This study measured the total quantity and composition of waste generated in a large, New York City (NYC) hospital kitchen over a one-day period to assess the impact of potential waste diversion ...strategies in potential weight of waste diverted from landfill and reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. During the one-day audit, the hospital kitchen generated 1515.15 kg (1.7 US tons) of solid waste daily or 0.23 kg of total waste per meal served. Extrapolating to all meals served in 2019, the hospital kitchen generates over 442,067 kg (487 US tons) of waste and emits approximately 294,466 kg of CO2e annually from waste disposal. Most of this waste (85%, 376,247 kg or 415 US tons annually) is currently sent to landfill. With feasible changes, including increased recycling and moderate composting, this hospital could reduce landfilled waste by 205,245 kg (226 US tons, or 55% reduction) and reduce GHG emissions by 189,025 kg CO2e (64% reduction). Given NYC's ambitious waste and GHG emission reduction targets outlined in its OneNYC strategic plan, studies analyzing composition, emissions, and waste diversion potential of large institutions can be valuable in achieving city sustainability goals.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the largest federal food assistance program designed to alleviate food insecurity and improve dietary intake. This study assessed the opinions ...of SNAP participants and food-insufficient nonparticipants on their perceptions of the program and strategies to improve its nutritional impact.
This study surveyed 387 individuals via Amazon Mechanical Turk, of whom 118 were SNAP participants and 269 were food insufficient but not enrolled in SNAP (nonparticipants). Open-ended questions were coded and analyzed for thematic content. For closed-ended questions, response frequencies were compared using chi-square tests. Data were analyzed in 2016.
SNAP participants reported that the program successfully served its primary purpose: to allow individuals to buy enough food to make ends meet and reduce food insecurity. Importance was placed on buying food for their children/families and the ability to allocate money for other expenses. To improve the nutritional impact, SNAP participants suggested more nutrition education, increasing the benefit allotment, incentivizing healthful foods, and excluding unhealthful foods for purchase with SNAP. When participants and nonparticipants were asked to choose between SNAP and a nutritionally enhanced program combining healthy incentives with exclusions for sugary beverages (i.e., SNAP+), 68% of participants and 83% of nonparticipants chose SNAP+. Of those who initially chose SNAP, 68% of participants and 64% of nonparticipants chose SNAP+ if paired with a 50% increase in total benefits.
SNAP participants and food-insufficient nonparticipants support policies that facilitate purchases of healthful foods and limit purchases of unhealthful foods, specifically sugary beverages.
Two U.S. cities require chain restaurants to label menu items that exceed 100% of the Daily Value (DV) for sodium, informing consumers and potentially prompting restaurant reformulation. To inform ...policy design for other localities, this study determined the percentage of the top 91 U.S. chain restaurants’ menu items that would be labeled if a warning policy were established for menu items exceeding the thresholds of 20%, 33%, 50%, 65%, and 100% of the sodium DV for adults. We obtained U.S. chain restaurants’ nutrition information from the 2019 MenuStat database and calculated the percentage of items requiring sodium warning labels across the food and beverage categories at all the restaurants and at the full- and limited-service restaurants separately. In total, 19,038 items were included in the analyses. A warning label covering items with >20%, >33%, >50%, >65%, and >100% of the sodium DV resulted in expected coverage of 42%, 30%, 20%, 13%, and 5% of menu items at all the restaurants, respectively. At each threshold, the average percentage of items labeled per restaurant was higher among the full-service restaurants than the limited-service restaurants. These results suggest that restaurant warning policies with a threshold of 100% of the sodium DV per item would cover a minority of high-sodium menu items and that lower thresholds should be considered to help U.S. consumers reduce their sodium consumption.
In 2011, a National Academy of Medicine report recommended that packaged food in the U.S. display a uniform front-of-package nutrition label, using a system such as a 0–3 star ranking. Few studies ...have directly compared this to other labels to determine which best informs consumers and encourages healthier purchases. In 2013, we randomized adult participants (N=1247) in an Internet-based survey to one of six conditions: no label control; single traffic light; multiple traffic light; Facts Up Front; NuVal; or 0–3 star ranking. We compared groups on purchase intentions and accuracy of participants' interpretation of food labels. There were no differences in the nutritional quality of hypothetical shopping baskets across conditions (p=0.845). All labels improved consumers' abilities to judge the nutritional quality of foods relative to no label, but the best designs varied by outcomes. NuVal and multiple traffic light labels led to the greatest accuracy identifying the healthier of two products (p<0.001), while the multiple traffic light also led to the most accurate estimates of saturated fat, sugar, and sodium (p<0.001). The single traffic light outperformed other labels when participants compared nutrient levels between similar products (p<0.03). Single/multiple traffic light and Facts Up Front labels led to the most accurate calories per serving estimations (p<0.001). Although front-of-package labels helped participants more accurately assess products' nutrition information relative to no label, no conditions shifted adults' purchase intentions. Results did not point to a clearly superior label design, but they suggest that a 3-star label might not be best for educating consumers.
