Nutri-Score of Meat, Fish, and Dairy Alternatives: A Comparison between the Old and New Algorithm.

Nutri-Score is a front-of-pack label that visualizes the nutritional quality of food products from most healthy (A, dark green) to least healthy (E, red). However, concerns have been raised about discrepancies between Nutri-Score labels and dietary recommendations. Therefore, the Nutri-Score algorithm has recently been adapted. To investigate the effect of the new algorithm, the Nutri-Score of plant-based meat, fish, and dairy alternatives (n = 916) was calculated with the old and new algorithms. In addition, the nutritional values of meat and milk alternatives with Nutri-Score labels A and B were compared under the old and new conditions and subsequently assessed for alignment with the criteria of Dutch dietary guidelines. The new algorithm resulted in a reduction in the number of products with labels A and B, ranging from 5% (cold cuts alternatives) to 55% (milk alternatives). The nutritional composition of products with labels A and B improved for meat alternatives (lower energy and saturated fatty acid contents; higher protein content) and milk alternatives (lower energy, salt, and sugar contents; higher protein and fiber contents). Overall, the new Nutri-Score algorithm is more in line with the Dutch dietary guidelines for plant-based meat and dairy alternatives, though challenges remain with respect to micronutrient (iron, calcium, vitamin B12), salt, and protein contents.

Cross-Sectional Study to Map Nutritional Quality of Meat, Fish, and Dairy Alternatives in Dutch Supermarkets According to the Dutch Food-Based Dietary Guidelines and Nutri-Score.

Due to a growing challenge to feed the world's population and an increased awareness to minimize the impact of our food choices on climate change, a more plant-based diet has gained popularity with a growing number of plant-based products on the market. To stimulate a plant-based diet that also improves long-term health, data are needed to monitor whether these products are healthy alternatives to animal-based foods. Therefore, this study inventoried 916 plant-based meat, fish, and dairy alternatives from eight Dutch supermarkets. The nutritional quality of each product was assessed by (1) the Dutch food-based dietary guidelines and (2) the Nutri-Score. The results show that over 70% of meat, fish, and dairy alternatives have an A/B Nutri-Score (indicating high nutritional quality), but do not comply with the Dutch dietary guidelines. This is mainly due to high salt and low vitamin B12 and iron content (meat and fish alternatives) or low protein and calcium levels (dairy alternatives). In conclusion, the majority of plant-based products are nutritionally not full alternatives of the animal-based equivalents; however, there are still opportunities for reformulation. To aid the consumer in making healthy plant-based food choices, a better alignment between the Nutri-Score and the recommended dietary guidelines is needed.

Modelling health and economic impact of nutrition interventions: a systematic review.

Diet related non-communicable diseases (NCDs), as well as micronutrient deficiencies, are of widespread and growing importance to public health. Authorities are developing programs to improve nutrient intakes via foods. To estimate the potential health and economic impact of these programs there is a wide variety of models. The aim of this review is to evaluate existing models to estimate the health and/or economic impact of nutrition interventions with a focus on reducing salt and sugar intake and increasing vitamin D, iron, and folate/folic acid intake. The protocol of this systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42016050873). The final search was conducted on PubMed and Scopus electronic databases and search strings were developed for salt/sodium, sugar, vitamin D, iron, and folic acid intake. Predefined criteria related to scientific quality, applicability, and funding/interest were used to evaluate the publications. In total 122 publications were included for a critical appraisal: 45 for salt/sodium, 61 for sugar, 4 for vitamin D, 9 for folic acid, and 3 for iron. The complexity of modelling the health and economic impact of nutrition interventions is dependent on the purpose and data availability. Although most of the models have the potential to provide projections of future impact, the methodological challenges are considerable. There is a substantial need for more guidance and standardization for future modelling, to compare results of different studies and draw conclusions about the health and economic impact of nutrition interventions.

The Nutri-Score algorithm: Evaluation of its validation process.

