Search

Background: Nutrient profiling systems (NPSs) use algorithms to evaluate the nutritional quality of foods and beverages. Criterion validation, which assesses the relationship between consuming foods rated as healthier by the NPS and objective measures of health, is essential to ensure the accuracy of NPSs., Objective: We examined and compared NPSs that have undergone criterion validity testing in relation to diet-related disease risk and risk markers., Methods: Academic databases were searched for prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies published before November, 2022. NPSs were eligible if they incorporated multiple nutrients or food components using an algorithm to determine an overall summary indicator (e.g., a score or rank) for individual foods. Studies were included if they assessed the criterion validity of an eligible NPS. Validation evidence was first summarized in narrative form by NPS, with random effects meta-analysis where ≥2 prospective cohort studies assessed the same NPS and outcomes., Results: Of 4519 publications identified, 29 describing 9 NPSs were included in the review. The Nutri-Score NPS was assessed as having substantial criterion validation evidence. Highest compared with lowest diet quality as defined by the Nutri-Score was associated with significantly lower risk of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59, 0.93; n = 6), cancer (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.94; n = 5), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.74; 95% CI; 0.59, 0.91; n = 4) and change in body mass index (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.50, 0.92; n = 3). The Food Standards Agency NPS, Health Star Rating, Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion, Food Compass, Overall Nutrition Quality Index, and the Nutrient-Rich Food Index were determined as having intermediate criterion validation evidence. Two other NPSs were determined as having limited criterion validation evidence., Conclusions: We found limited criterion validation studies compared with the number of NPSs estimated to exist. Greater emphasis on conducting and reporting on criterion validation studies across varied contexts may improve the confidence in existing NPSs., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Nutrition. All rights reserved.)

Context: Corporate engagement with food and beverage companies who produce food associated with health harms is a divisive topic in the global nutrition community, with high-profile cases of conflict of interest increasingly coming under scrutiny. There is a need for an agreed method to support health organizations in deciding whether and how to engage with large food and beverage manufacturers., Aim: The aim of this study was to develop a method to quantify the proportion of sales from food and beverage companies that are derived from unhealthy foods to support organizations in determining which companies might be considered high-risk for engagement., Methods: The 2015 WHO Euro nutrient profile model was applied to 35,550 products from 1294 brands manufactured by the top 20 global food and beverage companies from seven countries (Australia, Brazil, China, India, South Africa, UK and USA). For the purpose of this study, products that met the WHO Euro criteria were classified as "healthier" and those that failed were classified as "unhealthy". Products were grouped by brand and weighted by the brand's value sales for 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of each company's sales that were classified as unhealthy and healthier by company and category., Results: Overall, 89% of the top 20 companies' brand sales were classified as unhealthy. For every USD$10 spent on the top 20 companies' brands, only $1.10 was spent on products considered healthier. All companies saw the majority of their sales come from unhealthy foods, including soft drinks, confectionery and snacks. None of Red Bull or Ferrero's sales were classified as healthier and less than 5% of total sales were healthier for Mondelēz, Mars, and PepsiCo. Some companies had higher proportions of sales deriving from healthier products, including Grupo Bimbo (48%), Danone (34%) and Conagra (32%), although the majority of their sales were still derived from unhealthy foods., Discussion: The results presented in this study highlight the reliance the leading food and beverage companies have on sales of unhealthy products that are contributing to diet-related disease globally. The method and steps we have laid out here could be used by organizations in the global health community to identify companies that have conflicts of interest when it comes to engaging with governments, international organizations and public health bodies on issues of policy and regulation., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Sustainable food profiling models (SFPMs) are the scientific basis for the labelling of food products according to their environmental and nutritional impact, allowing consumers to make informed choices. We identified ten SFPMs that score individual foods according to at least two environmental indicators, with the most common being greenhouse gas emissions (n=10) and water use (n=8). Six models additionally assessed the nutritional quality of foods and presented different methods to combine nutritional and environmental indicators. Key advantages of identified models include a wide range in system boundaries, reference units, approaches for defining cutoff values, design proposals for food labelling schemes, and the comprehensive geographical scope of the lifecycle inventory databases used in the development phase of the model. Key disadvantages of identified models include inconsistent methods for food classification and poor replicability due to unclear methods, unavailable code for environmental and nutritional impact calculation, and unclear cutoff values. We found that few SFPMs to date account for at least two environmental impact factors, and even fewer include nutritional values or other dimensions of sustainability. This systematic review highlights the need to use consistent components and to develop national and international reference values for the classification of sustainable food to enable standardised food labelling., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

