Dietary studies at Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., in 1895

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Dietary studies at Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., in 1895
Series Title:
United States. Dept. of Agriculture. Office of Experiment Stations. Bulletin ;
Physical Description:
28 p. : incl. tables, diagrs. II pl. ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Stone, Winthrop E
United States -- Office of Experiment Stations
Publisher:
Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication:
Washington
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Dietetics   ( lcsh )
Nutrition surveys -- Indiana   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
by Winthrop E. Stone.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029391530
oclc - 23350377
System ID:
AA00014574:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text





WAYI
4 to 114




I ml






















Ak

-n
Orm
bt
44i










#in

!In










lw

4+1 ,1

10L
#w On

t-:
LA
N
4V

4ft







BULLETIN NO. 32. 176.
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS.






DIETARY STUDIES


AT



PURDUE UNIVERSITY, LAFAYETTE, IND.,

IN


1895

BY

WINTHROP E. STONE, Ph. D.,
PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY, PURDUE UNIVERSITY


WITH COMMENTS,
BY
W. 0. ATWATER and CHAS. D. WOODS.


WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,
1896.


I


,i ii
.ii.








































a:












LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS,
Washington, D. C., June 15, 1896.
Sit: I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on dietary
studies at Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., in 1895, by Winthrop E.
Stone, Ph. D., professor of chemistry at the university. These inves-
tigations constitute a part of the inquiries made with the funds
appropriated by Congress "to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to
investigate and report upon the nutritive value of the various articles
and commodities used for human food." They were conducted under
the immediate supervision of Prof. W. 0. Atwater, special agent in
charge of nutrition investigations, in accordance with instructions
given by the Director of this Office. Mr. H. M. Smith, special agent
of this Department, assisted in carrying on the investigations.
The dietary studies previously made in the United States have been
confined to a small number of places. In carrying out the provisions
of the act above cited, representative localities have been selected in
different parts of the country, in order that definite information regard-
ing the food supply and consumption of people living under different
conditions might be obtained. Lafayette, Ind., is near the eastern
edge of the prairie region of the middle West, and it is believed that
the food habits of people living in this region would be very much alike.
Purdue University possesses well-equipped laboratories, and offered
some exceptional facilities for carrying on food investigations.
The dietary study with the teacher's family is particularly interesting,
since it corresponds quite closely with the current dietary standards,
and at the same time the cost is very moderate. It is a good example
of what may be accomplished by judicious expenditure of money and
careful selection of available food materials. Comments on these
investigations made by Professors Atwater and Woods, and appended
to Professor Stone's report herewith, indicate the value of the Indiana
dietary studies as compared with similar investigations carried on
elsewhere.
Professor Stone's report and the accompanying comments by the
special agents of this Department are submitted, with the recommen-
dation that they be published as Bulletin No. 32 of this Office.
Respectfully,
A. C. TRUE,
Director.
- Hon. J. STERLING MORTON,
Secretary of Agriculture.










// ii
// ii




II
/i






:


ij







- ii;
I



























CONTENTS.



Page.
The dietary studies ..-.................................--............ ...... 10
Dietary of a teacher's family in Indiana .--.--...----..-----..-...--.... 12
Dietary of a tinner's family in Indiana .-------.. --.....---- ...-- -----.... 15
Composition of the food materials..-..........------......----.....- ..- ...-. 20
Refuse in meats.......... ............................ ,... .. ......... 21
Refus in eats---------------------------------------------------- 2
Relative character and cost of the dietaries-----------...-------..------..---..... 21
Comments on the dietary studies at Purdue University........--............ 23
Standards for dietaries .......................-............... ...... .... 23
Dietaries of mechanics' families -...-- .....---..--...-----....------------.. 24
Dietaries of families of professional men ...-.-----------.. ..--.-.... 25
5


.ii ....




















DIETARY STUDIES AT PURDUE UNIVERSITY.



Two dietary studies were made at Purdue University, one with the
family of a teacher and the other with the family of a mechanic. They
form part of a series, carried out in various localities, to learn the habits
of food consumption of the people of the United States. The methods
followed were those described at length in a previous publication.'
The observations were made with two principal ends in view: (1) To
ascertain the net amount of food materials of various kinds consumed
by the families during stated periods; and (2) by sampling and chem-
ical analysis of these food materials, to ascertain their composition, and
thus the total amount of nutrients consumed during the given time.
The general plan of the studies may be briefly outlined as follows:
At the beginning of each dietary study a careful inventory by weight
was taken of all the food and food materials in the house. During
exactly fourteen days all food purchased was weighed and recorded in
the same way, and all table and kitchen waste carefully collected,
weighed, and desiccated for subsequent analysis. At the close of the
period a second inventory of all materials on hand was taken. In this
way the necessary data for ascertaining the net amounts of food con-
sumed were secured. Samples of food materials on hand or purchased
during the period were secured and, when necessary, desiccated in a
drying oven at about 900 C. These were ground and mixed in the
usual way for analysis, and in these prepared samples the moisture, ash,
nitrogen, and fat were determined. The methods employed for the
analysis of the specimens of food are the same as those used by Atwater
and Woods,2 and quoted at length in Bulletin No. 29 of this Office.
The results of the analyses are given in the three tables which follow.
Table 1 shows the composition of the food materials as found in the
market, including both edible portion and refuse; Table 2 the composi-
tion of the edible portion on the basis of the water content at the time
in which the samples were taken, and Table 3 the composition of the
water-free substance of the edible portion., In addition to the ordinary
data of composition, Tables 1 and 2 present also the estimated fuel
value or potential energy of the foods.


U. S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experiment Stations Bul. 21.
Connecticut Storrs Station Report 1891, p. 41 et seq.










8


TABLE 1.--Composition of food materials as purchased (including both edible portion a
refuse).


[Analyzed at Lafayette, Ind.]


Refuse. Water. Protein.


I -----;- -I--


ANIMAL FOOD.
*f:
Porterhouse steak, native Peret. Per ct.
beef................ .... 58 14.5 53.9
Do...................... 79 11.2 50.6

Average .............. ........ 12.9 52.2

Sirloin steak, native beef...1 80 17. 2 52.1
Do............--........ 81 19.5 55.0

Average ................. ....... 18.3 53.6

Ribs........................ 171 28.7 40.5
Round ..................... 248 ...-.. 66.2
Do...................... 233 17.3 57. 2
Do...................... 249 5.6 59.8

Average 2 analyses. ..... .... 11.5 58.5


Rump ......................
Do .....................

Average...................

Shoulder.-.....--...........
Do.....................

Average...................

Veal:
Leg, round...............
Do..................
Do....................
Do.....----.......-....
Do................. .....
Do.....................
Do....................

Average................. .
Loin, with kidney ..........
Pork:
Round......................
Smoked ham..............
Lard. kettle-rendered.......
Do...........-.......
Butter..........................
Do.............. .........
Cheese, American full milk....

Milk.........................
Do......................

Average.----...-...........

VEOETABI.E FOOD.

Cornmeal, granular, home-grown
Hominy ...
Hominy ........................
Oats, rolled..................
'Wheat flour, graham............
Wheat flour, roller processs.....
W heat flour....................
Wheat flour, pastry-.............
Bread. white, baker's..........
Cake. baker's-.............-..-. I
Vanilla wafers.................
Beans, canned, with pork .-...--
Sweet potatoes, canned.........


259
260



305
319


1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1035


1053

2050
2068
4035
4036
22
47
3541

23
44


5028
5038
5066
5109
5149
5256
5280
5427
5465
5504
6862
7073


Fat.


Per et.
10. 8
20. 7


Carbohy-
drates.


Per cent.

..........


Ash.


Per ct.


Fuel

per
value

po, un



calories.
825
1,180


18.2 15.7 ......... 1.0 1,000

15.3 14.6 .8 ....... 9
8.5 16.6 .......... .4 8


15.6

18. 1
11. 1
7.7
14.8


- I-. I I.


17.8


17.3 57.6 17.8
9.9 66.8 19.3

13.66 62.2 18.6

8.8 65.1 19.0
13.3 58.0 16.5

11.1 ( 61.5 17.8


7.8
4.5
8.9
4.7
5.4
4.7
3.6

5.6
9.1

11.6
4.8


........

.r.......
........
........


