National Academies Press: OpenBook

Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report (2016)

Chapter: 8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages

« Previous: 7 Promotion, Motivation, and Support of Breastfeeding with the WIC Food Packages
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

8

Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages

The 2009 revised Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) food packages were designed to accommodate a broader array of dietary needs and preferences than in the past. This chapter considers the issuance of food package III for certain medical conditions, the extent to which WIC food packages accommodate the dietary needs of individuals with food allergies and other food-triggered sensitivities, and the availability of WIC package food items to accommodate varying food preferences (i.e., vegetarian and vegan diets) and food-related religious practices (i.e., Kosher and Halal dietary practices). Details of the literature search used to gather this information are provided in Chapter 3.

FOODS TO ADDRESS MEDICAL CONDITIONS

The revised WIC food packages can accommodate a wide range of medical conditions. This section summarizes the circumstances under which food package III can be issued and the extent to which the WIC food packages (all of the packages, including food package III) accommodate the dietary needs of individuals with food allergies and other food-triggered sensitivities.

The Special Case of Food Package III

At the discretion of a health care provider, individuals may be considered, “medically fragile” and can receive food package III for either themselves or their children. There exists no generally accepted definition

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

of medical fragility. Examples include an infant with failure to thrive and an adult with a wired jaw. Individual states have policies regarding who may qualify under WIC.

Nutrition plays a pivotal role in the health of medically fragile individuals, especially children, with appropriate nutrition preventing or mitigating significant neurodevelopmental deficiencies and being potentially life-saving. Depending on an individual’s specific medical needs, food package III can be tailored by including non-contract1 infant formulas with unique nutritional composition or WIC-eligible medical foods (see Box 8-1). As detailed in the interim rule and verified in the final rule, individuals receiving food package III may be issued 455 ounces of WIC formula2 per month, but only in addition to (not instead of) the maximum allowance of all other foods in the package appropriate for their life-stage (USDA/FNS, 2014). Exceptions to these food package regulations may be made as necessary and as dictated by the final rule (USDA/FNS, 2014).3

__________________

1 Any formula that is non-contract is not subject to rebates. Exempt infant formula is always non-contract. By federal regulation, for WIC participants who are also on Medicaid, the Medicaid program is the primary payer for exempt infant formulas, as well as for WIC-eligible medical foods. WIC is the payer of last resort for the Medicaid beneficiaries and the payer for those not on Medicaid. Some private insurance may also cover exempt formula.

2 WIC formula refers to infant formula, exempt infant formula, or a WIC-eligible medical food.

3 As specified in the final rule, exceptions for food package III include (1) whole milk may be provided to children more than 2 years of age and to women with a qualifying condition; (2) state agencies have the flexibility to provide children and women the option of receiving commercial jarred infant food fruits and vegetables in lieu of the cash value voucher; and (3) infant formula may be provided in lieu of foods at 6 months of age.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

There are no publicly available data for estimating how many WIC participants nationwide receive food package III. A report detailing electronic benefit transfer (EBT) redemption patterns in Kentucky, Michigan, and Nevada indicated that, on average, 1.5 percent of WIC families in these states were issued a medical food of some kind, although not necessarily through food package III (Phillips et al., 2014). Only 54 percent of these families redeemed the entire package and 14 percent redeemed none of the package. Non-Hispanic Asian and non-Hispanic white families were more likely to redeem the entire package than non-Hispanic black families, and 72 percent of families in urban areas redeemed the full benefit compared to 53 percent in large rural areas (Phillips et al., 2014). Missouri state data from September 2015 indicate that 2 percent of Missouri WIC participants are receiving food package III (personal communication, R. Arni, Missouri WIC, October 9, 2015). In a recent study of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003–2010 data, Rossen et al. (2015) found that 6.5 percent of infants living at or below 185 percent of the federal poverty-to-income ratio (PIR) (the qualifying PIR for WIC) consumed “specialty” formulas (those having clear clinical indications for use). Similarly, data from 2004 indicated that 6 percent of infant formulas issued through WIC nationally were exempt (non-contract formula for special medical needs), ranging from 1 to 23 percent by state (USGAO, 2006). This is higher than the proportions of WIC families in the Phillips et al. (2014) study who were reportedly issued medical foods, which is likely to include specialty (exempt) formulas.