Background: Adoption of healthy and sustainable diets could be essential for safe-guarding the Earth's natural resources and reducing diet-related mortality, but their adoption could be hampered if such diets proved to be more expensive and unaffordable for some populations. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the costs of healthy and sustainable diets around the world., Methods: In this modelling study, we used regionally comparable food prices from the International Comparison Program for 150 countries. We paired those prices with estimates of food demand for different dietary patterns that, in modelling studies, have been associated with reductions in premature mortality and environmental resource demand, including nutritionally balanced flexitarian, pescatarian, vegetarian, and vegan diets. We used estimates of food waste and projections of food demand and prices to specify food system and socioeconomic change scenarios up to 2050. In the full cost accounting, we estimated diet-related health-care costs by pairing a comparative risk assessment of dietary risks with cost-of-illness estimates, and we estimated climate change costs by pairing the diet scenarios with greenhouse gas emission footprints and estimates of the social cost of carbon., Findings: Compared with the cost of current diets, the healthy and sustainable dietary patterns were, depending on the pattern, up to 22-34% lower in cost in upper-middle-income to high-income countries on average (when considering statistical means), but at least 18-29% more expensive in lower-middle-income to low-income countries. Reductions in food waste, a favourable socioeconomic development scenario, and a fuller cost accounting that included the diet-related costs of climate change and health care in the cost of diets increased the affordability of the dietary patterns in our future projections. When these measures were combined, the healthy and sustainable dietary patterns were up to 25-29% lower in cost in low-income to lower-middle-income countries, and up to 37% lower in cost on average, for the year 2050. Variants of vegetarian and vegan dietary patterns were generally most affordable, and pescatarian diets were least affordable., Interpretation: In high-income and upper-middle-income countries, dietary change interventions that incentivise adoption of healthy and sustainable diets can help consumers in those countries reduce costs while, at the same time, contribute to fulfilling national climate change commitments and reduce public health spending. In low-income and lower-middle-income countries, healthy and sustainable diets are substantially less costly than western diets and can also be cost-competitive in the medium-to-long term, subject to beneficial socioeconomic development and reductions in food waste. A fuller accounting of the costs of diets would make healthy and sustainable diets the least costly option in most countries in the future., Funding: Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition and Wellcome Trust., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MS reports grants from Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z) and personal fees from the Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition, during the conduct of the study. MAC reports grants from Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z) during the conduct of the study. PW reports personal fees from the Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition, during the conduct of the study. MR reports grants from Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z), during the conduct of the study. PS reports grants from Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z) and the British Heart Foundation (FS/15/34/31656), during the conduct of the study. The authors had no other financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The provision and over-consumption of foods high in energy, saturated fat, free sugars or salt are important risk factors for poor diet and ill-health. In the UK, policies seek to drive improvement through voluntary reformulation of single nutrients in key food groups. There has been little consideration of the overall progress by individual companies. This study assesses recent changes in the nutrient profile of brands and products sold by the top 10 food and beverage companies in the UK., Methods: The FSA/Ofcom nutrient profile model was applied to the nutrient composition data for all products manufactured by the top 10 food and beverage companies and weighted by volume sales. The mean nutrient profiling score, on a scale of 1-100 with thresholds for healthy products being 62 for foods and 68 for drinks, was used to rank companies and food categories between 2015 and 2018, and to calculate the proportion of individual products and sales that are considered by the UK Government to be healthy., Results: Between 2015 and 2018 there was little change in the sales-weighted nutrient profiling score of the top 10 companies (49 to 51; p = 0.28) or the proportion of products classified as healthy (46% to 48%; p = 0.23). Of the top five brands sold by each of the ten companies, only six brands among ten companies improved their nutrient profiling score by 20% or more. The proportion of total volume sales classified as healthy increased from 44% to 51% (p = 0.07) driven by an increase in the volume sales of bottled water, low/no calorie carbonates and juices, but after removing soft drinks, the proportion of foods classified as healthy decreased from 7% to 6% (p = 33)., Conclusions: The UK voluntary reformulation policies, setting targets for reductions in calories, sugar and salt, do not appear to have led to significant changes in the nutritional quality of foods, though there has been progress in soft drinks where the soft drink industry levy also applies. Further policy action is needed to incentivise companies to make more substantive changes in product composition to support consumers to achieve a healthier diet., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Food production is a major contributor to environmental damage. More environmentally sustainable foods could incur higher costs for consumers. In this review, we explore whether consumers are willing to pay (WTP) more for foods with environmental sustainability labels ('ecolabels'). Six electronic databases were searched for experiments on consumers' willingness to pay for ecolabelled food. Monetary values were converted to Purchasing Power Parity dollars and adjusted for country-specific inflation. Studies were meta-analysed and effect sizes with confidence intervals were calculated for the whole sample and for pre-specified subgroups defined as meat-dairy, seafood, and fruits-vegetables-nuts. Meta-regressions tested the role of label attributes and demographic characteristics on participants' WTP. Forty-three discrete choice experiments (DCEs) with 41,777 participants were eligible for inclusion. Thirty-five DCEs (n = 35,725) had usable data for the meta-analysis. Participants were willing to pay a premium of 3.79 PPP$/kg (95%CI 2.7, 4.89, p ≤ 0.001) for ecolabelled foods. WTP was higher for organic labels compared to other labels. Women and people with lower levels of education expressed higher WTP. Ecolabels may increase consumers' willingness to pay more for environmentally sustainable products and could be part of a strategy to encourage a transition to more sustainable diets.