68.8
69. 5
68. 9
70. 3
67.9
71.6
66.8

09. 1
66. 7


19. 7
20. 2
18.9
20. 6
19.9
21.4
19.7

20.1
12.8


11.2

6. 3
2.9


.6

.6
1.1
.9
1.0


1.0

1.0
1. 1


I I


4.6

6.1
11.3

8.7


2.6
4.7
2.2
3.2
5.7
1. 1
8.9

4.1
10.7


51.1 16.6 19.8 .........
28.3 14.5 51.9 .........
........ ........ 100.0 .........
...... ......... 100. 0 .........
8.0 .1 89.6 .........
8.0 .1 89.6 .........
31.6 37.0 25.3 1.4

88.0 3.3 3.9 4.1
89.5 3.4 2.8 3.6

88.8 I 3.3 3.3 1 3.9


13.2
11.4
11.2
10.8
10.8
11.5
10.8
40. 2
28. 3
5.8
76. 1
42. 0


9.7
0.5
18.4
15.5
14.7
12.0
12. 3
8.7
4.6
6.8
5.2
2.6


4.0
.7
5.8
2.8
.6
.9
.6
.7
5.9
15.7
2.1
.5


71.8
78. 0
62.8
69. 1
73. 4
75. 2
75.9
49.7
60.5
71.2
15.2
53.6


1.0

1.0
.9


I I -


.9


1.1
1. 1
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0


.7


880

900
870
640
975

806
so

595
480


540

610
785


700


475
575
'45
.520
610
445
740

545
G0o


.9 1,145
.5 2,460
........ 41230
........ 4,220
2.3 3,785
2.3 3,785
4.7 1,785

.7 305
.7 250

.7 275



1.3 1,485
.4 1,655
1.8 1,760
1.8 1,600
.5 1,65
.4 1,660
.4 1,665
.7 .1,115
.7 1,460
.5 2,115
1.4 465
1.3 1,065


Kind of food material.


Refer-
ence
num-
ber.


__ ____


- --


Bee


..........

..........
..........
..........


......---.-

..........


..........

..........
... ... ..


..........

..........
..........
..........
..........
..........

.. ........
.. .. .. .







1* ;


9


TABLE 2.-Composition of fresh, edible portion of food materials.

[Analyzed at Lafayette, Ind.]


Kinds of food material.


ANIMAL FOOD.
Beef:
SPorterhouse steak, native beef.....
Do ...........................

Average........................

Sirloin steak, native beef...........
Do ............................

Average -........-...............

Ribs..............................
Round.............................
Do..............................
Do.................................

Average.........................


Rump .verage................... ..
Doulder ...........................
Average..........................

Shoulder ...........................
Do...............-......

Average.........................

Veal:
Leg, round......................
Do............................
Do........ ....................
Do............................
Do............................
Do...........................
Do....... .....................

Average......-.................
Loin, with kidney.................
Pork:
Round..............................
Smoked ham ......................
Lard, kettle-rendered .............
Do ...........................
Butter .................................
Do .................................
Cheese, American full milk.............


Refer-
ence
berm-
ber.


Water.


Per ct.
58 63.1
79 57.0

........ 60.0

80 62.9
81 68.3


Pro-
tein.



Per ct.
23.1
18. 7

20.9

18.5
10.6


65. 6 14.6


171
233
248
249


259
260


305
319


1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1035


1050

2050
2068
4035
4036
22
47
3541


Milk............................... 23
Do ........................... ... 44

Average..... .......................


VEGETABLE FOOD.

Corn meal, granular, home-grown ......
Hominy, home-grown ..................
Oats, rolled...........................
Wheat flour, graham ................
Wheat flour, roller process ...........
Wheat flour...... ........................
Wheat flour, pastry ...................
Bread, white, baker's. -...............
Cake, baker's-.....-..-.................
Vanilla wafers......................
Beans, canned, with pork...........--..
Sweet potato, canned......-............


5028
5038
5066
5109
5149
5256
5280
5427
5465
5504
6862
7073


. Carbohy- Fuel
Fat. rates As. valueper
Ipound.


P'er ct. Per cent. 'Per ct. Calories.
12.0 .......... 1.2 960
23.3 .......... 1.0 1,330

18.0 ..... ..... 1.1 1, 145

17.6 .......... 1.0 1, 0i5
20.6 .......... .5 1,065

19. 1 ....... .... .7 1,075


56.8 17.0 25.4 I..........' .8 1,390
69.2 20.4 9.3 I.......... 1. 1 770
66.2 21.6 11.1 i.......... 1.1 870
63.3 19.9 15.7 .......... 1.1 1,035

66.2 20.6 12.1 ..........! 1.1 890

69.7 21.5 7.6.......... 1.2 720
74.2 21.4 3.2 .......... 1.2 535

72.0 21.4 5.4 .......... 1.2 625

71. 4 20.8 6. 7 .......... 0. 670
66.9 19.0 13. 1 .......... 1.0 905

69.1 19.9 9.9 .......... 1 790


74.6 21.4 2.8 .......... 1.2 515
72.8 i 21.1 5.0 I......... 1. I 6U5
75.6 20.8 2.4 .......... 1.2 490
73.8 21.6 3.4 ........I 1.2 545
71.8 21.0 6.0 ......... 1.2 G45
75.1 22.5 1. 1 .........1 1.3 465
69.3 20.4 9.2 ......... ... 1. 765

73.3 21.2 4.3i.......... 1.2 575
73.3 14.1 11.8 .......... .8 760

57.7 18.8 22.4 ......... 1.1 1,295
29.7 15.2 54.5 .......... 2,585
........ ........ 100.0 ............. ..... 4,220
........ ..... 100. ..................... 4, 20
8.0 .1 89.6 .......... 2.3 I 3,785
8. .1 89.6 ........ 2.3 3,785
31.6 37.0 25.3 1.4 4.7 1,785

88.0 3.3 3.9 4.1 .7' 305
89.5 3.4 2. 8 3.6 .7 250

88.81 3.3 3.3 3.9 .7 275


13. 2 9.7 4.0 71.8
11.4 9.5 .7 78.0
11.2 18.4 5.8 62.8
10.8 15.5 2.8 69.1
10.8 14.7 .6 73.4
11.5 12.0 .9 75.2
10.8 12.3 75.9
40.2 8.7 .7 49.7
28.3 4.6 5.9 GO. 5
5.8 6.8 15.7 71.2
76.1 5.2 2.1 15.2
42.0 2.6 .5 53.6


1,685
1,655
1,760
1,690
1,665
1, G60
1,665
1,115
1,460
2,115
465
1,065


1-1


I ---.









10


TABLE 3.-Composition of water-free su.bstawe of edible portion of food matriss.

[ nalysed at Lafayette, Ind.]


Kind of food material.


ANIMAL FOOD.
Beef:
Porterhouse steak, native beef.....
Do ...........................

Average.........................

Sirloin steak, native beef...........
Do ..........................

Avrage............ .................

Ribs..... .... ........... ...........
Roun...............................
Do ............................
Do .................. ...........

Average.......-..-............

Rump ............................
Do ...........................

Average.....................

Shoulder........................
Do ........................

Average.....................

Veal:
Leg,round .........................
Do ............................
Do ........................
Do ......... ...............
Do .................. ........
Do ..-........................1-
Do .............................

Average.-........................'
Loin, with kidney ..............I.
Pork:
Round.............................
Smoked ham............... .....
Lard, kettle-rendered............
Do..-...-... ......---..........
Butter.................................
Do..................................
Cheese, American full milk............

M ilk...................................
Do................................

Average.......................

VEGETABLE FOOD.

Corn meal, home-grown, granular.......
Hominy, home-grown..................
Oats, rolled........................-.....
Wheat flour, graham ................
Wheat flour, roller process .............
Wheat flour.......................-
Wheat flour, pastry ..................
Bread, white, baker's..................
Cakes, baker's........................
Vanilla wafers .........................
Beans, baked, canned, with pork........
Sweet potatoes, canned............-.


Refer-
ence num-Nitrogen.
ber.I


Protein.


Fat.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
58 10.51 62.6 34.1
79 7.25 43.5 54.2

......... 8.88 53.0 44. 2

80 8.13 49.9 47.4
81 5.35 33.4 65.0

.......... 6.74 41.7 56.2

171 6.49 39.4 58.8
233 10.95 66.2 30.2
248 10.59 63.9 32.8
249 8.93 54.2 42.8

S...10.16 61.4 35.3

259 11.46 71.0 25.0
260 13.52 82.9 12.4


.......... 12.49 76.9

305 11.84 72.7
319 9.81 57.4

----..... 10.82 65.1


1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1035


..... .. I
1053

2050
2068
4035
4036
22
47
3541

23
44





5028
5038
5066
5109
5149
5256
5280
5427
5465
5504
6862
7073


13.72
12.42
13.53
13.16
11.82
14.50
10.59

12.74
8.80

7.55
2.73
..........
..........





















..........


84.3
77.6
85.3
82.4
74. 5
90.4
66. 4

80. 1
52.8

44. 4
21.6
100.0
100.0
.1
.1
54.1

27.5
32. 4

30. 0



11.2
10. 7
20. 7
17.4
16. 5
13. 6
13.8
14.5
6.4
7.2
21.8
4.5


18.7

23. 4
39.6

31.5


11.0
18.4
9.8
13.0
21.3
4.4
30.0

15.4
44.2

53.0
77.5
..........

