Original Research

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

Amy E. Griel, MEd, Brenda Eissenstat, MS, RD, Vijaya Juturu, PhD, Gloria Hsieh, Penny M. Kris-Etherton, PhD, RD
Department of Nutritional Sciences (A.E.G., B.E., P.M.K.), The Prevention Research Center (G.H.), The Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, Pennsylvania, Nutrition 21, Purchase, New York (V.J.)
Key words: nuts, peanuts, peanut butter, peanut products, diet quality, Healthy Eating Index (HEI), CSFII
Objective: To evaluate the diet quality of free-living men, women, and children choosing peanuts and peanut
products.
Design: Using data reported in the Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals and Diet and Health
Knowledge Survey (CSFII/DHKS) from 1994 1996, food codes were used to sort respondents by use or nonuse
of peanuts.
Subjects: A nationally representative sample of 4,751 men, 4,572 women, and 4,939 children (boys and
girls, 219 yrs) who completed 2-day intake records.
Measures of Outcome: The two-sample t test was used to analyze differences between peanut users and
nonusers for energy, nutrient intakes, Health Eating Index (HEI) scores, and body mass index (BMI).
Results: Peanut users (24% of CSFII/DHKS) had higher intakes (p 0.001) of protein, total fat,
polyunsaturated fat (PUFA), monounsaturated fat, (MUFA) (p 0.01), fiber, vitamin A, vitamin E, folate,
calcium, magnesium, zinc, and iron. Percent of energy from saturated fat was not significantly different for men,
women or girls and was slightly lower (p 0.01) for boys. Dietary cholesterol of peanut users was lower for
all population groups; this decrease was significant for both men (p 0.01) and children (p 0.001). The HEI
was calculated as a measure of overall nutrient profile of the diets and was significantly greater for peanut users
(men 61.4, women, 65.1, children 66.8) compared to nonusers (men 59.9, women 64.1, children 64.7) for men
(p 0.0074) and children (p 0.001). Energy intake was significantly higher in all population groups of peanut
users (p 0.001; boys: p 0.01); however mean BMI for peanut users was lower for all gender/age categories
(women: p 0.05; children: p 0.001).
Conclusions: These results demonstrate improved diet quality of peanut users, indicated by the higher intake
of the micronutrients vitamin A, vitamin E, folate, calcium, magnesium, zinc, and iron and dietary fiber, and by
the lower intake of saturated fat and cholesterol. Despite a higher energy intake over a two-day period, peanut
consumption was not associated with a higher BMI.

INTRODUCTION

fat from one ounce of nuts for the equivalent energy from
carbohydrate and saturated fat reduced CHD risk 30% and
45%, respectively [10]. In addition, results from the Adventist
Health Study demonstrated that the consumption of nuts 5
times per week reduced the risk of death from CHD by 39%
[3]. Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated that tree nuts
and peanuts beneficially affect plasma lipids and lipoproteins
(reduced total cholesterol (TC), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides without reducing high density
lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol) [11]. A meta-analysis by Fulgoni et al. [12] showed that the consumption of almonds

A large body of evidence consistently shows that consumption of tree nuts and peanuts is associated with a reduced risk
of coronary heart disease (CHD). To date, five large epidemiologic studies (the Adventist Health Study [1 4], the Iowa
Womens Health Study [5 6], the Nurses Health Study [7],
the Physicians Health Study [8] and the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) Study [9]) have reported an inverse
association between nut consumption and the risk of CHD [10].
The Nurses Health Study reported that the substitution of the

Address correspondence to: Penny M. Kris-Etherton PhD, RD, 126-S Henderson Bldg., Department of Nutritional Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, PA 16802. E-mail: pmk3@psu.edu.
At the time of this study, Dr. Juturu was a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Nutritional Sciences at The Pennsylvania State University.

Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 23, No. 6, 660668 (2004)
Published by the American College of Nutrition
660

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

significantly reduced both TC (3.6%) and LDL-C (4.7%), with
significantly greater responses in those individuals with baseline TC values greater than 5.2 mmol/L. Beyond CHD, the
Nurses Health Study [13] has shown that the consumption of
peanuts and peanut butter 5 times a week (equivalent to
140-g of peanuts/week) was associated with a 27% and 21%
reduction in risk of type 2 diabetes, respectively.
The health benefits associated with nuts are thought to
reflect their nutritional profile including their nutrient density,
fatty acid profile and presence of bioactive compounds. While
peanuts are botanically classified as a legume, they frequently
are grouped with the tree nuts because their nutritional profile
is similar (Table 1). For example, peanuts are a rich source of
B-vitamins, vitamin E, magnesium, copper and phosphorus. In
addition, they are a source of plant protein (including arginine),
dietary fiber, and unsaturated fatty acids. Numerous bioactive
substances (i.e., flavonoids, resveratrol and plant sterols) also
are present in peanuts. Resveratrol and -sitosterol found in
peanuts have been associated with decreased risk of CHD and
reduced cancer risk [14 15]. Thus, it stands to reason that tree
nut and peanut consumption would be associated with a favorable nutrient intake.
Despite their unique nutritional profile, some individuals
avoid tree nuts and peanuts because they are an energy dense
food. Accordingly, because of the high caloric density of tree
nuts, peanuts and peanut products, inclusion in the diet might
increase energy intake leading to weight gain and an increase in
Body Mass Index (BMI). Although they did not report data on