Objective: There are concerns that price promotions encourage unhealthy dietary choices. This review aims to answer the following research questions (RQ1) what is the prevalence of price promotions on foods in high-income settings, and (RQ2) are price promotions more likely to be found on unhealthy foods?, Design: Systematic review of articles published in English, in peer-review journals, after 1 January 2000., Setting: Included studies measured the prevalence of price promotions (i.e. percentage of foods carrying a price promotion out of the total number of foods available to purchase) in retail settings, in upper-mid to high-income countries., Participants: 'Price promotion' was defined as a consumer-facing temporary price reduction or discount available to all customers. The control group/comparator was the equivalent products without promotions. The primary outcome for this review was the prevalence of price promotions, and the secondary outcome was the difference between the proportions of price promotions on healthy and unhealthy foods., Results: Nine studies (239 344 observations) were included for the meta-analysis for RQ1, the prevalence of price promotions ranged from 6 % (95 % CI 2 %, 15 %) for energy-dense nutrient-poor foods to 15 % (95 % CI 9 %, 25 %) for cereals, grains, breads and other starchy carbohydrates. However, the I-squared statistic was 99 % suggesting a very high level of heterogeneity. Four studies were included for the analysis of RQ2, of which two supported the hypothesis that price promotions were more likely to be found on unhealthy foods., Conclusions: The prevalence of price promotions is very context specific, and any proposed regulations should be supported by studies conducted within the proposed setting(s).

Background: Traditional methods of dietary assessment have their limitations and commercial sources of food sales and purchase data are increasingly suggested as an additional source to measuring diet at the population level. However, the potential uses of food sales data are less well understood. The aim of this review is to establish how sales data on food and soft drink products from third-party companies have been used in public health nutrition research., Methods: A search of five electronic databases was conducted in February-March 2018 for studies published in peer-reviewed journals that had used food sales or purchase data from a commercial company to analyse trends and patterns in food purchases or in the nutritional composition of foods. Study quality was evaluated using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies., Results: Of 2919 papers identified in the search, 68 were included. The selected studies used sales or purchase data from four companies: Euromonitor, GfK, Kantar and Nielsen. Sales and purchase data have been used to evaluate interventions, including the impact of the saturated fat tax in Denmark, the soft drink and junk food taxes in Mexico and supplemental nutrition programmes in the USA. They have also been used to identify trends in the nutrient composition of foods over time and patterns in food purchasing, including socio-demographic variations in purchasing., Conclusion: Food sales and purchase data are a valuable tool for public health nutrition researchers and their use has increased markedly in the last four years, despite the cost of access, the lack of transparency on data-collection methods and restrictions on publication. The availability of product and brand-level sales data means they are particularly useful for assessing how changes by individual food companies can impact on diet and public health., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The global burden of obesity leads to significant morbidity and has major economic implications. In April 2018, Britain will join a growing number of countries attempting to tackle this using fiscal measures when the UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy is introduced. We review recent evidence from natural experiments of the impact of health-related food and drink taxes on consumer behaviour, and discuss the possible consequences of these approaches on purchases and health. We highlight some of the potential indirect consequences and the importance of robust prospective evaluation.

Background: Health-related food taxes and subsidies may promote healthier diets and reduce mortality. Our aim was to estimate the effects of health-related food taxes and subsidies on deaths prevented or postponed (DPP) in New Zealand., Methods: A macrosimulation model based on household expenditure data, demand elasticities and population impact fractions for 18 diet-related diseases was used to estimate effects of five tax and subsidy regimens. We used price elasticity values for 24 major commonly consumed food groups in New Zealand, and food expenditure data from national Household Economic Surveys. Changes in mortality from cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and other diet-related diseases were estimated., Findings: A 20% subsidy on fruit and vegetables would result in 560 (95% uncertainty interval, 400 to 700) DPP each year (1.9% annual all-cause mortality). A 20% tax on major dietary sources of saturated fat would result in 1,500 (950 to 2,100) DPP (5.0%), and a 20% tax on major dietary sources of sodium would result in 2,000 (1300 to 2,700) DPP (6.8%). Combining taxes on saturated fat and sodium with a fruit and vegetable subsidy would result in 2,400 (1,800 to 3,000) DPP (8.1% mortality annually). A tax on major dietary sources of greenhouse gas emissions would generate 1,200 (750 to 1,700) DPP annually (4.0%). Effects were similar or greater for Maori and low-income households in relative terms., Conclusions: Health-related food taxes and subsidies could improve diets and reduce mortality from diet-related disease in New Zealand. Our study adds to the growing evidence base suggesting food pricing policies should improve population health and reduce inequalities, but there is still much work to be done to improve estimation of health impacts.

