by Marion Nestle

Search results: peanut

Nov 18 2008

Food allergies: OK to eat peanuts if pregnant?

A new study reports that children of women who ate peanuts during pregnancy had lower rates of peanut allergies than women who were told not to eat peanuts.  This could be good news.  But I’m baffled by food allergies.  Why are rates rising?  Why don’t we know more about them?  Why isn’t there more research?  I’m getting lots of questions about them lately.  Good places to start: The National Library of Medicine explains the research.  Organizations like the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network and the Food Allergy Initiative provide basic information.  And for personal experience, Allergic Girl has plenty to say on her blog.

Tags:
Oct 27 2007

ConAgra’s Peanut Butter Recall: the story

CIO, the magazine for corporate Chief Information Officers, has an interesting report on this year’s recall of Peter Pan peanut butter. It’s written from the standpoint of company data managers, the folks responsible for setting up tracking systems for product recalls. Fine, but what about food safety systems?

Sep 13 2007

How’s This for a Use for Peanut Butter?

Peanut butter, it seems, is the basis of a “ready-to-use therapeutic food” (RUTF) for aiding recovery of severely malnourished children in Africa. The announcement of these results doesn’t say what kind. The study itself is published in Maternal and Child Nutrition and the authors make the point that people administering this RUTF do not need to be medically trained so this therapy can be used at home. I’m always amazed when researchers discover that feeding malnourished children helps them to recover. Peanut butter is highly concentrated in calories and the investigators mixed in some vitamins along with it, so I guess it can be considered a superfood.

Mar 17 2026

Lawsuit #1: David’s protein bars

This week, I’m going to be writing about lawsuits against food companies, starting with the class action lawsuit filed against David Protein, which states that the company misrepresented the calorie and fat content of its bars.

Here is a Nutrition Facts panel from the company’s website.

The FDA allows several methods for counting calories in food products, one of which is to apply Atwater values, 4 calories per gram for protein and carbohydrate, and 9 calories per gram for fat (this is why fat is fattening).

Doing that here gives:

Fat: 2.5 x 9     =    23 (rounded off)

Carbs: 12 x 4  =    48

Protein: 26 x 4 = 104

Total calories  =   175

This is higher than what’s on the label.  But calories are difficult to measure accurately, so the FDA allows a 20% margin of error.

But the difference must have gotten the attention of the plaintiffs.

They took the product and burned it in a bomb calorimeter, a device that measures the heat produced when foods are burned to completion.  This heat is equivalent to calories, when corrected for the nitrogen in protein.

Here is what the plaintiffs got when they did this.

Wow.  That’s quite a difference.

But David’s has a rebuttal.

…bomb calorimetry is not the right testing method for determining calories in foods containing certain ingredients, such as dietary fiber, certain sweeteners, and, critically for us, fat substitutes like esterified propoxylated glycerol (EPG)…If you burn ingredients like complex carbohydrates, fiber or EPG in a calorimeter, these ingredients would appear to deliver far more calories than the body actually metabolizes.

This took me right to the ingredient list (see above)

PROTEIN SYSTEM: MILK PROTEIN ISOLATE, COLLAGEN, WHEY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, EGG WHITE. | BINDING SYSTEM: MALTITOL, GLYCERIN, ALLULOSE, TAPIOCA STARCH, SOY LECITHIN. | FAT SYSTEM: MODIFIED PLANT FAT (EPG), COCONUT OIL. | FLAVOR SYSTEM: UNSWEETENED CHOCOLATE, PEANUT FLOUR, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, PEANUT EXTRACT, SALT, DUTCH PROCESS COCOA POWDER, SUCRALOSE, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM.

My first question: Why would anyone want to eat a collection of concocted ingredients like this with hardly any of them recognizable as food?  These bars are quintessential ultra-processed products.

Whatever.  EPG is esterified propoxylated glycerol, a fat substitute. It provides less than one calorie per gram.

Here’s my quote from the New York Times

Dr. Marion Nestle, a professor emerita of nutrition and food studies at N.Y.U., told DealBook that the plaintiffs’ claims were based on counting calories from a “concocted ingredient that’s not absorbed” by the body. The lawsuit was likely to be dismissed, she added.

Not that Nestle was weighing in on the healthfulness of David bars: “Whether anyone should be eating non-absorbable fat is another discussion,” she said.

Precisely.

Mar 6 2026

Sweet thought for the weekend: Reese’s v. Hershey’s

This story starts here with this post.

Really? When I go to the Hershey’s site, I get this:

Milk Chocolate (Sugar, Cocoa Butter, Chocolate, Skim Milk, Milk Fat, Lactose, Lecithin, PGPR); Peanuts; Sugar; Dextrose; Salt; TBHQ & Citric Acid (TO MAINTAIN FRESHNESS)

Four kinds of sugar and ultra-processed; it’s hard to believe it could get worse.

Even so, the Reese family doesn’t like what is happening to its iconic brand.

