| Literature DB >> 26999196 |
Emma McMahon1,2, Rozlynne Clarke3, Rachael Jaenke4,5, Julie Brimblecombe6.
Abstract
Food reformulation is an important strategy to reduce the excess salt intake observed in remote Indigenous Australia. We aimed to examine whether 12.5% and 25% salt reduction in bread is detectable, and, if so, whether acceptability is changed, in a sample of adults living in a remote Indigenous community in the Northern Territory of Australia. Convenience samples were recruited for testing of reduced-salt (300 and 350 mg Na/100 g) versus Standard (~400 mg Na/100 g) white and wholemeal breads (n = 62 for white; n = 72 for wholemeal). Triangle testing was used to examine whether participants could detect a difference between the breads. Liking of each bread was also measured; standard consumer acceptability questionnaires were modified to maximise cultural appropriateness and understanding. Participants were unable to detect a difference between Standard and reduced-salt breads (all p values > 0.05 when analysed using binomial probability). Further, as expected, liking of the breads was not changed with salt reduction (all p values > 0.05 when analysed using ANOVA). Reducing salt in products commonly purchased in remote Indigenous communities has potential as an equitable, cost-effective and sustainable strategy to reduce population salt intake and reduce risk of chronic disease, without the barriers associated with strategies that require individual behaviour change.Entities:
Keywords: Indigenous Australian consumers; acceptance; bread; detection; reformulation; salt
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26999196 PMCID: PMC4808897 DOI: 10.3390/nu8030169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Scales used in white (A) and wholemeal (B) acceptability testing.
Participant demographics.
| Demographic | White Bread Testing | Wholemeal Bread Testing |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 52% ( | 38% ( |
| Indigenous | 90% ( | 100% ( |
| Age group: | ||
| 18–34 years | 32% ( | 36% ( |
| 35–55 years | 47% ( | 42% ( |
| 56+ years | 21% ( | 21% ( |
| Missing data | 0% ( | 1% ( |
| Smoking status: | ||
| Non-smoker | 45% ( | 31% ( |
| Smoker | 55% ( | 64% ( |
| Missing data | 0% ( | 6% ( |
Difference testing results.
| Test | All Participants | Gender (% Correct) | Smoking Status (% Correct) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correct | Male | Female | Smoker | Non-Smoker | ||||
| White | ||||||||
| 300 | 30% (19/62) | 0.69 | 44% (14/32) | 17% (5/30) | 0.02 | 26% (9/34) | 35% (10/28) | 0.43 |
| 350 | 42% (26/62) | 0.17 | 44% (14/32) | 40% (12/30) | 0.76 | 44% (15/34) | 39% (11/28) | 0.70 |
| Wholemeal | ||||||||
| 300 | 35% (25/72) | 0.80 | 41% (11/27) | 31% (14/45) | 0.41 | 30% (14/46) | 45% (10/22) | 0.23 |
| 350 | 35% (25/72) | 0.80 | 33% (9/27) | 36% (16/45) | 0.85 | 37% (17/46) | 32% (7/22) | 0.68 |
Values are % correct identifications of the different bread (number of participants correct/total sample size). * Analysed using bionomial probability; † Analysed using Chi square. Std = standard bread.
Figure 2Average liking of Standard versus reduced sodium white (A) and wholemeal (B) breads. Error bars indicate standard deviation.