Search

Background:The Eatwell Guide is a pie-chart representing the UK government’s dietary advice and is used to promote healthy diets in a range of settings. The angles of these food groups depicted in the Eatwell Guide were derived from population diet optimisation modelling (a method to find the optimum diet under certain conditions and constraints) based on the population average diet. In 2016, we estimated that the cost of the current (population average) diet was £6.02 (95% Confidence Intervals [CIs] £5.96 to £6.08) per adult, per day and the cost of achieving the Eatwell Guide diet (i.e. a diet that meets the dietary recommendations with the least deviation from the current diet) was £5.99 (95% CIs £5.93 to £6.05) per adult, per day. This estimate was based on price data on 7575 food items listed on a UK supermarket price comparison website in 2016. In 2022, we estimated the cost of achieving the Eatwell Guide diet using food price data of foods and drinks available for purchase in November 2019 from the UK’s leading online supermarkets. We estimated that, based on data for 13912 food items, the cost of achieving a healthy diet was £6.82 per person, per day. Aim:The aim of this project is to update the estimated price of achieving a healthy diet (i.e. the Eatwell Guide diet). Methods:We estimated the cost of achieving the Eatwell Guide diet through linking food price data from foodDB - a time-stamped, weekly updated database of all foods and drinks available for purchases from the UK’s leading online supermarkets - with food consumption estimates from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey and the 2016 Eatwell Guide study. For this update, we used data taken from UK supermarkets in May 2022 – two and a half years after the price data were collected for our previous estimate. We calculated the median and inter-quartile range, for the prices of the matched foodDB food items for 125 NDNS sub-food groups. The cost of the Eatwell Guide diet was calculated by summing the median prices for each of the 125 sub-food groups. Results:Based on data collected in May 2022 for 18,441 food items, the cost of the baseline diet is £6.82 per person, per day and the cost of achieving a healthy diet is £7.48 per person, per day.

The overall aim of this systematic review is to identify nutrient profile models (NPMs) that have been developed for use in front-of-pack nutrition labelling (FOPL) and any secondary applications of identified NPMs for FOPL. Nutrient profiling is a scientific method for assessing the nutritional quality of food and beverage items. Front-of-pack nutrition labelling comprises nutrient-specific systems (e.g., traffic light), summary indicator systems (e.g., Nutri-Score or Health Star Rating), as well as health/nutrition claims and warnings (e.g., Keyhole and warning labels). The review will collect and compare data on NPM characteristics, components, and methods for classifying or ranking food products.

Supplementary information including further background information, description of model scenarios, and results. (PDF 855 kb)

Objectives To model food group consumption and price of diet associated with achieving UK dietary recommendations while deviating as little as possible from the current UK diet, in order to support the redevelopment of the UK food-based dietary guidelines (now called the Eatwell Guide). Design Optimisation modelling, minimising an objective function of the difference between population mean modelled and current consumption of 125 food groups, and constraints of nutrient and food-based recommendations. Setting The UK. Population Adults aged 19 years and above from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey 2008–2011. Main outcome measures Proportion of diet consisting of major foods groups and price of the optimised diet. Results The optimised diet has an increase in consumption of ‘potatoes, bread, rice, pasta and other starchy carbohydrates’ (+69%) and ‘fruit and vegetables’ (+54%) and reductions in consumption of ‘beans, pulses, fish, eggs, meat and other proteins’ (−24%), ‘dairy and alternatives’ (−21%) and ‘foods high in fat and sugar’ (−53%). Results within food groups show considerable variety (eg, +90% for beans and pulses, −78% for red meat). The modelled diet would cost £5.99 (£5.93 to £6.05) per adult per day, very similar to the cost of the current diet: £6.02 (£5.96 to £6.08). The optimised diet would result in increased consumption of n-3 fatty acids and most micronutrients (including iron and folate), but decreased consumption of zinc and small decreases in consumption of calcium and riboflavin. Conclusions To achieve the UK dietary recommendations would require large changes in the average diet of UK adults, including in food groups where current average consumption is well within the recommended range (eg, processed meat) or where there are no current recommendations (eg, dairy). These large changes in the diet will not lead to significant changes in the price of the diet.

Health claims and symbols are a convenient tool when it comes to the marketing of foods and theyshould, in theory, support consumers in making informed food choices, ideally in choosing healthier foodproducts. However, not much is known about their actual impact on consumer behaviour. CLYMBOL (“The Role of health-relatedCLaims and sYMBOLs in consumer behaviour”) is an EU-funded project aiming to study how health claims and symbols influenceconsumer understanding, purchase and consumption behaviour. During a 4-year period, a wide range of research studies have beenconducted across Europe, in order to analyse European consumer behaviour in the context of health claims and symbols. Results ofthe studies will provide a basis for recommendations for stakeholders such as policy makers, the food industry and consumer andpatient organisations.

Background: Colour coded front-of-pack nutrition labelling (‘traffic light labelling’) has been recommended for use in the UK since 2006. The voluntary scheme is used by all the major retailers and some manufacturers. It is not clear how consumers use these labels to make a single decision about the relative healthiness of foods. Our research questions were: Which of the four nutrients on UK traffic light labels (total fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt) has the most influence on decisions? Do green lights or red lights have a greater influence? Are there age and gender differences in how people use the colour and nutrient information? Methods: We recruited participants from a UK supermarket chain membership list to conduct an online choice experiment in May 2014. We analysed data using multilevel logisitic models with food choices (n = 3321) nested in individuals (n = 187) as the unit of analysis. Results: A food with more reds was 11.4 (95 % confidence intervals: 10.3, 12.5) times less likely to be chosen as healthy, whereas a food with more greens was 6.1 (5.6, 6.6) times more likely to be chosen as healthy. Foods with better colours on saturated fat and salt were 7.3 (6.7, 8.0) and 7.1 (6.5, 7.8) times more likely to be chosen as healthy – significantly greater than for total fat (odds ratio 4.8 (4.4, 5.3)) and sugar (5.2 (4.7, 5.6)). Results were broadly similar for different genders and age groups. Conclusions: We found that participants were more concerned with avoiding reds than choosing greens, and that saturated fat and salt had a greater influence on decisions regarding healthiness than total fat and sugar. This could influence decisions about food reformulation and guidance on using nutrition labelling.

Restricting children's exposures to marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages is a global obesity prevention priority. Monitoring marketing exposures supports informed policymaking. This study presents a global overview of children's television advertising exposure to healthy and unhealthy products. Twenty-two countries contributed data, captured between 2008 and 2017. Advertisements were coded for the nature of foods and beverages, using the 2015 World Health Organization (WHO) Europe Nutrient Profile Model (should be permitted/not-permitted to be advertised). Peak viewing times were defined as the top five hour timeslots for children. On average, there were four times more advertisements for foods/beverages that should not be permitted than for permitted foods/beverages. The frequency of food/beverages advertisements that should not be permitted per hour was higher during peak viewing times compared with other times (P < 0.001). During peak viewing times, food and beverage advertisements that should not be permitted were higher in countries with industry self-regulatory programmes for responsible advertising compared with countries with no policies. Globally, children are exposed to a large volume of television advertisements for unhealthy foods and beverages, despite the implementation of food industry programmes. Governments should enact regulation to protect children from television advertising of unhealthy products that undermine their health.