Perceived influences on post-diagnostic dietary change among a group of men with prostate cancer

A cancer diagnosis is often associated with loss of agency and control that can adversely affect well-being. Patients may try to regain control through dietary change aimed at preventing progression and/or recurrence. Evidence for the effectiveness of post-diagnostic dietary change in prostate cancer is not conclusive, which can cause uncertainty among patients and health professionals. This qualitative study explored how eight men in the UK, who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer in the previous 5 years, accounted for any post-diagnostic changes they made to their diet. Data were generated through semi-structured telephone interviews and were subjected to thematic analysis. This yielded two themes concerning the perceived nature and importance of dietary change and the perceived determinants of dietary change. The latter focused on internal dimensions such as agency and external dimensions such as the perceived role of relationships with health professionals, the availability of credible dietary information and family influences. The study points to the importance of the family context in enabling the men to implement dietary change. It is suggested that, even if health professionals can only offer qualified, general advice about diet, this may provide men with a focus for action and a means of regaining control

Designing a research infrastructure on dietary intake and its determinants

Research on dietary intake and its determinants is crucial for an adequate response to the current epidemic of diet-related non-communicable chronic diseases. In order to respond to this challenge, the RICHFIELDS project was tasked with designing a research infrastructure (RI) that connects data on dietary intake of consumers in Europe, and its determinants, collected using apps and wearable sensors, from behavioural laboratories and experimental facilities and from other RIs. The main output of the project, an RI design, describes interfaces (portals) to collect data, a meta-database and a data-model to enable data linkage and sharing. The RICHFIELDS project comprises three phases, each consisting of three work packages, and an overarching methodological support work package. Phase 1 focused on data generated by consumers (e.g. collected by apps and sensors) relating to the purchase, preparation and consumption of food. Phase 2 focused on data generated by organisations such as businesses (e.g. retail data), government (e.g. procurement data) and experimental research facilities (e.g. virtual supermarkets). Phases 1 and 2 provided Phase 3 with insights on data types and design requirements, including the business models, data integration and management systems and governance and ethics. The final design will be used in the coming years to build an RI for the scientific research community, policy makers and businesses in Europe. The RI will boost interdisciplinary multi-stakeholder research through harmonisation and integration of data on food behaviour.</p

Impact of acute consumption of beverages containing plant-based or alternative sweetener blends on postprandial appetite, food intake, metabolism, and gastro-intestinal symptoms: Results of the SWEET beverages trial

Project SWEET examined the barriers and facilitators to the use of non-nutritive sweeteners and sweetness enhancers (hereafter "S&SE") alongside potential risks/benefits for health and sustainability. The Beverages trial was a double-blind multi-centre, randomised crossover trial within SWEET evaluating the acute impact of three S&SE blends (plant-based and alternatives) vs. a sucrose control on glycaemic response, food intake, appetite sensations and safety after a carbohydrate-rich breakfast meal. The blends were: mogroside V and stevia RebM; stevia RebA and thaumatin; and sucralose and acesulfame-potassium (ace-K). At each 4 h visit, 60 healthy volunteers (53% male; all with overweight/obesity) consumed a 330 mL beverage with either an S&SE blend (0 kJ) or 8% sucrose (26 g, 442 kJ), shortly followed by a standardised breakfast (∼2600 or 1800 kJ with 77 or 51 g carbohydrates, depending on sex). All blends reduced the 2-h incremental area-under-the-curve (iAUC) for blood insulin (p 0.05 for all). Compared with sucrose, there was a 3% increase in LDL-cholesterol after stevia RebA-thaumatin (p < 0.001 in adjusted models); and a 2% decrease in HDL-cholesterol after sucralose-ace-K (p < 0.01). There was an impact of blend on fullness and desire to eat ratings (both p < 0.05) and sucralose-acesulfame K induced higher prospective intake vs sucrose (p < 0.001 in adjusted models), but changes were of a small magnitude and did not translate into energy intake differences over the next 24 h. Gastro-intestinal symptoms for all beverages were mostly mild. In general, responses to a carbohydrate-rich meal following consumption of S&SE blends with stevia or sucralose were similar to sucrose

The role of beliefs and sensory responses to milk in determining the selection of milks of different fat content

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:DX173973 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Engagement, representativeness and legitimacy in the development of food and nutrition policy

In a policy environment that contains structures to enable public engagement, the validity of expressions of public opinion and concern are in part legitimated through constructions of their representativeness. The current paper examined the ways in which various organisations involved in food and nutrition policy development negotiated the legitimacy of their inclusion in policy processes through claims about who they represented and how, with a specific focus upon older people (aged 60+) as an example of the "hard to reach". This study is set in the context of theoretical considerations around the forms of representativeness that have been identified in the literature. A thematic analysis of 52 interviews with organisations and stakeholders active in the area of food and nutrition policy in England, UK explores these competing modalities of representation and how they are used both to claim legitimacy for self and to discount the claims of others. Different scripts of representation are deployed by various stakeholders and there is evidence of the strategic and the simultaneous deployment of different representativeness claims. The notions of expert representativeness permeate other modalities of representativeness, suggesting that the dominant framework for food and nutrition policy development is based upon technocratic models of decision-making. This highlights the way in which public views can be distanced from the framing of policy questions.Representativeness Public participation Stakeholders Food Nutrition policy Legitimacy