The Nutri-Score front-of-pack label, which classifies the nutritional quality of products in one of 5 classes (A to E), is one of the main candidates for standardized front-of-pack labeling in the EU. The algorithm underpinning the Nutri-Score label is derived from the Food Standard Agency (FSA) nutrient profile model, originally a binary model developed to regulate the marketing of foods to children in the UK. This review describes the development and validation process of the Nutri-Score algorithm. While the Nutri-Score label is one of the most studied front-of-pack labels in the EU, its validity and applicability in the European context is still undetermined. For several European countries, content validity (i.e., ability to rank foods according to healthfulness) has been evaluated. Studies showed Nutri-Score's ability to classify foods across the board of the total food supply, but did not show the actual healthfulness of products within different classes. Convergent validity (i.e., ability to categorize products in a similar way as other systems such as dietary guidelines) was assessed with the French dietary guidelines; further adaptations of the Nutri-Score algorithm seem needed to ensure alignment with food-based dietary guidelines across the EU. Predictive validity (i.e., ability to predict disease risk when applied to population dietary data) could be re-assessed after adaptations are made to the algorithm. Currently, seven countries have implemented or aim to implement Nutri-Score. These countries appointed an international scientific committee to evaluate Nutri-Score, its underlying algorithm and its applicability in a European context. With this review, we hope to contribute to the scientific and political discussions with respect to nutrition labeling in the EU.

Comparison between the Choices Five-Level Criteria and Nutri-Score: Alignment with the Dutch Food-Based Dietary Guidelines.

The current food environment in The Netherlands is considered obesogenic. Eighty percent of the products in supermarkets are unhealthy. The Wheel of Five is the well-established, science-based Dutch food-based dietary guideline (FBDG) developed to stimulate healthier choices. In addition, simple directions on food packaging, such as front-of-package (FOP) health logos, could also be helpful. However, these tools should be in line with each other, in order not to confuse the consumer. To study this, we evaluated two FOP nutrient profiling systems (NPSs) for their alignment with the Wheel of Five: Choices five-level criteria and Nutri-Score. For this, a small but representative sample of 124 products was selected from the Dutch food composition database (NEVO). For these products, the scores for Choices and Nutri-Score were calculated using the published criteria, while compliance with the Wheel of Five was established by using the criteria from Netherlands Nutrition Center (NNC). The Wheel of Five food groups were used to categorize the products. Differences between the Wheel of Five and Choices are smaller than with Nutri-Score, concluding that Choices is more consistent with the Wheel of Five and might be an attractive alternation for a FOP health logo on the Dutch market.

Protein Intake among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: The Influence of (Pre-) Motivational Determinants.

An adequate protein intake is important for healthy ageing, yet nearly 50% of Dutch community-dwelling older adults do not meet protein recommendations. This study explores protein intake in relation to eight behavioral determinants (I-Change model) among Dutch community-dwelling older adults. Data were collected through an online questionnaire from October 2019-October 2020. Protein intake was assessed by the Protein Screener 55+, indicating a high/low chance of a low protein intake (<1.0 g/kg body weight/day). The behavioral determinants of cognizance, knowledge, risk perception, perceived cues, attitude, social support, self-efficacy and intention were assessed by evaluating statements on a 7-point Likert scale. A total of 824 Dutch community-dwelling older adults were included, recruited via online newsletters, newspapers and by personal approach. Poisson regression was performed to calculate quartile-based prevalence ratios (PRs). Almost 40% of 824 respondents had a high chance of a low protein intake. Univariate analyses indicated that lower scores for all different behavioral determinants were associated with a higher chance of a low protein intake. Independent associations were observed for knowledge (Q4 OR = 0.71) and social support (Q4 OR = 0.71). Results of this study can be used in future interventions aiming to increase protein intake in which focus should lie on increasing knowledge and social support.

What Is on the Menu?-A Quantitative Analysis on Label Format among (Potential) Restaurant Guests and Restaurant Owners.

About 20% of energy intake in the Netherlands is consumed out-of-home. Eating out-of-home is associated with higher energy intake and poorer nutrition. Menu labeling can be considered a promising instrument to improve dietary choices in the out-of-home sector. Effectiveness depends on the presentation format of the label and its attractiveness and usability to restaurant guests and restaurant owners. This exploratory study investigated which menu labeling format would be mostly appreciated by (a) (potential) restaurant guests (n386) and (b) the uninvestigated group of restaurant owners (n41) if menu labeling would be implemented in Dutch full-service restaurants. A cross-sectional survey design was used to investigate three distinct menu labeling formats: a simple health logo; (star) ranking and calorie information. Questionnaires were used as study tool. Ranking has been shown to be the most appreciated menu labeling format by both (potential) restaurant guests and owners. Statistical analysis showed that label preference of potential restaurant guests was significantly associated with age, possibly associated with level of education, and not associated with health consciousness. In summary, we found that ranking is the most appreciated menu label format according to both (potential) restaurant guests and restaurant owners, suggesting it to be a promising way to improve healthy eating out-of-home.

