Maria Gabriela M Pinho1,2, Jeroen Lakerveld3,4,5,6, Marjolein C Harbers5, Ivonne Sluijs5, Roel Vermeulen5,7, Anke Huss7, Jolanda M A Boer8, W M Monique Verschuren5,8, Johannes Brug8,9, Joline W J Beulens3,4,5, Joreintje D Mackenbach3,4. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1089A, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.matiasdepinho@amsterdamumc.nl. 2. Upstream Team, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1089a, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.matiasdepinho@amsterdamumc.nl. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1089A, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Upstream Team, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1089a, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 6. Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Princetonlaan 8a, 3584 CB, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 7. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 8. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands. 9. Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018 WV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the patterns of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) consumption in the Netherlands; to test if exposure to the food environment is associated with UPFs consumption; and if this association differed across educational levels and neighbourhood urbanisation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using 2015-data of 8104 older adults from the Dutch EPIC cohort. Proportion of UPFs consumption was calculated from a validated food-frequency questionnaire. Exposure to the food environment was defined as proximity and availability of supermarkets, fast-food restaurants, full-service restaurants, convenience stores, candy stores and cafés. Consumption of UPFs was expressed as both percentage of total grams and total kilocalories. RESULTS: The study population was aged 70(± 10 SD) years and 80.5% was female. Average UPFs consumption was 17.8% of total food intake in grams and 37% of total energy intake. Those who consumed greater amounts of UPFs had a poorer overall diet quality. Adjusted linear regression models showed that closer proximity and larger availability to any type of food retailer was associated with lower UPFs consumption (both in grams and kilocalories). Somewhat stronger significant associations were found for proximity to restaurants (β = - 1.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = - 2.6; - 0.6), and supermarkets (β = - 2.2%, 95%CI = - 3.3; - 1.1); i.e., Individuals living within 500 m from the closest supermarket, as compared to 1500 m, had 2.6% less calories from UPFs. No differences were found on analyses stratified for urbanisation and education. CONCLUSIONS: Using various measures of exposure to the food environment, we found that exposure to restaurants and supermarkets was associated with somewhat lower consumption of UPFs.
PURPOSE: To describe the patterns of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) consumption in the Netherlands; to test if exposure to the food environment is associated with UPFs consumption; and if this association differed across educational levels and neighbourhood urbanisation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using 2015-data of 8104 older adults from the Dutch EPIC cohort. Proportion of UPFs consumption was calculated from a validated food-frequency questionnaire. Exposure to the food environment was defined as proximity and availability of supermarkets, fast-food restaurants, full-service restaurants, convenience stores, candy stores and cafés. Consumption of UPFs was expressed as both percentage of total grams and total kilocalories. RESULTS: The study population was aged 70(± 10 SD) years and 80.5% was female. Average UPFs consumption was 17.8% of total food intake in grams and 37% of total energy intake. Those who consumed greater amounts of UPFs had a poorer overall diet quality. Adjusted linear regression models showed that closer proximity and larger availability to any type of food retailer was associated with lower UPFs consumption (both in grams and kilocalories). Somewhat stronger significant associations were found for proximity to restaurants (β = - 1.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = - 2.6; - 0.6), and supermarkets (β = - 2.2%, 95%CI = - 3.3; - 1.1); i.e., Individuals living within 500 m from the closest supermarket, as compared to 1500 m, had 2.6% less calories from UPFs. No differences were found on analyses stratified for urbanisation and education. CONCLUSIONS: Using various measures of exposure to the food environment, we found that exposure to restaurants and supermarkets was associated with somewhat lower consumption of UPFs.
Authors: Claire M Luiten; Ingrid Hm Steenhuis; Helen Eyles; Cliona Ni Mhurchu; Wilma E Waterlander Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Kevin D Hall; Alexis Ayuketah; Robert Brychta; Hongyi Cai; Thomas Cassimatis; Kong Y Chen; Stephanie T Chung; Elise Costa; Amber Courville; Valerie Darcey; Laura A Fletcher; Ciaran G Forde; Ahmed M Gharib; Juen Guo; Rebecca Howard; Paule V Joseph; Suzanne McGehee; Ronald Ouwerkerk; Klaudia Raisinger; Irene Rozga; Michael Stagliano; Mary Walter; Peter J Walter; Shanna Yang; Megan Zhou Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 27.287
Authors: Eurídice Martínez Steele; Larissa Galastri Baraldi; Maria Laura da Costa Louzada; Jean-Claude Moubarac; Dariush Mozaffarian; Carlos Augusto Monteiro Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Qingqing Cai; Ming-Jie Duan; Louise H Dekker; Juan Jesús Carrero; Carla Maria Avesani; Stephan J L Bakker; Martin H de Borst; Gerjan J Navis Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 8.472