Prevalence and Types of Non-Nutritive Sweeteners in the New Zealand Food Supply, 2013 and 2019

The widely recognized association between high sugar intakes and adverse health outcomes has increased consumer demand for products lower in sugar. This may lead to increased use of other sweeteners by the food industry. The current study investigated the prevalence and types of non-nutritive sweeteners over time (2013–2019) in New Zealand’s packaged food and beverages, overall and between categories. A New Zealand database of packaged foods and beverages was used to investigate the presence of Food Standards Australia New Zealand Code-approved non-nutritive sweeteners (n = 12). Products available in 2013 (n = 12,153) and 2019 (n = 14,645) were compared. Between 2013 and 2019, the prevalence of non-nutritive sweeteners in products increased from 3% to 5%. The most common non-nutritive sweeteners in both years were acesulphame-potassium, sucralose, aspartame, and stevia, which were predominantly found in special foods (breakfast beverages and nutritional supplements), non-alcoholic beverages, dairy products, and confectionery. The prevalence of non-nutritive sweeteners is increasing over time in New Zealand’s packaged foods and beverages and is likely a consequence of consumer demand for lower-sugar products. Ongoing monitoring of the prevalence and type of NNS is important to detect further increases.

Download Full-text

Which companies dominate the packaged food supply of New Zealand and how healthy are their products?

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0245225 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

pp. e0245225

Author(s):

Sally Mackay ◽

Helen Eyles ◽

Teresa Gontijo de Castro ◽

Leanne Young ◽

Cliona Ni Mhurchu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Market Share ◽

Food Supply ◽

Dietary Guidelines ◽

Alcoholic Beverages ◽

Food Groups ◽

System 2 ◽

Packaged Foods ◽

Processed Products ◽

Packaged Food

Improvement of national food supplies are an opportunity to improve a country’s health. Our aim was to identify the major food companies manufacturing packaged foods and non-alcoholic beverages available in New Zealand supermarkets in 2018; to assess the healthiness of products using (1) the Health Star Rating (HSR) system, (2) Australian Dietary Guidelines classification (core/discretionary), and (3) by level of processing; to compare the healthiness of products displaying and not displaying the HSR and; to assess potential for food reformulation within selected food sub-categories. Information on packaged foods was obtained from the Nutritrack supermarket database. Companies that manufactured each food and brand were identified using company websites and the New Zealand companies register. In total, 13,506 packaged products were mapped to 1,767 brands and 1,214 companies. Based on market share of products available for sale (Euromonitor data), there were 22 dominating companies producing 31% of products and 17% of brands. Fifty-nine percent of products were classified as unhealthy (HSR <3.5/5 stars), 53% as discretionary, and 69% as ultra-processed. Products displaying the HSR on the package had a higher mean HSR ±SD than if the HSR was not displayed (3.2±1.3 versus 2.5±1.4, p = 0.000). Efforts to improve the healthiness of products should be directed to the 22 food companies dominating this market share, particularly in the core foods groups which are currently less likely to meet Heart Foundation reformulation targets (bread, breakfast cereals, cheese, canned baked beans, yoghurt). The New Zealand supermarket packaged food supply included in the Nutritrack database is dominated by a small number of companies and is mostly unhealthy. Government leadership is required to improve the healthiness of the packaged food supply and provide adequate information to consumers. This includes interventions setting reformulation targets for core food groups, setting population nutrient intake targets and mandating that the HSR is displayed on all products.

Download Full-text

Nutrition and health claims on healthy and less-healthy packaged food products in New Zealand

British Journal Of Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s0007114516002981 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 116 (6) ◽

pp. 1087-1094 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Haya H. Al-Ani ◽