Development of the Choices 5-Level Criteria to Support Multiple Food System Actions.

In 2008, the Choices International Foundation developed its logo criteria, identifying best-in-class food products. More advanced, global and graded nutrient profiling systems (NPSs) are needed to substantiate different national nutrition policies. The objective of this work was to extend Choices NPS to identify five levels of the healthiness of food products, so that the Choices NPS can also be used to support other nutrition policies, next to front-of-pack labelling. Based on the same principles as the previous logo criteria, four sets of threshold criteria were determined using a combination of compliance levels, calculated from a large international food group-specific database, the Choices logo criteria, and WHO-NPSs developed to restrict marketing to children. Validation consisted of a comparison with indicator foods from food-based dietary guidelines from various countries. Some thresholds were adjusted after the validation, e.g., because intermediate thresholds were too lenient. This resulted in a new international NPS that can be applied to different contexts and to support a variety of health policies, to prevent both undernutrition and obesity. It can efficiently evaluate mixed food products and represents a flexible tool, applicable in various settings and populations.

Low awareness of community-dwelling older adults on the importance of dietary protein: new insights from four qualitative studies.

Meeting the recommended daily protein intake can be a challenge for community-dwelling older adults (CDOA). In order to understand why, we studied attitudes towards protein-rich products and healthy eating in general; identified needs and preferences, barriers and promotors and knowledge regarding dietary behaviour and implementation of high protein products. Attitudes towards protein-rich products and healthy eating were evaluated in focus groups (study 1, n 17). To gain insights in the needs and preferences of older adults with regard to meals and meal products (study 2, n 30), visual information on eating behaviour was assessed using photovoicing and verified in post-photovoice interviews. In studies 3 and 4, semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify protein consumption-related barriers, opportunities (n 20) and knowledge and communication channels (n 40), respectively. Risk of low protein intake was assessed using ProteinScreener55+ (Pro55+) in studies 2-4 (n 90). Focus groups showed that participants were unaware of potential inadequate dietary protein. Photovoicing showed that sixteen of thirty participants mainly consumed traditional Dutch products. In post-photovoice interviews, participants indicated that they were satisfied with their current eating behaviour. Barriers for adequate use of protein-rich products were 'lack of knowledge', 'resistance to change habits' and 'no urge to receive dietary advice'. Promotors were 'trust in professionals' and 'product offers'. Sixty-two percent had a low risk of low protein intake. CDOA feel low urgency to increase protein intake, possibly linked to low knowledge levels. A challenge for professionals would be to motivate older adults to change their eating pattern, to optimise protein intake.

Periodic Revisions of the International Choices Criteria: Process and Results.

Unhealthy diets contribute to an increased risk of non-communicable diseases, which are the leading causes of deaths worldwide. Nutrition policies such as front-of-pack labeling have been developed and implemented globally in different countries to stimulate healthier diets. The Choices Programme, including the International Choices criteria, is an established tool to support the implementation of such policies. The Choices criteria were developed to define the healthier choices per product group, taking saturated fatty acids, trans fatty acids, sodium, sugars, energy, and fiber into account. To keep these criteria updated, they are periodically revised by an independent international scientific committee. This paper explains the most important changes resulting from revisions between 2010 and 2016 and describes the process of the latest revision, resulting in the International Choices criteria version 2019. Revisions were based on national and international nutrition and dietary recommendations, large food composition databases, and stakeholders' feedback. Other nutrient profiling systems served as benchmarks. The product group classification was adapted and new criteria were determined in order to enhance global applicability and form a credible, intuitively logical system for users. These newly developed criteria will serve as an international standard for healthier products and provide a guiding framework for food and nutrition policies.

