Potential Population-Level Nutritional Impact of Replacing Whole and Reduced-Fat Milk With Low-Fat and Skim Milk Among US Children Aged 2–19 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Dietary guidance emphasizes plain low-fat and skim milk over whole, reduced-fat, and flavored milk (milk eligible for replacement [MER]). The objective of this study was to evaluate the population-level impact of such a change on energy, macronutrient and nutrient intakes, and diet cost. DESIGN: Cross-sectional modeling study. SETTING: Data from the 2001-2002 and 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 8,112 children aged 2-19 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Energy, macronutrient, and micronutrient intake before and after replacement of MER with low-fat or skim milk. ANALYSIS: Survey-weighted linear regression models. RESULTS: Milk eligible for replacement accounted for 46% of dairy servings. Among MER consumers, replacement with skim or low-fat milk would lead to a projected reduction in energy of 113 (95% confidence interval [CI], 107-119) and 77 (95% CI, 73-82) kcal/d and percent energy from saturated fat by an absolute value of 2.5% of total energy (95% CI, 2.4-2.6) and 1.4% (95% CI, 1.3-1.5), respectively. Replacement of MER does not change diet costs or calcium and potassium intake. CONCLUSIONS: Substitution of MER has the potential to reduce energy and total and saturated fat intake with no impact on diet costs or micronutrient density. The feasibility of such replacement has not been examined and there may be negative consequences if replacement is done with non-nutrient-rich beverages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".