An Evaluation of the Healthiness of the Indian Packaged Food and Beverage Supply

Commonly consumed processed packaged foods in Bangladesh are unhealthy and their nutrient contents are not in conformity with the label declaration

The present study was undertaken to identify the major nutrient content in processed foods commonly consumed in Bangladesh, their label conformity healthiness, and percent daily nutrient contribution. Twenty-four nationally representative composite samples were analyzed using AOAC and other standard methods. Results were compared with label information using a restrictive approach and EU tolerance guidelines. The healthiness of the products was evaluated in terms of the Health Star Rating (HSR) scheme and the UK traffic light labeling system. Among the analyzed samples, fried pulse, chanachur, lozenge, and fried peas had the highest amount of protein, fat, carbohydrates, and dietary fiber, respectively. Biscuits and milk chocolate had high levels of trans fatty acids (TFA) and saturated fatty acids (SFA). It was observed that around half of the products lacked information about saturated fatty acid (46%), followed by total dietary fiber and trans-fat (38% each). Other information was missing in one-fifth of the products, namely protein (17%), total fat (17%), available carbohydrate (17%), energy (17%), sugar (21%), and salt (21%). Label compliance analysis according to the restrictive approach revealed that none of the products accurately reported the salt, sugar, saturated fat, and trans fat content on the label. According to the EU tolerance guideline, approximately half of the products had protein (58%), fat (54%), and carbohydrate (42%) levels that fell within the EU tolerance limit. However, only around one-third of the samples had sugar (21%), salt (38%), and saturated fat (33%) levels that met the EU tolerance limit. In terms of healthiness analysis, according to the HSR, the range of stars was between 0.5 and 2.5 of the foods where fried peas got the highest rating (2.5 stars), while in terms of the UK traffic light system, none of the samples got all green signals. The lozenge got green lights for fat, SFA, and salt contents. It was also found that consumption of 100 g of fried peas or pulse would exceed the acceptable daily limit of salt, sugar, and SFA compared to the daily maximum allowable intake for the 2000 kcal diet recommended by the WHO. However, according to the serving size, biscuits were major contributors of TFA, sugar, and SFA, whereas fried pulse was a key contributor of sodium/salt. Proper regulatory actions should be introduced to promote healthy processed foods with user-friendly front-of-the-pack labeling and monitor their quality to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

The development of a method for the global health community to assess the proportion of food and beverage companies' sales that are derived from unhealthy foods

CONTEXT

Corporate engagement with food and beverage companies who produce food associated with health harms is a divisive topic in the global nutrition community, with high-profile cases of conflict of interest increasingly coming under scrutiny. There is a need for an agreed method to support health organizations in deciding whether and how to engage with large food and beverage manufacturers.

AIM

The aim of this study was to develop a method to quantify the proportion of sales from food and beverage companies that are derived from unhealthy foods to support organizations in determining which companies might be considered high-risk for engagement.

METHODS

The 2015 WHO Euro nutrient profile model was applied to 35,550 products from 1294 brands manufactured by the top 20 global food and beverage companies from seven countries (Australia, Brazil, China, India, South Africa, UK and USA). For the purpose of this study, products that met the WHO Euro criteria were classified as "healthier" and those that failed were classified as "unhealthy". Products were grouped by brand and weighted by the brand's value sales for 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of each company's sales that were classified as unhealthy and healthier by company and category.

RESULTS

Overall, 89% of the top 20 companies' brand sales were classified as unhealthy. For every USD$10 spent on the top 20 companies' brands, only $1.10 was spent on products considered healthier. All companies saw the majority of their sales come from unhealthy foods, including soft drinks, confectionery and snacks. None of Red Bull or Ferrero's sales were classified as healthier and less than 5% of total sales were healthier for Mondelēz, Mars, and PepsiCo. Some companies had higher proportions of sales deriving from healthier products, including Grupo Bimbo (48%), Danone (34%) and Conagra (32%), although the majority of their sales were still derived from unhealthy foods.

DISCUSSION

The results presented in this study highlight the reliance the leading food and beverage companies have on sales of unhealthy products that are contributing to diet-related disease globally. The method and steps we have laid out here could be used by organizations in the global health community to identify companies that have conflicts of interest when it comes to engaging with governments, international organizations and public health bodies on issues of policy and regulation.

Cross-Sectional Evaluation of Food Items Preferred by Adolescents under the Influence of Television Advertisements

BACKGROUND

Food and beverage advertisements on television play a significant role in food preferences, especially among children and adolescents. This study aimed to evaluate foods and beverages advertised on television and purchased by adolescents or their families using the World Health Organization (WHO) nutrient profiling model.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed on 2,699 students (1380 males and 1319 females) aged 11-16 in Ankara, Turkey, in 2015. Socio-demographic characteristics, television-viewing habits, and the tendency to purchase foods and beverages under the influence of TV advertisements were recorded. The body weight and height were measured by the researchers. All reported food and beverage items (n  =  284) were evaluated and classified as permitted or not permitted to advertise, according to the WHO nutrient profile model (2015).

RESULTS

The majority (69.8%) of students were underweight/normal weight, whereas 13.3% and 16.9% were classified as overweight and obese, respectively. A total of 69.6% of adolescents declared that they were influenced by food advertisements, and 66.4% bought those foods. The most purchased products included cakes and sweet biscuits (63.8%), chocolate and confectionery (44.9%), savory snacks (39.6%), and soft drinks (25.4%). Only 8.5% of all the advertised products (n  =  284) were permitted to be advertised, according to the WHO nutrient profile model (2015). Dairy products, meat products, grains, fruits and vegetables, soup, and some traditional Turkish foods (e.g., cig kofte and Turkish pizza) were permitted. The permitted products were preferred by only 13.6% of the adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

Unhealthy foods are advertised on television for adolescents, and food advertisement management may be an essential strategy to provide healthy food choices.

Availability, healthiness, and price of packaged and unpackaged foods in India: A cross-sectional study

Background: Vulnerable populations are the most prone to diet-related disease. The availability, healthiness, and price of foods have established associations with diet-related disease in communities. However, data describing this in India are sparse, particularly in urban slums and rural areas. Aim: To quantify and compare availability, healthiness, and price of packaged and unpackaged foods and beverages in India, and to identify opportunities to improve diets and health of vulnerable populations. Methods: Nutrition data and price were collected on foods and beverages available at 44 stores in urban, urban slum, and rural areas in four states in India between May and August 2018. Healthiness was assessed using the Australasian Health Star Rating system and product retail prices were examined. Comparisons in the findings were made across state, community area type, and adherence to current and draft Indian food labeling regulations. Results: Packaged foods and beverages (n = 1443, 89%) were more prevalent than unpackaged (n = 172, 11%). Unpackaged products were healthier than packaged (mean Health Star Rating = 3.5 vs 2.0; p < 0.001) and lower in price (median price per 100 g/ml: 13.42 Indian rupees vs 25.70 Indian rupees; p < 0.001), a pattern observed across most community area types and states. 96% of packaged products were compliant with current Indian labeling regulations but only 23% were compliant with proposed labeling regulations. Conclusions: Unpackaged products were on average much healthier and lower in price than packaged foods and beverages. Food policies that support greater availability, accessibility and consumption of unpackaged foods, while limiting consumption of packaged foods, have enormous potential for sustaining the health of the Indian population.

Assessing the healthiness of UK food companies' product portfolios using food sales and nutrient composition data

Background

The provision and over-consumption of foods high in energy, saturated fat, free sugars or salt are important risk factors for poor diet and ill-health. In the UK, policies seek to drive improvement through voluntary reformulation of single nutrients in key food groups. There has been little consideration of the overall progress by individual companies. This study assesses recent changes in the nutrient profile of brands and products sold by the top 10 food and beverage companies in the UK.

Methods

The FSA/Ofcom nutrient profile model was applied to the nutrient composition data for all products manufactured by the top 10 food and beverage companies and weighted by volume sales. The mean nutrient profiling score, on a scale of 1–100 with thresholds for healthy products being 62 for foods and 68 for drinks, was used to rank companies and food categories between 2015 and 2018, and to calculate the proportion of individual products and sales that are considered by the UK Government to be healthy.

Results

Between 2015 and 2018 there was little change in the sales-weighted nutrient profiling score of the top 10 companies (49 to 51; p = 0.28) or the proportion of products classified as healthy (46% to 48%; p = 0.23). Of the top five brands sold by each of the ten companies, only six brands among ten companies improved their nutrient profiling score by 20% or more. The proportion of total volume sales classified as healthy increased from 44% to 51% (p = 0.07) driven by an increase in the volume sales of bottled water, low/no calorie carbonates and juices, but after removing soft drinks, the proportion of foods classified as healthy decreased from 7% to 6% (p = 33).

Conclusions

The UK voluntary reformulation policies, setting targets for reductions in calories, sugar and salt, do not appear to have led to significant changes in the nutritional quality of foods, though there has been progress in soft drinks where the soft drink industry levy also applies. Further policy action is needed to incentivise companies to make more substantive changes in product composition to support consumers to achieve a healthier diet.

A New Method to Monitor the Nutritional Quality of Packaged Foods in the Global Food Supply in Order to Provide Feasible Targets for Reformulation

Nutrient profiling systems, initially designed to promote healthy food choices at the point of sale, can also provide the scientific basis for innovation and product reformulation by the food industry. This work presents a new profiling system to help define feasible nutrient targets for reformulation of packaged foods. The focus is on five key nutrients for which the World Health Organisation (WHO) has set population-level goals: sugar, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, and protein. The methodology uses Mintel’s Global New Products Database of packaged foods to (1) identify nutrients relevant to each food category (2) sort products into sub-categories defined by a unique nutritional signature, and (3) develop standards for “best of class” products. For instance, if targeted to be amongst the best 15% of the global food supply, pizza must have less than 4.0 g/100 g saturated fat, less than 520 mg/100 g total sodium and more than 9.8 g/100 g protein. Fiber and sugar are not identified as relevant nutrients for the pizza category and no targets are provided.

Application of nutrient profile models to compare products offered in 'healthy' vs 'conventional' vending machines in a Spanish hospital environment

INTRODUCTION

Vending machines promote easy access to food with low nutritional value. 'Healthy' vending machines (HVM) have been introduced as a means to improve the availability and accessibility of healthy food options, and the healthiness of the foods, however, has not been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess the healthiness of the products offered in HVM and 'conventional' vending machines (CVM), located in the Catalan Institute of Oncology.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

All products available in vending machines (HVM (n = 33) and CVM (n = 62) were evaluate during three nutrient profile models (NPMs): the World Health Organization's European Regional Office model (WHO), Nutrient Profile Model UK (NPM-UK), and Australian Health Star Rating system (HSR).

RESULTS

Regardless of the NPM used, significant differences found in the proportion of healthy products among HVM and CVM (WHO: P-value = 0.005, NPM-UK: P value < 0.001, HSR: P-value < 0.001). The healthy products offered in HVM accounted for 30%, 73%, and 52% of the total content, while CVM offered 6%, 32%, and 15% of the content, as assessed by WHO, NPM-UK, and HSR, respectively. The WHO model was the most restrictive model, and the NPM-UK was the most permissible one.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not all products in HVM are rated as healthy by the different NPMs, the percentage of healthy products was significantly higher than those in CVM.

A comparison of the healthiness of packaged foods and beverages from 12 countries using the Health Star Rating nutrient profiling system, 2013-2018

We compared the healthiness of packaged foods and beverages between selected countries using the Health Star Rating (HSR) nutrient profiling system. Packaged food and beverage data collected 2013-2018 were obtained for Australia, Canada, Chile, China, India, Hong Kong, Mexico, New Zealand, Slovenia, South Africa, the UK, and USA. Each product was assigned to a food or beverage category and mean HSR was calculated overall by category and by country. Median energy density (kJ/100 g), saturated fat (g/100 g), total sugars (g/100 g) and sodium (mg/100 g) contents were calculated. Countries were ranked by mean HSR and median nutrient levels. Mean HSR for all products (n = 394,815) was 2.73 (SD 1.38) out of 5.0 (healthiest profile). The UK, USA, Australia and Canada ranked highest for overall nutrient profile (HSR 2.74-2.83) and India, Hong Kong, China and Chile ranked lowest (HSR 2.27-2.44). Countries with higher overall HSR generally ranked better with respect to nutrient levels. India ranked consistently in the least healthy third for all measures. There is considerable variability in the healthiness of packaged foods and beverages in different countries. The finding that packaged foods and beverages are less healthy in middle-income countries such as China and India suggests that nutrient profiling is an important tool to enable policymakers and industry actors to reformulate products available in the marketplace to reduce the risk of obesity and NCDs among populations.

The ineligibility of food products from across the EU for marketing to children according to two EU-level nutrient profile models

Background

A variety of nutrient profiling models have been developed to restrict food marketing to children. Previous assessments have shown substantial differences in terms of model strictness and agreement, but EU-wide data on how leading products in the various national markets perform against these health-minded nutrition criteria are unavailable.

Objective

To evaluate the nutritional composition of the pre-packaged food offer in selected categories sold at scale in the EU using criteria of two nutrient profile models intended to restrict food marketing to children.

Methods

The nutrient profile models of the private-sector EU Pledge and of the World Health Organization's Regional Office for Europe were applied to a commercial database with sales and nutritional information of 2691 pre-packaged products from five product categories (breakfast cereals, ready meals, processed meat, processed seafood, and yoghurts) and 20 EU countries. This study describes the criteria not met, the product ineligibility rates, and the distances to the various criteria thresholds.

Findings

Between 48% (EU Pledge) and 68% (WHO Europe) of the 2691 products analysed were found to be ineligible for marketing to children. The criteria thresholds most often not met were those for total sugars (in breakfast cereals, yoghurts), salt (in processed meat, processed seafood, ready meals), and fibre (in breakfast cereals). Total and saturated fat criteria also played a substantial role in rendering yoghurt products ineligible, and the energy criterion did so for ready meals.

Interpretation

A large number of food products selling at scale in the EU do not meet the criteria of two EU-level nutrient profile models intended to restrict food marketing to children. Given the considerable market share of many such products, they are likely to be consumed widely and in some cases regularly, including by children, even without being marketed to them. Nutrient profile models could serve as benchmarking tools for monitoring and evaluating food product reformulation efforts.

The Healthfulness of the US Packaged Food and Beverage Supply: A Cross-Sectional Study

The US food supply is dominated by highly-processed packaged food and beverage products that are high in energy, saturated fat, sugar, and salt. We report results of a cross-sectional assessment of the 2018 US packaged food and beverage supply by nutritional composition and indicators of healthfulness and level of processing. Data were obtained through Label Insight’s Open Data database, which represents >80% of all food and beverage products sold in the US over the past three years. Healthfulness and the level of processing, measured by the Health Star Rating (HSR) system and the NOVA classification framework, respectively, were compared across product categories and leading manufacturers. Among 230,156 food and beverage products, the mean HSR was 2.7 (standard deviation (SD) 1.4) from a possible maximum rating of 5.0, and 71% of products were classified as ultra-processed. Healthfulness and level of processing varied substantially by category (range: HSR 1.1–3.9; 0–100% ultra-processed) and manufacturer (range: HSR 0.9–4.6; 26–100% ultra-processed). The US packaged food and beverage supply is large, heterogeneous, highly processed, and generally unhealthy. The wide variability in healthfulness and level of processing demonstrates that opportunities exist, through reformulation or replacement, for large-scale improvements to the healthfulness of the US packaged food and beverage supply.

The use of commercial food purchase data for public health nutrition research: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Traditional methods of dietary assessment have their limitations and commercial sources of food sales and purchase data are increasingly suggested as an additional source to measuring diet at the population level. However, the potential uses of food sales data are less well understood. The aim of this review is to establish how sales data on food and soft drink products from third-party companies have been used in public health nutrition research.

METHODS

A search of five electronic databases was conducted in February-March 2018 for studies published in peer-reviewed journals that had used food sales or purchase data from a commercial company to analyse trends and patterns in food purchases or in the nutritional composition of foods. Study quality was evaluated using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.

RESULTS

Of 2919 papers identified in the search, 68 were included. The selected studies used sales or purchase data from four companies: Euromonitor, GfK, Kantar and Nielsen. Sales and purchase data have been used to evaluate interventions, including the impact of the saturated fat tax in Denmark, the soft drink and junk food taxes in Mexico and supplemental nutrition programmes in the USA. They have also been used to identify trends in the nutrient composition of foods over time and patterns in food purchasing, including socio-demographic variations in purchasing.

CONCLUSION

Food sales and purchase data are a valuable tool for public health nutrition researchers and their use has increased markedly in the last four years, despite the cost of access, the lack of transparency on data-collection methods and restrictions on publication. The availability of product and brand-level sales data means they are particularly useful for assessing how changes by individual food companies can impact on diet and public health.

Analysing the use of the Australian Health Star Rating system by level of food processing

BACKGROUND

The consumption of ultra-processed foods is associated with diminished dietary quality and adverse health outcomes. The Australian Health Star Rating (HSR) is a nutrient-based front-of-pack (FOP) labelling system that assesses the 'healthiness' of foods on a scale of 0.5 to 5 stars based on their content of 'risk' and 'positive' nutrients. This study aimed to analyse the use of health stars on new packaged food products entering the Australian marketplace by level of food processing.

METHODS

The Mintel Global New Product Database (GNPD) was searched to identify the number of stars displayed on the labels of all new packaged food products participating in the HSR system released into the Australian retail food supply between 27 June 2014 (the endorsement date) and 30 June 2017. Products were categorised by the four NOVA food processing categories: unprocessed and minimally processed (MP), processed culinary ingredients (PCI), processed (P), and ultra-processed (UP), and the distribution of the star ratings within each category was compared and analysed.

RESULTS

The majority of new food products displaying an HSR were UP (74.4%), followed by MP (12.5%), P (11.6%), and PCI (1.5%). The median HSR of MP products (4.5) was significantly higher than the median of P (4) and UP products (3.5) (all p < 0.05). In all NOVA categories HSR profiles were distributed towards higher star ratings, and the majority (77%) of UP products displayed an HSR ≥ 2.5.

CONCLUSIONS

The HSR is being displayed on a substantial proportion of newly released UP foods. Technical weaknesses, design flaws and governance limitations with the HSR system are resulting in 3 out of 4 instances of these UP foods displaying at least 2.5 so-called 'health' stars. These findings add further evidence to concerns that the HSR system, in its current form, is misrepresenting the healthiness of new packaged food products and creating a risk for behavioural nutrition.

Alignment of Supermarket Own Brand Foods' Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling with Measures of Nutritional Quality: An Australian Perspective

Two voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labels (FOPNL) are present in Australia: the government-led Health Star Ratings (HSR) and food industry-led Daily Intake Guide (DIG). Australia's two largest supermarkets are key supporters of HSR, pledging uptake on all supermarket own brand foods (SOBF). This study aimed to examine prevalence of FOPNL on SOBF, and alignment with patterns of nutritional quality. Photographic audits of all SOBF present in three large supermarkets were conducted in Perth, Western Australia, in 2017. Foods were classified as nutritious or nutrient-poor based on the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGTHE), NOVA level of food processing, and HSR score. Most (81.5%) SOBF featured FOPNL, with only 55.1% displaying HSR. HSR was present on 69.2% of Coles, 54.0% of Woolworths, and none of IGA SOBF. Half (51.3%) of SOBF were classified as nutritious using the AGTHE, but using NOVA, 56.9% were ultra-processed foods. Nutrient-poor and ultra-processed SOBF were more likely than nutritious foods to include HSR, yet many of these foods achieved HSR scores of 2.5 stars or above, implying they were a healthy choice. Supermarkets have a powerful position in the Australian food system, and they could do more to support healthy food selection through responsible FOPNL.

Measuring the Healthiness of the Packaged Food Supply in Australia

The increasing availability of packaged foods plays a key role in nutritional transition. This study examined the healthiness of the Australian packaged food supply using a range of different metrics; 40,664 packaged products from The George Institute's FoodSwitch database were included. Median and interquartile range (IQR) were determined for each measure of nutrient composition; mean and standard deviation (SD) for the measure based upon Health Star Rating (HSR); and proportions (%) for the measures based upon products with a higher HSR, classification of foods as either core or discretionary, extent of processing and proportions of foods that met reformulation targets for sodium, saturated fat and total sugars. Overall median (IQR) values were 1093 (1256) kJ/100 g for energy, 1.7 (6.3) g/100 g for saturated fat, 5.3 (21.4) g/100 g for total sugars, 163 (423) g/100 g for sodium and 50 (100) g or mL for serving size. Overall mean (SD) HSR was 2.8 (1.4), proportion with HSR < 3.5 was 61.8%, proportion of foods defined as discretionary was 53.0% and proportion of foods defined as highly processed was 60.5%. There were sodium targets set for 21,382/40,664 (53%) foods and achieved for 14,126/40,664 (35%). Corresponding figures for saturated fat were 328/40,664 (0.8%) and 130/40,664 (0.3%). Nutrient profiling, dietary guidelines and the extent of food processing provided comparable assessments of the nutritional quality of Australia's packaged food supply. Individual measures of nutrient composition did not, but may be of value for identifying specific foods of concern.