by Tanya HAFFNER | Jan 15, 2018 | Hot Topics in nutrition, Thoughts, Media in context, The Nation’s Health
Each week we analyse some of the hot headlines in health and nutrition news. This week we look at the role of choline in pregnancy, the health aspects of coconut oil and whether sleep can help us cut down on sugar.
HEADLINE 1: EATING FRY UPS DURING PREGNANCY CAN BOOST BABIES’ INTELLIGENCE
The effect of choline during pregnancy has been in the news this week, reported by the Independent, The Times, the Daily Mail and the Mirror.
This is based on a small study of 26 women entering their third trimester of pregnancy, who were randomised to consume either 480mg or 930mg choline supplement in addition to a controlled diet.
Babies were tested at 4,7,10 and 13 months of age and it was found that reaction time was significantly faster in babies of mothers who consumed 930mg choline supplement daily.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
We don’t hear of choline, which is a vitamin-like nutrient needed for the normal function of all cells, especially those in the liver and the central nervous system, including the brain.
Although choline is an essential nutrient, this study is a long way off proving that pregnant women need to focus on choline supplements to improve their children’s cognition, much less that fry ups result in intelligent babies:
- This was only a small study. It looked at a nutrient that does not register in UK dietary reference values as no incidence of choline deficiency has been reported.
- The women were given supplements rather than food in order to boost their levels – the headlines suggesting fry ups could be beneficial are misleading and could put mother and baby’s long-term health at risk.
- The reaction time results are of limited value for assessing the impact on cognitive development in the babies beyond 12 months.
Eating a healthy balanced diet, maintaining a healthy weight gain, keeping active and avoidance of alcohol and smoking during pregnancy will help ensure the best outcomes for the mother and the baby. Specific supplements of vitamin D and folic acid are also recommended by UK government. For tips on a healthy diet see the NHS
HEADLINE 2: IS COCONUT OIL A SUPERFOOD?
This week Dr Michael Mosley has been promoting the use of coconut oil as a health product, as picked up by the BBC, The Times and the Daily Mail. The suggestion is that despite high levels of saturated fat, coconut oil might still be good for you.
This report comes from the ‘Trust Me I’m a Doctor’ team, a new BBC series featuring Dr Mosley. 94 volunteers were involved, aged between 50 and 75 years, with no history of diabetes or heart disease. They were split into three research groups and for four weeks added to their diet as follows:
- Group 1: 50g of extra virgin coconut oil (about 4 tbsp) consumed daily
- Group 2: 50g of extra virgin olive oil (about 4 tbsp) consumed daily
- Group 3: 50g of unsalted butter (about 3 tbsp) consumed daily
Baseline measurements were taken for blood lipids, including LDL (‘bad’) and HDL (‘good’) cholesterol. The findings, averaged out, were as follows:
- Group 1 (coconut oil) – no rise in LDL levels; 15% rise in HDL levels
- Group 2 (olive oil) – small reduction in LDL (although deemed as non-significant); 5% rise in HDL
- Group 3 (butter) – 10% rise in LDL levels; 5% rise in HDL levels.
The participants’ weight and body fat remained unchanged.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This is a disappointing well-publicised study that will only serve to fuel consumers’ confusion about how they can reduce the incidence of UK’s number 1 killer, heart disease.
On the surface, the findings paint the picture that coconut oil could be good for the heart, through raising levels of HDL cholesterol.
However, conducted over only a short period of time, overall diet quality of the participants was not assessed – including overall saturated fat, free sugars and refined carbohydrate intakes from other food sources. Based on this, it is unclear what brought about the changes in lipid profiles and no conclusions can safely be made on the benefits or harmful effects of coconut oil.
Contradicting studies
While this study fuels the growing trend for coconut oil, it cannot compare to the extensive scientific literature reviews of good-quality studies by leading heart health and academic experts. These have shown consistently that saturated fats have an overall negative effect of increasing LDL cholesterol.
We discuss the different types of saturated fats found in coconut oil amongst other key points in our blog, Is Coconut Oil Really Good for You?
What are the current recommendations for use of coconut oil?
Here are what some of the major health organisations have to say about coconut oil:
- Heart UK – published a statement on coconut oil that for people wanting to lower their cholesterol, coconut oil should be avoided.
