Patterns of Sun Protection Behaviours among Australian Adolescents and Adults over a Six-Year Period.

The major cause for skin cancer is the excessive and unprotected exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR), which can be prevented by engaging in sun protection behaviours. As longitudinal studies on both adolescents' and adults' performances of sun protection behaviours are limited, the current study aimed to investigate changes in sun protection in these population segments in Western Australia, a region with high annual UVR. During six summer seasons (2015/16 to 2020/21), cross-sectional surveys were conducted among 1806 adolescents (14 to 17 years old) and 1808 adults (18-45 years old), investigating the frequency of five sun protection behaviours (wearing clothing, applying sunscreen, wearing a hat, wearing sunglasses, and seeking shade) and sun avoidance (staying indoors). Over the six-year period, staying indoors increased in both groups. Among adolescents, a decrease in wearing clothing and sunglasses and an increase in seeking shade was demonstrated, and hat and sunscreen use remained relatively stable. Among adults, an increase in sunscreen use was shown, whereas all other sun-related behaviours remained consistent over the six-year period. The results from this study can provide directions for health communications focusing on improving sun protection behaviours among both adolescent and adult populations.

The ability of five different front-of-pack labels to assist Australian consumers to identify healthy versus unhealthy foods.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the relative ability of different interpretive front-of-pack food labels to alert consumers to both healthier and unhealthier options to inform their food choices. METHODS: One thousand Australians completed an online experiment where they rated the nutritional quality of sets of fictional products pre- and post-randomisation to one of five front-of-pack labels: Health Star Rating, Multiple Traffic Lights, Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes and Warning Label. Two sample z-tests were used to assess the ability of each label to facilitate the correct identification of the least and most healthy product options. RESULTS: The Nutri-Score was superior in assisting respondents to identify both the healthiest and unhealthiest options. The Health Star Rating ranked second for both outcomes, followed by the Multiple Traffic Lights. CONCLUSIONS: Results reinforce the role of interpretive front-of-pack labels in assisting consumers to understand the nutritional quality of food products and suggest spectrum labels may provide superior utility in assisting consumers to identify both the most and least nutritious products from among available product options. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: The strongest performance of a highly interpretive front-of-pack label (Nutri-Score) featuring colour in a summary indicator suggests potential strategies for enhancing the performance of the Health Star Rating.

Implementation Outcomes Following Participation in a Large-Scale Healthy Workplace Program Conducted Across Multiple Worksites.

PURPOSE: To measure implementation outcomes of a freely available workplace health promotion program (Healthier Workplace Western Australia [HWWA]) that provides employees with services and supports to make changes in their workplaces. SETTING: Western Australian workplaces. SUBJECTS: Employees accessing HWWA services. INTERVENTION: A range of services (training sessions, tailored advice, grant schemes, online resources) were offered relating to nutrition, physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and mental health. DESIGN/MEASURES: Of the 1627 individuals e-mailed 6 months after participation in HWWA, 345 (21%) individuals who recalled accessing one or more services completed a survey assessing the number and type of changes they had implemented and the perceived barriers to doing so. ANALYSIS: Negative binomial regressions and one-way analysis of variances assessed whether respondent characteristics or number of services used was associated with the number and types of changes made. A qualitative analysis of the perceived barriers was also conducted. RESULTS: The majority of respondents (86%) reported implementing one or more changes. Greater perceived responsibility/authority to make change (ß = .56, P < .01), perceived support from coworkers (ß = .23, P < .05), and number of HWWA services used (ß = .04, P < .05) were positive predictors of the number of changes made. Frequently reported barriers included cost/budget restrictions, lack of management support, and resistance from staff. CONCLUSION: The HWWA program facilitated implementation of various healthy workplace initiatives across the organizations represented in the evaluation.

The types and aspects of front-of-pack food labelling schemes preferred by adults and children.

There is strong interest in front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) as a potential mechanism for improving diets, and therefore health, at the population level. The present study examined Australian consumers' preferences for different types and attributes of FoPLs to provide additional insights into optimal methods of presenting nutrition information on the front of food packets. Much research to date has focused on two main types of FoPLs - those expressing daily intake values for specific nutrients and those utilising 'traffic light' colour coding. This study extends this work by: (i) including the new Health Star Rating system recently introduced in Australia and New Zealand; (ii) allowing a large sample of consumers to self-nominate the evaluation criteria they consider to be most important in choosing between FoPLs; (iii) oversampling consumers of lower socioeconomic status; and (iv) including children, who consume and purchase food in their own right and also influence their parents' food purchase decisions. A cross-sectional online survey of 2058 Australian consumers (1558 adults and 500 children) assessed preferences between a daily intake FoPL, a traffic light FoPL, and the Health Star Rating FoPL. Across the whole sample and among all respondent subgroups (males vs females; adults vs children; lower socioeconomic status vs medium-high socioeconomic status; normal weight vs overweight/obese), the Health Star Rating was the most preferred FoPL (44%) and the daily intake guide was the least preferred (20%). The reasons most commonly provided by respondents to explain their preference related to ease of use, interpretive content, and salience. The findings suggest that a simple to use, interpretive, star-based food label represents a population-based nutrition promotion strategy that is considered helpful by a broad range of consumers.

Do Health Claims and Front-of-Pack Labels Lead to a Positivity Bias in Unhealthy Foods?

Health claims and front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) may lead consumers to hold more positive attitudes and show a greater willingness to buy food products, regardless of their actual healthiness. A potential negative consequence of this positivity bias is the increased consumption of unhealthy foods. This study investigated whether a positivity bias would occur in unhealthy variations of four products (cookies, corn flakes, pizzas and yoghurts) that featured different health claim conditions (no claim, nutrient claim, general level health claim, and higher level health claim) and FoPL conditions (no FoPL, the Daily Intake Guide (DIG), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), and the Health Star Rating (HSR)). Positivity bias was assessed via measures of perceived healthiness, global evaluations (incorporating taste, quality, convenience, etc.) and willingness to buy. On the whole, health claims did not produce a positivity bias, while FoPLs did, with the DIG being the most likely to elicit this bias. The HSR most frequently led to lower ratings of unhealthy foods than the DIG and MTL, suggesting that this FoPL has the lowest risk of creating an inaccurate positivity bias in unhealthy foods.

Tick tock: time for a change?

Issue addressed: New developments in front-of-pack nutrition labelling are substantially improving the nutrition information available at the point of purchase. This has led to a need to reconsider the role of health logos such as the National Heart Foundation's 'Tick'.Methods: Using a qualitative, exploratory approach involving 10 focus groups with adults and children, this study investigated consumers' attitudes to the Tick and its relevance to their purchase decisions.Results: Both adults and children exhibited awareness of the Tick and its aim to indicate healthier product alternatives. Views on the effectiveness of the Tick were polarised, with some considering it a useful tool and others querying the basis of its licensing arrangements.Conclusions: While the Tick has in the past played a role in assisting consumers to make more informed decisions and encouraging favourable modification of the food supply, recent questions relating to its role and credibility have resulted in the Heart Foundation deciding to retire it.So what?: After a quarter of a century in the Australian marketplace, the National Heart Foundation's Tick program has been reviewed. The findings of the present study provide insight into consumers' views of the Tick and suggest that the emergence of more comprehensive food labelling initiatives may make logo-based nutrition labels redundant.