Socio-economic difference in purchases of ultra-processed foods in Australia: an analysis of a nationally representative household grocery purchasing panel.

BACKGROUND: Consumption of ultra-processed foods is associated with increased risk of obesity and non-communicable diseases. Little is known about current patterns of ultra-processed foods intake in Australia. The aim of this study was to examine the amount and type of ultra-processed foods purchased by Australian households in 2019 and determine whether purchases differed by socio-economic status (SES). We also assessed whether purchases of ultra-processed foods changed between 2015 and 2019.  METHODS: We used grocery purchase data from a nationally representative consumer panel in Australia to assess packaged and unpackaged grocery purchases that were brought home between 2015 to 2019. Ultra-processed foods were identified according to the NOVA system, which classifies foods according to the nature, extent and purpose of industrial food processing. Purchases of ultra-processed foods were calculated per capita, using two outcomes: grams/day and percent of total energy. The top food categories contributing to purchases of ultra-processed foods in 2019 were identified, and differences in ultra-processed food purchases by SES (Index of Relative Social Advantage and Disadvantage) were assessed using survey-weighted linear regression. Changes in purchases of ultra-processed foods between 2015 to 2019 were examined overall and by SES using mixed linear models. RESULTS: In 2019, the mean ± SD total grocery purchases made by Australian households was 881.1 ± 511.9 g/d per capita. Of this, 424.2 ± 319.0 g/d per capita was attributable to purchases of ultra-processed foods, which represented 56.4% of total energy purchased. The largest food categories contributing to total energy purchased included mass-produced, packaged breads (8.2% of total energy purchased), chocolate and sweets (5.7%), biscuits and crackers (5.7%) and ice-cream and edible ices (4.3%). In 2019, purchases of ultra-processed foods were significantly higher for the lowest SES households compared to all other SES quintiles (P < 0.001). There were no major changes in purchases of ultra-processed foods overall or by SES over the five-year period. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2015 and 2019, ultra-processed foods have consistently made up the majority of groceries purchased by Australians, particularly for the lowest SES households. Policies that reduce ultra-processed food consumption may reduce diet-related health inequalities.

Estimating the potential impact of the Australian government's reformulation targets on household sugar purchases.

BACKGROUND: Countries around the world are putting in place sugar reformulation targets for packaged foods to reduce excess sugar consumption. The Australian government released its voluntary sugar reformulation targets for nine food categories in 2020. We estimated the potential impact of these targets on household sugar purchases and examined differences by income. For comparison, we also modelled the potential impact of the UK sugar reduction targets on per capita sugar purchases as the UK has one of the most comprehensive sugar reduction strategies in the world. METHODS: Grocery purchase data from a nationally representative consumer panel (n=7,188) in Australia was linked with a large database (FoodSwitch) with product-specific sugar content information for packaged foods (n=25,261); both datasets were collected in 2018. Potential reductions in per capita sugar purchases were calculated overall and by food category. Differences in sugar reduction across income level were assessed by analysis of variance. RESULTS: In 2018, the total sugar acquired from packaged food and beverage purchases consumed at-home was 56.1 g/day per capita. Australia's voluntary reformulation targets for sugar covered 2,471/25,261 (9.8%) unique products in the FoodSwitch dataset. Under the scenario that all food companies adhered to the voluntary targets, sugar purchases were estimated to be reduced by 0.9 g/day per capita, which represents a 1.5% reduction in sugar purchased from packaged foods. However, if Australia adopted the UK targets, over twice as many products would be covered (n=4,667), and this would result in a more than four times greater reduction in sugar purchases (4.1 g/day per capita). It was also estimated that if all food companies complied with Australia's voluntary sugar targets, reductions to sugar would be slightly greater in low-income households compared with high-income households by 0.3 g/day (95%CI 0.2 - 0.4 g/day, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sugar-reduction policies have the potential to substantially reduce population sugar consumption and may help to reduce health inequalities related to excess sugar consumption. However, the current reformulation targets in Australia are estimated to achieve only a small reduction to sugar intakes, particularly in comparison to the UK's sugar reduction program.

Discrepancy in socioeconomic status does not fully explain the variation in diet quality between consumers of different coffee types.

PURPOSE: Habitual consumers of different coffee types may vary in socioeconomic status (SES), which is an important determinant of diet quality. Nonetheless, research on diet quality among coffee consumers was scarce. We aimed to compare the diet quality of coffee consumers with different preferences towards coffee type and additive usage. METHODS: In this cross-sectional analysis, intake data of food, coffee, and additive usage from the adult respondents of the 2011-2012 Australian Health Survey were used. Participants were grouped according to the type of coffee (espresso and ground coffee, E&G; coffee made from coffee mixes and instant coffee, M&I; non-consumers, NC) and additives (milk, sugar, and intense sweetener) consumed. Adjusted food group intake was compared between consumption groups using general linear model. RESULTS: E&G drinkers had better SES than M&I and NC. After adjusting for covariates, the mean dairy intake of E&G drinkers was 22.2% higher than M&I drinkers (p < 0.001) and 33.1% higher than NC (p < 0.001). Mean discretionary food intake of E&G drinkers was 12.1% lower than M&I (p = 0.003) and 12.3% lower than NC (p = 0.001). In terms of additive usage, non-users of coffee additive had the lowest dairy food intake and the highest discretionary food intake. CONCLUSIONS: Coffee consumers' different preferences towards coffee type and additive usages reflected significant variations in their diet quality, even after adjustment of SES. Therefore, future epidemiological studies should consider separating coffee drinkers according to their habitual consumption of different types of coffee.

A nutrient profiling assessment of packaged foods using two star-based front-of-pack labels.

OBJECTIVE: To compare two front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems for the assessment of packaged foods and drinks with Australian Dietary Guidelines. DESIGN: A cross-sectional nutrient profiling assessment. Food and drink products (n 20 225) were categorised into scoring levels using criteria for the Institute of Medicine (IOM) three-star system and the five-star Australian Health Star Rating (HSR). The effectiveness of these systems to categorise foods in accordance with Australian Dietary Guidelines was explored. SETTING: The study was conducted in Australia, using a comprehensive food database. SUBJECTS: Packaged food and drink products (n 20 225) available in Australia. RESULTS: Using the IOM three-star system, the majority (55 %) of products scored the minimum 0 points and 25·5 % scored the maximum 3 points. Using HSR criteria, the greatest proportion of products (15·2 %) scored three-and-a-half stars from a possible five and 12·5 % received the lowest rating of a half-star. Very few products (4·1 %) scored five stars. Products considered core foods and drinks in Australian Dietary Guidelines received higher scores than discretionary foods in all food categories for both labelling systems (all P<0·05; Mann-Whitney U test), with the exception of fish products using IOM three-star criteria (P=0·603). The largest discrepancies in median score between the two systems were for the food categories edible oils, convenience foods and dairy. CONCLUSIONS: Both the IOM three-star and Australian HSR front-of-pack labelling systems rated packaged foods and drinks broadly in line with Australian Dietary Guidelines by assigning core foods higher ratings and discretionary foods lower ratings.

Electronic Dietary Intake Assessment (e-DIA): Comparison of a Mobile Phone Digital Entry App for Dietary Data Collection With 24-Hour Dietary Recalls.

BACKGROUND: The electronic Dietary Intake Assessment (e-DIA), a digital entry food record mobile phone app, was developed to measure energy and nutrient intake prospectively. This can be used in monitoring population intakes or intervention studies in young adults. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the relative validity of e-DIA as a dietary assessment tool for energy and nutrient intakes using the 24-hour dietary recall as a reference method. METHODS: University students aged 19 to 24 years recorded their food and drink intake on the e-DIA for five days consecutively and completed 24-hour dietary recalls on three random days during this 5-day study period. Mean differences in energy, macro-, and micronutrient intakes were evaluated between the methods using paired t tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and correlation coefficients were calculated on unadjusted, energy-adjusted, and deattenuated values. Bland-Altman plots and cross-classification into quartiles were used to assess agreement between the two methods. RESULTS: Eighty participants completed the study (38% male). No significant differences were found between the two methods for mean intakes of energy or nutrients. Deattenuated correlation coefficients ranged from 0.55 to 0.79 (mean 0.68). Bland-Altman plots showed wide limits of agreement between the methods but without obvious bias. Cross-classification into same or adjacent quartiles ranged from 75% to 93% (mean 85%). CONCLUSIONS: The e-DIA shows potential as a dietary intake assessment tool at a group level with good ranking agreement for energy and all nutrients.