[PEREZGONZALEZ Jose D (2008). Nutritional balance of low-fat soymilk. Journal of Knowledge Advancement & Integration (ISSN 1177-4576), 2011, pages 80-83.] [Printer friendly]
Nutritional balance of low-fat soymilk
This article offers descriptive data regarding the nutritional balance of low-fat soymilk. These data were collected for a research on milk and milk alternatives in New Zealand between 2007 and 2008 (Perezgonzalez, 20081).
Low-fat (light, or lite) soymilk is made from soybeans and water, and contains around 1.3% fat. This article, however, analyzes the nutritional balance of low-fat soymilk beyond its fat content. Indeed, the average low-fat soymilk (in this sample) is adequate in fat and low in saturated fat, but also high in protein, low in carbohydrate but high in sugar, low in fiber, and high in sodium (for its energetic content).
On average, low-fat soymilk has a nutritional balance of BNI 27.08s, being particularly unbalanced towards excess of sugar.
|
|
International standards
Low-fat soymilk appears as somehow unbalanced according to international Recommended Dietary Intakes (RDIs), an practically balanced according to U.S. and Canada's standards, which allow for a higher content of sugars and fat.
Illustration 3: Nutritional balance across different RDIs (low-fat soymilk) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low-fat soymilk | average | 27.06 | 46.79 | 1.30 | 26.80 | 21.73 | |
Product 100ml | Company | BNI | WHO | US/CAN | AUS/NZ | UK | |
Get Natural light | So Natural | 13.47 | 26.70 | 2.46 | 13.02 | 9.78 | |
So Good essential | Sanitarium | 15.75 | 35.26 | 1.62 | 15.84 | 13.08 | |
Vitasoy calci-plus high fibre | Vitasoy | 16.14 | 36.19 | .24 | 16.12 | 13.79 | |
So Good active | Sanitarium | 31.00 | 50.80 | 2.31 | 30.60 | 21.70 | |
So Good lite | Sanitarium | 35.94 | 55.74 | 1.07 | 35.81 | 15.89 | |
Vitasoy light original | Vitasoy | 50.97 | 61.11 | 20.69 | 50.69 | 48.69 | |
Soyfresh soymilk | Soyfresh | 69.43 | 89.43 | 26.05 | 58.97 | 54.05 | |
(Source: Perezgonzalez, 20081) |
Correlations between indexes are positive (and significant at the 0.10 cut-off point, which seems appropriate given the small sample size). These correlations indicate that the soymilk products being compared tend to form a similar hierarchy when indexed using different international standards.
Illustration 4: Correlations between RDIs | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
BNI | WHO | US/CAN | AUS/NZ | |
WHO | .981 | |||
(sig.) | .000 | |||
US/CAN | .905 | .836 | ||
(sig.) | .005 | .019 | ||
AUS/NZ | .991 | .960 | .885 | |
(sig.) | .000 | .001 | .008 | |
UK | .941 | .884 | .977 | .937 |
(sig.) | .002 | .008 | .000 | .002 |
Author
Jose D PEREZGONZALEZ (2011). Massey University, Turitea Campus, Private Bag 11-222, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand. (JDPerezgonzalez).
Other interesting sites |
Journal KAI |
Wiki of Science |
AviationKnowledge |
A4art |
The Balanced Nutrition Index |