FOOD VALUE AND USES OF POULTRY. 25 
As the figures in the table and the diagrams in figure 2 snow, 
poultry has an energy value much like that of other flesh foods, 
and, like that, varying with individual kinds; chicken, for example, 
averages less energy value per pound than duck, owing to the fact 
that it is usually less fat. Im chicken the light and dark meat have 
much the same energy value per pound, while in duck the leg and 
second joint have a higher energy value than the breast, being 
almost equal to pork chop in this respect. 
DIGESTIBILITY AND HEALTHFULNESS. 
There is a popular idea that different kinds of poultry vary con- 
siderably in digestibility or healthfulness.. Such ideas, it may be 
said in passing, most often refer merely to the behavior of food in 
the stomach—whether or not it leaves that organ quickly and with- 
out causing discomfort—and take no account of the equally impor- 
tant intestinal digestion. In the case of poultry of different kinds, 
scientific investigation indicates that there is much less difference 
than is commonly supposed, and that nearly all of the nutrients and 
energy of poultry, as of other meats, are utilized by the healthy, 
normal body. 
Such a statement does not take account of the ease and quickness 
_of digestion nor of the effect that some of the characteristics of the 
different meats might have in certain forms of disease, and these 
considerations must be borne in mind in discussing the value of differ- 
ent kinds of foods in special cases. 
For example, it has been said that poultry, veai, and lamb are 
more healthful than red meats (beef), because the so-called ‘‘light”’ 
meats contain less of certain nitrogenous extractives supposed to be 
harmful in rheumatism, gout, and certain kidney diseases. Recent 
investigations indicate that the differences in this regard between the 
two classes of meat are inconsiderable, and that they are quite as 
much in favor of the red as the light meats. 
There is also a theory that. the light meat of chicken, turkey, etc., 
is more easily digested, because more tender, than the dark. A 
glance at the figures for chicken and turkey, in the table, will show 
that the light meat of these birds, and especially of turkey, contains 
more protein and less fat than the dark, and that, since fat is some- 
times less easily digested than protein, they may yield more nourish- 
ment for the same amount of digestive effort. Very likely the popu- 
lar idea that the breast of duck is much more digestible than other 
parts of the bird may be explained by the fact that it contains 5 per 
cent more protein and 24 per cent less fat than the other parts. 
These differences in nutritive value seem to depend on the chemical 
composition rather than on the texture of the fibers, and are not ordi- 
narily of practical importance. 