What do screening tools measure? Lessons learned from SCREEN II and SNAQ65.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, different screening tools for malnutrition have been developed. Within these tools, a distinction can be made between tools that assess nutritional risk and tools that assess protein energy malnutrition. Insights in differences in characteristics of participants at risk and in differences in prevalence rates will aid in deciding which tool(s) to use in daily practice. METHODS: Dutch community-dwelling older adults (n = 200, 78.2 ± 6.9 years), not known to have specific nutrition problems, were recruited to participate in this cross-sectional study. SNAQ65+ (low risk vs moderate/high risk) was used to assess risk of protein energy malnutrition and SCREEN II was used to assess nutrition risk (score <54 out of 64). Chi-square tests were used to test associations between demographic, health, physical and social factors and outcome of SNAQ65+ and SCREEN II. RESULTS: Of all participants 69.0% were at nutrition risk (SCREEN II), while 13.5% were at risk of protein energy malnutrition (SNAQ65+). Agreement between the two tools was poor (kappa < 0.20). Gender, BMI, living status, income, activity level and protein/energy intake were associated with SCREEN II; age, BMI, comorbidities, medication use, help at home, activity level and low basic mobility were associated with SNAQ65+. CONCLUSION: SCREEN II and SNAQ65+ measure different concepts of malnutrition and therefore identify different persons at risk. SCREEN II is more inclusive and comprises both undernutrition and overnutrition as well as different determinants that can impact on food intake, while SNAQ65+ is solely focused on protein-energy malnutrition.

The ConsuMEER study: a randomised trial towards the effectiveness of protein-rich ready-made meals and protein-rich dairy products in increasing protein intake of community-dwelling older adults after switching from self-prepared meals towards ready-made meals.

The risk of undernutrition in older community-dwelling adults increases when they are no longer able to shop or cook themselves. Home-delivered products could then possibly prevent them from becoming undernourished. This single-blind randomised trial tested the effectiveness of home-delivered protein-rich ready-made meals and dairy products in reaching the recommended intake of 1·2 g protein/kg body weight (BW) per d and ≥25 g of protein per meal. Community-dwelling older adults (n 98; mean age 80·4 (sd 6·8) years) switched from self-prepared to home-delivered hot meals and dairy products for 28 d. The intervention group received ready-made meals and dairy products high in protein; the control group received products lower in protein. Dietary intake was measured at baseline, after 2 weeks (T1), and after 4 weeks (T2). Multilevel analyses (providing one combined outcome for T1 and T2) and logistic regressions were performed. Average baseline protein intake was 1·09 (se 0·05) g protein/kg BW per d in the intervention group and 0·99 (se 0·05) g protein/kg BW per d in the control group. During the trial, protein intake of the intervention group was 1·12 (se 0·05) g protein/kg BW per d compared with 0·87 (se 0·03) g protein/kg BW per d in the control group (between-group differences P < 0·05). More participants of the intervention group reached the threshold of ≥25 g protein at dinner compared with the control group (intervention T1: 84·8 %, T2: 88·4 % v. control T1: 42·9 %, T2: 40·5 %; P < 0·05), but not at breakfast and lunch. Our findings suggest that switching from self-prepared meals to ready-made meals carries the risk of a decreasing protein intake, unless extra attention is given to protein-rich choices.

Consumer Distrust about E-numbers: A Qualitative Study among Food Experts.

Food additives (E-numbers) are allowed in foods, but many consumers have a negative perception of them. The objective was to study the opinion of food experts about the causes and ways to reduce consumer distrust about E-numbers. Thirteen food experts from universities, research institutes, the government, food industry organisations, media, a nutrition information organisation, a consumer association and two other non-governmental organisations (NGOs) were interviewed with a semi-structured topic list, based on a model of risk perception. Interviews were transcribed, coded by an open-coding approach and analysed. Results indicated that, according to food experts, consumer distrust of E-numbers arose from negative communication by traditional media, social media and books. Food experts suggested that the information sources and the reliability of E-number information are important for consumers. Food experts also suggested reducing consumer distrust by avoiding negative label claims and making collective agreements with all parties about honest and transparent communication. According to interviewed food experts, food companies need to explain clearly and honestly why they use E-numbers in food. A nutrition information organisation and the government were often mentioned as appropriate parties to undertake action. The interviews suggested that consumers had no confidence in the food industry.

Reformulation as an Integrated Approach of Four Disciplines: A Qualitative Study with Food Companies.