- British Heart Foundation – state there is not enough good-quality research to provide us with a definitive answer as to whether the types of saturated fats in coconut oil are any better for us than other saturated fats.
- UK Department of Health – Advises to consume only small amounts of coconut oil
We need to promote good quality science, which is the basis for international and national guidelines with regard to saturated fat. These included reductions in saturated fat (a maximum of 20g and 30g daily for women and men, respectively), inclusion of unsaturated fats, replacement of refined carbohydrates with whole grains, minimising intakes of free sugars and increasing our fruit and vegetable intakes.
Two level tablespoons of coconut oil provides 19g of saturated fat and is therefore not considered a healthy choice for regular consumption. As part of a balanced diet, coconut oil is fine to have in small quantities.
We look forward to seeing the latest extensive review of research undertaken by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, due to be published by March this year.
HEADLINE 3: A GOOD NIGHT’S SLEEP HELPS YOU CUT SUGAR
The Telegraph (Sleep yourself slim: how an extra 90 mins in bed can stop sugar cravings), The Times, the Sun and the Daily Mail (How 20 minutes’ extra sleep could help you say no to cake) have reported on the impact sleep could have on sugar intake.
A study involved 42 participants with poor sleeping habits (deemed as having typically between five and seven hours sleep per night), who were encouraged to follow a personalised sleep extension protocol. The body mass index (BMI) of each participant was between 18.5kg/ m2 to less than 30kg/m2. They each kept food diaries.
The four-week randomised control trial involved:
- Group 1 (intervention group): 21 participants received a behavioural consultation session targeting ‘sleep hygiene’ – this involved avoiding screens late at night, keeping work out of the bedroom and reducing caffeine.
- Group 2 (control group): 21 participants maintained habitual short sleep patterns
Over the four weeks, the intervention group extended their time in bed by 55 minutes on average and their sleep duration by 21 minutes compared with the control group.
On average, there was a reported 10g reduction in intake of free sugars compared to the control group. BMI did not change in the four-week period.
Free sugars are all the different types of sugar we have in our diet, excluding the sugars found naturally in intact fruit and vegetables, milk and milk products. 10g of free sugars is equivalent to 2.5 tsp of sugar, 1.5 tsp of honey, 90ml of cola or 110ml of fruit juice.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
Once again, this study was only of a small number of people and for a short period of time. It was not designed in a way to accurately assess dietary intake, so we cannot be confident that improved sleep patterns will cause a reduction in sugar intake. Food diaries rely on the honesty of the patient and are not necessarily accurate.
Is there a link between sleep and body weight?
Some of the news outlets gave the impression that extra sleep will cause weight loss, but this was not found.
However, the NHS does recognise that sleeping less may contribute to weight gain, highlighting previous studies showing that people who sleep less than seven hours per day are 30% more likely to be obese than those who sleep for nine hours or more.
Sleep is important for mental and physical health and evidence for its role in weight loss/obesity is growing. The NHS recommends seven to nine hours a night. Find out more about ways to get a good night’s sleep.
by Tanya HAFFNER | Jan 9, 2018 | Thoughts, Media in context, The Nation’s Health, Impactful health initiatives
Each week we analyse some of the hot headlines in health and nutrition news. This week we look at a new ‘Change4Life’ campaign on children’s snacks and the link between processed meats and breast cancer.
HEADLINE 1: LIMIT CHILDREN’S SNACKS TO 100 CALORIES
Popular in the news this week is the new campaign being launched to encourage healthier snacking in children. This has been reported widely, including the BBC, Sky News, The Telegraph, ITV News, the Sun and The Guardian.
Figures have shown that half the sugar consumed by children in England aged 4–10 comes from unhealthy snacks such as biscuits, cakes and sweets, as well and fizzy and juice drinks.
Public Health England (PHE) have launched a new ‘Change4Life’ campaign promoting children’s snacks which are no more than 100 calories. They also advise cutting number of snacks down to twice per day.
The campaign will run for eight weeks and offers money-off vouchers if parents sign up for lower-sugar snacks. Selected supermarkets including Tesco are supporting the campaign.
