Greenhouse gas emissions, total food spending and diet quality by share of household food spending on red meat: results from a nationally representative sample of US households.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if US household food purchases with lower levels of red meat spending generate lower life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE), greater nutritional quality and improved alignment with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Affordability of purchasing patterns by red meat spending levels was also assessed. DESIGN: Household food purchase and acquisition data were linked to an environmentally extended input-output life-cycle assessment model to calculate food GHGE. Households (n 4706) were assigned to quintiles by the share of weekly food spending on red meat. Average weekly kilojoule-adjusted GHGE, total food spending, nutrients purchased and 2010 Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2010) were evaluated using ANOVA and linear regression. SETTING: USA.ParticipantsHouseholds participating in the 2012-2013 National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey. RESULTS: There was substantial variation in the share of the household food budget spent on red meat and total spending on red meat. The association between red meat spending share and total food spending was mixed. Lower red meat spending share was mostly advantageous from a nutritional perspective. Average GHGE were significantly lower and HEI-2010 scores were significantly higher for households spending the least on red meat as a share of total food spending. CONCLUSIONS: Only very low levels of red meat spending as a share of total food spending had advantages for food affordability, lower GHGE, nutrients purchased and diet quality. Further studies assessing changes in GHGE and other environmental burdens, using more sophisticated analytical techniques and accounting for substitution towards non-red meat animal proteins, are needed.

The healthfulness of food and beverage purchases after the federal food package revisions: The case of two New England states.

OBJECTIVE: In 2009, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) implemented new food packages to improve dietary intake among WIC participants. This paper examines how the healthfulness of food purchases among low-income households changed following this reform. METHODS: Point-of-sale data for 2137 WIC-participating and 1303 comparison households were obtained from a regional supermarket chain. The healthfulness of purchased foods and beverages was determined per their saturated fat, sugar, and sodium content. A pre-post assessment (2009-2010) of the product basket healthfulness was completed using generalized estimating equation models. Data were analyzed in 2015. RESULTS: At baseline, healthy products accounted for most of the food volume purchased by WIC participants, but beverages were dominated by moderation (less healthy) items. With new subsidies for fruit, vegetables and whole grains, the WIC revisions increased the volume of healthy food purchases of WIC-participating households by 3.9% and reduced moderation foods by 1.8%. The biggest improvements were reductions in moderation beverages (down by 24.7% in volume), driven by milk fat restrictions in the WIC food package revisions. The healthfulness of the product basket increased post-WIC revisions; mainly due to a reduction in the volume of moderation food and beverages purchased (down by 15.5%) rather than growth in healthy products (up by 1.9%). No similar improvements were seen in a comparison group of low-income nonparticipants. CONCLUSIONS: After the WIC revisions, the healthfulness of participant purchases improved, particularly for beverages. Efforts to encourage healthy eating by people receiving federal food assistance are paying off.

Food spending in the United States during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought about a significant increase in the unemployment rate and a decline in consumer income. At the same time, the public health responses to the pandemic, such as lockdowns and business closures, disrupted the food supply chain. These pandemic-driven changes could lead to a shift in food spending behaviors and potentially exacerbate the food insecurity situation. Leveraging the nationally representative dataset from the 2017-2020 consumer expenditure surveys, we employ a two-part model to assess the changes in weekly household spending on total food, food-at-home (FAH), and food-away-from-home (FAFH) between the pre-pandemic and pandemic period in the United States. Our finding shows a predicted marginal decline in FAFH expenditure by 33.7% but an increase in FAH spending by 6.9% during the pandemic. The increase in FAH spending could not fully offset the decrease in FAFH spending, leading to a decline in total food spending by 12.6%. The results could provide a basis for future studies on food insecurity, nutrient intake, and healthy consumption during the pandemic.

Inedible Food Waste Linked to Diet Quality and Food Spending in the Seattle Obesity Study SOS III.

Americans waste about a pound of food per day. Some of this is represented by inedible food waste at the household level. Our objective was to estimate inedible food waste in relation to diet quality and participant socio-economic status (SES). Seattle Obesity Study III participants (n = 747) completed the Fred Hutch Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) and socio-demographic and food expenditure surveys. Education and geo-coded tax-parcel residential property values were measures of SES. Inedible food waste was calculated from diet records. Retail prices of FFQ component foods (n = 378) were used to estimate individual-level diet costs. The NOVA classification was used to identify ultra-processed foods. Multivariable linear regressions tested associations between inedible food waste, SES, food spending, Nutrient Rich Food (NRF9.3) and Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2015) scores. Inedible food waste was estimated at 78.7 g/d, mostly from unprocessed vegetables (32.8 g), fruit (30.5 g) and meat, poultry, and fish (15.4 g). Greater inedible food waste was associated with higher HEI-2015 and NRF9.3 scores, higher food expenditures and lower percent energy from ultra-processed foods. In multivariable models, more inedible food waste was associated with higher food expenditures, education and residential property values. Higher consumption of unprocessed foods were associated with more inedible food waste and higher diet costs. Geo-located estimates of inedible food waste can provide a proxy index of neighborhood diet quality.

Relative Density of Away from Home Food Establishments and Food Spend for 24,047 Households in England: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Eating away from home is a risk factor for poor diet quality and obesity. With an ever-increasing proportion of household food spend directed toward eating out, the proliferation of these food establishments may contribute to their use, a potential precursor to less healthy food choices and low overall diet quality. However few studies are conducted at the national level and across a range of away from home food sources. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between the density of away from home food establishments (e.g., restaurants, fast food outlets and cafés) and household spend on away from home food within a nationally representative sample for England, UK. A cross-sectional analysis of data from Wave 1 of the UK Household Longitudinal Survey (n = 24,047 adults aged ≥19y) was conducted. Exposure was characterised as the density of away from home food establishments to all other food sources within 1 mile of the home, divided into quintiles (Q1 as lowest exposure and Q5 as highest exposure). The primary outcome included households with a high away from home equivalised monthly food spend (≥25% of total food spend). Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between away from home food establishment exposure and high away from home food spend. Away from home food establishment density was significantly associated with a greater odds of high monthly food spend (Q3: OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.07, 1.30; Q4: OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.18, 1.43; and Q5: OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.37, 1.68) with attenuation after controlling for known socioeconomic confounders (Q4: OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.25; and Q5: OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.04, 1.30) compared to those least exposed (Q1). Those most exposed to away from home food establishments had a 16% greater odds of allocating more than 25% of household food spend on away from home food sources. This study provides one of the first analyses at the national level to examine the role of the local food environment in relation to household food spend, a potential precursor to diet quality and health.

Food costs, diet quality and energy balance in the United States.

The high obesity rates and poor diet quality in the United States, particularly among low income populations, are often attributed to low income, low food access, and high food prices of healthy foods. This paper discusses these associations and questions some of the metrics used to measure food prices. The paper argues that 1. On average, Americans consume diets that need improvement and there is only a very limited relationship between income and diet quality; 2. The way the food price is measured makes a difference in the perception of how expensive healthy and less healthy food is; 3. The way Americans allocate their food budgets between healthy and less healthy foods is not in line with healthy diets; and 4. At any food spending level there are households that purchase healthy (and unhealthy) diets, including budgets at or below the maximum allotment for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) which provides a means for low-income households to purchase food. Our key finding is that healthy foods and diets are affordable, but policy makers, nutrition educators, researchers and the media need to focus on promoting this message, and providing additional guidance on making the changes for Americans to switch to a healthy and affordable diet.