2. Curbing the Nation’s Sweet Tooth
Dr Charlotte Evans
c.e.l.evans@leeds.ac.uk
Lecturer in nutritional epidemiology & public health nutrition
Nutritional Epidemiology Group, School of Food Science and Nutrition,
University of Leeds
Obesity: Tipping back the Scales of the Nation,
Manchester, 19th April, 2017
2
3. History of sugar consumption
50kg per year/person
is equivalent to
approx. 130g per day
or 500kcal per day
5. Risk factors for Cardiovascular disease
Associated with
higher risk of
CVD
High blood sugar/type 2 diabetes mellitus
High Tryaclglycerol (TAG)
Obesity
High blood pressure
6. Objectives:
6
1. To review the evidence that free sugars
promote weight gain
2. To discuss the most effective ways of
reducing consumption of free sugars in the
UK
9. Diets higher in sugars increase energy intake
9
Overall (I-squared = 0.2%, p = 0.422)
Brynes AE, et al., 2003
ID
Saris WH, et al., 2000
Drummond S, et al., 2003
Raben A, et al., 2002
Drummond S & Kirk T, 1998
Reid M, et al., 2007
Study
Poppitt SD, et al., 2002
1274.52 (888.76, 1660.27)
880.00 (-314.62, 2074.62)
difference in means (95% CI)
1100.00 (387.70, 1812.30)
1000.00 (-403.12, 2403.12)
2796.00 (1442.83, 4149.17)
845.00 (-635.95, 2325.95)
1315.07 (673.75, 1956.39)
Weighted
1470.00 (-1300.89, 4240.89)
1274.52 (888.76, 1660.27)
880.00 (-314.62, 2074.62)
difference in means (95% CI)
1100.00 (387.70, 1812.30)
1000.00 (-403.12, 2403.12)
2796.00 (1442.83, 4149.17)
845.00 (-635.95, 2325.95)
1315.07 (673.75, 1956.39)
Weighted
1470.00 (-1300.89, 4240.89)
Higher EI with low sugar Higher EI with high sugar
0-2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Difference in Energy Intake (KJ/day) between groups: low sugar diet vs high sugar diet
See supporting documents from the SACN carbohydrates and health report:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sacn-carbohydrates-and-health-report
12. Sugar Sweetened Beverage (SSB) consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes,
Reference - Association between sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened soft drinks and type 2
diabetes: systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis of prospective studies, Greenwood
et al. (2014) British Journal of Nutrition
13. Recommendations around the world
German Nutrition Society, Germany:
High consumption of sugar-sweetened
beverages increases the risk of obesity &
type 2 diabetes mellitus
High dietary fibre intake, mainly from
whole-grain products, reduces the risk of
obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, &
cardiovascular disease .
WHO:
Review of sugars and obesity. Honey, syrup
and fruit juice are now included in added
sugar. New ideal target of free sugars <5% of
energy.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA):
Have not updated their recommendations
recently (45-60% of energy as carbohydrate,
25g of fibre). Insufficient evidence to set an
upper limit on added sugar intake
13
UK:
Has recently updated recommendations for
carbohydrates and cardio-metabolic
health. Fibre recommendation has
increased to 30g AOAC (from approx 25g)
and sugar has reduced from 10% to 5%
total energy (population intake).
Fibre intakes are well below recommended
and sugar intakes are over twice the
recommended levels.
USA:
Maximum upper limit on added sugars of
25%, high fibre intakes recommended are
double the average intake. Wholegrain
foods are encouraged.
Australia and New Zealand:
Recommendations (for adequate intake) are
25g of fibre for women and 30g fibre for
men. Dietary recommendation for sugar is
to limit intake.
14. Carbohydrates: recommended & consumed
Nutrient Old UK
Recommendation
New 2015 UK
recommendation
UK* consumption
Energy intake KJ/kcal Women 9MJ/day
(2000kcal)
Men 11MJ/day
(2500kcal)
Women 8.7 MJ/d
(2079kcal/d)
Men10.9 MJ/d
(2605kcal/d)
Men 8.86 MJ/day
(2107 kcal/day)
Women 6.71 MJ/day
(1595 kcal/day)
Total carbohydrate 50% of energy 50% of energy ~50%
Fibre – AOAC/non starch
polysaccharides (NSP)
25g/18g 30g/25g 18/13g
Non milk extrinsic (added)
sugars
10% of total energy
(including alcohol)
11% of food energy
5% of total energy
(population)
12.3%
14
Recommendation for Sugar sweetened beverages (SSB) is to reduce
intake but no specific acceptable intake provided
*NDNS rolling programme 5-6 year summary 2012-2014
16. Public Health England (PHE)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sugar-
reduction-from-evidence-into-action 16
17. Obesity prevalence by deprivation decile
and year of measurement
National Child Measurement Programme 2006/07 to 2014/15
17Patterns and trends in child obesity
Child obesity: BMI ≥ 95th centile of the UK90 growth reference
Children in Year 6 (aged 10-11 years)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Most
deprived
Least
deprived
Obesityprevalence
Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2010) decile
2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15
18. 8 areas for action from PHE
1.Reduce price promotions (supermarkets)
2.Reduce marketing (food industry)*
3.Clarity with nutrient profiling (PH Nutritionists)
4.Reformulation and reduced portion sizes (food
industry, restaurants/cafes)*
5.Sugar tax (government)*
6.Improved buying standards (government)
7.Accredited training (various)
8.Raise awareness of health issues and provide
practical steps to help reduce sugar
(nutritionists, media)*
20. SALT
Changes in salt intake as measured by 24 h urinary sodium excretion (UNa), blood
pressure, stroke and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality in England from 2003 to 2011.
*p<0.05, ***p<0.001 for trend.
Feng J He et al. BMJ Open 2014;4:e004549
Reformulation is effective
TRANS FATS
Percentage of the population meeting the
recommended intake of 2% of energy (UK
recommendation) has increased (using national
diet and nutrition survey data):
• In adults the percent meeting the
recommended levels for trans fats has
increased from 96.0% (in 2001) to 99.5%
• In children and young people the percent
meeting the recommended levels for trans
fats has increased from 98% (in 1997) to
99.5%.
We are submitting results from the national diet
and nutrition survey (NDNS) comparing trans
fats intakes with the WHO recommendations of
1% of total energy – watch this space!
25. Conclusions
• High intakes of free sugars, particularly in drinks, promote
weight gain and type 2 diabetes
• New recommendations for intakes of free sugars are
tough to meet
• Action is needed from everyone (the food industry,
supermarkets, restaurants, dietitians, public health
nutritionists, government and the media) and has not
gone far enough (yet) to curb the nation’s sweet tooth
• Some progress has been made (percent free sugars has
reduced from 14.4% to 13.4% in children)
• We need to prioritise action that will reduce inequalities
in diet and health (even if it means starting with more
unpopular policies).
26. 26
Contact me on: c.e.l.evans@leeds.ac.uk
Thank you
and thanks also to
my colleagues at
the University of
Leeds
Dr Victoria
Burley
(Nutritional
Epidemiology)
Dr Darren
Greenwood
(Biostatistics)
Professor
Marion
Hetherington
(Psychology)
Professor
Janet Cade
(Nutritional
Epidemiology)
Europe starting importing raw cane sugar, processing it into white sugar in the 1300s then started extracting sugar from beet in 1700s
Sugar intake was low until it became a modern and highly efficient sector at the beginning of the 19th century.
Sugar intake increased until about 1990 then started to decrease.
There are other countries that eat more sugar than in the UK – USA, Germany, the Netherlands.
Shows the main contributors to added sugars in our diet in the uk. We are talking about added sugars or free sugars in this talk not sugars in fruit.
Main risk factors for CVD associated with diet:
High blood pressure
High Lipids
High blood sugars, insulin sensitivity
obesity
-but 10% of this mortality decrease was attributed to a relatively modest improvement in average cholesterol levels of 4%
Indicating that CHD rates could poss be improved if cholesterol levels are improved in the general population
High blood pressure accounts for half of the cvd risk – according to the global burden of disease
Worsening obesity, physical activity and diabetes levels (1981-2000) estimated to have contributed to 8,000 more deaths
What is the scientific evidence for including advice on sugars for good health?
What is the scientific evidence for including advice on sugars for good health?
Fig 4 Effect of increasing free sugars on measures of body fatness in adults. Pooled effects for difference in body weight (kg) shown for studies comparing increased intake (higher sugars) with usual intake (lower sugars). Overall effect shows increased body weight after intervention in the higher sugars groups. Data are expressed as weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval), using generic inverse variance models with random effects
The recent recommendations from the Scientific advisory committee for nutrition (SACN) reduced the recommendations for sugars based on the systematic review and the associations with energy intake. There isn’t a review on sugars demonstrating risk with other risk factors for CVD such as blood pressure (check).
Weighted mean differences (95% CI) in weight change (kg) between the intervention and control regimens from randomized controlled trials in adults. Interventions evaluated the effect of adding sugar-sweetened beverages. Horizontal lines denote 95% CIs; solid diamonds represent the point estimate of each study. Open diamonds represent pooled estimates of the intervention effect, and the dashed line denotes the point estimate of the pooled result from the random-effects model (D+L). Weights are from the random-effects analysis (D+L). Pooled estimates from the random-effects analysis (D+L) and the fixed-effects analysis (I-V) are shown based on 5 randomized controlled trials (n = 292). The I2 and P values for heterogeneity are shown. D+L, DerSimonian and Laird; I-V, inverse variance.
A: Forrest plot of studies evaluating SSB consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes, comparing extreme quantiles of intake. Random-effects estimate (DerSimonian and Laird method). *Information from personal communication. B: Forrest plot of studies evaluating SSB consumption and risk of metabolic syndrome comparing extreme quantiles of intake. Random-effects estimate (DerSimonian and Laird method).
Different regions of the world have different recommendations but those that have updated their recommendations recently have reduced recommended sugar intake and increased fibre intake.
The current recommendations for sugar intake are 5% of total energy (population average) which is reduced from 10%.
This is the equivalent of 25g (contributing 100kcal) for a 2000kcal/day diet
It is difficult to meet the fibre and free sugar recommendations. This diet is a long way from the typical diet of most people in the UK.
Public Health England have published a report with details on how to reduce sugar consumption. One of the main remits for PHE is to reduce inequalities in health. Therefore it is important that policies do not widen inequalities which is what will happen if they are more effective in those with the best diets compared to those with the worst diets.
How successful has nutrition policy been so far? I would say that it has failed. Inequalities in health have widened. Obesity rates continue to soar for children in low income families. The United Nations has reported that our austerity measures are a breach of human rights as they have encouraged more people to use food banks because they don’t have enough money to feed their families.
The inequalities gap in child obesity appears to be widening. Prevalence of obesity shows a pattern of increase over time among the most deprived Year 6 children (age 10-11 years) whereas prevalence has remained relatively stable or is decreasing among the least deprived children. The United Nations has reported that our austerity measures are a breach of human rights.
The deprivation deciles in this analysis have been assigned using the LSOA of residence of children measured.
Data source: Health and Social Care Information Centre, http://www.hscic.gov.uk/ncmp.
There are 8 areas for action from public health England but I am only going to cover 4 of these where I think the evidence is the strongest.
There is encouragement from WHO to reduce marketing of unhealthy foods, particularly to children. There is evidence that marketing increases consumption of high fat, high sugar foods both in the short term and the long term.
Improvements in salt and trans fats have both come about with changes in reformulation. Reformulation could therefore be useful for reducing sugar consumption.
Changes in salt intake as measured by 24 h urinary sodium excretion (UNa), blood pressure, stroke and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality in England from 2003 to 2011. *p<0.05, ***p<0.001 for trend.
Effect of taxes and subsidies (%) on consumption of the target food/nutrient (%). Numbers in figures correspond to reference numbers. Data are presented only for studies that presented the following: 1) subsidies and taxes as a percentage, and 2) findings of effect as percent change in consumption of target food, nutrient, or calories. Details on all foods and study populations are found in Appendix 1.A: Subsidies for healthy foods.15,22,25,32,33,50,54B: Taxes and subsidies on sugar-sweetened beverages. Subsidies appear as negative taxes, i.e., a subsidy of 10% appears here as a tax of −10%.8,19,20,21,26,40,46,42,24,18,43,23C: Taxes on individual nutrients (fat, salt, sugar).25,30,35,41,45D: Taxes based on nutrient profiling.16,17,43,44,49,50,53,55*Nonsignificant.
If providing information is confusing it risks only changing the diets of those who are educated.
In this example, how much sugar is in the whole bottle? 5.2g x 4.4 = 23g
More information is not always better – e.g. flying on a plane, I don’t want the pilot to tell me what is ahead!
Fig 5 Isoenergetic exchanges of free sugars with other carbohydrates or other macronutrient sources. Pooled effects for difference in body weight (kg) for studies comparing isoenergetic exchange of free sugars (higher sugars) with other carbohydrates (lower sugars). Data are expressed as weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval), using generic inverse variance models with random effects
Weighted mean differences in BMI change (95% CI) between the intervention and control regimens from randomized controlled trials in children. Interventions evaluated the effect of reducing sugar-sweetened beverages. Horizontal lines denote 95% CIs; solid diamonds represent the point estimate of each study. Open diamonds represent pooled estimates of the intervention effect, and the dashed line denotes the point estimate of the pooled result from the random-effects model (D+L). Weights are from the random-effects analysis (D+L). Pooled estimates from the random-effects analysis (D+L) and the fixed-effects analysis (I-V) are shown based on 5 randomized controlled trials (n = 2772). The I2 and P values for heterogeneity are shown. D+L, DerSimonian and Laird; I-V, inverse variance.