Anandita Devi ◽

Helen Eyles ◽

Boyd Swinburn ◽

Stefanie Vandevijvere

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Food Choices ◽

Health Claims ◽

Nutrition And Health ◽

Nutrition Claims ◽

Nutrient Profiling ◽

Packaged Foods ◽

Packaged Food ◽

Nutrition And Health Claims

AbstractNutrition and health claims are displayed to influence consumers’ food choices. This study assessed the extent and nature of nutrition and health claims on the front-of-pack of ‘healthy’ and ‘less-healthy’ packaged foods in New Zealand. Foods from eight categories, for which consumption may affect the risk of obesity and diet-related chronic diseases, were selected from the 2014 Nutritrack database. The internationally standardised International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-Communicable Diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) taxonomy was used to classify claims on packages. The Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC) was used to classify products as ‘healthy’ or ‘less healthy’. In total, 7526 products were included, with 47 % (n 3557) classified as ‘healthy’. More than one-third of products displayed at least one nutrition claim and 15 % featured at least one health claim on the front-of-pack. Claims were found on one-third of ‘less-healthy’ products; 26 % of those products displayed nutrition claims and 7 % featured health claims. About 45 % of ‘healthy’ products displayed nutrition claims and 23 % featured health claims. Out of 7058 individual claims, the majority (69 %) were found on ‘healthy’ products. Cereals displayed the greatest proportion of nutrition and health claims (1503 claims on 564 products), of which one-third were displayed on ‘less-healthy’ cereals. Such claims could be misleading consumers’ perceptions of nutritional quality of foods. It needs to be explored how current regulations on nutrition and health claims in New Zealand could be further strengthened (e.g. using the NPSC for nutrition claims, including general health claims as per the INFORMAS taxonomy) to ensure consumers are protected and not misled.

Download Full-text

Nutrient profile of 23 596 packaged supermarket foods and non-alcoholic beverages in Australia and New Zealand

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980015000968 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 401-408 ◽

Cited By ~ 29

Author(s):

Cliona Ni Mhurchu ◽

Ryan Brown ◽

Yannan Jiang ◽

Helen Eyles ◽

Elizabeth Dunford ◽

...

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Energy Density ◽

Meat Products ◽

Saturated Fat ◽

Food Products ◽

Nutritional Composition ◽

Health Claims ◽

Alcoholic Beverages ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Packaged Food

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the nutrient profile of packaged supermarket food products available in Australia and New Zealand. Eligibility to carry health claims and relationship between nutrient profile score and nutritional content were also evaluated.DesignNutritional composition data were collected in six major Australian and New Zealand supermarkets in 2012. Mean Food Standards Australia New Zealand Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC) scores were calculated and the proportion of products eligible to display health claims was estimated. Regression analyses quantified associations between NPSC scores and energy density, saturated fat, sugar and sodium contents.ResultsNPSC scores were derived for 23 596 packaged food products (mean score 7·0, range −17 to 53). Scores were lower (better nutrient profile) for foods in Australia compared with New Zealand (mean 6·6 v. 7·8). Overall, 45 % of foods were eligible to carry health claims based on NPSC thresholds: 47 % in Australia and 41 % in New Zealand. However, less than one-third of dairy (32 %), meat and meat products (28 %) and bread and bakery products (27·5 %) were eligible to carry health claims. Conversely, >75 % of convenience food products were eligible to carry health claims (82·5 %). Each two-unit higher NPSC score was associated with higher energy density (78 kJ/100 g), saturated fat (0·95 g/100 g), total sugar (1·5 g/100 g) and sodium (66 mg/100 g; all P values<0·001).ConclusionsFewer than half of all packaged foods available in Australia and New Zealand in 2012 met nutritional criteria to carry health claims. The few healthy choices available in key staple food categories is a concern. Improvements in nutritional quality of foods through product reformulation have significant potential to improve population diets.

Download Full-text

Ultra-processed foods have the worst nutrient profile, yet they are the most available packaged products in a sample of New Zealand supermarkets

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980015002177 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 530-538 ◽

Cited By ~ 62

Author(s):

Claire M Luiten ◽

Ingrid HM Steenhuis ◽

Helen Eyles ◽

Cliona Ni Mhurchu ◽

Wilma E Waterlander

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Food Products ◽

Alcoholic Beverages ◽

Processed Foods ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Significant Positive Association ◽

Energy Unit ◽

Industrial Processing ◽

Nutrient Profile ◽

Packaged Foods

AbstractObjectiveTo examine the availability of packaged food products in New Zealand supermarkets by level of industrial processing, nutrient profiling score (NPSC), price (energy, unit and serving costs) and brand variety.DesignSecondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data on packaged supermarket food and non-alcoholic beverages. Products were classified according to level of industrial processing (minimally, culinary and ultra-processed) and their NPSC.SettingPackaged foods available in four major supermarkets in Auckland, New Zealand.SubjectsPackaged supermarket food products for the years 2011 and 2013.ResultsThe majority (84 % in 2011 and 83 % in 2013) of packaged foods were classified as ultra-processed. A significant positive association was found between the level of industrial processing and NPSC, i.e. ultra-processed foods had a worse nutrient profile (NPSC=11·63) than culinary processed foods (NPSC=7·95), which in turn had a worse nutrient profile than minimally processed foods (NPSC=3·27), P<0·001. No clear associations were observed between the three price measures and level of processing. The study observed many variations of virtually the same product. The ten largest food manufacturers produced 35 % of all packaged foods available.ConclusionsIn New Zealand supermarkets, ultra-processed foods comprise the largest proportion of packaged foods and are less healthy than less processed foods. The lack of significant price difference between ultra- and less processed foods suggests ultra-processed foods might provide time-poor consumers with more value for money. These findings highlight the need to improve the supermarket food supply by reducing numbers of ultra-processed foods and by reformulating products to improve their nutritional profile.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Healthiness, Labelling, and Price between Private and Branded Label Packaged Foods in New Zealand (2015–2019)

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu13082731 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (8) ◽

pp. 2731

Author(s):

Teresa Castro ◽

Sally Mackay ◽

Leanne Young ◽

Cliona Ni Mhurchu ◽

Grace Shaw ◽

...

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Sugar Content ◽

Sodium Content ◽

Food Composition ◽

Nutritional Composition ◽

Chi Square ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Packaged Food ◽

Over Time ◽

Chi Square Tests

We aimed to compare New Zealand private label (PL) and branded label (BL) packaged food products in relation to their current (2019) healthiness (sodium and sugar contents, and estimated Health Start Rating (HSR) score), display of the voluntary HSR nutrition label on the package, and price. Healthiness and HSR display of products were also explored over time (2015 to 2019). Data were obtained from Nutritrack, a brand-specific food composition database. Means and proportions were compared using Student t-tests and Pearson chi-square tests, respectively. Changes over time were assessed using linear regression and chi-square tests for trends (Mantel–Haenzel tests). Altogether, 4266 PL and 19,318 BL products across 21 food categories were included. Overall, PL products in 2019 had a significantly lower mean sodium content and price, a higher proportion of products with estimated HSR ≥ 3.5/5 (48.9% vs. 38.5%) and were more likely to display the HSR on the pack compared with BL products (92.4% vs. 17.2%, respectively). However, for most food categories, no significant difference was found in mean sodium or sugar content between PL and BL products. In the period 2015–2019, there were no consistent changes in estimated HSR score, sodium or sugar contents of PL or BL products, but there was an increase in the proportion of both PL and BL products displaying HSR labels. In most food categories, there were PL options available which were similar in nutritional composition, more likely to be labelled with the HSR, and lower in cost than their branded counterparts.

Download Full-text

How effective is food industry self-substantiation of food–health relationships underpinning health claims on food labels in Australia?

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980018004081 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 22 (09) ◽

pp. 1686-1695 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Lyndal Wellard-Cole ◽

Wendy L Watson ◽

Clare Hughes ◽

Kathy Chapman

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Food Industry ◽

Poor Quality ◽

Health Claims ◽

General Level ◽

Food Labels ◽

Regulatory Enforcement ◽

Published Evidence ◽

Food Standards ◽

The Government

AbstractObjectiveThe Food Standards Code regulates health claims on Australian food labels. General-level health claims highlight food–health relationships, e.g. ‘contains calcium for strong bones’. Food companies making claims must notify Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) and certify that a systematic literature review (SLR) substantiating the food–health relationship has been conducted. There is no pre- or post-notification assessment of the SLR, potentially enabling the food industry to make claims based on poor-quality research. The present study assessed the rigour of self-substantiation.DesignFood–health relationships notified to FSANZ were monitored monthly between 2013 and 2017. These relationships were assessed by scoping published literature. Where evidence was equivocal/insufficient, the relevant government food regulatory agency was asked to investigate. If not investigated, or the response was unsatisfactory, the project team conducted an independent SLR which was provided to the government agency.SettingAustralia.ParticipantsSelf-substantiated food–health relationships.ResultsThere were sixty-seven relationships notified by thirty-eight food companies. Of these, thirty-three relationships (52 %) from twenty companies were deemed to have sufficient published evidence. Four were excluded as they originated in New Zealand. Three relationships were removed before investigations were initiated. The project initiated twenty-seven food–health relationship investigations. Another six relationships were withdrawn, and three relationships were awaiting government assessment.ConclusionsTo ensure that SLR underpinning food–health relationships are rigorous and reduce regulatory enforcement burden, pre-market approval of food–health relationships should be introduced. This will increase consumer and public health confidence in the regulatory process and prevent potentially misleading general-level health claims on food labels.

Download Full-text

Changes in nutrition content and health claims post-implementation of regulation in Australia

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980019004890 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 23 (12) ◽

pp. 2221-2227

Author(s):

Lyndal Wellard-Cole ◽

Rebecca Li ◽

Christine Tse ◽

Wendy L Watson ◽

Clare Hughes

Keyword(s):

Comparative Analysis ◽

New Zealand ◽

Health Claims ◽

Alcoholic Beverages ◽

Unhealthy Food ◽

Nutrient Profiling ◽

Food Packages ◽

Food Standards ◽

Cereal Bars ◽

Sydney Australia

AbstractObjective:To determine whether there were changes in the prevalence or healthiness of products carrying claims post-implementation of Standard 1.2.7: Nutrition, Health and Related Claims in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code.Design:Observational survey of claims on food packages in three categories: non-alcoholic beverages, breakfast cereals and cereal bars. Nutrient profiling was applied to products to determine their eligibility to carry health claims under Standard 1.2.7. The Standard came into effect in 2013. The proportion of products carrying claims and the proportion of those not meeting the nutrient profiling criteria were calculated. A comparative analysis was conducted to determine changes between 2011 and 2016.Setting:Three large metropolitan stores from the three major supermarket chains in Sydney, Australia were surveyed in 2011 and 2016.Participants:All claims on all available products in 2016 (n 1737). Nutrition composition and ingredients were collected from the packaging.Results:Overall in 2016, 76 % of products carried claims and there were 7367 claims identified in the three food categories. Of products in 2016 with health claims, 34 % did not meet nutrient profiling criteria. These may breach Standard 1.2.7. Comparison of 2011–2016 showed a significant increase in the number of products carrying claims (66 v. 76 %, P < 0·001).Conclusions:The proportion of products carrying claims that do not meet nutrient profiling and consumers’ tendency to infer health benefits from nutrition content claims warrants the regulation of all claims using the nutrient profiling. This will ensure consumers are not misled by claims on unhealthy food products.

Download Full-text

Estimating population food and nutrient exposure: a comparison of store survey data with household panel food purchases

British Journal Of Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s000711451600088x ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 115 (10) ◽

pp. 1835-1842 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Helen Eyles ◽

Bruce Neal ◽

Yannan Jiang ◽

Cliona Ni Mhurchu

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Survey Data ◽

Alcoholic Beverage ◽

Population Exposure ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Food Purchase ◽

Food Purchases ◽

Household Food ◽

Packaged Foods ◽

Packaged Food

AbstractPopulation exposure to food and nutrients can be estimated from household food purchases, but store surveys of foods and their composition are more available, less costly and might provide similar information. Our aim was to compare estimates of nutrient exposure from a store survey of packaged food with those from household panel food purchases. A cross-sectional store survey of all packaged foods for sale in two major supermarkets was undertaken in Auckland, New Zealand, between February and May 2012. Longitudinal household food purchase data (November 2011 to October 2012) were obtained from the nationally representative, population-weighted New Zealand Nielsen HomeScan® panel. Data on 8440 packaged food and non-alcoholic beverage products were collected in the store survey. Food purchase data were available for 1229 households and 16 812 products. Store survey data alone produced higher estimates of exposure to Na and sugar compared with estimates from household panel food purchases. The estimated mean difference in exposure to Na was 94 (95 % CI 72, 115) mg/100 g (20 % relative difference; P<0·01), to sugar 1·6 (95 % CI 0·8, 2·5) g/100 g (11 %; P<0·01), to SFA −0·3 (95 % CI −0·8, 0·3) g/100 g (6 %; P=0·3) and to energy −18 (−71, 35) kJ/100 g (2 %; P=0·51). Compared with household panel food purchases, store survey data provided a reasonable estimate of average population exposure to key nutrients from packaged foods. However, caution should be exercised in using such data to estimate population exposure to Na and sugar and in generalising these findings to other countries, as well as over time.