In 2014, the Dutch government agreed with the food sector to lower salt, sugar, saturated fat and energy in foods. To reformulate, an integrated approach of four disciplines (Nutrition & Health, Food Technology, Legislation, and Consumer Perspectives) is important for food companies (Framework for Reformulation). The objective of this study was to determine whether this framework accurately reflects reformulation processes in food companies. Seventeen Dutch food companies in the bakery, meat and convenience sector were interviewed with a semi-structured topic list. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed. Interviews illustrated that there were opportunities to lower salt, sugar and saturated fat (Nutrition & Health). However, there were barriers to replacing the functionality of these ingredients (Food Technology). Most companies would like the government to push reformulation more (Legislation). Traditional meat products and luxury sweet bakery products were considered less suitable for reformulation (Consumer Perspectives). In addition, the reduction of E-numbers was considered important. The important role of the retailer is stressed by the respondents. In conclusion, all four disciplines are important in the reformulation processes in food companies. Reformulation does not only mean the reduction of salt, saturated fat and sugar for companies, but also the reduction of E-numbers.

Nutrient profiling for front of pack labelling: how to align logical consumer choice with improvement of products?

The primary goal of front of pack (FOP) labelling is to help consumers make healthier choices through communication. A secondary goal is to encourage producers to improve the nutritional composition of their products. Evidence has shown that (FOP) labelling can help consumers to make healthier food choices and has been an incentive for producers to improve product composition. As FOP labelling is seen as an important tool to improve food environments for public health purposes, the WHO supports initiatives of governments to implement an FOP labelling system. Based on the experiences of a wide range of countries over many years, possible success factors for such an FOP system have been defined, six of which are discussed in the present paper and used to evaluate the Dutch Choices Programme that was started in 2006. In the course of time a large number of producers joined the programme and the logo was recognised by more than 90 % of the consumers, but by 2016 the Dutch consumer organisation argued on the basis of their own research that a quarter of the consumers did not understand the colour coding of the logo and as a result the Dutch government decided to no longer support this logo and to introduce a nutrition app. The challenge that remains is to find a system that consumers understand well and that still encourages manufacturers of food to improve product composition. New technology-based data collecting initiatives might provide the right tools to develop such a system.

The use of food composition data in the Choices International Programme.

Food composition data have extensively been used in the Choices International Programme: they formed the basis of both criteria development and nutrient intake modeling. Criteria were developed for key nutrients linked to non communicable diseases by an independent scientific committee. The criteria can be used for the logo assignment on food products, in order to stimulate producers to improve their products and to stimulate consumers to purchase these products. Insights in steps of development of the criteria for the Choices program illustrates the importance of food composition data in this process. Modeling studies with the criteria for the Dutch Choices program showed an improved nutrient intake profile if consumers would choose products fulfilling the criteria of the Dutch logo as part of their diets. The role and availability of food composition databases in the development of the criteria and the modeling studies is discussed.

Modelling of usual nutrient intakes: potential impact of the choices programme on nutrient intakes in young dutch adults.

INTRODUCTION: The Choices Programme is an internationally applicable nutrient profiling system with nutrition criteria for trans fatty acids (TFA), saturated fatty acids, sodium, added sugar and for some product groups energy and fibre. These criteria determine whether foods are eligible to carry a "healthier option" stamp. In this paper a nutrient intake modelling method is described to evaluate these nutritional criteria by investigating the potential effect on nutrient intakes. METHODS: Data were combined from the 2003 Dutch food consumption survey in young adults (aged 19-30) and the Dutch food composition table into the Monte Carlo Risk Assessment model. Three scenarios were calculated: the "actual intakes" (scenario 1) were compared to scenario 2, where all foods that did not comply were replaced by similar foods that did comply with the Choices criteria. Scenario 3 was the same as scenario 2 adjusted for the difference in energy density between the original and replacement food. Additional scenarios were calculated where snacks were not or partially replaced and stratified analyses for gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI) and education. RESULTS: Calculated intake distributions showed that median energy intake was reduced by 16% by replacing normally consumed foods with Choices compliant foods. Intakes of nutrients with a maximal intake limit were also reduced (ranging from -23% for sodium and -62% for TFA). Effects on intakes of beneficial nutrients varied from an unintentional reduction in fat soluble vitamin intakes (-15 to -28%) to an increase of 28% for fibre and 17% calcium. Stratified analyses in this homogeneous study population showed only small differences across gender, age, BMI and education. CONCLUSIONS: This intake modelling method showed that with consumption of Choices compliant foods, nutrient intakes shift towards population intake goals for the nutrients for which nutrition criteria were defined, while effects on beneficial nutrients were diverse.