The Change4Life ‘Food Scanner’ app has also been updated and improved, showing parents the amount of sugar, salt and saturated fat in their food.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
According to the latest National Diet & Nutrition Survey (NDNS), 4–10 year olds consume on average 53.5g free sugars daily – equivalent to 13 teaspoons. Unhealthy snacks and sweet drinks contribute to at least half this daily intake – equivalent to around 7 teaspoons per day.
We discussed the need for free sugars to be limited for children in a previous blog. Improvements must be made in this area and we sincerely hope this campaign can make a difference.
The scale of the problem
According to the new analysis by PHE, every year each 4–10 year old consumes on average 400 biscuits; more than 120 cakes, buns and pastries; around 100 portions of sweets; nearly 70 of both chocolate bars and ice creams; plus over 150 juice drink pouches and cans of fizzy drink.
As these products are predominantly energy dense with few nutrients on offer, looking at the total calorie contribution per year makes the latest findings even more alarming:
| PHE classified unhealthy snacks/drinks |
Energy contribution to children’s diet per year |
| Biscuits |
26,682 kcal |
| Buns, cakes, pastries |
26,682 kcal |
| Sugar confectionery |
5,366 kcal |
| Chocolate confectionery |
10,673 kcal |
| Ice-cream |
10,673 kcal |
| Sweetened soft drinks including sweetened fruit juices |
10,673 kcal |
| Total annual energy intake from unhealthy snacks and drinks |
90,749 kcal |
| Daily calorie equivalent |
249 kcal |
| Weekly calorie equivalent |
1,740 kcal |
The campaign to change habits
A simple ‘rule of thumb’ advice is being promoted by the campaign to help make it easier for busy families to reduce the intake: ‘look for 100 calorie snacks, two a day max’.
While 50kcal saving per day may not seem a lot, over a year that’s a saving of over 18,000 kcals.
It should be noted that the advice does not focus on fruit and vegetables. A variety of these should be encouraged, aiming for a minimum of five portions per day.
Examples of snacks that fall at or below 100 calories include:
- One Soreen malt mini lunchbox loaf (30g) – 95 calories
- One small pot of fruit fromage frais (42-85g) – 45-75 calories
- Snack pack of raisins (14g) – 38 calories
- One banana – 81 calories
- One apple – 51 calories
- One Hartley’s no added sugar jelly pot (115g) – 7 calories
- One packet skinny popcorn (17g) – 57 calories
- One packet Tesco’s lentil curls (20g) – 91 calories
(Source: Values obtained from Dietplan 7 and online supermarkets 2018)
The packaged snacks should also ideally show as greens and ambers on the ‘traffic light’ labelling system (indicating they are not too high in sugar, fat, saturated fat or salt). More information on food labelling is supplied by Change4Life.
It is also useful to check on the label that the portion consumed is what the label portion actually relates to. For example, a large pack of crisps may display the calories for 1/8 of the packet but it can be easy for a child to have more than this portion.
What’s missing from the advice
Although it is positive that action is being taken to promote healthier snacking, the campaign only focuses on the role of calories and may not necessarily teach parents about what makes up a healthy snack.
For example, a handful of nuts would contain more than 100 calories, yet nuts are a nutrient dense food and have many benefits to our health. Snacks can contain less than 100 calories but not contain any valuable nutrients, as in the case of many cereal bars. So, it is questionable how well this campaign will educate parents about healthy eating.
Nevertheless, if improvements can be made to the current eating habits in children it will be beneficial.
HEADLINE 2: EATING BACON, SAUSAGES AND OTHER PROCESSED MEATS INCREASES BREAST CANCER RISK IN OLDER WOMEN
Also in the news this week is the suggestion that eating processed meats will increase the chances of getting breast cancer. This was picked up by the Sun, the Daily Mail, the Evening Standard and the Independent.
The study involved 262,195 women aged 40–69, followed over a period of seven years. For this cohort, a 21% increased breast cancer risk was associated with women consuming more than 9g processed meat per day.
However, when the study was combined with another 10 cohort studies and a meta-analysis performed, the risk was significantly lower.
