Search

The consumption of sugar and non-nutritive sweeteners has been associated with poor health outcomes. The aim of this paper was to provide a comparison of the range of sweetened or flavoured beverages between two high-income countries in the Asia-Pacific region: Australia and Singapore. Following the FoodTrackTM methodology, nutrition, labelling, and price data were collected from major Australian and Singaporean supermarket chains and convenience stores. The nutrient profiles of products were tested for differences using Kruskal−Wallis and Mann−Whitney U tests. The greatest number of products collected in Australia were from the ‘carbonated beverages’ category (n = 215, 40%), and in Singapore the greatest number of products were from the ‘tea and coffee ready-to-drink’ category (n = 182, 35%). There were more calorically sweetened beverages in Singapore compared with Australia (n = 462/517 vs. n = 374/531, p < 0.001). For calorically sweetened products, the median energy of Singaporean products was significantly higher than Australian products (134 kJ vs. 120 kJ per 100 mL, p = 0.009). In Australia, 52% of sweetened or flavoured beverages displayed a front-of-pack nutrient signposting logo, compared with 34% of sweetened or flavoured beverages in Singapore. These findings also indicate that the consumption of just one serving of calorically sweetened carbonated beverages or energy drinks would exceed the WHO maximum daily free sugar recommendations. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) National Research Foundation (NRF) Published version This study was funded under the Singapore–Australia Bilateral Program on Innovations in Food for Precision Health 2019 (grant No. 191D4003), funded jointly by the Singapore and Australian governments. BPC Smith was also supported by a National Research Foundation Singapore Whitespace grant (grant No. W20W3D0002) and a Health and Biomedical Sciences Industry Alignment Fund Pre-positioning grant (H1801a0-014) administered by the Agency for Science, Technology, and Research.

Using group model building we developed a series of causal loop diagrams identifying the environmental impacts of ultra-processed food (UPF) systems, and underlying system drivers, which was subsequently validated against the peer-reviewed literature. The final conceptual model displays the commercial, biological and social drivers of the UPF system, and the impacts on environmental sub-systems including climate, land, water and waste. It displays complex interactions between various environmental impacts, demonstrating how changes to one component of the system could have flow-on effects on other components. Trade-offs and uncertainties are discussed. The model has a wide range of applications including informing the design of quantitative analyses, identifying research gaps and potential policy trade-offs resulting from a reduction of ultra-processed food production and consumption.

Objective:The choice of terms used to describe ‘foods to limit’ (FTL) in food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) can impact public understanding, policy translation and research applicability. The choice of terms in FBDG has been influenced by available science, values, beliefs and historical events. This study aimed to analyse the terms used and definitions given to FTL in FBDG around the world, including changes over time and regional differences.Design:A review of terms used to describe FTL and their definitions in all current and past FBDG for adults was conducted, using a search strategy informed by the FAO FBDG website. Data from 148 guidelines (96 countries) were extracted into a pre-defined table and terms were organised by the categories ‘nutrient-based’, ‘food examples’ or ‘processing-related’.Setting:National FBDG from all world regions.Participants:None.Results:Nutrient-based terms (e.g. high-fat foods) were the most frequently used type of term in both current and past dietary guidelines (91 %, 85 %, respectively). However, food examples (e.g. cakes) and processing-related terms (e.g. ultra-processed foods) have increased in use over the past 20 years and are now often used in conjunction with nutrient-based terms. Regional differences were only observed for processing-related terms.Conclusion:Diverse, and often poorly defined, terms are used to describe FTL in FBDG. Policymakers should ensure that FTL terms have clear definitions and can be integrated with other disciplines and understood by consumers. This may facilitate the inclusion of the most contemporary and potentially impactful terminology in nutrition research and policies.

The purpose of this study was to investigate changes in the range and nutrient profile of processed alternative protein “convenience” products available in Australia from 2014 to 2021. Product data were extracted from FoodTrack™, an established database of packaged supermarket products. Eligible products were grouped into subcategories: (i) tofu products; (ii) legume products; and (iii) plant-based meats. Nutrient composition was assessed from the products’ nutrition information panel. The number of alternative protein products in supermarkets more than doubled between 2014 and 2021 (+130%). On average, products were available for 2.2 years (range 1–7 years). Generally, tofu products had the highest contents of saturated fat and sodium, legume products had the highest contents of carbohydrates, sugar and fibre, and plant-based meats had the highest contents of protein and total fat (per 100 g). This study found large variation in the nutrient composition of these products, highlighting the importance of reformulation and consumer education in the future.

Objective:Agriculture accounts for around 70 % of global freshwater withdrawals. As such, the food system has been identified as a critical intervention point to address water scarcity. Various studies have identified dietary patterns that contribute less to water scarcity. However, it is unclear what level of reduction is necessary to be considered sustainable. The pursuit of unnecessarily aggressive reductions could limit dietary diversity. Our objective was to assess the sustainability of water use supporting Australian dietary habits and the adequacy of current dietary guidelines.Design:Dietary intake data were obtained from the National Nutrition and Physical Activity component of the Australian Health Survey. For each individual daily diet, the water scarcity footprint was quantified, following ISO14046:2014, as well as a diet quality score. Water scarcity footprint results were compared with the planetary boundary for freshwater use downscaled to the level of an individual diet.Setting:Australia.Participants:9341 adults participating in the Australian Health Survey.Results:Dietary water scarcity footprints averaged 432·6 L-eq (95 % CI 432·5, 432·8), less than the 695 litres/person per d available to support the current global population of 7·8 billion, and the 603 litres/person per d available for a future population of 9 billion. Diets based on the Australian Dietary Guidelines required 521 L-eq/d, or 379 L-eq/d with lower water scarcity footprint food choices.Conclusions:Diets based on the Australian Dietary Guidelines were found to be within the freshwater planetary boundary. What is needed in Australia is greater compliance with dietary guidelines.

Objective: Diet-related self-identity, which includes components such as individuals’ overall dietary pattern and food choice motivations, is a strong predictor of health behaviors. This study sought to assess the variation in dietary patterns reported by a sample of Australian adults and their associations with diet quality. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Participants: Australian adults (n = 2,010) Variables measured: The main outcome measure was diet quality relative to the Australian Dietary Guidelines, measured by the Healthy Diet Score survey. Other outcomes captured included dietary patterns(eg, unrestricted, vegetarian, flexitarian, or ketogenic diets), diet-related self-identity constructs (centrality, prosocial motivation, personal motivation, and strictness), and sociodemographic characteristics (eg, age, sex, and education level). Analysis: Data were analyzed descriptively, and ordinary least squares regression was performed to identify significant predictors of diet quality. Results: Eighteen unique dietary patterns were reported. These were classified into 3 categories on the basis of the degree of restriction of core food groups. Diets based on restriction of animal protein were associated with the highest diet quality, including the highest consumption of fruits, vegetables, and wholegrains, whereas restriction of other foods was associated with the poorest diet quality. Unrestricted diets reported the highest consumption of discretionary food (high in saturated fat, salt, or added sugar). Finally, the regression analysis found that diet quality was significantly predicted by dietary pattern and diet-related self-identity constructs (F[8, 1974] = 54.952; P < 0.0001; adjusted R2 = 0.179).Conclusions and Implications: Dietary pattern and diet-related self-identity constructs are key determinants of diet quality. This has implications for future interventions, including that programs and messages could be tailored to ensure they align with the target population’s self-identity and overall dietary patterns. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) provide country-specific guidance on what constitutes a healthy diet. With increasing evidence for the synergy between human and planetary health, FBDGs have started to consider the environmental sustainability of food choices. However, the number of countries that discuss environmental sustainability in their guidelines is unknown. The purpose of this Review was to identify countries with government-endorsed FBDGs that made explicit mention of environmental sustainability and to examine the breadth and depth of the inclusion of sustainability in FBDGs. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN identified 95 countries with FBDGs. We assessed 83 countries against our inclusion criteria, of which 37 mentioned environmental sustainability. Relevant content was assessed against a set of criteria based on the Food and Agriculture Organization's guiding principles for sustainable healthy diets. The depth to which environmental sustainability was discussed varied and it was often restricted to general explanations of what a sustainable diet is. Few FBDGs addressed why sustainability is important, how dietary changes can be made, or provided quantified advice for implementing sustainable diets.

Poor diet, resulting from high intake of ultra-processed packaged foods, is increasingly recognised as a key contributing factor to ill health. Food labels provide information on the nutritional content of packaged foods to consumers, which may influence consumption of nutrients such as energy, fat, saturated fat, trans-fats, sodium and added sugars. This review aims to summarise the current evidence for the association between use of food labels and dietary intake. The systematic search was conducted in August 2017 using six databases, with 6325 results. Twenty-six studies were included, including cross-sectional studies (n = 20), a cohort study (n = 1) and randomised controlled trials (n = 5). Studies were assessed using the American Dietetic Association Quality Criteria Checklist. Results were inconsistent in reporting a relationship between diet and food label use but indicated that reading the nutrition facts label is associated with healthier diets, measured by food frequency questionnaires and 24 h recalls. However, there is insufficient research on the association between dietary consumption and use of ingredients lists, serving size information and front-of-pack labels. Using health-related claims may be associated with poor diets, however evidence is inconclusive. Apart from health-related claims, using food labels is associated with healthier diets and should continue to be promoted through policies and education programs. Further research in this area is warranted to provide additional information on the impact of ingredients lists, serving sizes, front-of-pack labels and health-related claims on dietary intake.

Objective: The purpose of this systematic literature review is to assess the factors associated with synergistic multisector alliances in the public health domain. Data Source: Articles in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar between March 2009 and February 2019 were searched. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Included alliances had a public health and behavioral focus, were from the public or private sector, and were multipartner and multisector, and from high-income countries. Public health research alliances were included, but clinical research alliances were excluded. Data Extraction: Data extraction included alliance description, alliance domain, country, single or multiple alliances, and the sectors included in the alliance. Two theoretical frameworks were used in data extraction. Data Synthesis: Data were coded according to 28 factors representing antecedents, management, and evaluation (Parent and Harvey model) and 3 output-specific factors (Bergen model). Results: A final 24 papers were included, of which 58% contained synergistic alliances. While almost all factors reportedly enabled synergy, some factors were more frequently associated with synergistic alliances, including clear purpose and positive coordination, information sharing, and evaluation of project outcomes. Complexity within some factors was also reported. Conclusion: The theoretical models were supported by the data. Public health alliances would likely benefit from incorporating factors identified as beneficial for synergy and from carefully considering the management of complex factors.

Food systems vitally depend on croplands, which are a scarce natural resource. Croplands are also heterogeneous, differing in productive capability and in environmental context. Some are in regions of high biodiversity conservation importance, others in regions vulnerable to food insecurity. In this study, life cycle assessment was used to quantify cropland scarcity footprints, cropland biodiversity footprints and cropland malnutrition footprints for 9341 individual Australian adult daily diets. Dietary cropland scarcity footprints averaged 7.1 m2yr-e person&minus, 1 day&minus, 1, exceeding a target of 6.1 m2yr-e person&minus, 1, consistent with the proposed global cropland planetary boundary of 15% of the ice-free land area. Discretionary foods, which are energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods high in saturated fat, added sugars and salt, and alcohol and are not essential to a healthy diet, made the largest contribution, followed by fresh meats and alternatives, breads and cereals, fruit, dairy and alternatives and vegetables. Around 45% of the variation in cropland footprint between individuals was explained by differences in total dietary energy intake. Diets characterised by higher diet quality and lower cropland scarcity footprint required only 4.2 m2yr-e person&minus, 1 and recommended diets based on the food choices of this subgroup required 5.9 m2yr-e person&minus, 1. Eating within the global cropland planetary boundary appears realistic if Australians greatly reduce their intake of discretionary foods and moderate their food choices within the &ldquo, meat and alternatives&rdquo, food group.