The dual burden of poor diet quality and food insecurity makes free food-food acquired at no cost-a very important part of the nutrition safety net for low-income families. The goal of this study was ...to determine the national prevalence and nutritional quality of free food acquired separately in two settings: 1) by children at school; and 2) by employees at work; both stratified by participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
Using National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey data (2012; n = 4,826 U.S. households containing 5,382 employed adults and 3,338 school-aged children), we used survey-weighted proportions to describe free food acquisition and linear regression to compare the 2010 Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2010) for free/non-free food acquisition events (i.e., meals) by SNAP status. Analyses were conducted in 2019-2020.
SNAP households had more free acquisition events (29.6%) compared to non-SNAP households (<185% federal poverty level (FPL) = 22.3%; ≥185%FPL = 21.0%, p's<0.001). For SNAP-participant children, free acquisition events at school had a higher mean HEI-2010 compared to non-free acquisition events at school (50.3 vs. 43.8, p = 0.033) and free acquisition events by SNAP-non-participant children ≥185%FPL at school (50.3 vs. 38.0, p = 0.001). Free and non-free acquisition events at work had relatively low HEI-2010s, with no differences by SNAP status.
Over one fifth of all food acquisition events were free, but free food acquisitions at school and work were relatively unhealthy. For children participating in SNAP, free food acquired at school had higher nutritional quality. Improving the dietary quality of free foods could improve the health of families, especially those participating in SNAP.
By feeding more than thirty million schoolchildren daily, the National School Lunch Program's food offerings substantially influence a contributing factor to climate change: US food production ...methods. Modifying school lunch nutrition standards could be a policy strategy to reduce climate change while promoting human health. To estimate how school lunches could be adjusted to encourage both outcomes, we compared the composition of school lunches with the EAT-Lancet Commission's healthy reference diet science-based benchmarks for reducing food system impacts on climate change. Analyzing more than 5,000 lunches served in the US during school year 2014-15, we found that they exceeded EAT-Lancet targets for dairy, fruit, refined grains, red meat, and starchy vegetables while containing insufficient whole grains, legumes, vegetables, and nuts. In addition, estimated food costs were higher for school lunches than for lunches meeting EAT-Lancet targets. Our findings suggest that redesigning school lunches could provide high-quality nutrition while benefiting the environment and reducing food costs.
The National Academy of Medicine recommends that the U.S. adopt an interpretative front-of-package food labeling system, but uncertainty remains about how this system should be designed. This study ...examined reactions to front-of-package food labeling systems that use positive labels to identify healthier foods, negative labels to identify unhealthier foods, or both.
In August 2021, U.S. adults (N=3,051) completed an online randomized experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 labeling conditions: control (calorie), positive, negative, or both positive and negative labels. Labels were adapted from designs for a ‘healthy’ label drafted by the Food and Drug Administration and displayed on the front of product packaging. Participants selected products to purchase, identified healthier products, and reported reactions to the labels. Analyses, conducted in 2022, examined the healthfulness of participants' selections using the Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model score (0–100, higher scores indicate being healthier).
Participants exposed to only positive labels, only negative labels, or both positive and negative labels had healthier selections than participants in the control arm (differences vs control=1.13 2%, 2.34 4% vs 3.19 5%, respectively; all p<0.01). The both-positive-and-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-negative-labels (p=0.03) and only-positive-labels (p<0.001) arms. The only-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-positive-labels arm (p=0.005). All the 3 interpretative labeling systems also led to improvements in the identification of healthier products and beneficial psychological reactions (e.g., attention, thinking about health effects; all p<0.05).
Front-of-package food labeling systems that use both positive and negative labels could encourage healthier purchases and improve understanding more than systems using only positive or only negative labels.