97.4
37.0

32.5
26.7

29.6



4.6
.8
6.5
3.1
.7
1.0
.7
1.2
8.2
16.7
8.8
.9


THE DIETARY STUDIES.


The results of two dietary studies are given in the following pages.

The tables under both are alike, and one description will answer.

The figures in the first three columns of the first table (Tables 4


Carbohy-
drates.



Pe, cnt.
..........
..........


-----------
..........


..........

..........
....- .. -..
.--------.
..........

..........

..........
..........

----------

.------..--
----------


..........
..........














2.0

34.2
34.3

34.2



82. 7
88.0
70.7
77.5
82.3
84.9
85. 1
83.1
84.4
75. 6
63. 6
92.4


Ash.


Per cena.
a'
8 3


2.8

Le

L1
11


LS

40
LO

&4

L9
.0

3.4


4.7
4.0
&6
to


4.2
5.3
3.6

4.5


1t
.9
..........

2.5

6.9

5.8
6.6

6.2



1.5
.5
2.1
2.0
.5
.5
.4
1.2
1.0
.5
5.8
2.2


. .. ... ...


r






11


and 7) of each dietary show the percentage composition of the foods
used, based upon the condition of the food as it was purchased, includ-
ing bone or other refuse. The fourth column shows the price paid
for the amount of each food purchased, and the remaining columns give
the total weight of each kind of food, together with the amounts of the
different nutrients-protein, fat, and carbohydrates-contained therein.
In all cases where the amount of food was large or of unknown com-
position, such as native beef, pork, milk, butter, flour, corn meal, etc.,
samples were analyzed in connection with the dietary study. In all
such cases the letter a is placed after the name of the food material.
These analyses are given in Tables 1 to 3, above. Where the article
was not analyzed, its percentage composition was taken from the table
of average composition of American foods in Bulletin No. 31 of this
Office.
The weights of the dried, table, and kitchen wastesI and their com-
position are given in the last line of the first table in each dietary
(Tables 4 and 7).
The second table in each dietary (Tables 5 and 8) shows the relative
proportion of the several classes of food materials in the dietary and
the nutrients furnished by each class. It tells its story so plainly as
to require little comment.
The last table in each dietary (Tables 6 and 9) gives the nutrients and
fuel values in food purchased, in table and kitchen wastes, and in the
portion actually eaten. The estimates of animal and vegetable nutri-
ents in the waste are computed as described below. In estimating the
fuel values of the nutritive ingredients, the protein and carbohydrates
are assumed to contain 4.1 and the fats 9.3 calories of potential energy
per gram.
It was not practicable in the collection of the wastes to distinguish
between that which came from animal and that from vegetable food.
It is, however, possible to estimate with more or less accuracy how
much of the nutritive materials came from the animal and how much
from the vegetable foodA. As there were practically no carbohydrates
in any of the animal foods except milk and cheese, and but little in
these, there is no great error in assuming that all waste carbohy-
drates came from the vegetable foods. It will also be fairly accurate
to assume that there are the same proportions of protein, fat, and car-
bohydrates in the vegetable waste as in the whole vegetable food
purchased. In other words, the amount of vegetable protein and
vegetable fat in the waste will bear nearly the same ratio to the total

'The words "refuse" and "waste" are used somewhat indiscriminately. In gen-
eral, refuse in animal food represents inedible material, although bone, tendon, etc.,
which are classed as refuse, may be utilized for soup. The refuse of vegetable foods,
such as parings, seeds, etc., represent not only inedible material, but also more or
less of edible material. The waste included the edible portion of the food, as pieces
of meat, bread, etc., which might be saved, but is actually thrown away with the
refuse.









12


amount of vegetable protein and fat in the food purchased that tb:

carbohydrates of the waste does to the total carbohydrates of the
vegetable food. Taking the percentages of the weights of the carbo.
hydrates in the total waste as the measure of the protein and fats in the

vegetable wastes, the actual weights of protein and fat in the latter are
readily calculated. Subtracting these weights of vegetable protein and
fat from the total weight of these ingredients in the waste, the remainder

gives the amounts of animal protein and fats in the whole waste.
Tables 10 and 11 give a summary of the results of the two dietary

studies.
DIETARY OF A TEACHER'S FAMILY IN INDIANA (No.44).'
The study began March 8, 1895, and continued fourteen days.
The members of the family and number of meals taken were as follows:
Meals.
Man between 50 and 60 years old ..-.......--- ......-....--........ 42
Man 25 years old-.........-- ..--- ..-...----..------- ........------- 42
2 men 22 years old..--...- ...---- ..---- ....... ..............-...-- 84
Woman between 40 and 50 years old (42 meals X 0.8 meal of man)
equivalent to .--..---...----------.. ----------........---........ 34
Woman 30 years old (42 meals X 0.8 meal of man) equivalent to.--. 33

Total number of meals equivalent to ---..-----.............. 235
Equivalent to one man seventy-eight days.

Remarks.-One of the men was a professor of mathematics, another

an instructor in chemistry, the other two, students. The younger

woman also was a teacher. They were all healthy, active persons,

with good appetites, and used no stimulants, narcotics, or medicines in

any form.

TABLE 4.-Food materials and table and kitchen wastes in dietary study No. 44.


Kind of food material.


ANIMAL FOOD.
Beef:
Porterhouse (a)............
Round (a)..-..............
Do. (a) ...............
Do. (a) ................
Sirloin (a) ......-....--.---
Shoulder (a) .--............-----
Do.....................
Smoked, dried .............

Total ...................

Veal:
Round (a)..............-..
Do. (a).................
Do. (a).-............. ...
Do. (a) ................
Do. (a).................
Do. (a).................
Do. (a)................


Percentage composition.


Pro-
tein.


Per ct.
16.6
21.6
19.0
18.8
15.3
16.5
16.5
31.8



19.7
20.2
18.9
20.6
19.7
19.9
21.4


Total ............... ........
"""" ~ 1 -^~~~~~


Fat. Carbohy-
rates.



Per ct. Per cent.
20.7 ..-....--..
11. 1 ..........
6.1 .........
14.8 .........
14.6 .........
11.3.........
11.3.........
6. 8 0.6

...... ---.......-

2.6.........
4.7.........
2.2 .........
3.2 .........
8.9 .........
5.7 ..........
1..........

...................


Total
cost.


$0.20
.15
.45
.16
.28
.36
.42
.25

2.27


Weight used.


l otal
food
ma-
terial.


Grams.
905
680
2, 040
735
1, 275
1,955
2,270
905

10, 765


........ 1,020
1,075
........ 540
........1,245
........ 1,075
540
........ 540
....... 1,105

1.84 6,600


Nutrients.


Grams.
150
147
388
139
195
323
374
288

2, 004


201
218
102
257
211
107
237

1,333


Pro- Fat.
tein. Fat


Grams.
187
75
124
109
186
221
257
62

1,221

27
51
12
40
96
31
13

270


Carbohy-
drates


Grama.
-.........
.--.-....-
..........


..........


5

..--------


.-.-------
----------
.---------


i -.....-- ______


a Specimen analyzed. See explanation, p. 11.

1Thc numbers of the dietary studies are laboratory numbers used in the investL
gations of which this study forms a part.









13


TABLE 4.-Food materials and table and kitchen wastes in dietary study No. 44-Cont'd.


Percentage composition.


Kind of food material.


ANIMAL FOOD-continued.

Pork:
Round (a).--................
Lard (a) ...................

Total ...-...............
Eggs .........................
Butter (a)......................
Milk (a) .......................
Mince-meat ...................

Total animal food........

VEGETABLE FOOD.

Cereals, sugar, etc.:
Corn meal (a)..............
Hominy (a) ...............
Flour, bread (a)............
Flour, pastry (a)..........
Oatmeal ...................
Crackers, milk............
Sugar, granulated ..........
Sugar, "C"..............
Sirup, maple..............
SHoney.....................

Total ...................

Vegetables:
Beans, dried (a)............
Cabbage ...................
Corn, canned.............
Lettuce...................
Parsnips................
Potatoes (30.9 per cent ref-
use) ..................
Radishes ................

Total...................

Fruits, nuts, etc.:
Apples (34.4 per cent ref-
use)......................
Bananas (28.6 per cent ref-
use).....................
Cranberries..............
Oranges (25 per cent ref-
use) ...................
Peaches, dried............
Prunes, dried............
Raisins ...................

Total ..................

Total vegetable food.....

Total food...............

Table and kitchen waste (a)...
Fat............................


Pro-
tein.