The meta-analysis found processed meat consumption to be associated with 9% increased risk of breast cancer in post-menopausal women only. No association was found in pre and peri-menopausal women, nor was an association found with red meat consumption.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
The study looked at a variety of processed meats, but clearly the UK headlines are pulling at the Brits’ heart strings by focusing on bacon and sausages.
Firstly, what counts as processed meat? Processed meats are defined as meat which has been preserved through salting, curing, fermentation, smoking or other processes. Examples include sausages, bacon, ham, salami, chorizo, corned beef, hot dogs and pepperoni.
9g processed meat equates to:
- 1 and a bit sausages
- 2½ rashes of back bacon or medium slices ham
- 13 thin 5cm diameter slices of salami
- Almost 3 Peperamis
This study adds further supports to one of the key messages for cancer prevention to avoid processed meat and reduce overall intakes of red meat (no more than 500g per week) whilst focusing on a more plant-based diet.
In order to truly help women reduce their risk of breast cancer, messages like this, focusing on one food type, are not helpful. Study findings should be placed in context of overall dietary and lifestyle advice proven to lower risk as well as regular breast screening checks. This study only found correlation in post-menopausal women and only reported on processed and red meat findings.
With 50,000 new cases of breast cancer every year in the UK, 20,000 of which could be prevented through dietary and lifestyle modifications, there are far more pertinent actions women can take. The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) highlights the following as major risk factors for breast cancer:
- Gaining weight in adulthood
- Drinking alcohol
- Being physically inactive
- Not breastfeeding when you have a baby
- Being overweight or obese (for post-menopausal breast cancer)
Although this study further supports the evidence that processed meat isn’t great for women’s health (or, indeed men’s health), we need to stop scare-mongering and instead provide helpful advice to women concerned about the UK’s number one cancer. Scientific findings need to be put into context and then interpreted into practical and helpful advice for consumers.
As well as the lifestyle recommendations by WCRF, it is also important to continue encouraging women to regularly check their breasts for lumps and seek medical assistance if they have any concern as well as attend any breast cancer screening invitation from their health service.
For more tips and advice see World Cancer Research Fund UK and Cancer Research UK
by Tanya HAFFNER | Dec 4, 2017 | Retail, Food category comment, Media in context, The Nation’s Health, Surveys and insights
Each week we analyse some of the hot headlines in health and nutrition news. This week cheese; obesity & diabetes/cancer risk; and sugar reduction in Kellogg’s cereals.
HEADLINE 1: A piece of cheese a day keeps the doctor away
Picked up in the news this week by the Daily Mail, The Express, The Sun, The Independent and The Guardian is the suggestion that eating cheese could reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
This is based on a meta-analysis of studies which concluded that consuming 40g of cheese per day reduced the risk of heart attack by 14% and stroke by 10%.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
While cheese lovers are likely to have rejoiced, there are limitations to the research on which the headlines were based. The lack of randomised controlled trials included within the meta-analysis means that no causal relationship can be assumed between eating cheese and risk of heart disease. There are far too many factors which could interfere with the results.
Interestingly, there are previous large studies that have found no association between heart disease and eating cheese. Again, it can be hard to prove that it is the cheese eating that is causing the effects.
The harm that eating too much cheese can cause to health is well documented. Although it is a good source of protein, calcium, phosphorous and vitamin B12, it can also be high in saturated fats. Having too much saturated fat in the diet can increase levels of LDL cholesterol in the blood, which is an established risk factor for heart disease. A 30g portion of cheddar cheese (a matchbox size) contains 6.5g saturated fat (over a quarter of the reference intake for saturated fat – 20g). It can also be quite easy to go above this recommended portion size.
Some cheeses can be high in salt and there is a lot of evidence to show that too much salt can increase the risk of high blood pressure, another risk factor for cardiovascular disease.
Cheese can be enjoyed as part of a healthy diet if eaten in moderation and can provide a valuable source of various nutrients. Sticking to the recommended 30g portion size and opting for lower fat varieties such as lighter/reduced fat cheddars, cottage cheese and ricotta, can help ensure we don’t exceed our recommended maximum amount of saturated fat.
Moreover, foods such as low-fat yogurts and lower fat milks can also provide us with calcium and protein (two of the key nutrients found in cheese) but provide less saturated fats (as well as fewer calories, which would be helpful for those trying to lose weight).