Food-Triggered Immune-Mediated Sensitivities

All of the food packages, including food package III, can support the nutritional needs of several different types of food-triggered immune-mediated sensitivities, including food allergies, celiac disease, non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS), and lactose intolerance. This section summarizes evidence from the literature on the nutritional needs of individuals with these medical conditions, and ways that the 2009 revised food packages accommodate individuals with these conditions.

Food Allergies

Allergy has been defined as a hypersensitivity disorder of the immune system where the immune system reacts to substances in the environment normally considered harmless (CDC, 2013). When allergy manifests as disease, those diseases, such as dermatitis, asthma, and rhinitis, are commonly referred to as “atopic” diseases. Researchers still do not understand the underlying factors that cause atopic disease, although several theories

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

have been put forth. Prominent among these is dysbiosis of the microbiome (Brown et al., 2013), which at one time was known as the “hygiene hypothesis” (Strachan, 1989). It has also been suggested that how and when foods are introduced into the diet of infants influences the risk of food allergy in particular (NIAID, 2010).

Food allergy has been defined as an adverse health effect arising from a specific immune response that occurs reproducibly on exposure to a given food; the specific food component eliciting the immune response and causing symptoms is the allergen (NIAID, 2010). Proper diagnosis of allergy is important because, in 50 to 90 percent of cases, symptoms presumed to be associated with food allergy are not related (NIAID, 2010).

Food allergies can be either IgE-mediated or non-IgE-mediated. The symptoms of IgE-mediated food allergy include cutaneous, ocular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and other miscellaneous effects. Diagnoses of IgE-mediated allergies are made using food elimination diets and oral food challenges (i.e., symptoms resolve when the causative food is removed from the diet and recur following an oral challenge). Non-IgE-mediated immunologic reactions to food include food protein-induced enteropathy, eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases, allergic contact dermatitis, and systemic contact dermatitis. Some, but not all, non-IgE-mediated allergies can be diagnosed using food elimination diet and oral food challenges.

Several expert groups have made still-evolving recommendations for prevention of food allergy. In 2000, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended delaying the introduction of allergenic foods in infants at higher risk of allergy development (AAP, 2000). However, subsequently, the AAP reported insufficient data to document a protective effect of any dietary intervention beyond 4 to 6 months of age (Greer et al., 2008). Likewise, a committee convened by the National Institute of Health’s (NIH’s) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases recommended that infants be breastfed for 4 to 6 months to prevent food allergy but that the introduction of solid foods not be delayed beyond 4 to 6 months, regardless of whether they are potentially allergenic (NIAID, 2010). Based on accumulating evidence (Osborn and Sinn, 2006; see also Alexander et al., 2010), the NIH committee further recommended hydrolyzed4 (and not soy) formula for the prevention of allergy in non-breastfed or supplemented breastfed at-risk infants (NIAID, 2010). In accordance with these earlier recommendations, in 2013 the American Academy of Allergy recommended breastfeeding for 4 to 6 months, use of a hydrolyzed protein infant formula

__________________

4 Hydrolyzed refers to formulas containing cow’s milk proteins that have been extensively broken down so they are unlikely to cause an allergic reaction.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

for at-risk infants who are not breastfed, and the introduction of solid foods at 4 to 6 months of age (Fleischer et al., 2013).5

In addition to recommending the delayed introduction of allergenic foods, AAP (2000) recommended avoidance of some foods by breastfeeding mothers. However, authors of a recent systematic review of maternal intake during pregnancy or lactation did not find any conclusive evidence of an effect of maternal diet on atopy in infants (Netting et al., 2014). Similarly, the NIH committee referenced above recommended against maternal restriction of allergenic foods during pregnancy and lactation as a means of reducing the likelihood of allergy development in infants (NIAID, 2010).

Despite these ever-evolving recommendations, the prevalence of reported food allergy has continued to rise. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data indicate that, among children ages 0 to 17 years, reports of food allergies increased approximately 50 percent between 1997 and 2011 (CDC, 2013). The prevalence of food allergies appears to be higher in non-Hispanics and in families with higher household incomes (CDC, 2013). The most common food allergies are allergies to peanuts, tree nuts, seafood, milk, and hen’s egg (NIAID, 2010), although wheat, fish, and soy allergies are also relevant to the WIC food packages. There is some evidence that early introduction of peanut protein reduces the likelihood of peanut allergy (Du Toit et al., 2008, 2015; Gruchalla and Sampson, 2015). Based on this evidence, in September 2015 AAP issued interim guidance for the early (between 4 and 11 months of age) introduction of peanut protein to high-risk infants under care of a health care provider (Fleischer et al., 2015).

WIC food package options for individuals with food allergies In sum, with respect to food allergy, the committee’s review of the literature indicated that most experts recommend breastfeeding for approximately 6 months and the provision of hydrolyzed protein formula for non-breastfed infants who are at risk of developing allergy. In accordance with these recommendations, hydrolyzed protein infant formulas for allergy at-risk infants are available to formula-fed WIC infants with a physician’s prescription. Because it is not fully understood how introduction of solid foods in the first year of life might influence the development of allergy, there is no currently defined role for WIC-provided infant foods in allergy prevention.

For children and adults, the current WIC packages include substitutions for allergenic foods so individuals with most major food allergies can be accommodated (see Table 8-1). However, as noted in the table, there is no current substitution in the case of an egg or a fish allergy. Importantly, WIC

__________________

5 Additional indications for the use of hydrolyzed formulas are summarized in Chapter 9.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

TABLE 8-1 Options in WIC Food Package Categories Potentially Unsuitable for Special Diets and Major Allergies

WIC Food Category Special Diet
Vegetarian Vegan Gluten-free Lactose-free
Ready-to-eat cereal images
Whole wheat bread images
Milkb images images
Cheese images images
Eggs images
Peanut butter
Canned fish images

NOTES: images Indicates that the primary food in the category is not likely to be suitable for the particular diet or allergy unless a suitable substitution is made available. The major allergens shellfish and tree nuts were excluded from the table because no WIC foods are provided in these categories. Soy is excluded because the baseline food packages do not contain soy products. The WIC food categories “mature legumes” and “juice” were excluded from the table because they are suitable for all cases covered in this table.

offers participants with food allergies a number of educational resources to support adherence to dietary restrictions (USDA/FNS, 2015a).

Celiac Disease

Approximately 1 in 200 individuals living in the United States have celiac disease, an immune-mediated inflammation of the small bowel caused by sensitivity to dietary gluten (a protein found in wheat and other grains) and related proteins (Guandalini and Assiri, 2014; Mooney et al., 2014). The disorder is neither IgE- nor IgG-mediated. A diagnosis is based on histology of a small bowel biopsy. A recent meta-analysis that included data from more than 4 million women indicated that women with celiac disease have an increased risk of obstetrical complications (Saccone et al., 2015). These included preeclampsia and preterm birth, intrauterine growth

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Major Allergen Substitutions Allowed (% of State Agencies Allowing Substitution)
Milk Eggs Fish Peanuts Wheat
images Corn, rice, or oat certified gluten-free cereala: 78%
images Brown rice: 90%; Tortillas: 82%; Oats: 34%
images Soy beverage: 71%; Tofu: 40%; Lactosefree milk: 73%
images No substitution
images No substitution
images Canned beans: 72%; Dry beans: 70%
images No substitution

a States may offer several gluten-free options. Seventy-eight percent of states allow the most commonly offered gluten-free rice cereal.

b Lactose-free milk is also permitted for individuals with lactose intolerance. Milk substitutions such as soy beverage and tofu are unsuitable for people with soybean allergies.

SOURCES: USDA/FNS, 2011, 2014.

restriction, stillbirth, low birthweight, or a small for gestational age infant (Saccone et al., 2015). An Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) systematic review indicated that women with undiagnosed celiac disease who follow a gluten-free diet have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (evidence graded as fair) (AND, 2006).

Delayed introduction of wheat proteins to the diet was once thought to prevent or delay the onset of the disease (Norris et al., 2005). However, results from a recent study and meta-analysis suggest that the time to first introduction of gluten into the diets of infants is not an independent risk factor for developing celiac disease by 5 years of age (Aronsson et al., 2015; Szajewska et al., 2015). Additional research may be needed on the optimal timing and amount of introduced foods containing gluten (Lebwohl et al., 2015).

Treatment for celiac disease includes lifelong avoidance of wheat, bar-

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

ley, and rye. Individuals with symptoms for celiac disease should be tested and, if positive, receive detailed nutritional counseling on gluten avoidance, because even milligram levels in the diet can have severe long-term health consequences (Rubio-Tapia et al., 2013). Because gluten-free grains (e.g., rice, potato flour, tapioca flour, corn) are not typically fortified, gluten-free diets may be low in iron and folate, as well as dietary fiber (Thompson, 2000). Nutrients of particular concern for pregnant women who follow a gluten-free diet include carbohydrates, iron, folic acid, niacin, calcium, phosphorus, zinc, and fiber (AND, 2014).

WIC food package options for individuals with celiac disease As of 2009, the majority of states (96 percent) offered a non-wheat option for the “whole wheat bread” food category that is suitable for gluten-free diets (USDA/FNS, 2011). The final rule for the WIC food packages does not require that states provide a gluten-free option for cereals, although the provision allows state agencies to offer corn or rice-based cereals which may be appropriate for participants who must avoid gluten (USDA/FNS, 2014). Such cereals are not necessarily certified as gluten-free, however, and gluten content may not fall under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) limit of 20 parts per million of gluten that is tolerated by most individuals with celiac disease (21 C.F.R. § 101). Individuals with non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) may also benefit from these non-wheat options (see section on NCGS that follows). Table 8-1 indicates the currently available WIC foods and substitutions that meet the dietary needs of individuals who must or choose to avoid gluten.

Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity

NCGS is defined as the occurrence of gastrointestinal symptoms after the ingestion of wheat-containing foods in the absence of celiac disease or wheat allergy. Because there is no biomarker for gluten sensitivity, NCGS is not clinically diagnosable and is generally self-diagnosed (Branchi et al., 2015; Elli et al., 2015; Lebwohl et al., 2015). DiGiacomo et al. (2013) reported a 0.55 percent prevalence of NCGS in NHANES 2009–2010, although gluten-free diets may have become more prevalent since then. Additional studies are needed to understand the etiology and underlying physiology of NCGS (Husby and Murray, 2015).

The AND has not issued guidance for dietary practices related to the mitigation of NCGS. WIC nutritionists may counsel individuals self-diagnosing with NCGS to clinically test for possible celiac disease and to ensure dietary adequacy of micronutrients (also see Rubio-Tapia et al., 2013).

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

WIC food package options for individuals with NCGS As mentioned above, Table 8-1 indicates the currently available WIC foods and substitutions that meet the dietary needs of individuals who choose to avoid gluten.

Lactose Intolerance

Lactose intolerance is a set of symptoms caused by lactase deficiency. Its prevalence varies greatly by racial and ethnic background, with primary lactase deficiency being nearly 100 percent in Asian and American Indian, 60 to 80 percent in black and Ashkenazi Jewish, and 50 to 80 percent in Hispanic subgroups. Lactose intolerance is rare in individuals of generally northern European descent. In Hispanic, Asian, and black children, evidence of lactase deficiency can appear before the age of 5; in white children, symptoms often appear after age 5 (Heyman et al., 2006). The condition can be diagnosed by a lactose challenge and breath test.

Individuals with lactose intolerance may be able to consume small amounts of dairy products (up to 8 ounces of milk or yogurt at one time) (Suarez et al., 1995, 1997; Lomer et al., 2007) or specific forms of dairy products (e.g., natural cheddar cheese contains 0.18 percent lactose, whereas skim milk contains 5.09 percent lactose [USDA/ARS, 2014]), although nutrition education might be necessary to ensure adequate calcium intake.

Food package options for individuals with lactose intolerance Table 8-1 also indicates the currently available WIC foods and substitutions that meet the dietary needs of individuals who choose to avoid lactose. Of note, there is no substitution for cheese for participants unable to tolerate that quantity of lactose.

VARYING FOOD PREFERENCES AND PRACTICES

The committee considered how WIC food packages accommodate preferences for vegetarian and vegan diets and food-related religious practices (e.g., Kosher and Halal diets). This section summarizes the committee’s evaluation of evidence supporting inclusion of foods in the packages that adhere to these practices.

Vegetarian or Vegan Diets

Several authoritative bodies hold the position that, when carefully planned, plant-based diets can be nutritionally adequate for infants, children, and adults. A vegetarian diet does not include animal flesh foods (i.e.,

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

meat, fish, seafood), but does include other animal products (e.g., eggs, milk, cheese, yogurt), whereas a vegan diet excludes all animal foods and products. In 2015, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee developed and evaluated a healthy vegetarian food pattern and found that it can meet nutrient intake needs for individuals ages 2 years and older (USDA/HHS, 2014). Individuals who consume a vegan diet should pay particular attention to their intakes of vitamins B12 and calcium, but their requirement for these nutrients can be met by consuming fortified foods (AND, 2014). If no eggs are consumed (as in a vegan diet), intake of eicosapentaneoic (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acids (DHAs) may be low (AND, 2015). The position of AND is that both vegetarian and vegan diets are not only adequate, but may promote the prevention or aid in the treatment of certain health conditions (AND, 2009).

The WIC food package includes several foods that by nature are compliant with vegetarian and vegan diets, including fruits, vegetables, legumes, peanut butter, and grains. However, there are currently no vegetarian/vegan substitutions for fish and no vegan substitutions for eggs or cheese (see Table 8-1). The proportion of the WIC population that prefers these types of diets is unknown, but 2012 estimates indicated that approximately 5 percent of Americans considered themselves vegetarian and 2 percent vegan (Newport, 2012).

With respect to infant feeding practices, AAP supports the provision of soy protein-based formulas in cases where an infant’s caretaker prefers to provide a vegetarian diet (as well as in cases where an infant does not tolerate cow’s milk formula) (Bhatia et al., 2008; AAP, 2014). A potential nutrition-related health challenge for these infants is ensuring adequate iron intake. As described in Chapter 6, the introduction of complementary foods to infants at approximately 6 months of age is recommended, in part, to ensure adequate iron intake, with AAP (2014) encouraging early introduction of red meats and other foods rich in iron. A vegetarian or vegan substitution for infant meat is not currently permitted in the WIC food packages. AAP (2014) further recommends that oral iron supplementation is appropriate for infants 6 to 12 months of age who are not consuming the recommended amount of iron from formula and complementary foods.

Kosher or Halal Diets

Regarding the extent to which the 2009 revised food packages accommodate food-related religious practices, some states offer options for Kosher or Halal foods prepared in accordance with Jewish and Islamic dietary laws, respectively. Eliasi and Dwyer (2002) provide a detailed description of Kosher and Halal diets. Very generally, for Kosher diets, meats must be

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

prepared a certain way, animal products must come from Kosher-prepared animals, and packaged foods must be Kosher-certified. Fruits and vegetables are considered inherently Kosher. To be considered Halal, meats must be prepared in a particular way and milk and foods prepared from milk must come from Halal animals. With respect to the WIC food packages, although federal regulations do not specify any requirement for availability of food that meet the needs of individuals who follow either of these diets, states have the option to accommodate these individuals. In 2009, 34 percent of WIC participants nationwide had the option to purchase Kosher items, 19 percent had the option to purchase Kosher or Halal foods, and 27 percent were allowed no substitution (see Table 8-2) (USDA/FNS, 2011; personal communication, N. Cole, Mathematica, March 17, 2015). A 2015 update of state options indicated that 7 percent of state agencies allowed Kosher milk, 100 percent of state agencies did not specify whether they allowed Kosher eggs, 92 percent did not specify whether Kosher juice was allowed, and 8 percent did not allow Kosher juice. No additional data were available for other Kosher options, and an update of the national availability of Halal options was not presented (USDA/FNS, 2015b). There were no available data on requests for Kosher or Halal foods either among WIC participants in general or in states in which these foods are available.

TABLE 8-2 Authorization of Kosher and Halal Substitutions

Substitutions Offered for WIC Foods WIC State Agencies Authorizing Substitutions (%) Nationwide WIC Participants Covered by the Option (%)*
Kosher 17 34
Kosher and Halal 6 19
No Substitutions 42 27
Not Specified 36 19

NOTES: Results were obtained from a database of WIC food lists for all 90 state agencies as of October 2009, as well as foods that were approved in the period immediately preceding implementation of the interim rule. WIC state plans, vendor manuals, and grocery shopping guides were also reviewed. The most recent WIC Food Packages Policy Options Study (USDA/FNS, 2015b) did not quantify the number of state agencies allowing Kosher and Halal options nationally. The report indicated that 7 percent of state agencies covering 21.3 percent of WIC participants allowed Kosher milk.

* Percentages represent the number of WIC participants linked to the state agencies offering the option.

SOURCE: USDA/FNS, 2011. WIC Food Packages Policy Options Study, with update from personal communication with N. Cole, Mathematica, March 17, 2015.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

REFERENCES

AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics). 2000. Committee on nutrition. Hypoallergenic infant formulas. Pediatrics 106(2):346-349.

AAP. 2014. Pediatric nutrition, edited by R. E. Kleinman and F. R. Greer, 7th ed. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics.

Alexander, D. D., D. F. Schmitt, N. L. Tran, L. M. Barraj, and C. A. Cushing. 2010. Partially hydrolyzed 100% whey protein infant formula and atopic dermatitis risk reduction: A systematic review of the literature. Nutrition Reviews 68(4):232-245.

AND (Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics). 2006. Evidence Analysis Library. Pregnancy and nutrition: Gluten-free diet. http://www.andeal.org/topic.cfm?cat=2966&conclusion_statement_id=250329 (accessed October 16, 2015).

AND. 2009. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Vegetarian diets. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 109:1266-1282.

AND. 2014. Nutrition and lifestyle for a healthy pregnancy outcome. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114(9):1447.

Aronsson, C. A., H. S. Lee, E. Liu, U. Uusitalo, S. Hummel, J. Yang, M. Hummel, M. Rewers, J. X. She, O. Simell, J. Toppari, A. G. Ziegler, J. Krischer, S. M. Virtanen, J. M. Norris, D. Agardh, and Teddy Study Group. 2015. Age at gluten introduction and risk of celiac disease. Pediatrics 135(2):239-245.

Bhatia, J., F. Greer, and American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition. 2008. Use of soy protein-based formulas in infant feeding. Pediatrics 121(5):1062-1068.

Branchi, F., I. Aziz, D. Conte, and D. S. Sanders. 2015. Noncoeliac gluten sensitivity: A diagnostic dilemma. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care 18(5):508-514.

Brown, E. M., M. C. Arrieta, and B. B. Finlay. 2013. A fresh look at the hygiene hypothesis: How intestinal microbial exposure drives immune effector responses in atopic disease. Seminars in Immunology 25(5):378-387.

CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2013. Trends in allergic conditions among children: United States, 1997–2011. NCHS Data Brief.

DiGiacomo, D. V., C. A. Tennyson, P. H. Green, and R. T. Demmer. 2013. Prevalence of gluten-free diet adherence among individuals without celiac disease in the USA: Results from the Continuous National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey 2009–2010. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 48(8):921-925.

Du Toit, G., Y. Katz, P. Sasieni, D. Mesher, S. J. Maleki, H. R. Fisher, A. T. Fox, V. Turcanu, T. Amir, G. Zadik-Mnuhin, A. Cohen, I. Livne, and G. Lack. 2008. Early consumption of peanuts in infancy is associated with a low prevalence of peanut allergy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 122(5):984-991.

Du Toit, G., G. Roberts, P. H. Sayre, H. T. Bahnson, S. Radulovic, A. F. Santos, H. A. Brough, D. Phippard, M. Basting, M. Feeney, V. Turcanu, M. L. Sever, M. Gomez Lorenzo, M. Plaut, G. Lack, and Leap Study Team. 2015. Randomized trial of peanut consumption in infants at risk for peanut allergy. New England Journal of Medicine 372(9):803-813.

Eliasi, J. R., and J. T. Dwyer. 2002. Kosher and Halal. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 102(7):911-913.

Elli, L., F. Branchi, C. Tomba, D. Villalta, L. Norsa, F. Ferretti, L. Roncoroni, and M. T. Bardella. 2015. Diagnosis of gluten-related disorders: Celiac disease, wheat allergy and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. World Journal of Gastroenterology 21(23):7110-7119.

Fleischer, D. M., J. M. Spergel, A. H. Assa’ad, and J. A. Pongracic. 2013. Primary prevention of allergic disease through nutritional interventions. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Practice 1(1):29-36.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

Fleischer, D. M., S. Sicherer, M. Greenhawt, D. Campbell, E. Chan, A. Muraro, S. Halken, Y. Katz, M. Ebisawa, L. Eichenfield, H. Sampson, G. Lack, G. Du Toit, G. Roberts, H. Bahnson, M. Feeney, J. Hourihane, J. Spergel, M. Young, A. As’aad, K. Allen, S. Prescott, S. Kapur, H. Saito, I. Agache, C. A. Akdis, H. Arshad, K. Beyer, A. Dubois, P. Eigenmann, M. Fernandez-Rivas, K. Grimshaw, K. Hoffman-Sommergruber, A. Host, S. Lau, L. O’Mahony, C. Mills, N. Papadopoulos, C. Venter, N. Agmon-Levin, A. Kessel, R. Antaya, B. Drolet, and L. Rosenwasser. 2015. Consensus communication on early peanut introduction and the prevention of peanut allergy in high-risk infants. Annals of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology 115(2):87-90.

Greer, F. R., S. H. Sicherer, A. W. Burks, and American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition. 2008. Effects of early nutritional interventions on the development of atopic disease in infants and children: The role of maternal dietary restriction, breastfeeding, timing of introduction of complementary foods, and hydrolyzed formulas. Pediatrics 121(1):183-191.

Gruchalla, R. S., and H. A. Sampson. 2015. Preventing peanut allergy through early consumption—Ready for prime time? New England Journal of Medicine 372(9):875-877.

Guandalini, S., and A. Assiri. 2014. Celiac disease: A review. JAMA Pediatrics 168(3):272-278.

Heyman, M. B., for the Committee on Nutrition. 2006. Lactose intolerance in infants, children, and adolescents. Pediatrics 118(3):1279-1286.

Husby, S., and J. Murray. 2015. Non-celiac gluten hypersensitivity: What is all the fuss about? F1000Prime Reports 7:54.

Lebwohl, B. J. F. Ludvigsson, P. H. R.Green. 2015 Celiac disease and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. British Medical Journal 351:h4347. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4347.

Lomer, M. C., G. C. Parkes, and J. D. Sanderson. 2007. Review article: Lactose intolerance in clinical practice—Myths and realities. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 27(2):93-103.

Mooney, P. D., M. Hadjivassiliou, and D. S. Sanders. 2014. Coeliac disease. BMJ 348:g1561.

Netting, M. J., P. F. Middleton, and M. Makrides. 2014. Does maternal diet during pregnancy and lactation affect outcomes in offspring? A systematic review of food-based approaches. Nutrition 30(11-12):1225-1241.

Newport, F. 2012. In U.S., 5% consider themselves vegetarians. http://www.gallup.com/poll/156215/consider-themselves-vegetarians.aspx (accessed October 13, 2015).

NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases). 2010. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food allergy in the United States. Bethesda, MD: NIH.

Norris, J. M., K. Barriga, E. J. Hoffenberg, I. Taki, D. Miao, J. E. Haas, L. M. Emery, R. J. Sokol, H. A. Erlich, G. S. Eisenbarth, and M. Rewers. 2005. Risk of celiac disease autoimmunity and timing of gluten introduction in the diet of infants at increased risk of disease. JAMA 293(19):2343-2351.

Osborn, D. A., and J. Sinn. 2006. Formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews(4):Cd003664.

Phillips, D., L. Bell, R. Morgan, and J. Pooler. 2014. Transition to EBT in WIC: Review of impact and examination of participant redemption patterns: Final report. Washington, DC: Altarum Institute. http://altarum.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-publication-files/Altarum_Transition%20to%20WIC%20EBT_Final%20Report_071614.pdf (accessed March 2, 2015).

Rossen, L.M., A. E. Simon, K. A. Herrick. 2015. Types of infant formulas consumed in the United States. Clinical Pediatrics. Published electronically July 6, 2015. pii: 0009922815591881.

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×

Rubio-Tapia, A., I. D. Hill, C. P. Kelly, A. H. Calderwood, J. A. Murray, and American College of Gastroenterology. 2013. ACG clinical guidelines: Diagnosis and management of celiac disease. American Journal of Gastroenterology 108(5):656-676; quiz 677.

Saccone, G., V. Berghella, L. Sarno, G. M. Maruotti, I. Cetin, L. Greco, A. S. Khashan, F. McCarthy, D. Martinelli, F. Fortunato, P. Martinelli. 2015. Celiac disease and obstetric complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. S0002-9378(15)01194-1. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.080. [Epub ahead of print].

Strachan, D. P. 1989. Hay fever, hygiene, and household size. BMJ 299(6710):1259-1260.

Suarez, F. L., D. A. Savaiano, and M. D. Levitt. 1995. A comparison of symptoms after the consumption of milk or lactose-hydrolyzed milk by people with self-reported severe lactose intolerance. New England Journal of Medicine 333(1):1-4.

Suarez, F. L., D. Savaiano, P. Arbisi, and M. D. Levitt. 1997. Tolerance to the daily ingestion of two cups of milk by individuals claiming lactose intolerance. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 65(5):1502-1506.

Szajewska, H., R. Shamir, A. Chmielewska, M. Piescik-Lech, R. Auricchio, A. Ivarsson, S. Kolacek, S. Koletzko, I. Korponay-Szabo, M. L. Mearin, C. Ribes-Koninckx, R. Troncone, and P. S. Group. 2015. Systematic review with meta-analysis: Early infant feeding and coeliac disease—Update 2015. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 41(11):1038-1054.

Thompson, T. 2000. Folate, iron, and dietary fiber contents of the gluten-free diet. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 100(11):1389-1396. http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/155923/eib55_1_.pdf (accessed August 30, 2015).

U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2014. Administration, 7 C.F.R. § 246.3.

U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2014. Food labeling, 21 C.F.R. § 101.

USDA/ARS (U.S. Department of Agriculture/Agricultural Research Service). 2014. USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, release 27. Beltsville, MD: USDA/ARS. http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl (accessed December 15, 2014).

USDA/FNS (U.S. Department of Agriculture/Food and Nutrition Service). 2011. WIC food packages policy options study, final report. Alexandria, VA: USDA/FNS. http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/WICFoodPackageOptions.pdf (accessed December 9, 2014).

USDA/FNS. 2014. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): Revisions in the WIC food packages; final rule, 7 C.F.R. § 246.

USDA/FNS. 2015a. Food allergies. http://wicworks.nal.usda.gov/topics-z/food-allergies (accessed June 2, 2015).

USDA/FNS. 2015b. WIC food packages policy options II, final report. Alexandria, VA: USDA/FNS. http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic-food-package-policy-options-ii (accessed November 11, 2015).

USDA/HHS (U.S. Department of Agriculture/U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2015. The report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2015, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC: USDA/HHS. http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/PDFs/Scientific-Report-of-the-2015-DietaryGuidelines-Advisory-Committee.pdf (accessed May 24, 2015).

USGAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2006. FNS could take additional steps to contain WIC infant formula costs. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office. www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-380 (accessed June 28, 2015).

Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 265
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 266
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 267
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 268
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 269
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 270
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 271
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 272
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 273
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 274
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 275
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 276
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 277
Suggested Citation:"8 Meeting Diverse Dietary Needs and Preferences: Considerations for the WIC Food Packages." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21832.
×
Page 278
Next: 9 Background and Approach to Considering Food Package Options »
Review of WIC Food Packages: Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $84.00 Buy Ebook | $64.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) began 40 years ago as a pilot program and has since grown to serve over 8 million pregnant women, and mothers of and their infants and young children. Today the program serves more than a quarter of the pregnant women and half of the infants in the United States, at an annual cost of about $6.2 billion. Through its contribution to the nutritional needs of pregnant, breastfeeding, and post-partum women; infants; and children under 5 years of age; this federally supported nutrition assistance program is integral to meeting national nutrition policy goals for a significant portion of the U.S. population.

To assure the continued success of the WIC, Congress mandated that the Food and Nutrition Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reevaluate the program's food packages every 10 years. In 2014, the USDA asked the Institute of Medicine to undertake this reevaluation to ensure continued alignment with the goals of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. This, the second report of this series, provides a summary of the work of phase I of the study, and serves as the analytical underpinning for phase II in which the committee will report its final conclusions and recommendations.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!