Per ct.
16.6



13. 1
.1
3.3
6.5


9.6
9.5
14.8
12.3
15. 6
9.3


22. 5
1.8
2.8
1.1
1.3

2.1
1.0




.5

1.2
.5

.8
2.9
2.0
2.5






20. 8


Fat.


Per ct.
19.8
100.0


9 5
89. 6
3.9
1.4


4.0
.7
.6
.6
7.3
13. 1


1.4
.3
1.3
.3
.5

.1
.1




.5

.8
.7

.6

.7
4.7






33. 6
100.0


Total................. ........ l........II


Total
coat.


$0.10
.60
n-,f


Weight Iusa.


Total
food
ma-
terial.



Grams.
455
2,495
n hntn


Carbohy-
drates.




Per cent.
..........
..........



4. 1
60.4

..........



71.8
78. 0
73. 4
75.9
68.0
69.2
100.0
95. 0
70. 0
75. 1

....-.---.-


61.0
4.9
19. 3
2.7
12.9

18.0
4.6

..........



16.6

22. 9
10. 1

9.7
63. 3
58.6
74.7


1.82


.09
.32
.25
.40
.05

.28
.05

1.44


Nutrients.

Pro- p t. Carbohy-
teiu. drates.



Grams. Grams. Grams.
76 90 .........
.-.-. 2,495 ..........

76 I 2,585 i..........
616 447 ..........
2 1,599 i..........
1,817 2,147 2,257
24 5 224

5,872 8,274 2,486



232 96 1,718
24 2 199
1,116 45 I 5,5:;55
854 42 5,272
37 18 163
13 18 97
....... ........ 2,295
....... .......I 4,094
S........ 627
........ ....... 319


25,440 2,276 221 20,319


835 187 12 510
2,890 52 9 141
1,210 34 16 233
905 10 3 21
795 10 4 103

6,750 142 7 1,215
310 3 ........ 14

13,695 438 | 51 2,240



5,470 27 27 908

1,420 17 11 325
355 2 2 36

540 4 3 52


865
440
45


.......... 1.34 9,135

.......... 4.60 48, 270
-- I- t604- =
.......... 14.37 130,500

42.1 ........ 1,800
.......... ........ 10

.......... ........ 1,810


25

1

85

2,799

8,671

374


374


3
2

48


547
258
34

2,160


320 24,719

8,594 27,205

605 758
10 ..........

615 758


a Specimen analyzed. See explanation, p. 11.


~- -- -- --


.IV U V50
1.17 4,705
1.06 1,785
2.57 55,055
.16 370

9.77 82,230



.08 2,395
.02 255
.25 7,540
.30 6,945
.02 240
.03 140
.24 2,295
.43 4,310
.25 895
.20 425


Weight us .


l


I

........1...._..









14

TABLE 5.--Weights and percentages of food materials and nutritive ingredients ad is
dietary study No. 44.
*


Kind of food material.


Weight in grams.


Food
ma-
terial.


FOR FAMILY 14 DAYS.


Beef, real, and mutton...... 17,365
Pork, lard, etc............. 2,950
Eggs ........-------...----- 4,705
Butter...................... 1,785
Milk ...-..........-......... 55,055
Mince-meat ................ 370

Total animal food-..-. 82, 230

Cereals, sugars, starches.... 25,440
Vegetables .-...--..--------- 13,695
Fruita..-- ---.--.--.-..-..---- 9, 135

Total vegetable food .- 48,270

Total food..-....------. 130,500


PER MAN PER DAY.

Beef, veal, and mutton......
Pork, lard, etc..............
Eggs..........----......--.--.......
Butter ......................
Milk ..--..................
Mince-meat ........-......-

Total animal food....

Cereals, sugars, starches ...
Vegetables....................
Fruits.......................

Total vegetable food...

Total food............

PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL FOOD.

Beef, veal, and mutton.......
Pork, lard, etc.............
Eggsa......................
Butter.....................
Milk ...... ..............
Mince-meat................

Total animal food .....

Cereals, sugars, starches ....
Vegetables..................
Fruits.......................

Total vegetablefood...

Total food............


222
38
60
23
706
5

1,054

326
176
117

619

1,673


Nutrients.


Pro-
tein.



3,337
76
616
2
1, 17
24

5, 872

2,276
4.38
85

2,799

8, 671


Fat.


1,491
2,585
447
1,599
2,147
5

8, 274

221
51
48

320

8, 594


43 19
1 33
8 6
....... 20
23 28

75 106

29 3
6 1
1 ........

36 4

111 110


Carbohy-
drates.


Weight in pounds.


Food
ma-
terial.


5 38.3
.......... 6.5
.......... 10.4
.. .. 3. 9
2, 257 121. 4
224 .8

2,486 181.3

20,319 56.0
2,240 30. 2
2, 160 20.2


Nutrients.

Pro- Ft. Cbohy-
tein. dratrh.


7.3
.2
1.3

4.90
.1

12. 9


3.3
5.7
1.0
3.5
4.7

18.2


5.0
.5

5.5


5.0 .5 44.8
1.0 .1 t9
.2 .1 4.8


24,719 106.4 6.2 .7 l 64.5

27,205 287.7 19.1 18.9 60.0


.......... .49 .10 .04..........
.......... .08 ---- 071: .........
.......... .13 02 01........
......... .05..... .05..........
29 1.56 .005 .:
3 .01 -... .--... .01

32 2.32 .171 .23 .01


260 .72
29 .39
28 .26

317 j 1.37

349 | 3.69


#4.11
.10
L IT
LOG
L
.16



L .t
L34

4.0U

14.37









.1a


.07 .01 ......
.01 ...... ......
...... ...... .06......

.08 .01o .70 .06

25 .24 .77 .18


Peret. Per t. Per ct. Percent. Pert
13.3 38.5 17.3 ............. ...... ................ 28.6
2.2 .9 30.1 .......... ........ ... 4.9
3. 6 7.1 5.2 ........................ ...... .......... 8.1
1.4 ........ 18.6 .......... ........ ............ .......... 7.4
42. 2 20. 9 25.0 8.3 ... .--.-'. .... 17.9
.3 .3 .1 .8 ........------.....----. .......... L1
I -- ---- -
63.0 67.7 96.3 9.1....-.... -..--- ...... .......... 68.0
19.5 26.2 2.6 74.7 ............................. 127
10.5 5.1 .6 8.2 ........ .....10.0
7.0 1.01 5 8.0 ........ ...... .... .......... 9.3

37.0 32. 3 3.7 90.9 ............. .............------

100.0 100.0 100.0o looo. ....... ...... ............... 1 .


.. ..... .......


-1


:J


CIost. *









15


TAB 6.-Nutrients and potential energy in food purchased, rejected, and eaten in dietary
study No. 44.


Kind of food material.


Food purchased:
Animal......-........................-...........

T otal - - -

Waste:
Animal.. ...............---------- ....--..----
Vegetable.......-..----...--.----.....-------
Total ------------------------------------

Total........................---.....--.--

Food actually eaten:
Animal.......................... ..-..
Vegetable .......-.........................
Total..............-----.................-----
PER MAIN PER DAY.

Food purchased:
Animal.................. ................
Vegetable...--...--............. ..........-.
Total.........---.--...---.----...........------

Waste:
Animal ... ....................... ..............
Animal ---------- ---------------------------
Vegetable--....---...............-.--....--.....
Total..----............--..--..--...---......

Food actually eaten:
Animal-----.................................
Vegetable..............--.-........--.

Total-----. ..--................ ......--.

PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL FOOD PURCHASED.

Food purchased:
Animal...................................-.
Vegetable...-----..--......--..--.........--.

Total.-.............-........--........-


Waste:




Food actually eaten:
Animal ........................................
Vegetable..-.................................

Totalo......................................


DIETARY OF A TINKER'S FAMILY IX INDIANA (No.49).

The study began April 22, 1895, and continued fourteen days.
The members of the family and number of meals taken were as follows:
Meals.
Man about 55 years old-----.. ...----...--. ..--..-- ........--... ..-. 42
Man about 20 years old.......-.....-- ...........------......--- ..-. 28
Woman about 48 years old (42 meals x 0.8 meal of man) equivalent to. 33
Visitors ..................................-----.........------.... 2

Total number of meals taken equivalent to.................. 105
Equivalent to one man thirty-five days.


-I--


Nutrients.
Cost. ---Fel
Protein. Fat. Carboy- value.
drates.