Hershey blasted by Reese’s family over core ingredient changes: Reese family sends open letter to Hershey, challenging whether the confectionery giant is protecting the Reese’s legacy… Read more

Hershey facing criticism from Reese family

  • Reese family member accuses Hershey of lowering core product quality
  • Brad Reese claims formulations replaced milk chocolate and real peanut butter
  • Open letter argues changes threaten brand heritage and consumer trust foundations
  • Criticism pressures Hershey to address transparency concerns amid evolving brand strategy
  • Debate highlights tension between cost efficiencies and protecting long-held product identity

Comment

As described in yesterday’s post, the chocolate industry is in trouble because of diminishing supplies, increased costs, and climate change.  Hershey’s must think its customers can’t tell the difference between simple real food ingredients and ultra-processed concoctions.

Real foods cost more.  That’s a problem for food companies.

Tags:
Jan 26 2026

The sugar industry fights back

With the new dietary guidelines taking such a strong stance on minimizing sugar intake, the sugar industry has its damage-control work cut out.

Lisa Sutherland, my co-author on our forthcoming (September 2026) Sugar Coated: Unboxing the Hidden Forces Shaping America’s Favorite Breakfast. Food, sent this link to information sent out to dietitian subscribers to Today’s Dietitian.

When it comes to added sugars, on one hand the public is hearing they should stop eating sugar entirely, on the other, they’re hearing that real sugar is healthier than other forms of added sugars and sweeteners. The fact is that added sugars currently make up around 13% of Americans total calories – the lowest amount in 40 years and close to the lowest amount ever recorded (11% in 1909). The steep decline in added sugars intake over the past 25 years has coincided with rising rates of childhood obesity and chronic disease – yet most people are unaware of these data and continue to demonize and place a significant amount of blame on real sugar for these conditions.

It then goes on to discuss all this under the following headings:

  • Real Sugar plays a key role in healthy balanced diets
  • Real Sugar is irreplaceable as a single ingredient
  • Facts over fear

And it comes with great charts.  My favorite, too big to reproduce here, is titled “Sugar is a partner in nutrient delivery.”  This points out that high-fiber cereals, fruit yogurs, canned vegetables, salad dressings, peanut butter, and pre-packaged snacks all are more enjoyable to eat and have longer shelf-life with some sugar tossed in.

Oct 13 2025

Industry-funded studies of the week: Nuts!

My collection of studies funded by the nut industry is growing, so here are a bunch all at once.

Almonds: Almond Consumption Modestly Improves Pain Ratings, Muscle Force Production, and Biochemical Markers of Muscle Damage Following Downhill Running in Mildly Overweight, Middle-Aged Adults: A Randomized, Crossover Trial. Current Developments in Nutrition, Volume 8, Issue 9, 104432

  • Conclusion: This study demonstrates that 2.0 oz/d of almonds modestly reduces pain, better maintains muscle strength, and reduces the CK response to eccentric-based exercise.
  • Funding: This study was supported by the Almond Board of California

Peanuts: Peanut Polyphenols Are Bioaccessible and Inhibit Proliferation of Cultured Jurkat Leukemia Cells.  Current Developments in Nutrition, Volume 8, Supplement 2, July 2024, 102631

  • Conclusions: Polyphenol-rich PSE inhibits the growth and proliferation of Jurkat cells [a cell line derived from leukemia T-cells].
  • Funding: The Peanut Institute.

Pecans: Pecan Intake Improves Lipoprotein Particle Concentrations Compared with Usual Intake in Adults at Increased Risk of Cardiometabolic Diseases: A Randomized Controlled Trial.  The Journal of Nutrition, Volume 155, Issue 5, 1459 – 1465

  • Conclusion: Incorporating 57 g/d of pecans into the diet in place of usual snacks for 12 wk improved apoB, atherogenic lipoprotein subfractions, and the LP-IR in adults at risk of cardiometabolic diseases.
  • Funding: This study was funded by the American Pecan Council.

Pistachios: Nighttime Pistachio Consumption Alters Stool Microbiota Diversity and Taxa Abundance Compared with Education to Consume 1–2 Carbohydrate Exchanges (15–30 grams) over 12 Weeks in Adults with Prediabetes: A Secondary Analysis from a Randomized Crossover Trial.  Current Developments in Nutrition.  Volume 9, Issue 7107481July 2025 [Thanks to Martin Camhi for this one]

  • Conclusions: In adults with prediabetes, intake of 57 g/d of pistachios as a nighttime snack altered stool microbial community diversity and composition compared with a CHO-rich snack, providing evidence of stool microbial effects with pistachio consumption.
  • Funding: The American Pistachio Growers; Penn State’s Clinical & Translational Research Institute, Pennsylvania State University

Comment: If one nut producer does this, they all have to.  This is about market competition.  The idea is to convince you that nuts are superfoods performing health miracles and to eat more nuts.  These studies must be interpreted as marketing efforts.

Nuts are indeed healthy, but highly caloric—best eaten in small handfuls.  

If such studies should convince you of anything, it’s to eat the nuts you like.  They all can be shown to have health benefits.

Tags: ,
Oct 9 2025

The National Food Museum’s collection of short food videos

The National Food Museum, is a project of Michael Jacobson, former founder and director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (I’m on its Advisory Council).  It is currently still virtual, but provides all kinds of resources, short videos among them.

The Museum organizes them into several categories.  I took a look at the category of “kids (and others).”  Three examples, from among many:

This is a large collection of such things.  Enjoy!