Leanne Young’s research while affiliated with University of Auckland and other places

Background Dietary risk factors are the leading cause of death globally and in New Zealand (NZ). Processed packaged foods are prevalent in the food supply and contribute excess amounts of sodium, saturated fat, and sugar in diets. Improving the nutritional quality of these foods has the potential to reduce population chronic disease risk. We aimed to evaluate the healthiness using the Australasian Health Star Rating (HSR, from 0.5 to 5 stars, with 5 being the healthiest) and nutrient composition (sodium, saturated fat, and total sugar) of packaged products manufactured by the largest NZ-based food and beverage companies in NZ 2015–2019. This analysis relates to a larger study evaluating structured engagement with food companies to improve nutrition-related policies and actions. Methods Data was sourced from Nutritrack, a NZ-branded supermarket-sourced food composition database. The largest NZ-based companies from annual retail sales revenue (n = 35) were identified using 2019 Euromonitor data. All relevant products of the selected companies were extracted for analysis. Products included totalled 17,795 with a yearly range of 3462–3672 products. The primary outcome was a nutrient profile score estimated using HSR. Healthiness was defined as ≥ 3.5 stars. Secondary outcomes were sodium, total sugar, and saturated fat per 100 g/100 mL. All outcomes were assessed overall, by food company, and food category. Change over time was tested using linear mixed models, adjusting for major food categories and cluster effects of food companies controlling for multiple comparisons. Model-adjusted mean differences between years were estimated with 95% confidence intervals. Results There was a small statistically significant increase in mean HSR between 2015 and 2019 (0.08 [0.15,0.01], p = 0.024). Mean total sugar content decreased over the same period (0.78 g/100 g [0.08,1.47], p = 0.020), but there were no significant changes in mean sodium or saturated fat contents. Seven of the 13 categories showed small increases in mean HSR (0.1–0.2). Most categories (9/13) exhibited a reduction in mean total sugar content. Conclusions Between 2015 and 2019, there were slight improvements in the nutritional quality of selected packaged foods and drinks in NZ. Much more substantive changes are needed to address the health-related burden of unhealthy diets, supported by stronger government action and less reliance on voluntary industry initiatives.

Objective This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of vegetarians, vegans and other dietary patterns that exclude some animal-source foods in New Zealand adults. We also examined sociodemographic and lifestyle correlates of these dietary patterns. Design The New Zealand Health Survey is a representative rolling cross-sectional survey of New Zealanders; data from the 2018/19 and 2019/20 waves were used for this analysis. Participants were asked if they completely excluded red meat, poultry, fish/shellfish, eggs, or dairy products from their diet. Setting New Zealand. Participants Adults, aged ≥15 years (n=23,292). Results The prevalence of red-meat excluders (2.89%), pescatarians (1.40%), vegetarians (2.04%), and vegans (0.74%) was low. After adjustment for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, women (Odds Ratio (OR)=1.54, 95% CI: 1.22-1.95), Asian people (OR=2.56, 95% CI: 1.96-4.45), people with tertiary education (OR=1.71, 95% CI: 1.18-2.48), and physically active people (OR=1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.76) were more likely to be vegetarian/vegan. Those aged ≥75 years (OR=0.28, 95% CI: 0.14-0.53) and current smokers (OR=0.42, 95% CI:0.23-0.76) were less likely to be vegetarian/vegan. Similar associations were seen between sociodemographic and lifestyle factors and the odds of being a red-meat excluder/pescatarian. Conclusions Approximately 93% of New Zealand adults eat red-meat and a very small number exclude all animal products from their diets. The Eating and Activity Guidelines for New Zealand adults recommend a plant-based diet with moderate amounts of animal-source foods. A comprehensive national nutrition survey would provide detailed information on the amount of red meat and other animal-source foods that the New Zealand population currently consumes.

Current human meat consumption levels contribute to environmental degradation and are a risk factor for non-communicable diseases. Globally, meat-reduction policy interventions are limited. Meat-Free Mondays (MFMs) is a global campaign to reduce meat consumption to improve planetary and human health. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation of MFMs at three District Health Boards (DHBs) (one not considering a MFM policy, one that had trialled MFMs and one implementing MFMs) to investigate attitudes towards MFMs and barriers and enablers to implementation. An online staff survey and eleven semi-structured interviews with food service managers, café managers and sustainability managers were conducted. Of the 194 survey participants, 51% were actively cutting back on meat, mainly for health, environmental concerns and enjoyment of plant-based dishes, and 59% were positive towards MFMs. Qualitative analysis using a general inductive approach identified four themes: (1) ‘Change and choice’ (impact on personal choice), (2) ‘Getting it right’ (product and price, food quality, health, customer retention and sales), (3) ‘Human and planetary health’ (hospitals as leaders in healthy, sustainable diets), (4) ‘Implementation success’ (communication and education). Recommendations for implementation of MFMs included seeking feedback from other DHBs, wide consultation with food service staff, cultural and dietitian food service support and providing evidence of the success of MFMs and alternatives to MFMs.

Aims: Plant-based eating patterns are recommended for human and planetary health. Plant-based protein sources in supermarkets include traditional options and plant-based meat analogues. This cross-sectional survey examined the nutritional content, healthiness, cost and labelling of these products. Methods: Nutrient content and claims on canned legumes (plain [N = 64] and flavoured [N = 25]), canned baked beans (N = 23), dried legumes (N = 21), tofu (plain [N = 8] and flavoured [N = 5]), falafels (N = 14), meat analogues (meat-free burgers [N = 11], meat-free sausages [N = 10] and 'other' meat-free products [N = 20]) were obtained from a database of packaged foods in New Zealand. Mean (SD) energy, protein, total fat, saturated fat, sodium and dietary fibre content (per 100 g) was calculated for each category. Healthiness was assessed using an estimated Health Star Rating (Rating ≥3.5 considered 'healthy'). Product data were linked with household purchasing data from the 2019 Nielsen IQ® consumer panel to calculate mean purchase price/100 g/category. The number and type of nutrition claims were compared across categories. Results: The highest mean protein content was 'other' meat-free products (14.8 ± 6.9 g/100 g). Meat-free sausages had the highest sodium and saturated fat content (643 ± 148 mg/100 g, 3.7 ± 4.5 g/100 g). Overall, few meat analogues (N = 5, 12%) scored an estimated Health Star Rating ≥3.5. Dried legumes were the cheapest plant protein (mean ± SD) purchase price = NZ $0.30 ± 0.16/100 g), compared with 'other' meat-free products (purchase price = NZ$2.57 ± 0.88/100 g). The most common nutrition claims on meat analogues were about protein content. Dietary fibre claims were the most common on canned and dried legumes. Conclusion: Meat analogues offer convenience, however, may be less healthy and more expensive than traditional plant-based proteins. This study assists dietitians in providing accurate consumer messaging about healthy plant-based proteins.

Aims: To examine the frequency of promotions on breakfast cereals and drinks in a major New Zealand supermarket chain, determine the healthiness of promoted versus non-promoted products, and quantify the effects of promotions on sales. Methods: Weekly data on product promotions and sales were collected in six Auckland supermarkets for 198 breakfast products over 12 weeks. The healthiness of products was determined using the Health Star Rating system, and the effect of promotions on sales was estimated using linear mixed models. Results: On average, 47% of breakfast products in a given week were promoted using on-shelf tickets, 12% in weekly mailers, and 9% via promotional displays. The healthiness of promoted and non-promoted breakfast products was comparable. In relation to weekly sales of non-promoted products, all three promotional strategies had substantial (2 to 2.5 times higher sales) and statistically significant (P < 0.001) effects on product sales. Conclusion: Promotions are frequently used and effective at increasing sales. Marketing strategies focusing solely on promoting healthier products could be an important nudging strategy to improve the healthiness of supermarket food purchases.