Methodological quality of front-of-pack labeling studies: a review plus identification of research challenges.

This review evaluates the methodological quality of current front-of-pack labeling research and discusses future research challenges. Peer-reviewed articles were identified using a computerized search of the databases PubMed and Web of Science (ISI) from 1990 to February 2011; reference lists from key published articles were used as well. The quality of the 31 included studies was assessed. The results showed that the methodological quality of published front-of-pack labeling research is generally low to mediocre; objective observational data-based consumer studies were of higher quality than consumer studies relying on self-reports. Experimental studies that included a control group were lacking. The review further revealed a lack of a validated methodology to measure the use of front-of-pack labels and the effects of these labels in real-life settings. In conclusion, few methodologically sound front-of-pack labeling studies are presently available. The highest methodological quality and the greatest public health relevance are achieved by measuring the health effects of front-of-pack labels using biomarkers in a longitudinal, randomized, controlled design in a real-life setting.

Potential effects of nutrient profiles on nutrient intakes in the Netherlands, Greece, Spain, USA, Israel, China and South-Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Nutrient profiling is defined as the science of categorising foods based on their nutrient composition. The Choices Programme is a nutrient profile system with criteria that determine whether foods are eligible to carry a "healthier option" stamp. The Daily Menu Method which has been developed to evaluate these criteria is described here. This method simulates the change in calculated nutrient intakes which would be the result of consumers changing their diets in favour of food products that comply with the criteria. METHODS: Average intakes of energy, trans fatty acids (TFA), saturated fatty acids (SAFA), sodium, added sugar and fibre were derived from dietary intake studies and food consumption surveys of 7 countries: The Netherlands, Greece, Spain, the USA, Israel, China and South Africa. For each of the key nutrients, these average intakes were translated into three Typical Daily Menus per country. Average intakes based on these three menus were compared with average intakes from three Choices Daily Menus. To compose the Choices Menus, foods from the Typical Menus that did not comply with the Choices criteria were replaced with foods that did comply and are available on the market. RESULTS: Comparison of intakes from the Choices Menus with the survey data showed that calculated intakes of energy, SAFA, TFA, sodium and added sugar were reduced. Fibre intakes were increased. The size of the effect differed per country. CONCLUSION: The Daily Menu Method is a useful means to predict the potential effects of nutrient profiles such as the Choices criteria, on daily nutrient intakes. The method can be applied internationally and confirms that the criteria of the Choices Programme are in line with the aim of the programme: to improve nutrient intakes in the direction of the recommendations.

Influence of placement of a nutrition logo on cafeteria menu items on lunchtime food Choices at Dutch work sites.

This study investigated the effectiveness of labeling foods with the Choices nutrition logo on influencing cafeteria menu selection and the behavioral determinants of menu choices in work site cafeterias in the Netherlands. A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted. Intervention cafeterias (n=13), where the Choices logo was used to promote healthier eating for a 3-week period, were compared with control cafeterias (n=12), which offered the same menu without the logo. Sales data were collected daily for 9 weeks, from March to May 2009. In addition, employees from one intervention and one control company completed an online questionnaire at baseline and after the intervention (n=368) in which the behavioral determinants of food choice (ie, attitude, self-efficacy, and intention) and logo use were measured. Generalized estimating equation analyses, χ² tests, t tests and linear regression analyses were performed. No nutritionally meaningful intervention effects were found in the sales of sandwiches, soups, snacks, fruit, and salads. Also, no significant differences in behavioral determinants were found. "Intention to eat healthier" and "paying attention to product information" were positively associated with self-reported consumption of foods with the Choices logo at lunch. The intervention did not have a significant effect on employees' lunchtime food choices. Labeling healthy choices might be useful for health-conscious employees in the volitional phase of behavior change. Further research should focus on the possible health benefits of menu reformulation in the catering sector.