Grams. Grams. Grams. Calories.
$9.77 5,872 8,274 2.486 111, 220
4.60 2,799 320 24,719 115,800

14.37 8, 671 8,594 27,205 227,020

-------283 605 .......... 6.790
..... 91 10 738 3,490

.......... 374 615 738 10,280

5,589 7,669 2,486 104,430
2,708 310 23,981 112,310

------ 8,297 7,979 26,467 216,740



.12 75 106 32 1,425
.06 36 4 317 1,483

.18 111 110 349 2,910

..-....... 4 8 ........... 90
.......... 1 .......... 9 40

.......... 5 8 91 130

.......... 71 98 32 1,335
.......... 35 4 308 1,445

.......... 106 102 340 2.780


Pcencent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Per cent.
68.0 67.7 96.3 9.1 49.0
32.0 32.3 3.7 90.9 51.0

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

.......... 3.3 7.0 ........ 3.0
.......... 1.0 .......... 2.7 1.5

.......... 4.3 7.0 2.7 4.5

......... 64.4 89.3 9.1 46.0
31.3 3.7 88.2 49.5

.......... 95.7 93.0 97.3 95.5


|
]









16


Remarks.-The family consisted of three adult persons, in good health
and with active occupation. They were not very "hearty eaters"
The men smoked tobacco moderately, otherwise none of the family
were addicted to stimulants or narcotics.
The men conducted a small business of their own and worked rather
less hours than hired laborers.

TABLE 7.-Food materials and table and kitchen wastes in dietary study VNo. 49.


Percentage composition.

Kind of food material. Total
Protein. Fat. Carbohy. cost.
drates.


ANIMAL FOOD.
Beef: Per ct. Per ct. Per cent.
Porterhouse (a)............ 19.8 10. 8 ..........$0.26
Sirloin (a) ................. 8. 5 16. 6 ......... .27
Rib roast (a)............... 12.2 18.1 .............2 .28
]:ound(a,.................. 16.9 7.7 .......... .19
Rump (a).................. 17.8 6.3 ....-..... .15
Do.......-.......----. 19.3 2.9 .......... .13
Total ......................... ..1.28
Veal: Loin (a).--................ 12.8 10.8 .......... .32
Pork: --
Ham (a) ................... 14.5 51.9 .......... .37
Lard (a) ................... ..... .. 100.0 .......... .23
Total.................... !..- ... ......... .. ....... O0
Eggs .......................... 13.1 9.5 .......... .74
Butter (a) .............. ...... .1 89.6 .......... .70
Cheese (a) ..................... 37.0 25.3 1.4 .18
3ilk (a) -................. .... 3.4 2.8 3.6 .57
Buttermilk .................... 3.0 .5 4.8 .06
Total animal food ........ -..... .... ............ 4.45

VEGETABLE FOOD.
Cereals, sugar, etc.:
Flour, wheat (a)...-.....-.. 12.0 .9 75.2 .08
Oats, rolled (a) ............. 18.4 5.8 62.8 .03
Bread, wheat, baker's (a).. 8.7 .7 49.7 .67
Cake, baker's (a).....--...-. 4.6 5.9 60.5 .56
Wafers, vanilla(a) ......... 6.8 15.7 71.2 .40
Sugar, granulated .......... ............... 100.0 .17
Sugar, "Coffee A" (a) ...... ......... .....I 86.6 .24
Sirp----------LI------------------------7. 0
Sirup ..................................... 72.0 .03
--I
Total ............................-----------------....... 2.18

Vegetables:
Asparagus ............ 1.8 .2 3.3 .2
Beans, baked, canned (a)... 5.2 2.1 15.2 .15
Lettuce.-........--......... 1.1 .3 2.7 .20
Onions .................... 1.5 .4 8.9 .10
Potatoes...................' 1.8 .1 15.3 .22
Radishes..-..--..-----.... 1.0 .1 4.6 .05
Rhubarb-..-............... .4 .4 2.2 .10
Sweet potatoes, caeded (a) 2.6 .5 53.6 .15
Total ...................-......... .......-.......... 1.17

Fruits, nuts, etc.: I
Bananas................... .7 .5 13.7 .60
Blackberries, canned ....... .8 2.1 56.4 .15
Grapes. canned ............ .6 .7 13.0 .15
Oranges .--...--.......--- 6 .4 7.1 .20
Strawberries ..............1 1.0 .7 6.8 .15
Total .................... ........ ... ...... ....... 1.25
Total-------------------- --------- ----1.S
Total vegetable food---------------------4.60$

Total food ............... .... ........ .......... 9.05

Table and kitchen waste (a)....! 15.2 20.7 63.3 .......-
Fat........................... ........ 100.0 ..................
Total .................... ................-...............


Weight used.


Total
food
mate-
rial.


Grams.
810
990
1,265
680
680
565
4,990
1,825

965
1,600
2,565
3,565
1,505
455
10, 390
2,440


Nutrients.


Proteio.



Grams.
160
84
154
115
121
110
744
234

140

140
467
2
168
353
73


27,735 2,181


2,835
240
7, 855
2, 565
935
2, 525
1,530
600
19,085


340
44
683
118
64



1, 249


795 14
795 41
455 5
340 5
7,770 139
455 5
850 3
1,175 31
12,635 243

2,610 18
1,330 11
1,275 8
1,505 9
455 5


Fat.


Grams.
87
165
229
52
43
16
592.
196

501
1,600
2,101
339
1,348
115
291
12
4.994



26
14
55
151
147



393

2
17
1
1
8


6
3


13
28
9
6
3


7,1755 51j 59

38, 895 1,543 490

66,630 3,724 5,484
3,715 565 769
50 ........ 50
-- --56-- 819
3,765 585 1 819


Carbohy-
dratei.


Grams.

..........
..........
.w.-......
..........
..........


.---------






374
117
497



2,182
151
3.904
1, 552
666-
2,525
1,326
432
12,688

26
121
12
30
1,189
21
19
629
2,047

358
750
166
107
31
1,412

16,147

16,644

2,352

2.352


a Specimen analyzed. See explanation, p.11.









17


TABLE 8.-Weights and percentages of food materials and nutritive ingredients used in
dietary study No. 49.


Kind of food material.


SFO FAMILY 14 DAYS.

Beef, veal, and mutton.......
Pork, lard, etc..............
Eggs......................
Butter .....................
(heese......................
Milk .......................
Buttermilk .................


Weight in grams.


Food
mate-
rinal.


I- 1I


6,815
2,565
3,565
1,505
455
10,390
2,440


Total animal food ..... 27, 735


Cereals, sugars, starches....
Vegetables ........-.........
Fri ita.......................

Total vegetable food ..

Total food............

PER MAN PER DAY.

Beef, veal, and mutton.......
Pork, lard, etc .............
Eggs........................
Butter .....................
Cheese...................
Milk .......................
Buttermilk..................

Total animal food....

Cereals, sugars, starches....
Vegetables......................
Friits.....................

Total vegetable food..

Total food...........

PBBCENTAGES OF TOTAL FOOD.

Beef, veal, and mutton......
Pork, lard, etc...............
Eggs.......................
Butter ...................
Cheese..................
Milk ........... ...........
Buttermilk .................

Total animal food ....

Cereals, sugars, starches....
Vegetables.................
Fruits......................

Total vegetable food ..

Total food............


Nutrients.

Pro- Fat. Carbohy-
tein. drates.


978 788
140 2,101
467 339
2 1,348
168 115
353 291
73 12

2,181 4,994


19,085 1,249
12,635 243
7,175 51

38,895 1, 543

66,630 3,724


195
73
102
43
13
297
70

793

545
361
205

1,111

1,904


Per ct.
10.2
3.8
5.4
2.3
.7
15. 6
3.6

41.6

28. 6
19.0
10.8

58.4

100.0


28
4
13

5
10
2

62

36
7
1

44

106


393
38
59

490

5,484



23
60
10
38
3
9


143

11
1
2

14

157


Per ct. Per ct.
26.3 14.4
3.8 38.3
12.5 6.2
........ 24.6
4.5 2.1
9.5 5.3
2.0 .2

58.6 91.1

33.5 7.1
6.5 .7
1.4 1.1

41.4 8.9

100.0 100. 0


..........
..........
..........

6
374
117


12,688
2,047
1,412

16,147


Weight in pounds.


Food
mate-
rial.


15.0
5.7
7.8
3.3
1.0
22. 9


497 61.1


42. 1
27. 9
15.8

85. 8


16,644 146. 9


..........
..........

.........ii
11
3

14

363
58
40

461

475


1.74

1.20
.80
.45

2.45

4.19


Per. cent.



.7



3.0 .......

76.2.......
12.3 .......
8.5 .......

97.0 ........

100.0 777.77...


Nutrients.


Pro- Fat.
tein.



2.1 1.7
.3 4.6
1.0 .8
..... 3.0
.4 .3
.8 .6
.2 .....

4.8 11.0

2.8 .9
.5 .1
.1 .1

3.4 1.1

8.2 12.1


Carbohy-
drates.



..........




.8
.3


Cost.


