Dataset Information

Association between intake of less-healthy foods defined by the United Kingdom's nutrient profile model and cardiovascular disease: A population-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Mytton OT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5754044 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association between intake of less-healthy foods defined by the United Kingdom's nutrient profile model and cardiovascular disease: A population-based cohort study.

Mytton Oliver T OT Forouhi Nita G NG Scarborough Peter P Lentjes Marleen M Luben Robert R Rayner Mike M Khaw Kay Tee KT Wareham Nicholas J NJ Monsivais Pablo P

PLoS medicine 20180104 1

<h4>Background</h4>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 (CV ...[more]

PMID: 29300725

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPlacing food further away from people decreases likelihood of consumption ("Proximity Effect"). However, it is unclear how proximity affects consumption when both healthier and less healthy foods are available and cognitive resource for self-control is limited.AimsTo test the hypothesis that when both healthier (raisins) and less healthy (chocolate M&Ms) foods are available, placing less healthy food far, rather than near, increases the likelihood that healthier food is consumed.MethodsGeneral population participants (N = 248) were all put under cognitive load and randomised to one of four groups: 1. Raisins near (20 cm), M&Ms far (70 cm); 2. Both foods near; 3. M&Ms near, raisins far; 4. Both far.Primary outcomeproportions of participants consuming raisins and M&Ms, respectively.ResultsThe results did not support the primary hypothesis: when healthier and less healthy foods were both available, placing M&Ms far, rather than near, did not increase likelihood of consuming raisins (OR = 1.54, p = .432). Regardless of the M&Ms proximity, likelihood of consuming raisins was unaffected by the raisins' proximity (62.9%(near) vs. 56.5%(far) OR = 0.61, p = .211). Likelihood of consuming M&Ms non-significantly decreased when they were far and raisins were near, and when both foods were far (OR = 2.83, p = .057). Likelihood of consuming M&Ms was affected by M&Ms proximity, being higher when near (68.3%) than far (55.6%), OR = 0.39, p = .015. Indices of cognitive load impact (higher vs lower) were unrelated to consumption of either food.ConclusionsLikelihood of consuming a healthier food was unaffected by its proximity and that of a less healthy food. By contrast, likelihood of consuming a less healthy food was influenced by its proximity and possibly by that of a healthier food. These effects need replication in studies designed to detect smaller effect sizes.Trial registrationThis study was registered online with ISRCTN (ISRCTN11740813).

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about how normal variation in dietary patterns in humans affects the ageing process. To date, most analyses of the problem have used a unidimensional paradigm, being concerned with the effects of a single nutrient on a single outcome. Perhaps then, our ability to understand the problem has been complicated by the fact that both nutrition and the physiology of ageing are highly complex and multidimensional, involving a high number of functional interactions. Here we apply the multidimensional geometric framework for nutrition to data on biological ageing from 1560 older adults followed over four years to assess on a large-scale how nutrient intake associates with the ageing process.ResultsAgeing and age-related loss of homeostasis (physiological dysregulation) were quantified via the integration of blood biomarkers. The effects of diet were modelled using the geometric framework for nutrition, applied to macronutrients and 19 micronutrients/nutrient subclasses. We observed four broad patterns: (1) The optimal level of nutrient intake was dependent on the ageing metric used. Elevated protein intake improved/depressed some ageing parameters, whereas elevated carbohydrate levels improved/depressed others; (2) There were non-linearities where intermediate levels of nutrients performed well for many outcomes (i.e. arguing against a simple more/less is better perspective); (3) There is broad tolerance for nutrient intake patterns that don't deviate too much from norms ('homeostatic plateaus'). (4) Optimal levels of one nutrient often depend on levels of another (e.g. vitamin E and vitamin C). Simpler linear/univariate analytical approaches are insufficient to capture such associations. We present an interactive tool to explore the results in the high-dimensional nutritional space.ConclusionUsing multidimensional modelling techniques to test the effects of nutrient intake on physiological dysregulation in an aged population, we identified key patterns of specific nutrients associated with minimal biological ageing. Our approach presents a roadmap for future studies to explore the full complexity of the nutrition-ageing landscape.

Project description:Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Unhealthy diets are one of four main behavioral risk factors contributing to the majority of NCDs. To promote healthy eating and reduce dietary risks, the Australian Commonwealth Government established the Healthy Food Partnership (HFP). In 2018, the HFP consulted on proposed nutrient reformulation targets for 36 food categories to improve the overall quality of the food supply. This study assessed whether the proposed targets were feasible and appropriate. The HFP used a five-step approach to inform the proposed targets. We replicated and extended this approach using a different nutrient composition database (FoodSwitch). Products in FoodSwitch were mapped to the proposed HFP targets. The proportion of products meeting each target was calculated and the FoodSwitch data were compared with HFP data to determine whether the proposed target nutrient levels were appropriate or whether a more stringent target was feasible. Products from the FoodSwitch database (10,599) were mapped against the proposed HFP categories: 8434 products across 30 categories for sodium, 2875 products across seven categories for sugar, and 612 products across five categories for saturated fat. The analyses revealed that 14 of 30 proposed HFP targets for sodium, one of seven targets for sugar, and one of five targets for saturated fat were feasible and appropriate. For the remaining 26 reformulation targets, the results indicate that these target levels could be more stringent and alternative targets are proposed. The draft HFP targets are feasible but the majority are too conservative. If Australia is to meet its commitment to a 30 per cent reduction in the average population salt intake by 2025, these targets could be implemented as interim targets to be reached within two years. However, the opportunity exists to improve the food supply and strengthen the HFP's population health impact by adopting more ambitious and incremental targets. Reformulation programs should be prioritized and closely monitored as part of a coordinated, multi-faceted national food and nutrition strategy.

Project description:ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of prices of healthier versus less healthy foods/diet patterns while accounting for key sources of heterogeneity.Data sourcesMEDLINE (2000-2011), supplemented with expert consultations and hand reviews of reference lists and related citations.DesignStudies reviewed independently and in duplicate were included if reporting mean retail price of foods or diet patterns stratified by healthfulness. We extracted, in duplicate, mean prices and their uncertainties of healthier and less healthy foods/diet patterns and rated the intensity of health differences for each comparison (range 1-10). Prices were adjusted for inflation and the World Bank purchasing power parity, and standardised to the international dollar (defined as US$1) in 2011. Using random effects models, we quantified price differences of healthier versus less healthy options for specific food types, diet patterns and units of price (serving, day and calorie). Statistical heterogeneity was quantified using I(2) statistics.Results27 studies from 10 countries met the inclusion criteria. Among food groups, meats/protein had largest price differences: healthier options cost $0.29/serving (95% CI $0.19 to $0.40) and $0.47/200 kcal ($0.42 to $0.53) more than less healthy options. Price differences per serving for healthier versus less healthy foods were smaller among grains ($0.03), dairy (-$0.004), snacks/sweets ($0.12) and fats/oils ($0.02; p<0.05 each) and not significant for soda/juice ($0.11, p=0.64). Comparing extremes (top vs bottom quantile) of food-based diet patterns, healthier diets cost $1.48/day ($1.01 to $1.95) and $1.54/2000 kcal ($1.15 to $1.94) more. Comparing nutrient-based patterns, price per day was not significantly different (top vs bottom quantile: $0.04; p=0.916), whereas price per 2000 kcal was $1.56 ($0.61 to $2.51) more. Adjustment for intensity of differences in healthfulness yielded similar results.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis provides the best evidence until today of price differences of healthier vs less healthy foods/diet patterns, highlighting the challenges and opportunities for reducing financial barriers to healthy eating.

Dataset Information

Association between intake of less-healthy foods defined by the United Kingdom's nutrient profile model and cardiovascular disease: A population-based cohort study.

Background

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

Association between intake of less-healthy foods defined by the United Kingdom's nutrient profile model and cardiovascular disease: A population-based cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets