Dataset Information

Perceptions of Arguments in Support of Policies to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption Among Low-Income White, Black and Latinx Parents of Young Children.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To test for racial/ethnic differences in perceived argument strength in favor of structural interventions to curb childhood obesity among lower-income parents of young children.

Design

Cross-sectional, self-report.

Setting

Online research panel, national sample of 1485 US adults in Fall 2019.

Participants

Parents of children (age 0-5 years) with an annual income <$40,000, stratified by White, Black and/or Latinx race/ethnicity.

Measures

SSB consumption, policy support, and strength of arguments in favor of marketing restrictions and a penny-per-ounce tax.

Analysis

Descriptive statistics, multivariable OLS models.

Results

Race/ethnicity was not a significant predictor of the perceived strength of a composite of marketing arguments (p_Black = 0.07; p_Latinx = 0.10), however it was a significant predictor of the perceived strength of tax arguments (p_Black = 0.01; p_Latinx = 0.01). Perceptions of strength of 12 of 35 discrete SSB tax arguments differed by race/ethnicity (p < .05). Arguments regarding industry targeting of Black children (marketing: p_Black < .001; p_Latinx = .001; tax: p_Black < .001; p_Latinx = .001), were particularly demonstrative of this difference. In contrast, arguments that these policies would provide support for parents (marketing: p_Black = 0.20; p_Latinx = 0.84) and communities (tax: p_Black = 0.24; p_Latinx = 0.58) were seen as strong arguments across groups.

Conclusions

Black and Hispanic/Latinx parents may be more prepared to move toward SSB policy support than white parents. Emphasizing community benefits of policy may be effective in moving constituents toward policy support across groups.

SUBMITTER: Cannon JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8669211 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the associations between the consumption of sugary drinks (such as sugar sweetened beverages and 100% fruit juices), artificially sweetened beverages, and the risk of cancer.DesignPopulation based prospective cohort study.Setting and participantsOverall, 101 257 participants aged 18 and over (mean age 42.2, SD 14.4; median follow-up time 5.1 years) from the French NutriNet-Santé cohort (2009-2017) were included. Consumptions of sugary drinks and artificially sweetened beverages were assessed by using repeated 24 hour dietary records, which were designed to register participants' usual consumption for 3300 different food and beverage items.Main outcome measuresProspective associations between beverage consumption and the risk of overall, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer were assessed by multi-adjusted Fine and Gray hazard models, accounting for competing risks. Subdistribution hazard ratios were computed.ResultsThe consumption of sugary drinks was significantly associated with the risk of overall cancer (n=2193 cases, subdistribution hazard ratio for a 100mL/d increase 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.27, P<0.0001) and breast cancer (693, 1.22, 1.07 to 1.39, P=0.004). The consumption of artificially sweetened beverages was not associated with the risk of cancer. In specific subanalyses, the consumption of 100% fruit juice was significantly associated with the risk of overall cancer (2193, 1.12, 1.03 to 1.23, P=0.007).ConclusionsIn this large prospective study, the consumption of sugary drinks was positively associated with the risk of overall cancer and breast cancer. 100% fruit juices were also positively associated with the risk of overall cancer. These results need replication in other large scale prospective studies. They suggest that sugary drinks, which are widely consumed in Western countries, might represent a modifiable risk factor for cancer prevention.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03335644.