$1.60
.60
.74
.70
.18
.57
.06


1.1 4.45

28.0 2.18
4.5 1.17
3.1 1.25

35. 6 4.60

36. 7 9. 05


.06 .05 ...............
.01 .13 ..............
.03 .02:.......... ...
...... 09.......... ......
.01 .01 .......... ......--
.02 .02 .02......
...... ...... .01 ......
.01 ----
-.I -
.13: .32i .03, .13

.08 .02 .80 ......
.02...... 13......
...... .01 .09 ......

.10 .031 1.021 .13

.23 .351 1.05 .26


Peret.
...... ............... .. 17.7
6.6
...... ...... .......... 8.2
7.7
...... ...... .......... .
...... ...... .......... 2.0
...... ...... .......... 6.3


...... ...... .. ..4...... .2
...... ...... .......... 4.1

...... ...... .......... 12.9
...... ...... .......... 13.8

............ ........... 50.8

...... ................ 100.0


340-No. 32-2









18



study No. 49.


Nutrients.
Kind of food material. Cost. -FuelF
Protein. at. Crbohy- vdl
drates.


Food purchased:
Animal.---............................------..
Vegetable........... --........... ........

Total........................................


Waste:
Animal........................................ ..........
Vegetable................. ............. .............


Total ........................................

Food actually eaten:
Animal-- ------...-... --........................
Vegetable--..........---.....---- ...------. ...

Total........................................

PER MAN PER DAY.

Food purchased:
Animal-...-....................................
Vegetable-....................................

Total...-........................-....---...

Waste:
Animal.......................... ............
Vegetable....--...---.........--.............--

Total........................................

Food actually eaten:
Animal--....-------...........-......---....-........
Vegetable....--.......----.................---------------

Total ........... .... .........................

PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL FOOD PURCHASED.

Food purchased:
Animal......................................
Vegetable......--.....-....--..-----------....-......

Total........................... ............

Waste:
Animal.....................................
Vegetable....................................

Total.........................................

Food actually eaten:
Animal................................ .........
Vegetable....................................

Total......................................


$4.45
4.60

9.05


Granms.
2,181
1,543

3,724

459
106

565

1,722
1,437


Grams.
4, 994
490

5,484

785
34

819

4,209
456


Grams.1
497
16,147

16, 64


----------------------------------
2,352
2, 352

497
13,795


57,420




91, m

10,580

48, 40
60, 680


.......... 3,159 4,665 14,292 114 930



.13 62 143 14 1,60a
.13 44 14 461 2,200

.26 106 157 475 3,840

.......... 13 22 ..........2
.......... 3 1 7 25

.......... 16 23 67 555

.......... 49 121 14 1, 345
.......-. 41 13 394 1,940

.......... 90 134 408 3,285


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per enmt
49.2 58.6 91.1 3.0 42.7
50.8 41.4 8.9 97.0 57.3

100. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

........... 12.3 14.3 .......... 6.8
.......... 2.9 .6 14.1 7.'

.......... 15.2 14.9 14.1 1& 5


46. 8
38. 5

84.8


76. 8
8.3

85. 1


3.0'
82.9

85.9


359
49.6

85.5


SIii


..... .....


..........l
..........

..........









19


TArLE 10.-Summary of weights and percentages of food materials and nutritive ingre-
dients used in dietary studies Nos. 44 and 49.


Kind of food material.


PS MAN PER DAY.

Teacher's fami ly.

Beef, veal and mutton..
*Pork, lard, etc..........
Eggs ..................
Butter.................
Milk...................
Mince-meat ............

Total animal food.

Cereals, sugars, starchesl
Vegetables .............
Fruits..................

Total vegetable
food ...........

Total food .......

Thinner's family.

Beef, veal, and mutton..
Pork, lard, etc..........
Eggs ..................
Butter .................
Cheese.................
Milk .................
Buttermilk.............

Total animal food

Cereals, sugars, starches
Vegetables .............
Fruits.................

Total vegetable
food............

Total food........


Food
mate-
rial.


Orams.
222
38
60
23
706
5

1,054

326
176
117


619

1,673


105
73
102
43
13
297
70

793

545
361
205


1,111

1,904


Weight.

Nutrients.


Pro- Fat.
tein.


Grams.
43
1
8

23
(')

75

29
6
1


36

111



28
4
13

5
10
2

62

36
7
1


Grams.
19
33
6
20
28
(1)

106
3
1
(1)

4

110


Carbo-
hy-
drates.




Grams.



29
3

32

260
29
28


317


Cost.


Cents.
5.2
.9
1.4
1.3
3.2


12.0

2.4
1.9
1.7

6.0


349 18.0


23 ........
60 .........
10 ........
38 .........
3 ........
9 11"
(') 3

143I 14

11 363
1 58
2 40


14 461

157 475


4.5
2.4
1.7
2.1
.5
1.6
.2

13. O0

6.2
3.3
3.5


13.0

26. 0


Percentage of total food.

Nutrients.
Food -- --
mate- Carbo-
rial. ti. Fat. hy-
S drates.


Per ct.
13.3
2.2
3.6
1.4
42.2
.3

63.0

19.5
10. 5
7.0


Perct.
38. 5
.9
7. 1

20. 9
.3

67.7

26.2
5.1
1.0


37. 0 32. 3


100.0


10.2
3.8
5.4
2.3
.7
15.6
3.6

41.6

28.6
19.0
10.8


100.


26. 3
3.8
12.5

4.5
9.5
2.0

58. 6

33. 5
6. 5
1.4


58.4 41.4

100.0 o100.0


Perct.
17.3
30.1
5.2
18.6
25. 0
.1

96. 3

2.6
.6
.5

3.7

100. 0


14.4
38.3
6.2
24.6
2.1
5.3
.2

91.1

7.1
.7
1. 1


8. 9


100. OI


Per cent.



8. 3
.8

9.1

74.7
8.2
8.0


00.9

100.0







2.3
.7

3.0

76. 2
12.3
8.5
1-1


Cost.


Perct.
28. 6
4.9
8.1
7.4
17.9
1. 1

68.0

12.7
10.0
9.3


32.0

100.0


17. 7
6.6
8.2
7.7
2.0
6.3
.7

49. 2

24.1
12.9
13.8


SLess than 1 gram.


97. 0 50.8


100.0 100.


- -








20

TABLE 11.-Nutrients and potential energy in food purchased, rqected, and Rpal p:
man per day in dietary studies Nos. 44 and 49.

Kind of food material. Cost. Protein. Fat. Carbohy- pr
drates. vab.


TEACHER'S FAMILY.
Food purchased:
Animal ................-..............
Vegetable.....................................
Total.....................................
Waste:
Animal.......................................
Vegetable.................................
Total.....................................
Food actually eaten:
Animal.................................
Vegetable.....................................
Total.......................................
TINNER'S FAMILY.
Food purchased:
Animal................................
Vegetable................................... ..
Total.....................................
Waste:
Animal......................................
Vegetable......................................
Total............... .... ................. ....
Food actually eaten:
Animal.............. .............-..
Vegetable........... .......... .....


Total.............................. .............


Grams.
75
36


Grams.
106
4


Grams.
32
317


slerlf.


$0.12
.06


.18 111 110 840 ,10


4
1
5


8

8


9


*6
1IS


71 98 22 1,33
....35 4 308 1,445
.......... 106 102 340 2



.13 62 143 14 1,610
.13 44 14 461 2,200
.26 106 157 475 3,840

.......... 13 22 ......... S
..........3 1 67 9 5
.......... 16 23 67 55

49 121 14 1,345
41 13 394 1,04


408


3,285


Some discussion of the data obtained in these dietary studies will
doubtless render them more easily intelligible and direct attention to
certain features which might otherwise escape notice.

COMPOSITION OF THE FOOD MATERIALS.

The analyses of food materials here recorded relate almost without
exception to local products, which may be taken as fairly representa-
tive of the food supplies available in a considerable section of the
"Middle West." Such analyses have therefore a particular interest
as giving accurate information regarding the composition and nutritive
value of the food products of a certain locality. They also furnish a
means of comparison with similar products in other localities or coun-
tries; and, finally, they contribute to the general fund of information
being accumulated for the purpose of a general study of American
food stuffs. It would, however, be unjustifiable to draw general con-
clusions from the limited number of analyses herewith reported. As
compared with the small number of other recorded analyses of beef, it
would seem that the samples used in these dietaries contained less fat
in the edible portion, the effect of which may be traced in the some-
what lower fuel values per pound. This may be regarded as a desira-


..........

..........







21


ble characteristic, since it is probable that, from the standpoint of food
value, much American beef is too fat. In their most valued constitu-
ent, protein, these meats are in nowise inferior, but in most cases show
a relatively high percentage of this substance.
The dairy products, with the exception of butter, contain on the
average a comparatively low amount of solids and fats, while the vege-
table foods show relatively a high content of protein and fats.
REFUSE IN MEATS.
There is a general lack of accurate knowledge as to the percentage
of refuse in meats (bones, skin, etc). For this reason the data given
in Table 1 will be of some interest. In some instances this refuse
amounts to nearly 30 per cent of the weight of meat purchased and
rarely falls below 10 per cent. Of the remaining "edible portion,"
usually from 50 to 70 per cent is found to be water. Considering the
prices of meats as compared with other foods, it is easily seen that
the actual cost of the nutrients in this form is very high. With 12 per
cent of refuse and 60 per cent of water in the edible portion of a given
specimen of meat, the actual nutritive portion constitutes only about
one-third the purchased weight, or, in other words, the actual cost of
the nutrients in such meat is three times the apparent cost. Of course,
in the absence of bone, this objection is largely removed.

RELATIVE CHARACTER AND COST OF THE DIETARIES.
The summaries of the two dietaries given in Tables 10 and 11 pre-
sent several interesting features. From these the exact proportions
of the different kinds of animal and vegetable foods which went to
make up the daily rations can be learned, the proportional sums spent
for these, the total amount of food consumed per individual, the total
cost per individual, and, finally, what is particularly interesting from
the standpoint of economy, the proportion of the food which was
respectively wasted and consumed in the two families.
It will be of interest first to compare the relative proportion of
animal and vegetable food purchased per man per day. In the teacher's
family this was 1,054 grams (2.32 pounds) of animal and 619 grams
(1.36 pounds) of vegetable food; in the tinner's family this proportion
was virtually reversed, the amounts being 793 grams (1.75 pounds) and
1,111 grams (2.45 pounds). These figures express very clearly the
dietary habits of the two families.
The relative sums spent for animal and vegetable foods in the teach-
er's family were 12 and 6 cents respectively, and in the tinner's family
13 and 13 cents per man per day-that is, the tinner's family spent 1
cent more for animal food than the teacher's family and more than twice
as much for vegetable foods.
Reference to the items of the two dietaries shows that the teacher's
I family purchased more substantial and more nourishing food than the







22

thinner's family, although in less quantity. The former ate home-na .'.d .
bread and cakes, the latter bought baker's bread and occasionally c ake
The teacher's family consumed more than twice as much milk per man
per day as the tinner's family, while the latter purchased rather mojsre
of fruits and vegetables. The total food purchased by the teacher's
family per man per day was 1,673 grams (3.69 pounds), at a cost of 1.is
cents; by the tinner's family 1,904 grams (4.20 pounds), at a cost of! .MES
cents. This food contained, respectively, of the nutrient substances 570 !
grams (1.26 pounds) and 738 grams (1.62 pounds), of which 548 gram In
(1.21 pounds) and 632 grams (1.39 pounds) were consumed in the
respective families. The relative cost of the two dietaries was as A.1
to 1.44 and the relative consumption of nutrients was as 1 to 1.15.
These results are exceedingly instructive with regard to economy of
living and well worth careful study. They show very plainly that the
more costly dietary is not necessarily the more attractive or nutritious,
It could not be said that the tinner's dietary, which cost 26 cents per
day, was in any way preferable to that of the teacher's family which
cost 18 cents per day. On the contrary, the latter was the more rational
and substantial.
The difference in cost was due largely to the character and to some
extent to the greater amount of food purchased. The dinner pur-
chased 1.29 times as much edible nutrients as the teacher; but only
consumed 1.15 times as much. The discrepancy between cost, amount
purchased, and consumption was due to two causes, which are without
doubt the two principal errors in general household economy in America.
The first was the purchase of nutrients in their more expensive forms.
The second was the undue proportion of waste of materials which were
in themselves edible. The final table, which summarizes the amounts
of animal and vegetable foods respectively purchased, wasted, and
eaten brings out this latter fact with great distinctness. In the teach-
er's family 96.1 per cent of all food purchased was actually eaten and
.only 3.9 per cent wasted. In the thinner's family, only 85.6 of the pure
chased food was eaten and 14.4 per cent wasted. Without detracting ;
from the attractiveness or value of the daily food in any way, there was
opportunity in the latter case for economy in two ways, viz, in purchas-
ing the food and in avoiding wastes.
The dietary of the teacher's family constitutes an exceptionally good
example of intelligent and economical management, securing at the
same time excellent living. The thinner's dietary was in no way an
exception, but is probably quite typical of the manner of living of the
great majority of wage earners of the better class. I
















OOMMENTS ON THE DIETARY STUDIES AT PURDUE UNIVERSITY.


By W. O. ATWATER and CHAS. D. WOODS.


In the preceding pages Professor Stone has reported the results of
two interesting dietary studies, one of the family of a professional man
(teacher in a college), the other of a mechanic's family. Both families
were selected as being more or less typical of the classes which they
represent. It will be interesting to compare the results of these
studies with others obtained elsewhere and with the so-called "dietary
standards."
STANDARDS FOR DIETARIES.

The most satisfactory standards for dietaries must be based upon
the quantities of nutrients best suited to the nutrition of a particular
individual or class. This, which may be called the physiological stand-
ard, can be found only in the observed facts of normal metabolism, and
would take into consideration only what is best adapted to the actual
demand for nutriment. The most economical standard would take into
account not only the actual demands of the body for nourishment, but
the kinds of food available and their pecuniary cost. Unfortunately,
the data now at hand are too few and too incomplete to make accurate
estimates of the physiological demands of people of different classes,
and on this account the so-called dietary standards are for the most
part based upon the observed facts of food consumption. The stand-
ards which have been suggested by one of the writers,' and which are
given below, are based upon the assumptions that the body requires for
its nourishment enough of protein to replace all of the nitrogenous
substances consumed in the body and enough of energy to supply the
demand for heat and work. They differ somewhat from the standards
proposed by Voit and others in Europe twenty or more years ago,
partly because more recent research in the science of nutrition has
brought new information, but chiefly because the results of studies of
American dietaries havebeen taken into account in makingtheestimates.

'American and European Dietaries and Dietary Standards, by W. 0. Atwater,
Connecticut Storrs Station Report, 1891. See also U. S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experi-
ment Stations Bul. 21, p. 206 et seq.









24

Standards for daily dietaries.

Protein. Fuel Nutritdr
value. rats

Grams. Calories.
Man without muscular work.......................................... 100 2,700 1:5.
Man with light muscular work .................................... 112 8,000 1:5.
Man with moderate muscular work ................................ 125 3,500 1:5L8


In the discussion which follows, these st andards are to be understood
to represent simply tentative estimates of the protein and energy
required. Later research may be expected to furnish data for the
revision of these figures, and they are in no sense to be considered as
exact or final.
DIETARIES OF MECHANICS' FAMILIES.

In the table which follows are given the condensed results of several
dietary studies of mechanics' families in Connecticut,' one in Tennessee,2
and one in Indiana, reported in previous pages.

Dietaries of mechanics' families in Connecticut, Indiana, and Tennessee.

Per man per day.
----------- Nutritive
Protein Fat Carbohy- Fuel ratio.
rates. value.


MECHANICS' FAMILIES IN CONNECTICUT.

Dietary with minimum protein, food purchased..
Dietary with maximum protein, food purchased ..
Dietary with minimum energy, food purchased...
Dietary with maximum energy, food purchased...

Average 7 dietaries:
Food purchased-
Animal .................................
Vegetable.................................
Total...................................
Waste, total................................
Food eaten, total............................

MECHANIC'S FAMILY IN INDIANA.

Food purchased:
A nimal...................................... ..
Vegetable ...................................
Total...........................................
W aste, total........................... ............
Food eaten, total ................................
MECHANIC'S FAMILY IN TENNESSEE.

Food purchased:
Animal................................ ......
Vegetable ...................................
Total.....................................
Waste, total..................................
Food eaten, total ..................................

MECHANICS' FAMILIES.

Average of all (9) of above:
Food purchased-
Animal....................................
Vegetable..............................
Total............ .......................
Waste, total............................
Food eaten ....................................


Grams.
100
126
111
126


69
45

114
7
107


Grams.
159
188
144
188


150
8
158
12
146


Grams.
427
426
377
426


22
414

436
13
423


Calories.
3,640
4,010
3, 335
4, 010


1, 770
1,950

3,720
195
3,525


1:7.9
1:6.8
1:6.8
1:6.9


..........

1:7.8
1:7.0


---- --- I- -- ---- j -- >


62 143 14 1,640 ......
44 14 461 2,200 .........
106 157 475 3,840 1:8.9
16 23 67 555 ........
90 134 408 3,285 1:8.9


63 214 15
56 10 440

119 224 455
9 14 43
110 210 412


68
46

114
9
105


157 20
8 423

165 443
13 23
152 420


2, 310
2,125

4, 435
345
4,090




1, 820
2, 000

3,820
250
3,570


..........