Download Full-text

Packaged food supply in Fiji: Nutrient levels, compliance with sodium targets and adherence to labelling regulations

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s136898002100224x ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-23

Author(s):

Maria Shahid ◽

Gade Waqa ◽

Arti Pillay ◽

Ateca Kama ◽

Isimeli N. Tukana ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Food Industry ◽

Product Information ◽

Food Choices ◽

Food Composition ◽

Total Sugar ◽

Food Category ◽

Packaged Foods ◽

Sugar Levels ◽

Packaged Food

Abstract Objective To estimate the proportion of products meeting Fiji government labelling regulations, assess compliance with national sodium reformulation targets, and examine the sodium and total sugar levels in packaged foods sold in selected major supermarkets. Design We selected five major supermarkets in 2018 and collected the product information and nutritional content from the labels of all packaged foods sold. We organised 4,278 foods into 14 major food categories and 36 sub-categories and recorded the proportion of products labelled in accordance with the Fiji labelling regulations. We looked at the levels of sodium and total sugar in each food category and assessed how many products complied with the Fiji reformulation targets set for sodium. We also listed the companies responsible for each product. Setting Suva, Fiji. Results Fourteen percent of packaged foods in fourteen major categories met Fiji national labelling regulations. Sodium was labelled on 95.4% products, and total sugar labelled on 92.4%. The convenience foods category had the highest sodium levels (1699mg/100g) while confectionery had the highest content of total sugar (52.6g/100g). Forty percent of eligible products did not meet the proposed voluntary sodium reformulation targets. Conclusions Our findings indicate significant room for improvement in nutrient labelling, as well as a need for further enforcement of reformulation targets and monitoring of changes in food composition. Through enacting these measures and establishing additional regulations such as mandatory front-of-pack labelling, government and food industry can drive consumers towards healthier food choices and improve the nutritional quality of packaged foods in Fiji.

Download Full-text

Seven-year trends in the availability, sugar content and serve size of single-serve non-alcoholic beverages in New Zealand: 2013–2019

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980020005030 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-13

Author(s):

Teresa Gontijo de Castro ◽

Helen Eyles ◽

Cliona Ni Mhurchu ◽

Leanne Young ◽

Sally Mackay

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Sugar Content ◽

Food Composition ◽

Soft Drinks ◽

Alcoholic Beverages ◽

Slight Reduction ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Sweetened Beverages ◽

Sugary Drinks ◽

High Sugar Content

Abstract Objective: To assess trends in relative availability, sugar content and serve size of ready-to-drink non-alcoholic beverages available for sale in supermarkets from 2013 to 2019. Design: Repeat cross-sectional surveys. Data on single-serve beverages to be consumed in one sitting were obtained from an updated brand-specific food composition database. Trends in beverages availability and proportions with serve size ≤ 250 ml were assessed by χ2 tests. Sugar content trends were examined using linear regressions. The proportion of beverages exceeding the sugar threshold of the United Kingdom Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) was assessed. Setting: New Zealand. Results: From 2013 to 2019, there was (i) an increase in the availability of sugar-free/low-sugar beverages (n 25 (8·4 %) to n 75 (19·1 %); P < 0·001) and craft sugar-sweetened soft drinks (n 11 (3·7 %) to n 36 (9·2 %); P < 0·001), and a decrease in availability of fruit/vegetable juices/drinks (n 94 (31·8 %) to n 75 (19·4 %); P < 0·001); (ii) small decreases in sugar content (mean g/100 ml) of sugar-sweetened soft drinks (3·03; 95 % CI 3·77, 2·29); fruit/vegetable juices/drinks (1·08; 95 % CI 2·14, 0·01) and energy drinks (0·98; 95 % CI 1·63, 0·32) and (iii) slight reduction in the proportion of beverages with serve size ≤ 250 ml (21·6 to 18·9 %; P < 0·001). In 2019, most beverages were sugar-sweetened or had naturally occurring sugars (79·1 %) and serve size > 250 ml (81·1 %) and most sugar-sweetened beverages exceeded the SDIL lower benchmark (72·9 %). Conclusions: Most single-serve beverages available for sale in 2019 were sugary drinks with high sugar content and large serve sizes; therefore, changes made across the years were not meaningful for population’s health.

Download Full-text