are not included in the European
tables, so their nutritional values will have to be calculated.
This is why standardised tables need to be developed for
the nine European countries participating in EPIC.
In Europe, there is a further need to agree on common
de®nitions, analytical methods and=or modes of expression
for those nutrients for which comparable values are not yet
available such as carbohydrates, ®bre, folate, carotenes and
vitamins A and E.
While comparing de®nitions, methods and the resulting
values, it becomes clear that more effort needs to be put
into documenting the sources of data, the sampling, the
methods and de®nitions, as well as the algorithms and
recipes used to calculate missing values. In addition, it
would be helpful if those values which have been calculated or copied were marked as such. The sources of values
are best documented in the Dutch, Italian and Danish
tables, while the British tables, which are often used as a
source for other tables, give a short description of the food,
but unfortunately do not document the source of data at the
nutrient level.
To compile nutritional values in a standardised way,
strict guidelines should be followed, and this is possible
only if the tables are well documented. The values to be
copied need to be checked to determined: ®rst, whether the
foods are really similar, especially in terms of edible part,
water and fat contents; second, whether the de®nitions and
methods used are compatible; third, whether the values are
expressed in the same mode or if they need to be converted.
Finally, the values of protein and energy always need to be
re-calculated.
References
Anderson JW & Bridges SR (1988): Dietary content of selected foods. Am.
J. Clin. Nutr. 47, 440 ± 447.
AOAC (Association of Of®cial Analytical Chemists) (1980): Of®cial
Methods of analysis of the Association of Of®cial Analytical Chemists,
13th Edition. AOAC Washington DC.
AOAC (Association of Of®cial Analytical Chemists) (1984): Fibre (crude)
in animal feed. In Of®cial Methods of analysis of the Association of
Of®cial Analytical Chemists, 14th Edition. AOAC: Washington DC.
160 ± 162
Atwater WO (1910): Principles of nutrition and nutritive value of food.
Fmrs. Bull. US Dep. Agric. No142 (2nd review).
Bingham SA (1987): The dietary assessment of individuals; methods,
accuracy, new techniques and recommendations. Nutrition abstracts
and review (series A) 57, 705 ± 741.
Bligh EG & Dyer WJ (1959): A rapid method of total lipid extraction and
puri®cation. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 37, 911 ± 917.
Brubacher G (1986): Vitamin A (retinol and retinyl esters) in food HPLC.
In: Methods for determination of vitamins in food. Verlag: New York,
pp. 26 ± 29.
Candlish JK, Gourley L & Lee HP (1987): Dietary ®ber and starch in some
Southeast Asian fruits. J. Food. Comp. Analysis. 1, 81 ± 84.
Carr FH & Price EA (1926): Colour reactions attributed to vitamin A.
Biochem. J. 20, 497 ± 501.
Christie AA, Dean AC & Millburn BA (1973): The determination of
vitamin E in food by colorimetry and gas ± liquid chromatography.
Analyst 98, 161 ± 167.
Cummings JH, Robertfroid MB, Andersson H, Barth C, Ferro-Luzzi A,
Ghoos Y, Gibney M, Hermonsen K, James WPT, Korver O, Lairon D,
Pascal G & Voragen AGS (1997): Review Ð A new look at dietary
carbohydrate: chemistry, physiology and health. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 51,
417 ± 423
Dean AC (1978): Method for the estimation of available carbohydrate in
foods. Food Chem. 3, 241 ± 250.
Dvorak J, Rubeska I & Rezac Z (1971): Flame photometry: laboratory
practice. Iliffe: London.
Egan H, Kirk RS & Sawyer R (1981): Pearson's chemical analysis in
foods, 8th Edition. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh.
Englyst HN, Wiggins HS & Cummings JH (1982): Determination of nonstarch polysaccharides in plant foods by gas-liquid chromatography of
constituent sugars as alditol acetates. Analyst 197, 307 ± 318.
Englyst HN & Cummings JH (1988): Improved method for measurement
of dietary ®ber as non-starch polysaccharides in plant foods. J. Assoc.
Off. Anal. Chem. 71(4), 808 ± 814.
Englyst HN, Bingham SA, Runswick SA, Collinson E & Cummings JH
(1988): Dietary ®bre (non-starch polysaccharides) in fruits, vegetables
and nuts. J Human Nut Diet 1, 247 ± 286.
FAO=WHO Expert group (1973): Energy and protein requirements. In:
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
Report of a joint FAO=WHO ad hoc expert committee. FAO Nutrition
Meeting Report Series No52. Rome:FAO=WHO.
Folch J, Lees M & Stanley GHS (1957) A simple method for the isolation
and puri®cation of total lipids from animal tissues. J. Biol. Chem. 226,
497 ± 509.
Granado F, Olmedilla B, Blanco I & Rojas-Hidalgo E (1992): Carotenoid
composition in raw and cooked Spanish vegetables. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 40, 2135 ± 2140.
Green®eld H & Southgate DAT (1992): Food composition data Ð
Production, Management and Use. Elsevier Aplied Science: London.
Hart DJ & Scott KJ (1995): Development and evaluation of an HPLC
method for the analysis of carotenoids in foods, and the measurement of
the carotenoid content of vegetables and fruits commonly consumed in
the UK. Food Chem. 54, 101 ± 111.
Kaaks R & Riboli E (1995): Colorectal cancer and intake of dietary ®bre.
A summary of epidemiological evidence. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 49 (suppl
3), S10 ± S17.
Kinsella JE, Posati L, Weihrauch J & Anderson B (1975): Lipids in foods:
problems and procedures in collating data. CRC Crit. Rev. Food
Technol. 5, 299 ± 324.
Meuser F, Suckow P & Kulikowski W (1985): Methods for the determination of insoluble and soluble dietary ®ber in food stuff. Z. Lebens.
Unters. Forsch. 181(2), 101 ± 106.
Mongeau R & Brassard R (1989): A comparison of three methods for
analysing dietary ®ber in 38 foods. J. Food Comp. Analysis. 2, 189 ± 199.
Olmedilla (1993), Granado F, Blanco I & Rojas-Hidalgo E
(1993): Quantitation of provitamin A and non-provitamin A
carotenoids in the fruits most commonly consumed in Spain. In:
Food and Cancer Prevention: Chemical and biological aspects (eds)
Waldron KW, Johnson IT, Fenwich GR, RSC: Cambridge England, pp
141 ± 145.
Osborne DR & Voogt P (1978): The analysis of nutrients in food.
Academic Press: London.
Padmore JM (1990): Of®cial Methods of analysis, 15th Edition. Association of Of®cial Analytical Chemists: Arlington Virginia USA, 1, 83.
Paul AA & Southgate DAT (1978): McCance and Widdowson's The
composition of foods. 4th ed. Her Majesty's Stationery Of®ce: London.
Passmore R & Eastwood MA (1986): Davidson and Passmore Ð Human
Nutrition and dietetics. 8th ed. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh.
Pennington JAT & Butrum RR (1991): Food description using taxonomy
and the `Langual' system. Trends Food Sci. Technol. November, 285 ±
288.
Phillips DR & Wright AJA (1983): Studies on the response of Lactobacillus casei to folate vitamin in foods. Br. J. Nutr. 49, 181 ± 186.
Prosky L, Asp NG, Furda I, de Vries JW, Schweizer TF & Harland
BF (1985): Determination of total dietary ®ber in foods and food
products: collaborative study. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 68(4),
677 ± 679.
Riboli E, Roennholm H & Saracci R (1987): Biological markers of diet.
Cancer surveys 6(4), 685 ± 718.
Riboli E & Kaaks R (1997): The EPIC project: rationale and study design.
Int. J. Epidemiol. 26, (suppl.1), S6 ± S14.
Schweizer T & Wuersch P (1979): Analyses of dietary ®bre. J. Sci. Food
Agric. 30, 613.
Shearer MJ (1986): Vitamins. In: HPLC Small molecules, IRL Press:
Oxford, England. pp. 178, 214, 1624.
Slimani N (1993): Comparability of European food composition tables
with a view to their use in multi-centre epidemiological studies. In
Report of Eurofoods Ð Enfant project meeting, 10 ± 12 Nov 1993,
Portugal. Wageningen Agricultural University: The Netherlands, pp.
156 ± 160.
Slimani N, Deharveng G, CharrondieÁre UR, van Kappel AL, Ocke MC,
Welch A, Lagiou A, van Liere M, Agudo A, Pala V, Brandstetter B,
AndreÂn C, Stripp C, van Staveren W & Riboli E (1998): Structure of the
standardized computerized 24-hour diet recall interview used as reference method in the 22 centers participating in the EPIC project.
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine (in press).
Southgate DAT (1969): Determination of carbohydrates in foods II
Unavailable carbohydrates. J. Sci. Food Agric. 20, 331 ± 335.
Southgate DAT & Durnin JVGA (1970): Calorie conversion factors: an
experimental reassessment of the factors used in the calculations of the
energy value of human diets. Brit. J. Nutr. 24, 517 ± 535.
Southgate DAT (1976): Determination of food carbohydrates. Applied
Science Publishers: London.
Southgate DAT, Paul AA, Dean AC & Christie AA (1978a): Free sugars in
foods. J. Hum. Nutr. 32, 335 ± 347.
Southgate DAT, Hudson GJ & Englyst HN (1978b): The analysis of
dietary ®bre Ð the choices for the analyst. J. Sci. Food Agric. 29 (11),
979 ± 988.
Southgate DAT (1995): Dietary ®bre analysis. RSC: Cambridge, UK
Suddendorf RF & Cook KK (1984): Inductively coupled plasma emission
spectroscopic determination of nine elements in infant formula: Collaborative study. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 67 (5), 985 ± 992.
Trowell H (1972): Ischemic heart disease and dietary ®ber. Am. J. Clin.
Nutr. 25, 926 ± 932.
Trowell H, Southgate DAT, Wolever TMS, Leeds AR, Gassull MA &
Jenkins DJA (1976): Dietary ®bre rede®ned. Lancet I, 967.
Vanderslice JT, Higgs DL, Hayes JM & Block G (1990): Ascorbic acid
and dehydroascorbic acid content of foods-as-eaten. J. Food Comp.
Anal. 3, 105 ± 118.
Wenlock RW, Sivell LM & Agater IB (1985): Dietary ®bre fractions in
cereal and cereal-containing products in Britain. J. Sci. Food Agric. 36,
113 ± 121.
Wright AJA & Phillips DR (1985): The threshold growth response of
Lactobacillus casei to 5-methyl tetrahydrofolic acid: implications for
folate assays. Br. J. Nutr. 53, 569 ± 573.
77
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
Centre Informatique sur la qualite des aliments (CIQUAL), Paris
idem
Cereals and Cereal products, third supplement
Milk products and Eggs, fourth supplement
Vegetables, Herbs and Spices, ®fth supplement
Fruits and Nuts, ®rst supplement
Vegetable dishes, second supplement
Fish and Fish products, third supplement
Miscellaneous Foods, fourth supplement
Meat, Poultry and Game, ®fth supplement
Meat products and dishes, sixth supplement
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments ± Tome 1 ± Table
de composition des corps gras
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments ± Tome 2 ± Table
de composition des produits laitiers
ReÂpertoire geÂneÂral des aliments ± Tome 3 ± Table
de composition des `Fruits exotiques, fruits de
cueillette d'Afrique'
Istituto Nazionale della Nutrizione (INN), Roma
Food composition and Nutrition tables
BLS ± Bundeslebensmittel-schluÈssel II-2
Greek Food Composition Table
Tabelle di composizione degli alimenti
1994 ± 5th ed
1996
Greece
1992
Italy
1994
Appendix continued.
The Netherlands
1996
NEVO Tabel ± Nederlands voedingsstoffenbestand
Banca dati italiana di composizione degli alimenti
per studi epidemiologici
National School of Public Health ± Department of Nutrition,
Athens
NaÈhstoffe in Lebensmittel
1993
1998
Obertiefenbach
Nutrition composition tables of milk and dairy products
1992
Data: Stichting NEO ± TNO Voeding, AJ. ZEIST
Print: NEVO- Voorlichtingsbureau voor de voeding, PO box
85700, 3508 CK's ± Gravenhage (La Haye)
Istituto Europeo di Oncologia Div. epidemiologia e biostatistica, Milano
Bundesministerium fuÈr ErnaÈhrung, Landwirtschaft und
Forsten, Bonn und Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fuÈr
Lebensmittelchemie, Garching bei MuÈnchen
BGVV, Berlin
Academie der Wissenshaften der DDR
Zentral institut fuÈr ErnaÈhrung, Postdam ± RehbruÈcke
Justus-Liebig-UniversitaÈt Giessen Fachgebiet Milchwissenschaft
Energie und NaÈhstoffgehalt von Lebensmitteln
idem
Germany
1979
1993 ± 1st ed
1987 ± 1st ed
idem
Her Majesty's Stationery Of®ce, St Clements House,
2 ± 16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ
McCance and Widdowson's (The composition of foods)
England
1991 ± 5th ed
9 supplements:
1988 ± 4th ed
1989 ± 4th ed
1991 ± 4th ed
1992 ± 5th ed
1992 ± 5th ed
1993 ± 5th ed
1994 ± 5th ed
1995 ± 5th ed
1996 ± 5th ed
France
1995 ± 2nd ed
3 supplements:
1987 ± 1st ed
Data: Danish National Food Agency, Sùeborg
Print: Gyldendals Forlagsekspedition, Lindgreens
Alle 12, 2300 Copenhagen S
Levnedsmiddeltabeller
Denmark
1996 ± 4th ed
Institute responsible
Name of the FCT
Country=year
Appendix List of food composition tables as reported by the EPIC countries. General information
Karin Hulshof
E. Carnovale
L. Marletta
F. Miuccio
Simonetta Salvini
Prf. Dr Edmund Renner
Dr Anna Renz-Schanen
P.D. Dr Helmut Hescher
Beate Hescher
S.W. Souci
W. Fachmann
H. Kraut
Dr Dehne
Antonia Trichopoulou
Prof Dr Habil Helmut Haenel
idem
idem
idem
Jayne Ireland-Rippert
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
idem
Susan Church
Ian Quaterman
Erling Saxholt
Person responsible
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
78
DBNY94: recipe and food database
Food composition table ± Nutrients and Energy
Sweden
1994 being updated
1996
1997
Irene Mattisson
recipe: developed by the MalmoÈ Diet and Cancer study,
MalmoÈ food nutrient database from the National Food Administration
Swedish National Food Administration, Uppsala
Helen Enghardt
Luz Carretero Baeza
Dolores Gomez Vasquez
Wander ± Sandoz NutricioÂn
Olga Moreiras
Angeles Carbajal
Maria Luisa Cabrera
Jose Mataix VerduÂ
Person responsible
Ministerio de Salud y Consumo- SubdireccioÂn general de
Higiene de los Alimentos
Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Granada
Insalud
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos espanÄoles
Contenido de carotenoides en verduras y frutas
de mayor consumo en EspanÄa
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos espanÄoles
1993
1996
Alter ± Division Dietetica
NutricioÂn y salud
EUDEMA Universidad
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos
Tablas de composicioÂn de alimentos
La composicioÂn de los alimentos
Spain
1988
1990
1992
Institute responsible
Name of the FCT
Country=year
Appendix continued
Comparison of nutrients in nine European countries
G Deharveng et al
79