Background: Fiscal interventions to improve population diet have been recommended for consideration by many organisations including the World Health Organisation and the United Nations and policies such as sugar-sweetened beverage taxes have been implemented at national and sub-national levels. However, concerns have been raised with respect to the differential impact of fiscal interventions on population sub-groups and this remains a barrier to implementation., Objective: To examine how personal characteristics (such as socioeconomic status, sex, impulsivity, and income) moderate changes in purchases of targeted foods in response to food and beverage price changes in experimental settings., Design: Systematic review., Data Sources: Online databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, EconLit and PsycInfo), reference lists of previous reviews, and additional data from study authors., Study Selection: We included randomised controlled trials where food and beverage prices were manipulated and reported differential effects of the intervention on participant sub-groups defined according to personal characteristics., Data Analysis: Where possible, we extracted data to enable the calculation of price elasticities for the target foods by personal characteristic., Results: 8 studies were included in the review. Across studies, the difference in price elasticity varied from 0.02 to 2.43 between groups within the same study. 11 out of the total of 18 comparisons of own-price elasticity estimates by personal characteristic differed by more than 0.2 between groups. Income related factors were the most commonly considered and there was an indication that own-price elasticity estimates do vary by income but the direction of this effect was not clear., Conclusion: Experimental studies provide an opportunity to examine the differential effects of fiscal measures to improve population diets. Patterns in price sensitivity by personal characteristics are complex. General conclusions pertaining to the effects of personal characteristics on price sensitivity are not supported by the evidence, which shows heterogeneity between studies and populations., Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42014009705.

Objective: To examine the effects, by income group, of targeted food taxes and subsidies on nutrition, health and expenditure in the UK., Methods: A model based on consumption data and demand elasticity was constructed to predict the effects of four food taxation-subsidy regimens. Resulting changes in demand, expenditure, nutrition, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer mortality were estimated. Data Expenditure data were taken from the Expenditure and Food Survey; estimates of price elasticities of demand for food were taken from a report based on the National Food Survey 1988-2000. Estimates of effect on CVD and cancer mortality of changing fat, salt, fruit and vegetable intake were taken from previous meta-analyses., Results: (i) Taxing principal sources of dietary saturated fat is unlikely to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) or cancer mortality. (ii) Taxing 'less healthy' foods (defined by the WXYfm nutrient profiling model) could increase CVD and cancer deaths by 35-1300 yearly. (iii) Taxing 'less healthy' foods and subsidising fruits and vegetables by 17.5% could avert up to 2900 CVD and cancer deaths yearly. (iv) Taxing 'less healthy' foods and using all tax revenue to subsidize fruits and vegetables could avert up to 6400 CVD and cancer deaths yearly. Few obesity-related CVD deaths are averted by any of the regimens. All four regimens would be economically regressive and positive health effects will not necessarily be greater in lower-income groups where the need for dietary improvement is higher., Conclusions: A targeted food tax combined with the appropriate subsidy on fruits and vegetables could reduce deaths from CVD and cancer.

Objectives: To describe four different methods of identifying indicator foods that are high, medium or low in fat with reference to dietary patterns and to use these indicator foods to test three sets of definitions of 'high', 'medium' and 'low' in fat from 'banding schemes' developed by the Coronary Prevention Group (CPG), the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and Sainsbury's., Methods: Indicator foods were developed using food intake data from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey and two parameters: (i) probability of the food being consumed by an individual with a high-fat diet (Method 1); and (ii) the contribution of the food to the fat intake of the average diet of consumers (Methods 3 and 4). Method 2 used both parameters. The three banding schemes were tested by assessing their levels of agreement with methods in categorising indicators., Results: Sensitivity in identifying high, medium and low fat indicators was highest with the CPG banding scheme (high and medium fat indicators) and Sainsbury's scheme (low fat indicators) (Methods 2, 3 and 4). The levels of agreement (kappa coefficient) were 0.68 for the CPG scheme; 0.51 for the Sainsbury's scheme; and 0.41 for the FSA scheme (Method 3)., Conclusions: It is possible to use indicator foods related to dietary patterns of a specific population to generate more rational definitions of 'high', 'medium' and 'low' in fat. This could be the starting point for the development of indicator foods for testing more complex nutrient profile models (i.e. those that consider more than one nutrient).

Objective: To assess the validity of nutrient profiling Model WXYfm - developed for the purpose of regulating the promotion of 'less healthy' foods to children. The model ranks foods according to their healthiness and categorises foods into 'healthier' and 'less healthy' foods., Design: Convergent and discriminant validity was tested by comparing the way Model WXYfm categorises foods with the way the UK's national food guide - the Balance of Good Health (BGH) - categorises foods. Construct validity was assessed by testing a hypothesis relating the constructs of 'healthiness' of foods (as measured by Model WXYfm) and the 'healthiness' of diets (measured using the Diet Quality Index) and assessing whether this hypothesis was confirmed or refuted by using data on the dietary patterns of subjects (n = 1117) of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey of adults carried out in Great Britain in 2000-01., Results: Model WXYfm showed good convergent and discriminant validity: the level of agreement between the way the model categorises foods and the way the BGH categorises foods was good (kappa = 0.69). Model WXYfm also showed good construct validity: the energy intake from 'less healthy' foods amongst subjects with the least healthy diets was nearly twice the energy intake from 'less healthy' foods amongst the subjects with the healthiest diets., Conclusions: Model WXYfm demonstrated good validity in categorising foods in a way that is related to the healthiness of diets both recommended and achieved. The methods for assessing the validity of a nutrient profile model used in this paper have not, to our knowledge, been used before.

Objective: To examine the effects on nutrition, health and expenditure of extending value added tax (VAT) to a wider range of foods in the UK., Method: A model based on consumption data and elasticity values was constructed to predict the effects of extending VAT to certain categories of food. The resulting changes in demand, expenditure, nutrition and health were estimated. Three different tax regimens were examined: (1) taxing the principal sources of dietary saturated fat; (2) taxing foods defined as unhealthy by the SSCg3d nutrient scoring system; and (3) taxing foods in order to obtain the best health outcome., Data: Consumption patterns and elasticity data were taken from the National Food Survey of Great Britain. The health effects of changing salt and fat intake were from previous meta-analyses., Results: (1) Taxing only the principal sources of dietary saturated fat is unlikely to reduce the incidence of cardiovascular disease because the reduction in saturated fat is offset by a rise in salt consumption. (2) Taxing unhealthy foods, defined by SSCg3d score, might avert around 2,300 deaths per annum, primarily by reducing salt intake. (3) Taxing a wider range of foods could avert up to 3,200 cardiovascular deaths in the UK per annum (a 1.7% reduction)., Conclusions: Taxing foodstuffs can have unpredictable health effects if cross-elasticities of demand are ignored. A carefully targeted fat tax could produce modest but meaningful changes in food consumption and a reduction in cardiovascular disease.

Objective: Nutrient profiling can be defined as the 'the science of categorising foods according to their nutritional composition'. The purpose of the present paper is to describe a systematic and logical approach to nutrient profiling., Design: A seven-stage decision-making process is proposed and, as an illustration of how the approach might operate in practice, the development of a nutrient profiling model for the purpose of highlighting breakfast cereals that are 'high in fat, sugar or salt' is described., Results: The nutrient profile model developed for this paper calculates scores for foods using a simple equation. It enables breakfast cereals to be compared with each other and with other foods eaten at breakfast., Conclusion: Nutrient profiling is not new, but hitherto most nutrient profiling models have been developed in an unsystematic and illogical fashion. Different nutrient profiling models are needed for different purposes but a key requirement should be that they are developed using a systematic, transparent and logical process. This paper provides an example of such a process; approaches to validating nutrient profiling models are described elsewhere.

Objective: To compare nutrient profile models with a standard ranking of 120 foods., Design: Over 700 nutrition professionals were asked to categorise 120 foods into one of six positions on the basis of their healthiness. These categorisations were used to produce a standard ranking of the 120 foods. The standard ranking was compared with the results of applying eight different nutrient profile models to the 120 foods: Models SSCg3d and WXYfm developed for the UK Food Standards Agency, the Nutritious Food Index, the Ratio of Recommended to Restricted nutrients, the Naturally Nutrient Rich score, the Australian Heart Foundation's Tick scheme, the American Heart Association's heart-check mark and the Netherlands tripartite classification model for foods. Rank correlation was assessed for continuous models, and dependence was assessed for categorical models., Results: The continuous models each showed good correlation with the standard ranking (Spearman's rho = 0.6-0.8). The categorical models achieved high chi(2) results, indicating a high level of dependence between the nutrition professionals' and the models' categorisations (P < 0.001). Models SSCg3d and WXYfm achieved higher scores than the other models, implying a greater agreement with the standard ranking of foods., Conclusions: The results suggest that Models SSCg3d and WXYfm rank and categorise foods in accordance with the views of nutrition professionals.

Study Objective: To quantify the burden of ill health in the UK that can be attributed to food (the burden of food related ill health)., Design: Review and further analysis of the results of work concerned with estimates of the burden of disease measured as morbidity, mortality, and in financial terms and with the proportion of that burden that can be attributed to food., Main Results: Food related ill health is responsible for about 10% of morbidity and mortality in the UK and costs the NHS about 6 billion pounds annually., Conclusions: The burden of food related ill health measured in terms of mortality and morbidity is similar to that attributable to smoking. The cost to the NHS is twice the amount attributable to car, train, and other accidents, and more than twice that attributable to smoking. The vast majority of the burden is attributable to unhealthy diets rather than to food borne diseases.

This review assessed the effects of environmental labels on consumers' demand for more sustainable food products. Six electronic databases were searched for experimental studies of ecolabels and food choices. We followed standard Cochrane methods and results were synthesized using vote counting. Fifty-six studies (N = 42,768 participants, 76 interventions) were included. Outcomes comprised selection (n = 14), purchase (n = 40) and consumption (n = 2). The ecolabel was presented as text (n = 36), logo (n = 13) or combination (n = 27). Message types included: organic (n = 25), environmentally sustainable (n = 27), greenhouse gas emissions (n = 17), and assorted "other" message types (n = 7). Ecolabels were tested in actual (n = 15) and hypothetical (n = 41) environments. Thirty-nine studies received an unclear or high RoB rating. Sixty comparisons favored the intervention and 16 favored control. Ecolabeling with a variety of messages and formats was associated with the selection and purchase of more sustainable food products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The consumption of red and processed meat has been associated with increased mortality from chronic diseases, and as a result, it has been classified by the World Health Organization as carcinogenic (processed meat) and probably carcinogenic (red meat) to humans. One policy response is to regulate red and processed meat consumption similar to other carcinogens and foods of public health concerns. Here we describe a market-based approach of taxing red and processed meat according to its health impacts. Methods: We calculated economically optimal tax levels for 149 world regions that would account for (internalize) the health costs associated with ill-health from red and processed meat consumption, and we used a coupled modelling framework to estimate the impacts of optimal taxation on consumption, health costs, and non-communicable disease mortality. Health impacts were estimated using a global comparative risk assessment framework, and economic responses were estimated using international data on health costs, prices, and price elasticities. Findings: The health-related costs to society attributable to red and processed meat consumption in 2020 amounted to USD 285 billion (sensitivity intervals based on epidemiological uncertainty (SI), 93–431), three quarters of which were due to processed meat consumption. Under optimal taxation, prices for processed meat increased by 25% on average, ranging from 1% in low-income countries to over 100% in high-income countries, and prices for red meat increased by 4%, ranging from 0.2% to over 20%. Consumption of processed meat decreased by 16% on average, ranging from 1% to 25%, whilst red meat consumption remained stable as substitution for processed meat compensated price-related reductions. The number of deaths attributable to red and processed meat consumption decreased by 9% (222,000; SI, 38,000–357,000), and attributable health costs decreased by 14% (USD 41 billion; SI, 10–57) globally, in each case with greatest reductions in high and middle-income countries. Interpretation: Including the social health cost of red and processed meat consumption in the price of red and processed meat could lead to significant health and environmental benefits, in particular in high and middle-income countries. The optimal tax levels estimated in this study are context-specific and can complement the simple rules of thumb currently used for setting health-motivated tax levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) disproportionately affect low- and lower-middle income countries (LLMICs) where 80% of global NCD related deaths occur. LLMICs are the primary focus of interventions to address development and poverty indicators. We aimed to synthesise the evidence of these interventions' impact on the four primary NCDs (cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease and cancer) and their common behavioural risk factors (unhealthy diets, physical inactivity, tobacco and alcohol use). Methods: We systematically searched four online databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Global Health) for primary research conducted in LLMICS, published between January 1st 1990 and February 15th 2016. Studies involved development or poverty interventions which reported on outcomes relating to NCDs. We extracted summary level data on study design, population, health outcomes and potential confounders. Results: From 6383 search results, 29 studies from 24 LLMICs published between 1999 and 2015 met our inclusion criteria. The quality of included studies was limited and heterogeneity of outcome measures required narrative synthesis. One study measured impact on NCD prevalence, one physical activity and 27 dietary components. The majority of papers (23), involved agricultural interventions. Primary outcome measures tended to focus on undernutrition. Intensive agricultural interventions were associated with improved calorie, vitamin, fruit and vegetable intake. However, positive impacts were reliant on participant's land ownership, infection status and limited in generalisability. Just three studies measured adult obesity; two indicated increased income and consequential food affordability had the potential to increase obesity. Overall, there was poor alignment between included studies outcome measures and the key policy options and objectives of the Global Action Plan on NCDs. Conclusions: Though many interventions addressing poverty and development have great potential to impact on NCD prevalence and risk, most fail to measure or report these outcomes. Current evidence is limited to behavioural risk factors, namely diet and suggests a positive impact of agricultural-based food security programmes on dietary indicators. However, studies investigating the impact of improved income on obesity tend to show an increased risk. Embedding NCD impact evaluation into development programmes is crucial in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals and the rapid epidemiological transitions facing LLMICs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the United Kingdom, the Food Standards Agency-Ofcom nutrient profiling model (FSA-Ofcom model) is used to define less-healthy foods that cannot be advertised to children. However, there has been limited investigation of whether less-healthy foods defined by this model are associated with prospective health outcomes. The objective of this study was to test whether consumption of less-healthy food as defined by the FSA-Ofcom model is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD).Methods and Findings: We used data from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC)-Norfolk cohort study in adults (n = 25,639) aged 40-79 years who completed a 7-day diet diary between 1993 and 1997. Incident CVD (primary outcome), cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality (secondary outcomes) were identified using record linkage to hospital admissions data and death certificates up to 31 March 2015. Each food and beverage item reported was coded and given a continuous score, using the FSA-Ofcom model, based on the consumption of energy; saturated fat; total sugar; sodium; nonsoluble fibre; protein; and fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Items were classified as less-healthy using Ofcom regulation thresholds. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to test for an association between consumption of less-healthy food and incident CVD. Sensitivity analyses explored whether the results differed based on the definition of the exposure. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, behavioural risk factors, clinical risk factors, and socioeconomic status. Participants were followed up for a mean of 16.4 years. During follow-up, there were 4,965 incident cases of CVD (1,524 fatal within 30 days). In the unadjusted analyses, we observed an association between consumption of less-healthy food and incident CVD (test for linear trend over quintile groups, p < 0.01). After adjustment for covariates (sociodemographic, behavioural, and indices of cardiovascular risk), we found no association between consumption of less-healthy food and incident CVD (p = 0.84) or cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.90), but there was an association between consumption of less-healthy food and all-cause mortality (test for linear trend, p = 0.006; quintile group 5, highest consumption of less-healthy food, versus quintile group 1, HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20). Sensitivity analyses produced similar results. The study is observational and relies on self-report of dietary consumption. Despite adjustment for known and reported confounders, residual confounding is possible.Conclusions: After adjustment for potential confounding factors, no significant association between consumption of less-healthy food (as classified by the FSA-Ofcom model) and CVD was observed in this study. This suggests, in the UK setting, that the FSA-Ofcom model is not consistently discriminating among foods with respect to their association with CVD. More studies are needed to understand better the relationship between consumption of less-healthy food, defined by the FSA-Ofcom model, and indices of health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I first provide definitions of nutrient profiling and of a nutrient profile model. I set out the purposes of nutrient profiling: both general and specific. I give two examples of nutrient profile models that have been developed for regulatory purposes by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in the UK and the WHO for its European Region – the UK FSA/Ofcom and the WHO-Euro models – and compare the way the models are constructed and function, how they have been developed, the extent to which they have been tested and validated and their use in regulation. Finally I draw some conclusions about the future use of nutrient profiling for regulatory purposes. I argue that its full potential has yet to be realised and give some reasons why. I pose some urgent research questions with respect to nutrient profiling. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: To model population health impacts of dietary changes associated with the redevelopment of the UK food-based dietary guidelines (the ‘Eatwell Guide’). Method: Using multi-state lifetable methods, we modelled the impact of dietary changes on cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancers over the lifetime of the current UK population. From this model, we determined change in life expectancy and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) that could be averted. Results: Changing the average diet to that recommended in the new Eatwell Guide, without increasing total energy intake, could increase average life expectancy by 5.4 months (95% uncertainty interval: 4.7 to 6.2) for men and 4.0 months (3.4 to 4.6) for women; and avert 17.9 million (17.6 to 18.2) DALYs over the lifetime of the current population. A large proportion of the health benefits are from prevention of type 2 diabetes, with 440,000 (400,000 to 480,000) new cases prevented in men and 340,000 (310,000 to 370,000) new cases prevented in women, over the next ten years. Prevention of cardiovascular diseases and colorectal cancer is also large. However, if the diet recommended in the new Eatwell Guide is achieved with an accompanying increase in energy intake (and thus an increase in body mass index), around half the potential improvements in population health will not be realised. Conclusions: The dietary changes required to meet recommendations in the Eatwell Guide, which include eating more fruits and vegetables and less red and processed meats and dairy products, are large. However, the potential population health benefits are substantial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDGs) are developed to promote healthier eating patterns, but increasing food prices may make healthy eating less affordable. The aim of this study was to design a range of cost-minimized nutritionally adequate health-promoting food baskets (FBs) that help prevent both micronutrient inadequacy and diet-related non-communicable diseases at lowest cost. Methods: Average prices for 312 foods were collected within the Greater Copenhagen area. The cost and nutrient content of five different cost-minimized FBs for a family of four were calculated per day using linear programming. The FBs were defined using five different constraints: cultural acceptability (CA), or dietary guidelines (DG), or nutrient recommendations (N), or cultural acceptability and nutrient recommendations (CAN), or dietary guidelines and nutrient recommendations (DGN). The variety and number of foods in each of the resulting five baskets was increased through limiting the relative share of individual foods. Results: The one-day version of N contained only 12 foods at the minimum cost of DKK 27 (€ 3.6). The CA, DG, and DGN were about twice of this and the CAN cost ~DKK 81 (€ 10.8). The baskets with the greater variety of foods contained from 70 (CAN) to 134 (DGN) foods and cost between DKK 60 (€ 8.1, N) and DKK 125 (€ 16.8, DGN). Ensuring that the food baskets cover both dietary guidelines and nutrient recommendations doubled the cost while cultural acceptability (CAN) tripled it. Conclusion: Use of linear programming facilitates the generation of low-cost food baskets that are nutritionally adequate, health promoting, and culturally acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many children’s food products highlight positive attributes on their front-of-package labels in the form of nutrient claims. This cross-sectional study investigated all retailed packaged foods (n 5620) in a major Brazilian supermarket, in order to identify the availability of products targeted at children, and to compare the nutritional content of products with and without nutrient claims on labels. Data on energy, carbohydrate, protein, fibre, Na and total and SFA content, along with the presence and type of nutrient claims, were obtained in-store from labels of all products. Products targeted at children were identified, divided into eight food groups and compared for their nutritional content per 100 g/ml and the presence of nutrient claims using the Mann–Whitney U test (P<0·05). Of the 535 food products targeted at children (9·5 % of all products), 270 (50·5 %) displayed nutrient claims on their labels. Children’s products with nutrient claims had either a similar or worse nutritional content than their counterparts without nutrient claims. The major differences among groups were found in Group 8 (e.g. sauces and ready meals), in which children’s products bearing nutrient claims had higher energy, carbohydrate, Na and total and SFA content per 100 g/ml than products without nutrient claims (P<0·05). This suggests that, to prevent misleading parents who are seeking healthier products for their children, the regulation on the use of nutrient claims should be revised, so that only products with appropriate nutrient profiles are allowed to display them. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The majority of food in the United Kingdom is purchased in supermarkets, and therefore, supermarket interventions provide an opportunity to improve diets. Randomized controlled trials are costly, time-consuming, and difficult to conduct in real stores. Alternative approaches of assessing the impact of supermarket interventions on food purchases are needed, especially with respect to assessing differential impacts on population subgroups.Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of using the United Kingdom Virtual Supermarket (UKVS), a three-dimensional (3D) computer simulation of a supermarket, to measure food purchasing behavior across income groups.Methods: Participants (primary household shoppers in the United Kingdom with computer access) were asked to conduct two shopping tasks using the UKVS and complete questionnaires on demographics, food purchasing habits, and feedback on the UKVS software. Data on recruitment method and rate, completion of study procedure, purchases, and feedback on usability were collected to inform future trial protocols.Results: A total of 98 participants were recruited, and 46 (47%) fully completed the study procedure. Low-income participants were less likely to complete the study (P=.02). Most participants found the UKVS easy to use (38/46, 83%) and reported that UKVS purchases resembled their usual purchases (41/46, 89%).Conclusions: The UKVS is likely to be a useful tool to examine the effects of nutrition interventions using randomized controlled designs. Feedback was positive from participants who completed the study and did not differ by income group. However, retention was low and needs to be addressed in future studies. This study provides purchasing data to establish sample size requirements for full trials using the UKVS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Offering consumers the opportunity to swap to lower-salt foods while shopping has potential to reduce salt intake. Offering a wider range of alternatives which are much lower in salt could increase the magnitude of salt reduction gained but may interfere with consumers' engagement and willingness to accept swaps.Objectives: To compare the salt reduction from offering swaps to a similar product but with minimally less salt to offering swaps with a substantial salt reduction including a range of alternative foods.Methods: In an experimental, randomised trial conducted in a virtual online supermarket, participants with high blood pressure were asked to buy 12 items of food. One group was offered similar alternatives with 5-20% less salt (LS swaps); and the other group was offered these LS swaps and alternatives with >20% less salt (MLS swaps). The primary outcome was the change in salt density of the shopping basket (g/100g) from initially selected items, to the final items chosen.Results: 947 participants completed the task and were included in the analysis. There was a significant reduction in salt content of the final selected shopping basket in both groups; with a significantly greater reduction in the group offered LS + MLS swaps (-0.09g/100g, 95% C.I. -0.10, -0.07; p < 0.001). The proportion of swaps accepted was the same in both groups and the mean salt reduction per swap accepted in the group offered LS + MLS swaps was more than double that of the group offered LS swaps alone. 30% of MLS swaps accepted were from a different food subcategory.Conclusions: Offering alternative products with a large reduction in salt, including potentially dissimilar products, does not decrease acceptability and leads to significantly greater reductions in the salt content of the shopping basket.Trial Registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN91306993. Registered 5th February 2018 - retrospectively registered. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91306993. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nutrition labels and ecolabels can support consumers to make healthier and more sustainable choices, and the former is now widespread. But there is no information on the impact of ecolabels in the presence of nutrition labels. The aims of this study were primarily to examine whether (1) ecolabels are effective at promoting sustainable purchasing behaviour if presented alongside nutrition labels; (2) and secondarily, whether nutrition labels are effective at promoting healthier purchasing if presented alongside ecolabels. Participants (N = 2730) visited an experimental online supermarket platform, and were randomised to see products with (1) environmental impact labels only; (2) nutrition (NutriScore) labels only; (3) both environmental and nutrition labels; (4) no labels. Linear regressions compared the mean environmental impact scores (EIS; primary outcome) and health scores of products in participants' shopping baskets across each condition. Compared to control (no labels) there were significant reductions in the EIS when environmental impact labels were presented: Alone (-1.3, 95%CI: -2.3 to -0.4) or With nutrition labels (-2.0, 95%CI: -2.9 to -1.0), with no evidence of differences in effectiveness between these two conditions. There was no evidence of an impact of nutrition labels on either the EIS or the healthiness of purchases, both when nutrition labels were shown alone and when ecolabels were also present. Environmental impact labels may be effective at encouraging more sustainable purchases alone or when used alongside nutrition labels. This adds to the evidence base on the feasibility and effectiveness of environmental impact labelling as an important measure to change dietary behaviour to improve planetary health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]