Browse the place directories and read the reference tables below. Search and interactive comparisons need JavaScript.
Fruit, vegetables, pulses and nutrition measures
Describe frequency and household consumption while keeping clinical and nutrient conclusions separate.
Food frequency among women aged 15–49, NFHS-5
2019–21. Women aged 15–49 represented by NFHS-5, India.
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Place or category | Daily% | Weekly% | Occasionally% | Never% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milk or curd | 48.8% | 23.5% | 21.9% | 5.8% |
| Pulses or beans | 49.6% | 43.3% | 6.7% | 0.4% |
| Dark green, leafy vegetables | 52% | 38.8% | 8.9% | 0.3% |
| Fruits | 12.5% | 37.1% | 48.7% | 1.6% |
| Eggs | 5.2% | 39.9% | 26.9% | 28% |
| Fish | 5.1% | 30.6% | 29.9% | 34.4% |
| Chicken, meat | 1.4% | 34.5% | 32.6% | 31.5% |
| Fish, chicken or meat | 5.9% | 39.3% | 25.4% | 29.4% |
| Fried foods | 7.4% | 35.6% | 52.6% | 4.4% |
| Aerated drinks | 2.7% | 12.9% | 68.7% | 15.7% |
Percentages describe reported habitual frequency, not quantities, nutrient adequacy, lifetime abstention or a measured dietary intake on a particular day. Women and men in this table are both aged 15–49; this is not an all-age population estimate. The male report sample in this table is narrower than the full male interview sample. Eggs, fish, chicken/meat and the combined fish/chicken/meat row are separately defined. The combined row is published by NFHS; it must not be reconstructed by adding overlapping separate percentages. Never eating fish/chicken/meat does not identify a strict vegetarian or vegan population. Separate egg and meat percentages do not reveal their joint overlap. Do not average male and female percentages to invent a national vegetarian share.
Original source table ↗ · Table 10.25, printed p.437 / PDF p.472
Download this complete tableFood frequency among men aged 15–49, NFHS-5
2019–21. Men aged 15–49 represented by NFHS-5, India.
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Place or category | Daily% | Weekly% | Occasionally% | Never% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milk or curd | 48.8% | 31% | 16.4% | 3.7% |
| Pulses or beans | 48.1% | 45% | 6.4% | 0.4% |
| Dark green, leafy vegetables | 51.5% | 40.9% | 7.3% | 0.4% |
| Fruits | 12.2% | 44% | 42.3% | 1.5% |
| Eggs | 7.1% | 50.7% | 26.9% | 15.4% |
| Fish | 6.8% | 39% | 32.8% | 21.4% |
| Chicken, meat | 2.4% | 44.5% | 34.8% | 18.3% |
| Fish, chicken or meat | 8% | 49.3% | 26.1% | 16.6% |
| Fried foods | 9.2% | 35.9% | 47.5% | 7.3% |
| Aerated drinks | 4.2% | 20.9% | 61.3% | 13.6% |
Percentages describe reported habitual frequency, not quantities, nutrient adequacy, lifetime abstention or a measured dietary intake on a particular day. Women and men in this table are both aged 15–49; this is not an all-age population estimate. The male report sample in this table is narrower than the full male interview sample. Eggs, fish, chicken/meat and the combined fish/chicken/meat row are separately defined. The combined row is published by NFHS; it must not be reconstructed by adding overlapping separate percentages. Never eating fish/chicken/meat does not identify a strict vegetarian or vegan population. Separate egg and meat percentages do not reveal their joint overlap. Do not average male and female percentages to invent a national vegetarian share.
Original source table ↗ · Table 10.25, printed p.437 / PDF p.472
Download this complete tableDefinitions and evidence to use
Describe frequency and household consumption while keeping clinical and nutrient conclusions separate.
Start with the geographic unit, observation period and denominator. Compare counts with counts, rates with rates and spending at compatible prices. Read the original table’s coverage before calculating a total or interpreting a difference.
Next questions and clear gaps
The full coverage map separates delivered analysis, verified inputs and work still requiring extraction or suitable evidence. It is a research plan, not a claim that every proposed result is already published.
Open this subject in the coverage map