1
|
Belarmino EH, Carfagno M, Kam L, Ifeagwu KC, Nelson ME, Seguin-Fowler RA. Consideration of nutrition and sustainability in public definitions of 'healthy' food: an analysis of submissions to the US FDA. Public Health Nutr 2024; 27:e119. [PMID: 38569921 PMCID: PMC11036447 DOI: 10.1017/s1368980024000636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2022] [Revised: 01/08/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To better understand how the public defines 'healthy' foods and to determine whether the public considers sustainability, implicitly and explicitly, in the context of healthy eating. DESIGN We conducted a content analysis of public comments submitted to the US FDA in 2016 and 2017 in response to an invitation for feedback on use of the term 'healthy' on food labels. The analysis explored the ways in which commenters' definitions of 'healthy' aligned with the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and whether their definitions considered sustainability. SETTING The US Government's Regulations.gov website. PARTICIPANTS All 1125 unique comments from individuals and organisations. RESULTS Commenters' definitions of 'healthy' generally mirrored the recommendations that the Dietary Guidelines for Americans put forth to promote a 'healthy eating pattern'. Commenters emphasised the healthfulness of fruit, vegetables, whole grains, fish and other minimally processed foods and the need to limit added sugars, sodium, saturated and trans fats and other ingredients sometimes added during processing. One-third of comments (n 374) incorporated at least one dimension of sustainability, mainly the environmental dimension. Commenters who mentioned environmental considerations primarily expressed concerns about synthetic chemicals and genetic modification. Less than 20 % of comments discussed social or economic dimensions of sustainability, and less than 3 % of comments (n 30) used the word 'sustainability' explicitly. CONCLUSIONS This novel analysis provides new information about the public's perceptions of 'healthy' foods relative to nutrition and sustainability considerations. The findings can be used to advance policy discussions regarding nutrition labelling and guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily H Belarmino
- Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, University of
Vermont, 109 Carrigan Drive, Burlington, VT05405, USA
- Gund Institute for Environment, University of
Vermont, 210 Colchester Ave, Burlington, VT05405, USA
| | - Michelle Carfagno
- Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell
University, Savage Hall, Ithaca, NY14853, USA
| | - Lauren Kam
- Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell
University, Savage Hall, Ithaca, NY14853, USA
| | - Kene-Chukwu Ifeagwu
- Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell
University, Savage Hall, Ithaca, NY14853, USA
| | - Miriam E Nelson
- Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy,
Tufts University, 150 Harrison Avenue, Boston,
MA02111, USA
| | - Rebecca A Seguin-Fowler
- Institute for Advancing Health through Agriculture, Texas A&M
AgriLife Research, 1500 Research Parkway, Centeq Building B, College Station,
TX77845, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Howse E, Cullerton K, Grunseit A, Bohn-Goldbaum E, Bauman A, Freeman B. Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods. Health Res Policy Syst 2022; 20:26. [PMID: 35246170 PMCID: PMC8895540 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia–Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eloise Howse
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia. .,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Katherine Cullerton
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Anne Grunseit
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Erika Bohn-Goldbaum
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Adrian Bauman
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Becky Freeman
- Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|