←back to thread

311 points joshdickson | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source

Hi HN!

Today I’m excited to launch OpenNutrition: a free, ODbL-licenced nutrition database of everyday generic, branded, and restaurant foods, a search engine that can browse the web to import new foods, and a companion app that bundles the database and search as a free macro tracking app.

Consistently logging the foods you eat has been shown to support long-term health outcomes (1)(2), but doing so easily depends on having a large, accurate, and up-to-date nutrition database. Free, public databases are often out-of-date, hard to navigate, and missing critical coverage (like branded restaurant foods). User-generated databases can be unreliable or closed-source. Commercial databases come with ongoing, often per-seat licensing costs, and usage restrictions that limit innovation.

As an amateur powerlifter and long-term weight loss maintainer, helping others pursue their health goals is something I care about deeply. After exiting my previous startup last year, I wanted to investigate the possibility of using LLMs to create the database and infrastructure required to make a great food logging app that was cost engineered for free and accessible distribution, as I believe that the availability of these tools is a public good. That led to creating the dataset I’m releasing today; nutritional data is public record, and its organization and dissemination should be, too.

What’s in the database?

- 5,287 common everyday foods, 3,836 prepared and generic restaurant foods, and 4,182 distinct menu items from ~50 popular US restaurant chains; foods have standardized naming, consistent numeric serving sizes, estimated micronutrient profiles, descriptions, and citations/groundings to USDA, AUSNUT, FRIDA, CNF, etc, when possible.

- 313,442 of the most popular US branded grocery products with standardized naming, parsed serving sizes, and additive/allergen data, grounded in branded USDA data; the most popular 1% have estimated micronutrient data, with the goal of full coverage.

Even the largest commercial databases can be frustrating to work with when searching for foods or customizations without existing coverage. To solve this, I created a real-time version of the same approach used to build the core database that can browse the web to learn about new foods or food customizations if needed (e.g., a highly customized Starbucks order). There is a limited demo on the web, and in-app you can log foods with text search, via barcode scan, or by image, all of which can search the web to import foods for you if needed. Foods discovered via these searches are fed back into the database, and I plan to publish updated versions as coverage expands.

- Search & Explore: https://www.opennutrition.app/search

- Methodology/About: https://www.opennutrition.app/about

- Get the iOS App: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/opennutrition-macro-tracker/id...

- Download the dataset: https://www.opennutrition.app/download

OpenNutrition’s iOS app offers free essential logging and a limited number of agentic searches, plus expenditure tracking and ongoing diet recommendations like best-in-class paid apps. A paid tier ($49/year) unlocks additional searches and features (data backup, prioritized micronutrient coverage for logged foods), and helps fund further development and broader library coverage.

I’d love to hear your feedback, questions, and suggestions—whether it’s about the database itself, a really great/bad search result, or the app.

1. Burke et al., 2011, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3268700/

2. Patel et al., 2019, https://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/2/e12209/

1. sodality2 ◴[] No.43572303[source]
I have to say, irrespective of any concerns about the LLM-generated content, the actual app alone (goal-setting, macro tracking, etc) is the best free iOS-based nutrition-tracking app I've ever used, at first use. It's actually shockingly hard to find good, free (or even one time payment!) ones that don't constantly nag you to upgrade and paywall. I would pay a lot (once) for a nutrition/weight tracking app as slick as this, with all of the goal setting, data graphs, etc, that uses the OpenFoodFacts database, not your own. (Soliciting suggestions!) Please consider making the AI features optional and instead using the OFF database as the primary source.

Also, looks like the Apple Health option in Settings actually opens the start-of-week settings modal.

replies(1): >>43572530 #
2. joshdickson ◴[] No.43572530[source]
Thank you very much for your feedback. Building a great product that did not have variable usage costs that allowed for a generous free tier was my primary motivation for undertaking this project. While there is a need to monetize, I also believe there is a niche for an app with a more expansive free tier than exists in the space currently.

Only using the OFF database would be untenable to me as an end user. I think most people do not want to know or care about where the data is coming from, they just want it to be accurate and easy to use. I've listed the usability reasons here for why I can't offer that how I want with only OFF (and that's no dig to OFF, it is a fantastic project, and a primary motivator for this project and its license structure).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43570775

replies(1): >>43572655 #
3. sodality2 ◴[] No.43572655[source]
Some kind of fall-back mechanism would be nice, then, maybe? As someone who does indeed want it to be accurate, I would prefer to use OFF for any food which exists within their database, since it tends to be much more accurate (and maybe fall back to "AI search" if I want to look up "apple" or whatever).

I understand that most people probably consume more whole foods that might not have the cut-and-dry numbers on OFF. It just does feel like a big lacking feature to just categorically exclude OFF, if I wanted to use it.