This "Nutriprofile" stuff - has anyone else tried it?

I don't mind that they're pushing their products, that's fine, they've got to make a profit.

What really disappointed me was the way the questionnaire was phrased. They ask you about certain types of food, and the question is: how often do you eat this? e.g. how often do you eat red meat/wholemeal bread/fruit/etc. And then on the basis of that rather limited information they produce what is supposed to be a personal report for you - how on earth do they reckon they can produce a personal report about my nutrition when they have no idea how much I eat of anything - all they know is how often I eat this stuff!

Say you have two people filling in this questionnaire - John eats 100 grammes of red meat 5 times a week, whilst Jane eats 250 grammes of red meat twice a week. The answer to the question "how often do you eat red meat?" is going to be 5 times a week for John and twice a week for Jane, but they both eat the same amount per week.

Either I'm missing something or this is one big con!

I haven't filled one in - it's in my pile of things to have a look at - but I assume that based on what you respond you'll be advised not how you should balance out your diet but which of their various dietary supplements you need to take.

Or am I just being my usual cynical self?

Where did you find this Nutriprofile? Not heard of it.

It's something that a company called Healthspan, one of the suppliers of vitamins and dietary supplements, have developed. The questionnaire was inserted into various newspapers recently and can also be completed on-line:

http://www.nutriprofile.org/default.aspx

It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has sent it in.

I have done it - you can do it on-line and they email you to say when you can read the results. I think that Meirav points out one of the shortfalls with it. I would calculate how many times I eat something but judging it against a standard portion size (not necessarily the same as what we eat!)

It will tell you the proportions of carbs, protein, fat, sat fat, fibre etc (subject to the limitations as stated above), plus it breaks down all the vitamins and minerals and says whether you are short, OK or having too much (ditto).

It was quite interesting to see the answer, if you're that way inclined. I'm keeping a food diary this week as they have just emailed me to say it's been 3 months and it's time to do another (seasonal eating patterns could affect your general diet). I didn't buy any of the things they were promoting although I do take some supplements. One thing I do recall from the first one I did was that I was short on B vitamins and should try having Marmite more often!

It is genuinly free and they don't spam you (apart from the reminder I've just had to review my survey). For a freebie, it's not a bad indication of your diet. To get anything more accurate you would probably have to spend lots of cash.

Well, in that case they should rephrase their question to: how many standard portions a week do you eat? I answered the questions as they stood, and I would have thought that's what most people would do, so the information they get is useless!

And yes, Ron, they do then suggest their own supplements for you to take, but I didn't mind that - if they're offering a free service there has to be some profit-making element in there for them. I just resent the way they promote this as a personal report tailored especially to you, when their questionnaire actually gathers useless information about you and can't possibly reach any useful conclusion about what you need - they can't, for instance, know if I'm getting enough iron just by getting an answer to how often I eat red meat, as they've no idea if I have 100 grammes or half a kilo at a time!

My report has just come and it's very interesting.

First of all, they point out when you're deficient in vitamins but there is no mention of the recent research that suggests that excessive intake of vitamins may not be good for you! Instead, there are statements such as: "However, many experts now recommend that, for certain nutrients, an intake higher than the RNI is required for optimum benefit."

In particular it recommends a target of at least 1000mg of Omega 3 a day (the equivalent of four portions of oily fish a week), whereas the government recommends only 450mg a day with a maximum of 4 portions of oily fish a week.

As others have said, the figures are worked out without any indication of the amount of food consumed. For example, it suggests that my intake of B5 may be low; but this comes from (among other things) poultry, wholegrains, beans and vegetables, of which I eat a lot. Similarly with vitamin E, which can come from olive oil (I use pure, chilled olive oil as a spread), wholemeal cereals (I eat at least three slices of wholemeal bread a day plus 75/100g of oats), broccoli, etc.

It suggests that my salt intake may be too high, but I don't remember any question as to whether I use salt in my cooking - I don't - so presumably it is based on some average figure.

All in all, for someone who eats a reasonably balanced, healthy diet the margin of error in these figures is likely to be so large as to make the report useless, while people who have an unhealthy lifestyle are hardly likely to fill it in.

It does seem more aimed at creating concern among people who are serious about their diet and health and to sell them possibly unnecessary supplements. If you really are concerned about getting the balance of your diet right, this type of report will not give you the accurate information you need to make informed decisions.

I'm intrigued - I've just completed the questionnaire so will report back in 24 hours when I get the verdict!

It's been a while since I did mine. I did find it interesting, but you'd probably get more from it if you understand it's limitations as well?

I got high for salt intake too (just) even though I am very aware of this. I have to say that I eat very few ready meals, sauces from jars etc, and concentrate on fresh food with loads of fruit and veg, and even I find it difficult to keep under the 6g a day!

I'm currently keeping a food diary for a week so I can complete it with more accuracy this time round.

I have also filled this in. It was quite informative but the part I found annoying was that it said I was short of calcium because I don't have dairy. I do have soya milk and yoghurt which is calcium enriched but was unable to fill it in as there is nowhere on that section to do so. This happens in quite a few places- it needs a blank space for one to fill in the relevent info. It would make it more personal.

Thanks Sue - you just reminded me to go and get my results which I had sent to an email account I don't normally use.

Yes mine's a lot of nonsense too. Deficient in Omega 3, but I don't think it asked for details about the supplements I take. Interestingly for a lot of things I'm at risk of being deficient as it doesn't ask specific enough questions. I do take exception to being told I have too much sodium - I don't put salt on my food - ever - and I don't use it in cooking.

The general stuff's quite interesting but I already take half the supplements they recommend!

Ok, so perhaps I'm a bit more cynical about this - I did it again and it said I didn't eat enough fibre. Aim is for about 18g per day. I actually eat something like 30g per day (due to living mainly on fruit, veg, porridge and grains!) so I don't know how it came up with that...