Table 1. Nutrient Composition of Peanuts (dry roasted,

salted; 1 oz.)a
Nutrient
Total Calories
Protein
Carbohydrate
Dietary Fiber
Total Fat
Saturated Fat
Monounsaturated Fat
Polyunsaturated Fat
-6 fatty acids
-3 fatty acids
Dietary Cholesterol
Vitamin E
Folate
Niacin
Thiamin
Riboflavin
Vitamin B6
Magnesium
Resveratrol
Phytosterols

Amount
166.0 kcal
6.7 g
6.1 g
2.3 g
14.1 g
2.0 g
7.0 g
4.5 g
4.5 g
trace
0.0 mg
2.2 mg ATb
41.1 mcg
3.8 mg
0.12 mg
0.3 mg
0.7 mg
49.9 mg
2.8 mcg
62.4 mg

% Daily
Value

13%
2%
9%
22%
10%

0%
16%
10%
19%
8%
16%
4%
13%

Reference: USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 16. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp.
b
AT alpha tocopherol.

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION

BMI, an analysis of data from the 199294 Market Research

Corporation of America reported that individuals including
nuts in their diet had a significantly higher energy intake
(10%) than did non-nut users [16]. Of note however, is that
a recent review of epidemiologic, controlled-feeding and freeliving studies reported that the incorporation of nuts into a
self-selected diet does not result in a higher body mass index or
a tendency to gain weight [17]. In fact, the research conducted
to date has shown that nut eaters have a lower BMI than do
non-nut eaters. Hu et al. [7] reported that an increase in nut and
peanut consumption in the Nurses Health Study did not result
in a higher BMI, but rather a decrease in BMI with every
quartile increase in nut consumption, when controlled for total
energy intake. The possibility does exist that individuals who
already have a higher BMI avoid tree nuts and peanuts altogether due to their high energy density. This may be one
possible explanation for the lower BMI among nut consumers.
Alternatively, tree nut and peanut consumers could include tree
nuts, peanuts and peanut products in a healthy eating pattern
that achieves calorie control, resulting in a lower BMI.
Until recently, low-fat, and often very low-fat high-carbohydrate diets had been widely accepted as the recommended
diet of choice for good health. Current dietary guidance now
embraces a moderate-fat diet for reducing risk of chronic
disease. In addition to its health benefits, a moderate-fat diet,
that incorporates tree nuts and peanuts, may promote long-term
healthy dietary practices. For example, a recent study by McManus et al. [18] found that individuals who followed a moderate-fat (35% total energy from fat), Mediterranean style diet
for 18 months, had better adherence with a weight loss program
and maintained their weight loss for a longer period of time
compared to individuals instructed to follow a very low-fat diet
(20% total energy from fat). The recognition that a moderatefat diet (that is low in saturated fatty acids and cholesterol)
confers health benefits is important because it provides flexibility in diet planning. This is important because diet guidance
can be individualized to enhance dietary adherence.
The purpose of the present study was to use data reported in
the Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII)
from 1994 1996 to clarify whether individuals in a free-living
population who consume peanuts and peanut products exhibit
an overall healthier eating pattern compared with non-peanut
eaters. Moreover, we assessed whether the inclusion of peanuts
and peanut products in a diet was associated with a higher BMI
compared with individuals who did not consume peanuts or
peanut products.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CSFII 1994 96 was conducted by Westat, Inc (Rockville, MD) under contract to USDAs Food Surveys Research
Group, Agricultural Research Service. The Diet and Health
Knowledge Survey (DHKS) was a follow-up telephone survey

661

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

to the CSFII. Together, they are popularly referred to as the
What We Eat in America survey. The CSFII survey is part of
a continuing effort to monitor changes over time in the food
choices Americans make and the adequacy of their diet [19]. In
each of the three survey years, a nationally representative
sample of noninstitutionalized individuals of all ages, provided
through in-person interviews, a 1-day dietary recall on 2 nonconsecutive days (3 to 10 days apart). A multi-pass dietary
recall strategy was used by the interviewers to maximize the
accuracy and amount of information collected [20 21]. The
survey included over sampling of low income individuals to
yield a national sample of the low-income population. Records
of men, women and children (ages 219 years) were used in our
analysis. A complete list of the foods and nutrients analyzed to
date can be found at: http://www.barc.usda.gov/bhnrc/foodsurvey/home.htm
Food codes were used to sort respondents by use of peanuts
and peanut products. Type of peanut consumed was identified
as peanut butter, peanuts as part of a savory snack, peanuts as
part of a sweet snack, roasted/boiled peanuts, or peanuts as part
of a meal (including peanut oil and peanut butter identified as
ingredients in an entree).
Analysis of 2-day mean intakes included energy, sugar,
protein, total fat, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, polyunsaturated fat, fiber, cholesterol, carbohydrate, vitamin A (retinol
equivalents), vitamin E, vitamin C, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin,
vitamin B-6, folate, vitamin B-12, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, zinc, sodium, and potassium. Although reported
in other studies, vitamin D, selenium, manganese, and copper
were not evaluated in this study because they were excluded
from the CSFII 1994 96 database. In addition, alcohol was not
included.
Percentage RDAs [22] were assessed for energy, protein,
vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin C, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin,
vitamin B-6, folate, vitamin B-12, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, and zinc. Percentage RDAs were truncated at 100
to account for the dilution effect of individuals with higher
intakes. If the extreme values (100%) were not truncated then
it would be possible for those values to elevate individuals who
may be at a marginal or low level of intake when looking at
mean data [23]. Since the time of the CSFII 1994 96 Survey,
new Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) values have been established for many vitamins and minerals by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences/National
Academies [2327]. Adequacy of several nutrients with marginal intakes is evaluated relative to these new standards.
The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) was calculated as a measure of diet quality. The HEI includes 10 components, with the
score for each component ranging from 0 to 10. The components are defined in Table 2. Components 15 measure the
degree to which an individuals diet matches the serving recommendations of the USDA Food Guide Pyramid for the five
major food groups: grains, vegetables, fruits, milk products,
and meat products, respectively. HEI scores were calculated for