1:8.1
1:8. 1


..........

1:7.2
..1:.....
1:7.8


L Connecticut Storrs Station Reports, 1891-1895.
U. S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experiment Stations Bul. 29.


~







25


The figures of the above tables are more concisely compared in the
following:
Protein, fuel ralue, and nutritive ratio of dietaries of mechanics' families in Connecticut,
Tennessee, and Indiana.

NumberFu
of fam- Protein. Fuel tritive
lilies. value. ratio.
Food eaten: Grams. Calories.
Connectinct ............................................. 7 107 3,525 1:7.0
Indiana........................................ ....... 1 90 3,285 1:8.9
Tennessee............................................... 1 110 4,090 1:8.1
All .................................................... 9 105 3,570 1:7.3
Standard for man at light muscular work ........................... 112 3, 000 1:5.5
Standard for man at moderate muscular work......................... 125 3,500 1:5.8

It will be observed that all of the above dietaries have nutritive
ratios much larger than the standards. Viewed from this point, the
dietaries are deficient in protein. With the exception of the Tennessee
family, the fuel values agree quite closely with the standards. The
large nutritive ratio of the Indiana dietary is due chiefly to the use of
lard and butter in relatively large amounts; in Tennessee the family
used large quantities of lard, fat pork, and bacon. To the fatness of
meats, the abundance and comparative cheapness of sugar, starches,
and pork, and the common use of "sweets" of all kinds the large nutri-
tive ratio of American dietaries is chiefly to be attributed.

DIETARIES OF FAMILIES OF PROFESSIONAL MEN.

In the table which follows are given the condensed results of several
dietaries of professional men in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Indiana,
and Illinois. The studies in Connecticut were reported by the writers;1
the study in Pennsylvania was made by Prof. Belle Bevier, of the
Pennsylvania Woman's College, at Pittsburg, in cooperation with this
Department; the studies in Illinois were made in Evanston and Chi-
cago in cooperation with the Hull House for this Department by Miss
C. L. Hunt, and the one in Indiana is that reported in previous pages.
The results of the studies in Pennsylvania and Illinois have not yet
been published.

Connecticut Storrs Station Reports, 1891-1895.









26..i-ii

Dietaries of families of professional en (chiefly college professors) is Connewotdt, :*-:
sylvania, Indiana, and Illinois.


PROFESSIONAL MEN'S FAM I X IN CONNBECrCUT.

Dietar3 with minimum protein, food purchased...
Dietary with maximum protein, food purchased...
Dietary with minimum energy, food purchased...
Dietary with maximum energy, food purchased...
Average 7 dietary studies of 4 families:
Food purchased-
Animal......................... ..
Vegetable..............................
Total................................
Waste, total...............................
Food eaten, total................. .......
PROFESSIONAL MAN'S FAMILY IN PENNSYLVANIA.

Food purchased:
Animal ..................... ...............
Vegetable.......... ....................
Total........ .........................
Waste, total.............................
Food eaten, total...........................
PROFESSIONAL MAN'S FAMILY IN INDIANA.

Food purchaAed:
Animal...................................
Vegetable..................................
Total.......................................
Waste, total...................................
Food eaten, total...............................
PROFESSIONAL MEN'S FAMILIES IN ILLLNOIS.

Dietary with minimum protein, fbod purchased ...
Dietary with maximum protein, food purchased...
Dietary with minimum energy, food purchased...
Dietary with maximum energy, food purchased...
Average 3 dietaries:
Food purchased-
Animal...................................
Vegetable................ ............
Total............... ..............
No estimation of waste made.
PROFESSIONAL MEN'S FAMILIES.

Average of all (9) of above:
Food purchased-
Animal..............................
Vegetable...................... .....
Total....................................
Waste, total' ................. ...... .....
Food eaten, total ................................


Per man per day.


Protein.


Grams.
91
120
118
120


Fat.


Grams.
126
147

147


Carbohy-
drates.


Grams.
483
440
430
440


Fuel
value.


Odlories.
3.525
3, nO
k 205
3,168
s, zQs
s3ee0


1:8.4
Il:&4
1:6.4


66 114 23 1425 ........
43 15 415 2025 .........
109 129 438 3,450 1:7.
4 61 3 85 ......
105 123 435 8,36 1:8



54 168 16 1850 ..........
67 8 507 2, ..........

121 176 523 4,275 1:7.
7 11 17 200 ..........
114 165 506 4,075 b 1:7.'7



75 106 32 1,425 ..........
36 4 317 1,485 ..........

Ill 110 349 2,910 1:4
5 8 9 130 ..........
106 102 340 ,780 1:5.4


92 103 300 2,565 1:5.8
123 138 359 3.260 1:.5
92 103 300 2, 55 1:5.8
97 120 62 4,085 1:9.3


66 112 25 1,410 ..........
38 8 404 1,895 ..........

104 120 429 3,305 1:&8






65 118 24 1,460 ..........
44 11 411 1, 970 ..........


3,430
115
3,315


1:64
1:6 8


1 Average 6 dietaries.







27


The figures of the above table are more concisely stated in the
following:

Protein, fuel value, and nutritive ratio of dietaries of families of professional men in Con-
necticut, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Illinois.

Per man per day.
Number Nutritive
of .Fuel ratio,.
families.: Protein. Fue ti

Food eaten: Grams. Calories.
Connecticut................... ...............-.........- -4 105 3, 365 1:6.8
Pennsylvania.......................... ........... ..... 1 114 4,075 1:7.7
Indiana.................................. ..........-.... 1 106 2,780 1:5.4
linoi .........--.----.--..........-- ..---- -- ---............. ... 3 104 3,305 1: 6.8
Average of all .......................................... 9 104 3,615 1:6.8
Standard for man without muscular work ..........--- ...... .......... 100 2, 700 1:5. 6
Standard for man with light muscular work................. .......... 112 3,000 1 :5.5

SFood purchased.

It will be observed that the protein is fairly in accord with the stand-
ard in all of the instances except in the case of the Pennsylvania
dietary. The fuel value of food eaten is much larger than the standard
except in the case of the Indiana dietary. This dietary in fuel value,
nutritive ratio, and protein is very nearly that suggested in the stand-
ard for a man without muscular work. The nutritive ratio is larger
than the standard in all of the dietaries except that of the Indiana
family, and is particularly so in that of the Pennsylvania family.
It is very interesting to observe that so far as the average figures
are concerned the dietaries of these professional men accord very nearly
with the figures found for mechanics. As the following table indicates,
the chief difference is found in the slightly smaller fuel value and nutri-
tive ratio of the diet of the professional men:

Comparison of food eaten in dietaries of families of mechanics and of professional men.

Per man per day.
Number Nutritive
of Fuel ratio.
families. Protein. value.

Grams. Calories.
Mechanics......-----------------------------.....--...------------. 9 105 3,570 1:7.3
Professionalmen ......-------------------------.....---- -.. 9 104 3,315 1:6.8


If the average eating habits of the families thus stated are taken as
representing the average of families of their classes, it is evident that
the so-called standards above referred to and the actual practice of
well-to-do people in this country are not in accord. It would, however,
be going too far to assume that the results of these few studies accu-
rately represent the general practice. In order to find what the latter
is, a large amount of investigation is necessary. At the same time
the dietary studies of well-to-do people thus far made in the United
States show, as a whole, a relatively large consumption of the fuel
ingredients of food, fat, starch, and sugar, and wide nutritive ratio.






28

This subject has been discussed in another place.' It will suffice here
to say that, in the opinion of the writers, the difference between the
standards ordinarily adopted by physiologists and chemists and the
averages of the dietary studies made in the United States, in respect to
the relatively large amounts of fuel ingredients and the wider nutritive
ratios of the latter, are to be explained by a simple but important fact,
namely, that foods containing fat, starch, and sugar are so abundant
and so agreeable to the palate.
1 U. S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experiment Stations Bul. 21, pp. 206-214.




. .. ...... .. ...


























































!!i !i








..iil




















;jiiiE i



















































































































































































































































































































































































































































:iE .i hiii ii:..:..;;';; ii~ iiii. ..... .. :. .






















*ii














"ii
... il ii










































.. :::::
Im
ii










































H"
d" i ..: iiii *iiii




















II
.:::::::::::::
A :! ~i
,;iiiii








:Aii





























4t




4.
-. II








|w




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IIIIII III1111111
3 1262 08927 7775




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EAQSRF20N_JR504B INGEST_TIME 2013-11-02T00:56:44Z PACKAGE AA00014574_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES