Mal J Nutr 21(3): 365 - 374, 2015

Phosphorus Contents of Raw Chicken Meat and Processed Chicken Meat Products
Er SH1 & Chan YM1,2

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The per capita consumption of chicken meat and related products has increased steadily in Malaysia, as it is affordable and can be consumed without religious constraints. There is concern for the widespread use of phosphate additives in processed meats, which may lead to hyperphosphatemia, especially among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. The objective of this study was to determine and compare the phosphorus content in raw chicken breast meat (RCBM) and selected processed chicken meat products.
Methods: Samples of RCBM, chicken frankfurters, chicken patties and chicken nuggets of different brands were studied. The phosphorus content of the samples were determined via the dry ashing method and a Perkin-Elmer 5300DV inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometer (ICP-OES).
Results: The mean phosphorus content in RCBM was 209.15±3.13 mg per 100 g. Chicken nuggets contained the highest phosphorus content, followed by RCBM, chicken patties and chicken frankfurters. Compared to the RCBM, the mean phosphorus content of chicken frankfurters and chicken patties were 21.42% and 4.81% respectively lower, whilst that of chicken nuggets was 1.74% higher. The same type of chicken meat products from different brands also differed significantly in their phosphorus content.
Conclusion: There were significant differences in the phosphorus content among different types of chicken meat products, and among the same chicken meat products from different brands. Caution should be exercised, especially by CKD patients, in consuming processed chicken meat products due to the risk posed to them by phosphorus content.

Keywords: Chronic kidney disease, hyperphosphatemia, phosphate additives, processed chicken meat products, phosphorus contents.

Download full article

March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)

2010, Vol 16(2)

2010, Vol 16(3)

2011, Vol 17(1)

2011, Vol 17(2)

2011, Vol 17(3)

2012, Vol 18(1)

2012, Vol 18(2)

2012, Vol 18(3)

2013, Vol 19(1)

2013, Vol 19(2)

2013, Vol 19(3)

2014, Vol 20(1)

2014, Vol 20(2)

2014, Vol 20(3)

2015, Vol 21(1)

2015, Vol 21(2)

2015, Vol 21(3)

2016, Vol 22(1)

2016, Vol 22(2)

2016, Vol 22 Supplement

2016, Vol 22(3)

2017, Vol 23(1)

2017, Vol 23(2)