662

200-calorie increments between 1200 and 3000 calories, to

account for the differences in serving size recommendations
associated with the USDA Food Guide Pyramid. This calorie
range was selected based on the 1994 1995 mean food energy
intakes of 1,633 kcal for women and 2,470 kcal for men [19].
Components 6 and 7 are based on overall fat and saturated fat
consumption, respectively, as a percentage of total food energy
intake. Component 8 is based on cholesterol intake and component 9 is based on sodium intake. For components 6 9 a
perfect score of 10 is assigned to the recommended daily
intake, with a score of 0 assigned to extreme values. Components are then scored proportionally between 0 and 10, based
on the recommended values. See Table 2 for specific values.
Values above the high limits were also assigned a 0. A measure
of variety in the diet (component 10) was not assessed in the
present study, thus the HEI scores reported here have a maximum score of 90.
The two-sample t test was used to statistically analyze
(Statistical Analysis System, SAS 8.1, 1999 2000, Cary, NC)
differences between peanut users and nonusers in terms of
energy, nutrient intake, HEI and BMI. Analysis of Variance
was used to detect differences among peanut users for the
different quartiles of peanut intake. If significant differences
were detected among the quartiles of peanut intake, Tukey
post-hoc analyses were used to determine which quartiles were
different from one another. A p-value of .05 was used to
determine statistical significance.

RESULTS
14,262 individuals (4,752 men, 4,572 women, and 4,939
children) completed 2-day diet records in the 1994 96 CSFII/
DHKS. 24% of respondents consumed peanuts or peanut products. 13% consumed peanut butter, 9% consumed peanuts as
part of a sweet snack, 3% consumed peanuts as part of a savory
Table 2. Components of the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)
Component
Food Group
1. Grains
2. Vegetables
3. Fruits
4. Milk
5. Meat
Dietary Guidelines
6. Total Fat
7. Saturated Fat
8. Cholesterol
9. Sodium

Criteria for Perfect

Score of 10

Criteria for Minimum

Score of 0

512 Servingsa
26 Servingsa
24 Servingsa
2 Servingsa
23 Servingsa

0
0
0
0
0

30% or less energy

from fat
10% energy from
saturated fat
300 mg
2,4000 mg

45% or greater energy

from fat
15% or greater energy
from saturated fat
450 mg
4,800 mg

Servings
Servings
Servings
Servings
Servings

Determined for each 200-calorie level increments (1200 3000 calories) based
on the recommendations of the USDA Food Guide Pyramid.

VOL. 23, NO. 6

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

snack, 1.7% consumed peanuts, and 0.7% consumed peanuts,
peanut butter or peanut oil as ingredients in a meal. The HEI
index was calculated for a subset of individuals who were
consuming between 1200 and 3000 calories (n 10,632; 3,508
men, 3,315 women, and 3,809 children).
The demographic profile of the individuals is listed in Table
3. Our sample contained 51% men and 49% women, representative of the proportion determined in the U.S. Census Bureaus
Census 2000 (49% men, 51% women) [28]. When men, women
and children were combined, our sample included 78.0%
Whites, 12.7% Blacks, 2.4% Asians, 0.7% American Indians
and 6.1% Other. This sample is representative of the US
population: 75.1% Whites, 12.3% Blacks, 3.6% Asians, and
0.9% [28]. The data indicate a slight gender difference between
peanut use of adult men (20.6%) and women (18.2%), but use
by children was highest (32.9%). While peanut users were
more likely to be white across men, women and children, the
highest peanut consumption was seen in the small sample of
Native American men (n 30) and children (n 42) (23% and
38%, respectively).
Respondents of the CSFII/DHKS tended to have generally
good diets (Table 4). The average HEI of all respondents
exceeded 60 (maximum score of 90), and many of the RDA
1989 values exceeded 100%. The HEI of individuals consuming peanuts was significantly higher than that of nonusers for
both men (p 0.01) and children (p 0.001). All nutrients
with marginal intakes in nonusers were significantly higher in
peanut users (p 0.001). Nutrients of concern for adult men
and women were vitamin A, vitamin E, and zinc. In addition,
female nonusers had lower intakes of calcium and magnesium
(p 0.001). Vitamin E intake was low for all children (ranging
from 68.7 23.8 to 82.8 19.6% RDA) while calcium and
zinc intake was lower for female children, when compared to
male children. Beginning in 1998, Dietary Reference Intakes
(DRI) were established for many nutrients. If nutrient intake
during this study is compared to recent DRIs, magnesium
intake also would be low for men; folate and iron become
nutrients of concern for women (Table 5).
Energy intake of peanut users was significantly higher (p
0.001) in men, women, girls and boys (p 0.01) compared to

that of nonusers (Table 6). Interestingly, despite the higher

energy intake, BMI was lower in peanut users compared to
nonusers for all population groups. The lower BMI was significant in adult women (p 0.05) and highly significant in
children (p 0.001) but not in men. Percent of energy from
total fat was higher in peanut users compared to nonusers; the
higher intake was only significant for men and women (p
0.001). Percent of energy from MUFA also was significantly
higher in peanut users compared to nonusers for men (p
0.01), women (p 0.001), and children (p 0.05). However,
percent of energy from saturated fat was comparable, and was
actually lower for male children (p 0.01) and female children
(p 0.05) peanut users when compared to nonusers. Percent of
energy from protein was significantly lower in peanut users
compared to nonusers for all population groups (p 0.001). In
addition, dietary cholesterol was significantly lower in peanut
users compared to nonusers for men (p 0.01) and children
(p 0.001). Fiber was significantly higher in peanut users
versus nonusers in all age/gender groups (p 0.001).
Macronutrient characteristics also were examined for adults
and children consuming varying amounts of peanuts or peanut
butter. 533 men, 446 women, and 1095 children reported consuming peanuts or peanut butter in varying quantities (Table 7).
Intake was subdivided into four categories, 1.0128.35 g,
28.36 56.70 g, 56.71 85.05 g, and 85.05 g. For men,
women, and children, total energy increased with increasing
levels of peanut or peanut butter consumption. The percent of
energy from total fat and from MUFA also increased with each
increasing level of peanut or peanut butter consumption (1
oz/level), with the exception of women consuming 56.71
85.05 g. Likewise, there was a step-wise increase in the percent
of energy from SFA in men. The percent of energy from SFA
for women was variable among quartiles, ranging from 9.6% to
11.2%, and was not different in children (11.311.9%). Fiber
intake also increased with each increasing level of peanut
consumption, with the exception of the men who consumed
56.71 85.05 g. Despite increases in energy and fat consumption, there was no significant difference in BMI for adults or
children consuming small versus large quantities of peanuts or
peanut butter.

Table 3. Demographic Characteristics of Peanut Users Versus Nonusers

Demographic
variable
Race
White
Black
Asian
American Indian
Other

Men

Women

Children

Users
(n 980)

Nonusers
(n 3771)

Users
(n 833)

Nonusers
(n 3739)

Users
(n 1625)

Nonusers
(n 3314)

n
875
57
16
7
25

n
3053
415
90
23
190

n
718
81
13
3
18

n
2942
503
91
28
175

n
1278
229
15
16
87

n
2261
533
120
26
374

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION

663

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

Table 4. Healthy Eating Index (HEI)a and Selected Nutrient Intakes as Percentages of 1989 Recommended Dietary Allowances
(RDAs) Truncated at 100 for Peanut Users and Nonusers
Men
Variable

HEIa
Vitamin A
Vitamin E
Calcium
Magnesium
Zinc

Women

Children

Users

Nonusers

Users

Nonusers

(n 980)
61.4 12.8**
77.7 27.2***
85.4 19.6***
86.2 20.4***
87.5 17.3***
80.9 21.0***

(n 3771)
59.9 13.0
71.0 29.7
72.4 25.6
78.3 24.2
76.8 21.7
74.4 23.4

(n 833)
65.1 12.1
75.8 27.9***
79.3 22.1***
71.5 24.6***
81.3 19.5***
71.8 22.2***

(n 3739)
64.1 12.1
71.7 29.4
69.5 25.7
66.3 26.3
73.2 22.0
66.4 23.4

Male

Female

Users

Nonusers

(n 839)
66.8 9.6***
88.2 20.8***
82.8 19.6***
85.8 19.5***
95.8 11.9***
82.2 19.8***

Users

Nonusers

(n 1644)
(n 786)
(n 1670)
64.7 10.5 (calculated for both males and females)
83.1 24.6
85.5 22.9***
80.1 26.2
71.0 23.8
78.3 20.6***
68.7 23.8
80.2 23.1
79.1 23.4***
72.7 26.2
90.1 17.8
93.3 14.5
85.7 21.2
78.3 21.6
76.0 21.2***
72.4 22.2

HEI score can vary from zero to 90; sample size for HEI: male users: n 689; male nonusers: n 2819; female users: n 677; male nonusers: n 2638; child users:
n 1310; child nonusers: n 2499.
User mean is significantly different from respective nonuser mean ** p 0.01, *** p 0.001.
a

Table 5. Mean Selected Nutrient Intakes Compared to 1998 2001 Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs)
Men

Variable

Users

DRI
Nonusers

(n 980)
Vitamin A (g RE)
1233 1177***
Vitamin E (mg TE) 11.7 8.6***
Folate (g)
328 195***
Calcium (mg)
964 519***
Magnesium (mg)
363 133***
Zinc (mg)
14.5 8.4***
Iron (mg)
15.7 8.9***

RDAa

Women
AIb

Users

(n 3771)
(n 833)
1075 1113
900
974 1043
8.8 6.3
15
7.9 5.0***
278 170
400
237 129
806 456
1000c1200d 666 335***
e
f
299 127 400 420
255 96***
12.8 7.3
11
9.6 4.4***
14.8 7.8
8
13.5 6.2***

