Household food insecurity is a serious public health concern in rich countries with developed economies closely associated with inequality. The prevalence of household food insecurity is relatively high in some developed countries, ranging from 8 to 20% of the population. Human rights approaches have the potential to address the structural causes, not just the symptoms of food insecurity. Despite most developed countries ratifying the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights over 40 years ago, food insecurity rates suggest current social protections are inadequate. The contemporary framing of the solution to food insecurity in developed countries is that of diverting food waste to the hungry to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals agenda (Goals 2 and 12.3). An estimated 60 million people or 7.2% of the population in high income countries used food banks in 2013. Although providing food assistance to those who are hungry is an important strategy, the current focus distracts attention away from the ineffectiveness of government policies in addressing the social determinants of food insecurity. Much of the action needed to improve household food security falls to actors outside the health sector. There is evidence of promising actions to address the social determinants of food insecurity in some developed countries. Learning from these, there is a strong case for government leadership, for action within and across government, and effective engagement with other sectors to deliver a coordinated, collaborative, and cooperative response to finding pathways out of food insecurity.

Objective: The Western Australian Health Department’s Go for 2&5^® campaign aimed to increase adults’ awareness of the need to eat more fruit and vegetables and encourage increased consumption of one serving over five years.Design: The multi-strategy fruit and vegetable social marketing campaign, conducted from 2002 to 2005, included mass media advertising (television, radio, press and point-of-sale), public relations events, publications, a website (www.gofor2and5.com), and school and community activities. Campaign development and the evaluation framework were designed using health promotion theory, and assessed values, beliefs, knowledge and behaviour. Two independent telephone surveys evaluated the campaign: the Campaign Tracking Survey interviewed 5032 adults monitoring fruit and vegetable attitudes, beliefs and consumption prior to, during and 12 months after the campaign; and the Health & Wellbeing Surveillance System surveyed 17 993 adults between 2001 and 2006, continuously monitoring consumption.Setting: Population public health intervention–social marketing campaign in Western Australia, population of 2 010 113 in 2005.Subjects: Adults in the Perth metropolitan area.Results: The campaign reached the target audience, increasing awareness of the recommended servings of fruit and vegetables. There was a population net increase of 0.8 in the mean number of servings of fruit and vegetables per day over three years (0.2 for fruit (1.6 in 2002 to 1.8 in 2005) and 0.6 for vegetables (2.6 in 2002 to 3.2 in 2005), significant at P < 0.05).Conclusion: Sustained, well-executed social marketing is effective in improving nutrition knowledge, attitudes and consumption behaviour. The Go for 2&5^® campaign provides guidance to future nutrition promotion through social marketing.

Early adulthood represents the transition to independent living which is a period when changes in diet and body weight are likely to occur. This presents an ideal time for health interventions to reduce the effect of health problems and risk factors for chronic disease in later life. As young adults are high users of mobile devices, interventions that use this technology may improve engagement. The Connecting Health and Technology study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tailored dietary feedback and weekly text messaging to improve dietary intake of fruit, vegetables and junk food over 6 months among a population-based sample of men and women (aged 18–30 years). A three-arm, parallel, randomized control trial was conducted. After baseline assessments, participants were randomized to one of three groups: A) dietary feedback and weekly text messages, B) dietary feedback only or C) control group. Dietary intake was assessed using a mobile food record App (mFR) where participants captured images of foods and beverages consumed over 4-days at baseline and post-intervention. The primary outcomes were changes in serves of fruits, vegetables, energy-dense nutrient-poor (EDNP) foods and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB). The intervention effects were assessed using linear mixed effect models for change in food group serves. Young adults (n = 247) were randomized to group A (n = 82), group B (n = 83), or group C (n = 82). Overall, no changes in food group serves for either intervention groups were observed. An unanticipated outcome was a mean weight reduction of 1.7 kg (P = .02) among the dietary feedback only. Men who received dietary feedback only, significantly reduced their serves of EDNP foods by a mean of 1.4 serves/day (P = .02). Women who received dietary feedback only significantly reduced their intake of SSB (P = .04) by an average of 0.2 serves/day compared with controls. Tailored dietary feedback only resulted in a decrease in EDNP foods in men and SSB in women, together with a reduction in body weight. Using a mobile food record for dietary assessment and tailored feedback has great potential for future health promotion interventions targeting diet and weight in young adults. Australian Clinical Trials Registry Registration number: ACTRN12612000250831 .

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

Background: Fiscal strategies are increasingly considered upstream nutrition promotion measures. However, few trials have investigated the effectivene

Objective: To objectively evaluate voluntary nutrition and health claims and marketing techniques present on packaging of high-market-share ultra-processed foods (UPF) in Australia for their potential impact on public health.Design: Cross-sectional.Setting: Packaging information from five high-market-share food manufacturers and one retailer were obtained from supermarket and manufacturers’ websites.Subjects: Ingredients lists for 215 UPF were examined for presence of added sugar. Packaging information was categorised using a taxonomy of nutrition and health information which included nutrition and health claims and five common food marketing techniques. Compliance of statements and claims with the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code and with Health Star Ratings (HSR) were assessed for all products.Results: Almost all UPF (95 %) contained added sugars described in thirty-four different ways; 55 % of UPF displayed a HSR; 56 % had nutrition claims (18 % were compliant with regulations); 25 % had health claims (79 % were compliant); and 97 % employed common food marketing techniques. Packaging of 47 % of UPF was designed to appeal to children. UPF carried a mean of 1·5 health and nutrition claims (range 0–10) and 2·6 marketing techniques (range 0–5), and 45 % had HSR≤3·0/5·0.Conclusions: Most UPF packaging featured nutrition and health statements or claims despite the high prevalence of added sugars and moderate HSR. The degree of inappropriate or inaccurate statements and claims present is concerning, particularly on packaging designed to appeal to children. Public policies to assist parents to select healthy family foods should address the quality and accuracy of information provided on UPF packaging.