For more information, go to British Heart Foundation and the NHS
HEADLINE 2: Diabetes is a key factor in WORLDWIDE cancer surge
The Express, The Sun and The Daily Mail reported on a finding that diabetes and obesity have been linked to causing cancer.
Researchers found that people with a high BMI (defined as above 25kg/m) who also had diabetes were behind 5.6% of new cancer cases globally, affecting 792,600 people in 2012. The method used was through assessing the increase in new cases of 18 cancers based on the prevalence of diabetes and high BMI in 175 countries (using data about BMI and diabetes in 2002 and cancers recorded in 2012).
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This is an interesting study as it is the first study to have looked at the combined effect of having diabetes and obesity on cancer risk. Whilst the headlines alert us to the finding that over 5% of cancers were attributable to diabetes and cancer, there were significant differences between various groups of people, regions and types of cancer which should be noted. These are discussed in the original study. For example, cancers attributable to diabetes and being overweight were nearly twice as common in women (496,700 cases) as they were in men (295,900 cases).
It should be noted that there were limitations of the study. It is questionable whether the 10-year gap used between recording diabetes and high BMI to cancer incidence is entirely appropriate to enable conclusions to be drawn, as recognised by the researchers.
What we understand already is that obesity is certainly a risk factor for cancer. Analysis conducted by the World Cancer Research Fund has found that being overweight (BMI 25kg- 29.9/m) or obese (BMI 30kg/m and above) increases the risk of 11 types of cancer.
The Diabetes UK website outlines the link between diabetes and cancer. Some of the complications associated with diabetes can increase the risk of cancer. However, well-managed diabetes can help reduce the risk of any complications. Diabetes UK have given their thoughts on this study and stated that, “Diabetes doesn’t directly cause cancer, but this study adds to the evidence that having diabetes can increase the risk of certain types of cancer.”
The main message to take home from these headlines is that the increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes may lead to an increase in risk of certain cancers. Maintaining a healthy weight, eating well, keeping physically active, not smoking, and not exceeding the government guidelines for alcohol consumption can all help lower the risk of diabetes and cancer.
For more information, go to Diabetes UK and WCRF
HEADLINE 3: Kellogg’s to cut sugar in kids’ cereals by up to 40%
Also in the news this week is the announcement that Kellogg’s will cut the sugar levels in children’s cereals by up to 40%. This was reported by the BBC, the Daily Mail, the Evening Standard, The Times and The Sun.
Kellogg’s have said they will reduce sugar levels by 20-40% by the middle of 2018 for Coco Pops, Rice Krispies and Rice Krispies Multi-Grain Shapes. They are also going to stop making Ricicles from January 2018, due to the amount of sugar in the cereal, and are putting a stop to on-pack promotions aimed at children on Frosties.
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This is a very positive and encouraging move from Kellogg’s as the battle to reduce sugar consumption in the UK continues.
In March this year, officials at Public Health England called on food firms to cut sugar by 5% by the end of this year and by 20% by 2020. The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition currently advise that free sugar intake in the UK should account for no more than 5% of our daily energy intake. Advice for the different age groups is as follows:
- Children 4-6 years – no more than 19g free sugars per day (5 teaspoons)
- Children 7-10 years – no more than 24g free sugars per day (6 teaspoons)
- Children 11 years + and adults – no more than 30g free sugars per day (7 teaspoons)
Although not the highest source of sugar in our diets, cereals do contribute to daily intake, with the most recent National Diet and Nutrition Survey highlighting that cereals are responsible for 5% of the added sugar intakes of adults and 6-8% of that of 4-10-year olds and teens. In our blog post last year A Health Check on New Breakfast Opportunities we discussed the need for more breakfast options to offer lower sugar choices and so this certainly is a positive step forward. With gradually a lesser number of options available that are high in sugar, it may be less overwhelming for consumers to make healthier choices.
Here is how much sugar is currently in the Kellogg’s products and how much they are to be reduced by:
- Coco Pops – 9g sugar per 30g serving. To be reduced to 5.1g per 30g serving (40% reduction, changing from about 2 teaspoons of sugar to just over 1 teaspoon).
