Perspective: Food Is Medicine: Hype or Hope?

Top Things to Know

FIM interventions like MTMs and PRx show potential to improve diet and reduce disease risk, but more robust, long-term studies are essential to validate their clinical and economic impact.

FIM programs should be embedded into clinical workflows, supported by reimbursement models, and delivered through interdisciplinary teams including dietitians and community partners.

To avoid widening disparities, FIM programs should be culturally relevant, accessible to underserved populations, and increasingly personalized.

Summary of Conclusion/Findings

This critical review evaluates the current state of Food is Medicine (FIM) initiatives, which include medically tailored meals (MTMs), groceries (MTGs), produce prescriptions (PRx), and teaching kitchens (TKs). The authors find that while emerging evidence supports improvements in diet quality and modest reductions in cardiometabolic risk factors (e.g., HbA1c, BMI), the overall evidence base remains limited due to small sample sizes, short follow-up periods, and methodological variability. Some studies suggest potential health care cost savings and reduced hospitalizations, particularly with MTMs. Innovations such as AI-driven personalized nutrition, culturally tailored community programs, and expanded medical nutrition education are promising but face challenges in scalability, integration, and equity. The review emphasizes the need for larger, long-term trials, real-world implementation studies, and stronger policy support. Ultimately, FIM holds promise but must be grounded in rigorous evidence and aligned with broader public health goals to avoid over-medicalizing food.