The characteristics and extent of food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research articles from 10 leading nutritionrelated journals in 2018

Introduction: There is emerging evidence that food industry involvement in nutrition research may bias research findings and/or research agendas. However, the extent of food industry involvement in nutrition research has not been systematically explored. This study aimed to identify the extent of food industry involvement in peer-reviewed articles from a sample of leading nutrition-related journals, and to examine the extent to which findings from research involving the food industry support industry interests. Methods: All original research articles published in 2018 in the top 10 most-cited nutrition- and dietetics- related journals were analysed. We evaluated the proportion of articles that disclosed involvement from the food industry, including through author affiliations, funding sources, declarations of interest or other acknowledgments. Principal research findings from articles with food industry involvement, and a random sample of articles without food industry involvement, were categorised according to the extent to which they supported relevant food industry interests. Results: 196/1, 461 (13.4%) articles reported food industry involvement. The extent of food industry involvement varied by journal, with The Journal of Nutrition (28.3%) having the highest and Paediatric Obesity (3.8%) having the lowest proportion of industry involvement. Processed food manufacturers were involved in the most articles (77/196, 39.3%). Of articles with food industry involvement, 55.6% reported findings favourable to relevant food industry interests, compared to 9.7% of articles without food industry involvement. Conclusion: Food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research in leading nutrition-related journals is commonplace. In line with previous literature, this study has shown that a greater proportion of peer-reviewed studies involving the food industry have results that favour relevant food industry interests than peer-reviewed studies without food industry involvement. Given the potential competing interests of the food industry, it is important to explore mechanisms that can safeguard the integrity and public relevance of nutrition research

Consumer perceptions of nutrient content claims in Australia: A qualitative study

Background: Nutrition and health claims influence consumer purchasing. Claims include content claims, which refer to the amount of a nutrient contained in a product, and health claims, which refer to health benefits of foods or nutrients in a product. Products that display a health claim must meet the Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC). The present study aimed to explore consumer perceptions of content claims used on food and beverage labelling and advertisements. Methods: Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with Australian consumers. Analysis involved an inductive, reflexive approach to thematic analysis. Results: Six focus groups involving 26 participants were conducted. Four main interconnected themes were generated: (1) complex factors influence food choice; (2) content claim scepticism; (3) the difference between content and health claims is unclear; and (4) the regulation of content claims is not common knowledge. Content claims were used, although generally viewed through a lens of scepticism and mistrust, and seen as a promotional tool for the food industry. Product complexity appeared to increase content claim use as a result of consumer uncertainty of the content of complex products, such as ultraprocessed foods. Most participants were aware that content and health claims were in some way regulated. Overall, they did not know further detail, including the relevant regulatory body. Conclusions: For content claims to support the consumer they need to be accurate and their use limited to healthier foods. This can be achieved by requiring products with content claims to meet NPSC thresholds, as required for products making health claims

Chocolate unicorns and smiling teddy biscuits: analysis of the use of child-directed marketing on the packages of Australian foods

Abstract Objective: The use of food packaging as a vehicle for marketing to children is under investigated. Our objective was to determine the prevalence and types of child-directed promotional techniques used on food packaging in Australia. Design: Based on existing literature and regulations, we developed a framework to classify on-pack child-directed promotional techniques involving the use of characters and other elements that appeal to children. We analysed the packaging of all products in eight food categories available for sale from supermarkets in 2019 and recorded the use of child-directed promotions on pack. We assessed the number and proportion of products displaying child-directed promotional techniques overall and assessed the healthiness of products using child-directed promotions against four indicators of healthiness to provide summary data overall and for the manufacturers who most frequently employed child-targeted strategies. Setting: Data were collected from the FoodSwitch database in Sydney, Australia. Results: 901/8006 (11·3 %) products displayed one or more child-directed on-pack element. Most frequent was on foods for infants and young children (n 315), confectionery (n 283), snack foods (n 172) and dairy (n 168). Personified characters were the most commonly used element (n 512). Products using child-directed promotional techniques scored poorly on all four indicators of healthiness: mean health star rating 2·34 (out of 5); 81 % ultra-processed and 6·1 % and 4·5 % products eligible to market to children under Western Pacific and Mexican nutrient profiling schemes, respectively. Conclusions: Australian children are targeted by promotional techniques on the packaging of unhealthy food products. Stronger regulation of these techniques is warranted to protect children’s health