RDA Recommended Dietary Allowance, b AI Adequate Intake, c 19 50 years of age,

postmenopausal.
*** User mean is significantly different from respective nonuser mean p 0.001.
a

DRI

Nonusers
(n 3739)
903 1059
6.5 4.6
210 125
605 324
220 87
8.6 4.8
12.1 6.0

5170 years of age,

RDAa

AIb

700
15
400
1000c1200d
e

310 320
8
818g

19 30 years of age, f 3170 years of age,

Table 6. BMIa, Mean Total Energy, Percent Energy Intake from Carbohydrate, Protein, Fat, Saturated Fat, Monounsaturated Fat,
Polyunsaturated Fat, Cholesterol, and Fiber for Peanut Users and Nonusersb
Men
Variable

Users

26.3 4.3
(n 977)
Energy (kcal)
2569 911***
% Kcal from
(n 980)
Carbohydrate
49.8 8.7***
Protein
15.2 3.3***
Total fat
34.8 7.1***
Saturated fat
11.3 3.1
MUFA
13.7 3.2**
PUFA
7.2 2.4***
Fiber (g)
20.8 9.3***
Cholesterol (mg) 307 186**
BMI

Women

Children

Nonusers

Users

Nonusers

26.6 4.5
(n 3732)
2214 881
(n 3771)
48.6 9.7
16.4 4.1
33.6 7.8
11.3 3.4
12.9 3.4
6.7 2.5
17.2 9.4
327 205

25.7 5.7*
(n 812)
1727 8 557***
(n 833)
52.0 8.5
15.2 3.6***
33.7 7.0***
10.9 3.0
13.0 3.1***
7.2 2.5**
15.1 7.2***
205 131

26.2 6.0
(n 3596)
1546 562
(n 3739)
51.5 10.1
16.2 4.3
32.6 8.3
10.8 3.6
12.3 3.6
6.9 2.8
13.1 6.7
215 142

Male

Female

Users

Nonusers

Users

Nonusers

19.3 4.8***
(n 759)
2052 915**
(n 839)
55.0 7.0***
13.7 2.8***
32.9 5.5
11.9 2.7**
12.8 2.5*
5.8 1.7***
13.8 7.5***
214 163***

20.1 5.3
(n 1448)
1952 832
(n 1644)
53.7 7.7
14.6 3.1
32.7 6.1
12.2 2.9
12.5 2.7
5.5 1.9
12.7 7.1
249 158

18.4 4.8***
(n 707)
1694 574***
(n 786)
55.5 7.2***
13.7 2.7***
32.5 5.7
11.8 2.7*
12.6 2.6*
5.8 1.7
11.8 5.2***
174 111***

19.0 5.3
(n 1451)
1611 558
(n 1670)
54.4 7.9
14.4 3.3
32.4 6.4
12.0 3.1
12.3 2.9
5.6 2.0
10.6 5.1
198 120.3

BMI body mass index, b Includes mean standard deviation, * p 0.05, ** p 0.01, *** p 0.001.

DISCUSSION
Our results indicate that individuals who included peanuts
in their diet had a significantly higher diet quality as measured
by the HEI, and had significantly higher quantities of all
marginal nutrients. One might expect improved diet quality

664

with the additional energy consumption from a nutrient dense

food such as peanuts and, in fact, including peanuts and peanut
butter in their diet also led to an increase in the nutrient density
(intake/1000 kcal) for vitamin E, folate and magnesium.
Nutrient density for calcium also was greater for men using
peanuts relative to nonusers. Although peanuts are not a

VOL. 23, NO. 6

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

Table 7. BMIa,b, Mean Total Energyb, Percent Energy Intake from Total Fat, Saturated Fat, Monounsaturated Fat, and Fiberb for
Various Levels of Peanut/Peanut Butter Consumption
Gender
Men

Women

Children

Variable Amount (g)

1
1.0128.35

2
28.3656.70

3
56.7185.05

4
85.05

N
BMI
Energy (kcal)
% Kcal from total fat
Saturated fat
MUFA
Fiber (g)
N
BMI
Energy (kcal)
% Kcal from total fat
Saturated fat
MUFA
Fiber (g)
N
BMI
Energy (kcal)
% Kcal from total fat
Saturated fat
MUFA
Fiber (g)

179
26.0 4.2
2197 822
33.2
10.9
12.7
19.8 9.4
300
26.0 6.3
1646 530
32.6
10.7
12.4
15.5 7.0
631
18.3 4.7
1644 588
32.0
11.9
12.3
11.5 5.2

182
26.0 4.2
2435 782
34.9#
11.2
13.7#
22.0 9.3
105
25.9 5.9
1768 543
35.4#
11.2
13.8#
16.0 7.7
335
18.7 4.8
1878 594#
32.6#
11.5#
12.8#
13.6 5.9#

91
26.0 4.1
2753 1113#
35.6#
11.3#
14.1#
21.7 10.4
18
23.2 4.0
1956 496
32.8
9.6
13.3
21.9 12.8#
87
18.6 4.0
2101 643#
34.1#
11.3#
13.6#
15.7 6.7#

81
26.2 3.4
3100 1013#
39.5#
11.5#
16.4#
26.1 8.6#
23
25.8 4.4
2352 584#
38.7#
10.5#
16.2#
22.5 9.6#
42
19.1 4.2
3016 1886#
36.6#
11.9#
15.2#
22.9 17.8#

a
BMI body mass index, b Includes mean standard deviation, p 0.05, # significantly different from Quartile 1, significantly different from Quartile 2, significantly
different from Quartile 3.

significant source of calcium, these individuals may be choosing high calcium foods, such as milk, to accompany their
peanut and peanut butter food choices (e.g. a peanut butter
sandwich and a glass of milk). This may also reflect the
possibility that peanut consumers in general make healthy food
choices and follow a well-balanced nutrient dense diet.
Vitamin E is a nutrient that is often low in U.S. and Canadian
diets. Diets containing fewer than 30% kcal from fat, such as the
NCEP Step 1 and Step 2 diets result in even lower intakes of
vitamin E [29]. Epidemiologic studies demonstrated the importance of vitamin E in maintaining heart health. Postmenopausal
women who ate foods rich in vitamin E reduced their risk for
stroke (59%) and heart disease (62%) when comparing women in
the highest quintile versus those in the lowest quintile of intake [6,
30]. In addition, Rimm reported an inverse correlation between
vitamin E and heart disease in men [31]. The Food and Nutrition
Board recently revised the RDA for vitamin E to 15 mg daily
(approximately 50% higher than the 1989 RDA) [25]. Vitamin E
intake in this study (male users 11.7 mg, nonusers 8.8 mg; female
users 7.9 mg, nonusers 6.5 mg) fell far below the new RDA. In
addition, it may be possible that the higher levels of vitamin E
intake in peanut users is an artifact of including gamma tocopherol
in the calculation of vitamin E equivalents since peanuts are a rich
source of gamma tocopherol. Encouraging use of foods high in
vitamin E (i.e., nuts or peanuts) should continue to be a target of
nutrition education efforts.
The 1989 RDA for folate was 200 g for men, and 180 g
for women. By these standards, the percentage RDA (truncated

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION

at 100%) for folate in the present study was relatively good

(male users 92%, nonusers 89%; female users 88%, nonusers
83%). Since that time however, the importance of folate in the
U.S. diet has assumed renewed prominence. The role of folate
in preventing neural tube defects led the FDA to mandate the
fortification of all grain products beginning in 1998. Folate also
is important in the breakdown of the amino acid homocysteine,
which in excess, is implicated in arterial wall damage and
higher risk of heart attack [32]. The 1998 RDA is 400 g/day
for men and women [25]. Intake by individuals in this study fell
far below the new RDA (male users 328 g, nonusers 278 g;
female users 237 g, nonusers 210 g). However, male peanut
users did have a significantly higher intake of folate (p
0.001). A one-ounce serving of roasted peanuts provides approximately 35 g of folate [33]. The results from the National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999
2000 indicate a mean folate intake of 405 g for men and 319
g for women [34]. This increase may represent the impact of
the recent folate fortification of grains. From a practical perspective, a peanut butter sandwich, 2 tablespoons of peanut
butter on 2 slices of a folate-fortified grain product would be a
good food vehicle for folate (total: 86 g).
Magnesium is critical to heart health. Low magnesium
status can contribute to dysrhythmias, myocardial infarction,
and possibly hypertension. Both experimental [35] and epidemiologic [36] evidence indicate that dietary magnesium may
attenuate insulin resistance and the development of type 2
diabetes. The percentage of the 1989 RDA (truncated at 100)

665

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

for magnesium was significantly higher for men, women and
male children choosing peanuts compared to nonusers (p
0.001). Adequacy of magnesium in the diet of adult women not
choosing peanuts was marginal (female users 81%, nonusers
73%). All legumes, including peanuts, are excellent sources of
magnesium. One ounce of roasted peanuts provides approximately 52 mg of magnesium [33]. The revised 1998 RDI for
magnesium increased 1520 percent compared to the 1989
RDA [23]. Relative to these standards, magnesium intake appears to be a nutrient of concern for men (71% RDA) and
women (68% RDA) not choosing peanuts.
Vitamin A intake was marginal for all adults (male users
78% vs. nonusers 71%; female users 76% vs. nonusers 72%) in
this study. The Food and Nutrition Board recently released new
information regarding vitamin A and the provitamin A carotenoids indicating that earlier methods of measuring retinol
equivalents significantly overestimated the amount available
from carotenoids [26]. The new RDA for vitamin A is slightly
lower than the 1989 recommendations, but the CSFII nutrient
database used the older conversion factors for beta-carotene
and the other carotenoids, making comparisons between intake
in this study and the 2001 RDA difficult. Nonetheless, it is
possible that the Vitamin A intake in this study was adequate,
based on the 2001 RDA, given the fact that the older conversion factors were used.
Percentage energy from total fat was significantly higher for
adult peanut users versus nonusers, however the total fat intake
for both groups was within the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range (AMDR) of 20 35% of calories, set by the
Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) for macronutrients guidelines
[37]. This fat difference was primarily due to increases in
MUFA and PUFA, as there was no significant difference in
percentage of energy from saturated fat between peanut consumers and non-consumers. The favorable fatty acid profile of
peanuts has been shown repeatedly to provide substantial cholesterol-lowering effects without decreasing HDL cholesterol
[38]. Moreover, individuals with elevated triglycerides and
type 2 diabetes mellitus have benefited from an improved
glycemic profile and reduced triglycerides when consuming a
moderate fat diet high in MUFA compared to a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet [39].
Percent of energy from protein was lower in peanut users
relative to nonusers. The lower intake of cholesterol for men,
women and children, implies a lower intake of animal protein
sources. Choosing plant rather than animal protein sources
could improve fiber intake, depending on the foods selected.
The fiber intake of men, women and children was significantly
higher in peanut users vs. nonusers (p 0.001). However, fiber
intake for low-moderate peanut users was still less than what is
currently recommended (2535 g/d). Men and women consuming 56.71 85.05 g/d of peanut/peanut butter had a mean fiber
intake of 21.7 g and 21.9 g, respectively (Table 7). Peanuts
provide 2.6 g fiber/1 oz serving, of which 25% is soluble

666

fiber. Soluble fiber has been shown to reduce total- and LDLcholesterol concentrations and improve glycemic control [40].
Peanuts also provide a substantial amount of arginine. Arginine
is a precursor of nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator that inhibits
platelet adhesion and aggregation producing anti-atherogenic
effects [41].
There is a concern that consumption of peanuts (or other
nuts), a high fat, but nutrient dense food, may increase the risk
of weight gain. Results of this study indicate that despite the
higher energy intake over the 2-day period assessed, free living
men, women and children consuming peanuts did not have a
higher BMI than nonusers. While the lower mean BMI for
women including peanuts was significantly different (p 0.05)
relative to nonusers (25.7 vs. 26.2), this difference was not
significant for men (male users 26.3, nonusers 26.6). However,
the lower mean BMI for male and female children including
peanuts was highly significant (p 0.001) relative to that of
nonusers. These results indicate that the additional energy
intake observed in free-living adults and children including
peanuts in their diet in a 2-day period, even at a high level (
85.05 g/day) was not associated with a higher BMI. Therefore,
our results suggest that heavy peanut use over a 2-day period is
associated either with increased physical activity or reduced
calorie intake at another time in order to maintain a lower BMI.
In the present study, since data were assessed over a 2-day
period, it was not possible to determine whether one or both of
these likely explain our results.
There are other lifestyle factors that may influence the diet
quality associated with peanut consumption. It is evident that
the effects of the incorporation of peanuts into a diet plan as a
replacement for a particular food will vary greatly based on the
foods that peanuts replace. In addition, it is possible that
individuals who, in general, make unhealthy food choices avoid
peanuts, a high-energy and nutrient dense food, so that they are
able to consume other low nutrient dense foods instead. It will
be important to gain a better understanding of food choice
behaviors to answer these and other related questions.

CONCLUSIONS
In summary, the results of the present study have shown that
peanuts and peanut products enhance the nutrient profile of the
diet. Moreover, inclusion of this energy dense food can be done
in a manner that does not result in weight gain provided that
energy intake does not exceed energy expended over time. This
can be achieved with appropriate food substitution strategies
and/or increases in physical activity. Consumer awareness
about the energy content and nutrient value of peanuts and how
they can be incorporated in the diet as a strategy for substituting
unsaturated fats for saturated fat can improve the nutrient,
especially micronutrient, profile of the diet. Encouraging the
use of peanuts and peanut butter, both popular and familiar

VOL. 23, NO. 6

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

foods, gives additional options that may promote adherence to
a healthy diet that reduces risk of chronic disease.

REFERENCES
1. Fraser GE, Sabate J, Beeson WL, Strahan TM: A possible protective effect of nut consumption on risk of coronary heart disease.
The Adventist Health Study. Arch Intern Med 152:14161424,
1992.
2. Fraser GE, Lindsted KD, Beeson WL: Effect of risk factor values
on lifetime risk of an age at first coronary event. The Adventist
Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 142:746758, 1995.
3. Fraser GE, Shavlik DJ: Risk factors for all-cause coronary heart
disease mortality in the oldest-old. The Adventist Health Study.
Arch Intern Med 157:22492258, 1997.
4. Fraser GE, Sumbureru D, Pribis P, Neil RL, Frankson MA: Association among health habits, risk factors, and all-cause mortality in
a black California population. Epidemiology 8:168174, 1997.
5. Prineas RJ, Kushi LH, Folsom AR, Bostick RM, Wu Y: Walnuts
and serum lipids. N Engl J Med 329:359, 1993.
6. Kushi LH, Folsom AR, Prineas RJ, Mink PJ, Wu Y, Bostick RM:
Dietary antioxidant vitamins and death from coronary heart disease
in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 334:11561162, 1996.
7. Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, Rimm EB, Colditz GA, Rosner
BA, Speizer FE, Hennekens CH, Willett WC: Frequent nut consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in women: prospective
cohort study. BMJ 317:13411345, 1998.
8. Albert CM, Gaziano JM, Willett WC, Manson JE: Nut consumption and decreased risk of sudden cardiac death in the Physicians
Health Study. Arch Intern Med 162:13821387, 2002.
9. Brown L, Rosner B, Willett WC, Sacks FM: Nut consumption and
risk of recurrent coronary heart disease [Abstract]. FASEB 13:
A538, 1999.
10. Hu FB, Stampher MJ: Nut consumption and risk of coronary heart
disease: A review of epidemiologic evidence. Curr Athero Reports
1:205210, 1999.
11. Kris-Etherton PM, Zhao G, Binkoski AE, Coval SM, Etherton TD:
The effects of nuts on coronary heart disease risk. Nutr Rev
4:103111, 2001.
12. Fulgoni VL, Abbey M, Davis P, Jenkins D, Lovejoy J, Most M,
Sabate J, Spiller G: Almonds lower blood cholesterol and LDLcholesterol but not HDL-cholesterol in human subjects: results of
a meta-analysis [Abstract]. FASEB 16:A981, 2002.
13. Jiang R, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Liu S, Willett WC, Hu FB: Nut
and peanut butter consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes in
women. JAMA 288:25542560, 2002.
14. Sanders TH, McMichael RW, Hendris KW: Occurrence of resveratrol in edible peanuts. J Agric Food Chem 48:12431246,
2000.
15. Awad AB, Chan KC, Downie AC, Fink CS: Peanuts as a source of
-sitosterol, a sterol with anticancer properties. Nutr and Cancer
36:238241, 2000.
16. Lino M, Marcoe K, Dinkins JM, Hiza H, Anand R: The Role of
Nuts in a Healthy Diet. Washington, DC: USDA Center for
Nutrition Policy and Promotion. Nutrition Insights 23, 2000.
17. Sabate J: Nut consumption and body weight. Am J Clin Nutr
78(Suppl):647S650S, 2003.

