Dataset Information

Nutrition Claims on Fruit Drinks Are Inconsistent Indicators of Nutritional Profile: A Content Analysis of Fruit Drinks Purchased by Households With Young Children.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Fruit drinks are the most commonly consumed sugar-sweetened beverage among young children. Fruit drinks carry many nutrition-related claims on the front of package (FOP). Nutrition-related claims affect individuals' perceptions of the healthfulness of products and purchase intentions, often creating a "health halo" effect.

Objective

The aims of this study were to describe the prevalence of FOP nutrition-related claims on fruit drinks purchased by households with young children and to examine the association between claims and the nutritional profile of fruit drinks.

Design

The sample included 2059 fruit drinks purchased by households with children 0 to 5 years old participating in Nielsen Homescan in 2017. FOP labels were obtained from 2 databases that contain bar code-level information on all printed material on product labels. A codebook was used to code for presence of FOP nutrition-related claims. The coded claims data were linked by bar code with Nutrition Facts label data. Claim type prevalence was calculated, and the association between claim types and median calories and total grams of sugar per 100 mL was analyzed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. The percentages of products containing noncaloric sweeteners (NCSs) with and without each claim type were also calculated and compared.

Results

Almost all (97%) fruit drinks sampled had at least 1 nutrition-related FOP claim. Implied natural claims such as "natural flavors" were the most common (55% of products), followed by claims about the presence of juice or nectar (49%). Claims about vitamin C (33%), sugar (29%), and calories (23%) were also common. Fruit drinks with vitamin C, juice or nectar, fruit or fruit flavor, and overt natural claims were higher in calories and sugar and less likely to contain NCSs compared with products without these claims. Fruit drinks with calorie, sugar, NCS, implied natural, and other claims were lower in calories and sugar and more likely to contain NCSs compared with products without these claims.

Conclusions

Claims are prevalent on fruit drinks purchased by households with young children. This is concerning given prior research demonstrating that claims can mislead consumers. Regulatory actions such as requiring a warning or disclosure on drinks that contain added sugars or NCSs should be considered.

SUBMITTER: Duffy EW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7752796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine changes in household purchases of drinks and confectionery one year after implementation of the UK soft drinks industry levy (SDIL).DesignControlled interrupted time series analysis.ParticipantsMembers of a panel of households reporting their purchasing on a weekly basis to a market research company (average weekly number of participants n=22 183), March 2014 to March 2019.InterventionA two tiered tax levied on manufacturers of soft drinks, announced in March 2016 and implemented in April 2018. Drinks with ≥8 g sugar/100 mL (high tier) are taxed at £0.24/L and drinks with ≥5 to <8 g sugar/100 mL (low tier) are taxed at £0.18/L. Drinks with <5 g sugar/100 mL (no levy) are not taxed.Main outcome measuresAbsolute and relative differences in the volume of, and amount of sugar in, soft drinks categories, all soft drinks combined, alcohol, and confectionery purchased per household per week one year after implementation of the SDIL compared with trends before the announcement of the SDIL.ResultsIn March 2019, compared with the counterfactual estimated from pre-announcement trends, purchased volume of drinks in the high levy tier decreased by 155 mL (95% confidence interval 240.5 to 69.5 mL) per household per week, equivalent to 44.3% (95% confidence interval 59.9% to 28.7%), and sugar purchased in these drinks decreased by 18.0 g (95% confidence interval 32.3 to 3.6 g), or 45.9% (68.8% to 22.9%). Purchases of low tier drinks decreased by 177.3 mL (225.3 to 129.3 mL) per household per week, or 85.9% (95.1% to 76.7%), with a 12.5 g (15.4 to 9.5 g) reduction in sugar in these drinks, equivalent to 86.2% (94.2% to 78.1%). Despite no overall change in volume of no levy drinks purchased, there was an increase in sugar purchased of 15.3 g (12.6 to 17.9 g) per household per week, equivalent to 166.4% (94.2% to 238.5%). When all soft drinks were combined, the volume of drinks purchased did not change, but sugar decreased by 29.5 g (55.8 to 3.1 g), or 9.8% (17.9% to 1.8%). Purchases of confectionery and alcoholic drinks did not change.ConclusionsCompared with trends before the SDIL was announced, one year after implementation, the volume of soft drinks purchased did not change. The amount of sugar in those drinks was 30 g, or 10%, lower per household per week-equivalent to one 250 mL serving of a low tier drink per person per week. The SDIL might benefit public health without harming industry.Trial registrationISRCTN18042742.

Project description:The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides millions of low-income Americans food benefits and other forms of nutrition assistance. Evidence indicates that SNAP reduces food insecurity. However, there is a concern that the food benefit may increase the demand for less healthy foods more than healthier foods, thereby reducing the overall nutritional quality of the participant's food basket. This paper aims to examine the association of SNAP participation with the nutritional quality of food-at-home purchases of low-income households and to investigate the potential heterogeneity among consumers with different levels of nutrition attitude. This analysis used food purchase data from the USDA National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS). Our study sample included 2,218 low-income households, of which 1,184 are SNAP participants, and 1,034 are income-eligible nonparticipants. Multivariate regressions were performed to explore the SNAP-nutritional quality association. A household's nutrition attitude was measured using its response to a question on whether the household searched for nutrition information online in the last 2 months. Households that affirmed they had an online nutrition search were treated as nutrition-oriented households (21.2% of the low-income sample), and households that did not were considered less nutrition-oriented households (78.8%). For robustness, we also created an alternative nutrition attitude measure based on reported use of the nutrition facts label. We found that among less nutrition-oriented households, SNAP participants had a statistically significant 0.097 points (p = 0.018) lower Guiding Stars rating than low-income nonparticipants. However, there was no significant SNAP-nutritional quality association among nutrition-oriented households. In conclusion, SNAP participation was associated with lower nutritional quality of food purchases among less nutrition-oriented households, but not among nutrition-oriented households. The results suggest that the intended nutritional benefits of restrictions on purchases of healthy foods may not reach the subgroup of nutrition-oriented SNAP participants.

Project description:BackgroundConsumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, including fruit drinks (i.e., fruit-flavored drinks containing added sugar), contributes to childhood obesity.ObjectivesWe aimed to examine whether nutrition-related claims on fruit drinks influence purchasing among parents and lead to misperceptions of healthfulness.MethodsWe conducted an experiment in a virtual convenience store with 2219 parents of children ages 1-5 y. Parents were randomly assigned to view fruit drinks displaying 1 of 3 claims ("No artificial sweeteners," "100% Vitamin C," and "100% All Natural") or no claim (i.e., control group). Parents selected among each of 2 drinks for their young child: 1) a fruit drink or 100% juice (primary outcome), and 2) a fruit drink or water.ResultsWhen choosing between a fruit drink and 100% juice, 45% of parents who viewed the fruit drink with the "No artificial sweeteners" claim, 51% who viewed the "100% Vitamin C" claim, and 54% who viewed the "100% All Natural" claim selected the fruit drink, compared with 32% in the no-claim control group (all P < 0.001). "No artificial sweeteners" (Cohen's d = 0.13, P < 0.05) and "100% All Natural" (d = 0.15, P < 0.05) claims increased the likelihood of parents choosing the fruit drink instead of water but "100% Vitamin C" did not (P = 0.06). All claims made parents more likely to incorrectly believe that the fruit drinks contained no added sugar and were 100% juice than the control (d ranged from 0.26 to 0.84, all P < 0.001), as assessed in a posttest survey. The impact of claims on selection of the fruit drink (compared with 100% juice) did not vary by any of the moderators examined (e.g., race/ethnicity, income; all moderation P > 0.05).ConclusionsNutrition-related claims led parents to choose less healthy beverages for their children and misled them about the healthfulness of fruit drinks. Labeling regulations could mitigate misleading marketing of fruit drinks.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04381481.