Policymakers are interested in requiring chain restaurants to display sodium warning labels on menus to reduce sodium consumption. This study examined the influence of label design on consumers’ ...hypothetical choices, meal perceptions, and knowledge.
Four sequential, randomized, controlled online experiments were conducted.
Across all 4 experiments, 10,412 sociodemographically diverse participants were recruited online through Survey Sampling International and Amazon Mechanical Turk.
Participants were randomized to view restaurant menus with either no sodium label (control) or 1 of 13 sodium warning labels that varied the text (e.g., “sodium warning” versus “high sodium”), icons (e.g., stop sign), and colors (red/black) used. Participants placed a hypothetical meal order and rated restaurant meal perceptions. Data were collected and analyzed in 2016–2019.
The primary outcome was sodium content of hypothetical restaurant choices. Secondary outcomes included restaurant meal perceptions and sodium knowledge.
In Experiments 1–3, all warning labels reduced average sodium ordered across both restaurants (by 19–81 mg) versus controls, with some of the largest reductions from traffic light and stop sign labels, but results were not statistically significant. In a larger, preregistered replication (Experiment 4) testing traffic light and red stop sign labels versus control, traffic light and red stop sign labels significantly reduced average sodium ordered across both restaurants (−68 mg, p=0.002 and −46 mg, p=0.049, respectively). Warnings also significantly increased participants’ knowledge of sodium content and perceived health risks associated with high-sodium meals compared with no label.
Traffic light and red stop sign warning labels significantly reduced sodium ordered compared with a control. Warning labels also increased knowledge about high sodium content in restaurant meals. Designs with warning text are likely to improve consumer understanding.
Most Americans consume dietary sodium exceeding age-specific government-recommended targets of 1,500-2,300 mg day per person. The majority (71%) of US dietary sodium comes from restaurant and ...packaged foods. Excess sodium intake contributes to hypertension and cardiovascular disease, which is the leading cause of death in the United States. This review summarizes evidence for policy progress to reduce sodium in the US food supply and the American diet. We provide a historical overview of US sodium-reduction policy (1969-2010), then examine progress toward implementing the 2010 National Academy of Medicine (NAM) sodium report's recommendations (2010-2019). Results suggest that the US Food and Drug Administration made no progress in setting mandatory sodium-reduction standards, industry made some progress in meeting voluntary targets, and other stakeholders made some progress on sodium-reduction actions. Insights from countries that have significantly reduced population sodium intake offer strategies to accelerate US progress toward implementing the NAM sodium-reduction recommendations in the future.
To reduce added-sugar consumption, jurisdictions are considering requiring restaurant menu labels to identify high-added-sugar items. This study examined the impacts of added-sugar warning labels on ...hypothetical choices, knowledge of items’ added-sugar content, and perceptions of high-added-sugar items.
The design was an online RCT.
National sample of adults (N=15,496) was recruited to approximate the U.S. distribution of sex, age, race, ethnicity, and education.
Participants viewed fast-food and full-service restaurant menus displaying no warning labels (control) or icon-only added-sugar warning labels next to high-added-sugar items (containing >50% of the daily recommended limit).
The main outcome measures were hypothetical ordering of ≥1 high-added-sugar item, grams of added sugar ordered, and knowledge of items’ added-sugar content assessed in 2021 and analyzed in 2021–2022.
Warning labels reduced the relative probability of ordering ≥1 high-added-sugar item by 2.2% (probability ratio=0.978, 95% CI=0.964, 0.992; p=0.002); improved knowledge of added-sugar content (p<0.001); and led to a nonstatistically significant reduction of 1.5 grams of added sugar ordered, averaged across menus (p=0.07). The label modestly reduced the appeal of high-added-sugar items, increased perceptions that consuming such items often will increase Type 2 diabetes risk, increased perceived control over eating decisions, and increased injunctive norms about limiting consumption of high-added-sugar items (ps<0.001). However, in the warning condition, only 47% noticed nutrition labels, and 21% recalled seeing added-sugar labels. When restricting the warning condition to those who noticed the label, the result for grams of added sugar ordered was significant, with the warning condition ordering 4.9 fewer grams than the controls (95% CI= –7.3, –2.5; p<0.001).
Added-sugar warning labels reduced the probability of ordering a high-added-sugar menu item and increased participants' knowledge of whether items contained >50% of the daily value for added sugar. The modest magnitudes of effects may be due to low label noticeability. Menu warning labels should be designed for noticeability.
This study was registered at AsPredicted.org #65655
PDF