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION

18. McManus K, Antinoro L, Sacks F: A randomized controlled trial

of a moderate-fat, low-energy diet compared with a low fat, lowenergy diet for weight loss in overweight adults. Int J Obes Relat
Metab Disord 25:15031511, 2001.
19. Enns CW, Goldman JD, Cook A: Trends in Food and Nutrient
Intakes by Adults: NFCS 197778, CSFII 198991, and CSFII
199495. Fam Econ Nutr Rev 10:215, 1997.
20. Guenther PM, DeMaio TJ, Ingwersen LA, Berlin M: The multiplepass approach for the 24-hour recall in the Continuing Survey of
Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) 199496 [Abstract]. FASEB
10:A198, 1996.
21. Tippett KS, Cypel YS (eds): Design and Operation: The Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and the Diet and Health
Knowledge Survey 199496. Washington DC: US Dept of Agriculture, CSFII 199496, Nationwide Food Surveys Rep No. 96-1,
1997.
22. Food and Nutrition Board: Recommended Dietary Allowances,
10th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.
23. Food and Nutrition Board: Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press, 2001.
24. Food and Nutrition Board: Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D and Fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997.
25. Food and Nutrition Board: Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin
C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press, 2000.
26. Food and Nutrition Board: Dietary Reference Intakes for Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Folate, Vitamin B12, Pantothenic Acid, Biotin, and Choline. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press, 2000.
27. Food and Nutrition Board: Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin
A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron,
Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, and Zinc.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
28. U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Census Bureau: Census Profile 2000, 2000. Available at: http://www.census.gov
29. Peterson S, Sigman-Grant M, Eissenstat B, Kris-Etherton PM:
Impact of adopting lower-fat food choices on energy and nutrient
intakes of American adults. J Am Diet Assoc 99:177183, 1999.
30. Yochum LA, Folsom AR, Kushi LH: Intake of antioxidant vitamins and risk of death from stroke in postmenopausal women.
Am J Clin Nutr 72:476483, 2000.
31. Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Ascherio A, Giovannucci E, Colditz GA,
Willett WC: Vitamin E consumption and the risk of coronary heart
disease in men. N Engl J Med 328:14501456, 1993.
32. Hernandez-Diaz S, Martinez-Losa E, Fernandez-Jarne E, SerranoMartinez M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA: Dietary folate and the risk of
nonfatal myocardial infarction. Epidemiology 13:700706, 2002.
33. Wright JD, Wang CY, Kennedy-Stephenson J, Ervin RB: Dietary
Intake of Ten Key Nutrients for Public Health, United States:
19992000. Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics, No.
334. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2003.
34. USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 13.
Available at: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/cgi-bin/nut_search.pl
Accessed June 13, 2001.
35. Balon TW, Gu JL, Tokuyama Y, Jasman AP, Nadler JL: Magnesium supplementation reduces development of diabetes in a rat

667

Improved Diet Quality with Peanut Consumption

model of spontaneous NIDDM. Am J Physiol 269:E745E752,
1995.
36. Kao WH, Folsom AR, Nieto FJ, Mo JP, Watson RL, Brancati FL:
Serum and dietary magnesium and the risk for type 2 diabetes
mellitus: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Arch
Intern Med 15:21512159, 1999.
37. Dietary fats: total fat and fatty acids. In Dietary Reference IntakesEnergy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol,
Protein, and Amino Acids. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press, pp 11-111-87, 2002.
38. Kris-Etherton PM, Pearson TA, Wan Y, Hargrove RL, Moriarty K,
Fishell V, Etherton TD: High-monounsaturated fatty acid diets

668

lower both plasma cholesterol and triacylglycerol concentrations.

Am J Clin Nutr 70:10091015, 1999.
39. Kris-Etherton PM: Monounsaturated fatty acids and risk of cardiovascular disease. Circulation 100:12531258, 1999.
40. Anderson JW, Smith BM, Gustafson NJ: Health benefits and
practical aspects of high-fiber diets. Am J Clin Nutr 59(Suppl):
1242S1247S, 1994.
41. Fraser GE: Nut consumption, lipids and risk of a coronary event.
Clin Cardiol 22(Suppl):III1115, 1999.

Received December 5, 2003; revision accepted July 5, 2004.

VOL. 23, NO. 6