- Rice Krispies – 3g sugar per 30g serving. To be reduced to 2.4g per 30g serving (20% reduction, changing from ¾ teaspoon of sugar to a little under 2/3 teaspoon of sugar).
- Rice Krispies Multi-Grain Shapes – 6.3g sugar per 30g serving. To be reduced to 4.5g per 30g serving (30% reduction, changing from about 1.5 teaspoons of sugar to just over 1 teaspoon)
A step forward to reduce the sugar content of any foods available on the market can only surely be a positive one.
For more information, go to Kellogg’s – Sugar and Breakfast Cereal and SACN 2015 – Carbohydrates and Health Report
by Tanya HAFFNER | Nov 12, 2017 | Media in context
Each week we analyse some of the hot headlines in health and nutrition news
HEADLINE 1: Could sugary diets fuel Alzheimer’s disease? Scientists discover link between high levels of glucose in the brain and memory loss symptoms
The story linking sugar to Alzheimer’s disease was reported in The Daily Mail, The Sun, The Express and Hello Magazine
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This news was headline-grabbing indeed, with all the stories suggesting that diets high in sugar could be linked to Alzheimer’s disease.
The story is based on a study finding that there were significant abnormalities in glucose breakdown in patients with Alzheimer’s – resulting in high levels of brain glucose.
However, the actual reasons for these abnormalities remain unclear and cannot be drawn from this study. The study is still at an early stage and more research is needed to investigate whether genetic or perhaps environmental factors are the cause of such abnormalities. The headlines may lead people to think that high sugar diets cause Alzheimer’s. However, the study did not directly test this and no causal relationship can be assumed at all.
Nevertheless, as part of a healthy diet, sugar should be limited. SACN advise that less than 5% of daily energy should come from free sugars (which amounts to 30g per day for an average person over 11 years).
Where to find useful information on the topic
BDA Food Facts, Sugar
Alzheimer’s Society, Risk factors and Prevention
HEADLINE 2: Arthritis: Following THIS diet could help stave off the crippling condition
SWITCHING to a superfoods diet can help fight rheumatoid arthritis, research has found
The story in the Daily Express was also reported by:
NDTV: Scientists reveal the diet and superfoods that can beat arthritis
Daily Mail: Diet to beat arthritis
The Sun: Blueberries, ginger and olive oil offer pain relief to thousands of rheumatoid arthritis sufferers
Times Now: Rheumatoid arthritis: Indian scientists list foods that may help ease the condition
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This headline is based on a list of ‘superfoods’ that has been produced following a review of journals publishing on the subject. The list of foods includes blueberries, olive oil, green tea, pomegranates, dried plums, ginger and more. Those who carried out the research also recommend avoiding meat and including probiotics.
Many studies seem to hit the headlines regarding so called ‘superfoods’ (a term for which there is no official definition). However, no single food can outweigh the impact of the rest of one’s diet and hence a whole diet approach is recommended.
What we know is that no single food can cure arthritis. Rather than following a list of ‘superfoods’ as this headline suggests, having a healthy balanced diet, Mediterranean style, with a variety of fruit and vegetables, whole grains, beans, fish and healthy fats would be advised.
The links given below discuss in more detail key aspects of a healthy diet for arthritis, the role of vegetarian diets and the potential role of supplements for the condition:
Arthritis UK, Diet and Arthritis
BDA Food Facts, Diet and Rheumatoid Arthritis
HEADLINE 3: Cheers! Red wine cuts diabetes risk in women: Moderate drinking found to reduce chance of the disease by 27%
The story in The Daily Mail was also reported by:
The Express: Type 2 diabetes symptoms: Drinking RED WINE could help LOWER risk of condition
Health Spectator: Drinking tea and red wine reduces type 2 diabetes risk
Behind the headlines: the Nutrilicious dietetic view
This study looked into the eating habits of women aged between 40 and 65 years old. Through a food questionnaire it concluded that a diet rich in antioxidants (foods including red wine, dark chocolate, tea, fruits, nuts and vegetables) will reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes by 27%.
From this type of research, it cannot be proven that a diet rich in antioxidants, or as the headlines specifically say drinking red wine, reduces diabetes risk; it is an association found and more studies are needed. Food questionnaires, as used in this study, have questionable accuracy and the study can only be applied to middle aged women. Whilst many of the foods listed in this study such as fruit and vegetables play an important part in the diet, alcohol can have detrimental effects to our health and should be limited (no more than 14 units per week).
Looking at the bigger picture, it is interesting to note that the WCRF recommend for reducing cancer risk as much as possible, we should not be drinking alcohol at all. For type 2 diabetes prevention, the most important lifestyle factors are to maintain a healthy weight, eat a balanced diet and be active.
For more information, go to:
NHS, Drinking and Alcohol
WCRF Alcohol and Cancer Risk
Diabetes UK, Preventing Type 2 Diabetes
by Tanya HAFFNER | Sep 9, 2016 | Hot Topics in nutrition, The Nation’s Health
The latest NDNS survey is out today! The new survey (Years 5 and 6 – 2012/13-2013/14) will be met with disappointment and possibly frustration by many public health campaigners.
The Brits have done little to improve their intakes of essential nutrients despite significant government and NGO campaigns. We’re still eating too much sugar and saturated fat and seem to be unable to increase our fruit and vegetable, fibre and essential vitamin and mineral intakes. On a positive, and there was only one positive, we are reducing our intakes of red and processed meats. And at least our diets have not got worse. But the question remains, with little dietary improvements over the last 10 years, what really needs to be done to help the nation change their eating behaviour and nudge them into a healthier and happier life?
- Brits still struggling to meet their 5-a-day with no improvements in consumption compared to previous years:
- Just 8% of children and less than a third (27%) adults achieving their 5-a-day.
- Children’s average intake is less than 3 portions per day, whilst adults are so close to the recommendations at 4 portions a day.
- Heart healthy omega-3 and much needed vitamin D intakes cannot be expected to improve with oil-rich fish consumption continuing to fall short of the recommended 140g per day.
- Brits are only managing 62% of the recommendations at a max of 87g per day.
- The message is getting through about red and processed meat with reductions in intakes from previous years. However, men need to make further improvements as their intakes are significantly higher than women’s and the maximum recommendations of no more than 70g per day of red meat and avoidance of processed meat.
- Could the sugar reduction public health campaigns be making some small inroads to reducing added sugar intakes in children?
- Let’s not get too excited, but 4-10 year olds have reduced their intakes by 1% compared to previous years (13.4% of total energy intake vs. 14.4%).
- Unfortunately, teens and adults continue on their sweet ways with intakes remaining unchanged at 15.2% and 12.3% contribution to total energy intakes.
- Intakes are a long way from meeting the SACN recommendations of no more than 5%! Is sugar tax really going to be the solution?
- The attack on sweetened soft drinks seems to have made an impact on 4-10 year old’s intakes with a 23% reduction in amount consumed daily compared to previous years (100g vs 130g respectively).
- Unfortunately, adults and teens refuse to be told what to do and continue to struggle with the sweet nectar!
- Could the misleading media headlines ‘butter is good for you’ be responsible for the population continuing to exceed saturated fat intake recommendations (11% of total energy intake) and in fact have higher intakes than previous years.
- The latest data shows saturated fat to contribute to 12.7% of total energy intake, whilst in previous years it has been at 12.3-12.5%. A major contributor to elevated ‘bad’ cholesterol which afflicts over half the adult population.
- Fibre – another new government dietary recommendation doomed for failure! Although less publicity has been given to fibre, the SACN carbohydrate report did not only make new recommendations on sugar intakes but also recommended a significant increase in fibre intakes to 30g AOAC (23g non-starch polysaccharides NSP).
- The nation continues to struggle to meet the previous recommendations of 18g NSP per day with adults making no improvements to previous years at 13-14g NSP intakes daily.
- It would be great to see a public campaign for us to eat MORE of something rather than to deprive ourselves!
- Is it time for mandatory vitamin D fortification? The survey found around a fifth of adults with low vitamin D status and with an average level of 42-48nnmol/L.
- Few have the optimal status as recommended by many vitamin D experts of 50-70nnmol/L.
- Fatigue and tiredness in teenage girls and young women could be explained by continued poor iron intakes, with almost half of teenage girls and over a quarter (27%) of young women having iron intake below the lower reference nutrient intake.
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey
