Summer squash vs Okra - Health impact and Nutrition Comparison
INTRODUCTION
Okra is a vegetable that has edible pods filled with seeds. The pods have a wide range of usages in the culinary world. They can be used in stews, soups, or fried. They originated in western Africa and southern Asia. However, nowadays they are found nearly all around the world. Fresh okras are available seasonally.
Summer squash is vegetables that belong to the squash family. They are harvested when immature and they have similar culinary usage as okras. Summer squash was first cultivated in Central America.
In this article, we will be comparing the nutritional data and health impacts of both okra and squash.
NUTRITIONAL CONTENT COMPARISON
Taking the overall nutrient profile of okra and summer squash, we can conclude that okra is richer in almost all nutrients. Squash is richer in Vitamin B2, B6, and polyunsaturated fats. On the other hand, the nutritional profile of both foods is very similar, although a difference exists while comparing both of them however, these differences are not very significant. It is important to note that, the amounts of calcium and magnesium are remarkably different: Okra contains 5 times more calcium and 3 times more magnesium. Explore the charts below for more details.
HEALTH IMPACT
The impact on health is similar for both foods because of the similar nutritional structure. There is one medical study that involves Okra which showed that Okra extract suppresses oxidative stress and insulin resistance, thus improving blood glucose level. (1)
Both foods are very healthy because of their antioxidant properties, B-complex vitamins, carotenoids lutein, and zeaxanthin content. (2)
SUMMARY
The foods are not radically different, having a similar price, equal glycemic index, and mineral content, but okra contains 3 times more vitamins A, 1.5 times vitamin E, and 10 times more vitamin K which makes it a better choice in terms of nutrition.
References
Infographic
Mineral Comparison
Vitamin Comparison
Comparison summary table
|
|
||
| Lower in Sodium |
|
||
| Lower in glycemic index |
|
||
| Lower in price |
|
||
| Lower in Sugar |
|
||
| Lower in Saturated Fat |
|
||
| Rich in minerals |
|
||
| Rich in vitamins |
|
||
| Lower in Cholesterol | Equal | ||
All nutrients comparison - raw data values
| Nutrient | |
|
Opinion |
| Net carbs | 2.25g | 4.25g |
|
| Protein | 1.21g | 1.93g |
|
| Fats | 0.18g | 0.19g |
|
| Carbs | 3.35g | 7.45g |
|
| Calories | 16kcal | 33kcal |
|
| Starch | g | 0.34g |
|
| Fructose | 0.95g | 0.57g |
|
| Sugar | 2.2g | 1.48g |
|
| Fiber | 1.1g | 3.2g |
|
| Calcium | 15mg | 82mg |
|
| Iron | 0.35mg | 0.62mg |
|
| Magnesium | 17mg | 57mg |
|
| Phosphorus | 38mg | 61mg |
|
| Potassium | 262mg | 299mg |
|
| Sodium | 2mg | 7mg |
|
| Zinc | 0.29mg | 0.58mg |
|
| Copper | 0.051mg | 0.109mg |
|
| Vitamin A | 200IU | 716IU |
|
| Vitamin E | 0.12mg | 0.27mg |
|
| Vitamin D | 0IU | 0IU | |
| Vitamin D | 0µg | 0µg | |
| Vitamin C | 17mg | 23mg |
|
| Vitamin B1 | 0.048mg | 0.2mg |
|
| Vitamin B2 | 0.142mg | 0.06mg |
|
| Vitamin B3 | 0.487mg | 1mg |
|
| Vitamin B5 | 0.155mg | 0.245mg |
|
| Vitamin B6 | 0.218mg | 0.215mg |
|
| Folate | 29µg | 60µg |
|
| Vitamin B12 | 0µg | 0µg | |
| Vitamin K | 3µg | 31.3µg |
|
| Tryptophan | 0.011mg | 0.017mg |
|
| Threonine | 0.028mg | 0.065mg |
|
| Isoleucine | 0.042mg | 0.069mg |
|
| Leucine | 0.069mg | 0.105mg |
|
| Lysine | 0.065mg | 0.081mg |
|
| Methionine | 0.017mg | 0.021mg |
|
| Phenylalanine | 0.041mg | 0.065mg |
|
| Valine | 0.053mg | 0.091mg |
|
| Histidine | 0.025mg | 0.031mg |
|
| Cholesterol | 0mg | 0mg | |
| Trans Fat | 0g | 0g | |
| Saturated Fat | 0.044g | 0.026g |
|
| Monounsaturated Fat | 0.016g | 0.017g |
|
| Polyunsaturated fat | 0.089g | 0.027g |
|
Which food is preferable for your diet?
|
|
|
| Low Fats diet |
|
|
| Low Carbs diet |
|
|
| Low Calories diet |
|
|
| Low glycemic index diet |
|
People also compare
Vitamin and Mineral Summary Scores
Macronutrients Comparison
Comparison summary