Food allergies affect up to 32 million Americans, including about 6 million children. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that children’s incidence rates may be going up, as they’ve increased by 50% between 1997 and 2011.
But a recent study argues that significant advances in the understanding of food allergy reactions by analyzing “response thresholds” can lead to more informative food labels and provide people with food allergies and their caregivers with a powerful tool for managing risk. Staying current on advances in food allergy research will enable health care and nutrition practitioners to provide evidence-based guidance to their patients and empower families challenged by this health condition.
The study, by scientists at the Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences (IAFNS), describes what food allergies are, their impacts on sensitive individuals, and government regulations that determine protocol for food allergens. The study finds that apart from serious health effects, living with food allergies can significantly impact patient lifestyle, especially for children, who often are excluded from group activities and peer relations.
The paper concludes that meaningful and informative labeling of allergen hazards improves lives and that more focused research on “response thresholds”—below which risks of a reaction dwindle—is needed. Authors Neal Saab, PhD, senior science program manager at IAFNS, and Wendelyn Jones, PhD, executive director of IAFNS, wrote that additional clinical trials “should also be expanded to include representation of all ethnic backgrounds, ages, and sensitivity levels so that response thresholds are representative of the makeup of the US population.” The trends are described in a way that’s geared toward health care practitioners and nutritionists so they can provide evidence-based guidance.
According to Jones, “Bridging food safety topics so nutritionists can use emerging research in their practice is one way IAFNS improves public health outcomes for those with food allergies.”
Saab notes that “communicating and staying current on the rapidly evolving science of food allergen research and management allows nutritionists to enhance the quality of their interactions with patients. Emerging research may also lead to more informative food labels, assisting consumers and professionals in managing important health conditions.”
— Source: Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences
New Soda Tax Survey Measures Consumption in Adolescent Boys and Girls
Taxes on soda reduce consumption by boys but not girls, according to a new study of more than 11,000 adolescents.
Taxes on soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are levied by governments to reduce consumption and prevent obesity while raising revenue. Eight US cities and more than 45 countries have adopted the taxes, which in the United States amount to a penny or two per ounce.
These taxes are relatively recent, and their impact on SSB consumption is unclear. In addition, there has been little evidence about the impact of these taxes on youths, or any evidence at all from non-Western nations, which historically have been underrepresented in economic research.
New research by John Cawley, PhD, a professor of policy analysis and management and of economics at Cornell University, contributes to the evidence on this question by studying how SSB taxes affect the consumption and BMI of adolescents, and by providing evidence from a non-Western nation.
Cawley and collaborators Michael Daly, a doctoral candidate in the field of policy analysis and management, and Rebecca Thornton, PhD, an associate professor of economics at the University of Illinois, published the results of their research in the journal Health Economics: “The Effect of Beverage Taxes on Youth Consumption and Body Mass Index: Evidence From Mauritius.”
Mauritius is an island nation in the Indian Ocean that adopted a soda tax in 2013, while Maldives, another island nation in the region, didn’t. The researchers used data on adolescents from the World Health Organization’s Global School-Based Student Health Survey to compare changes in outcomes in the two nations. The results indicate that the Mauritius tax reduced the probability that boys consume soda by 11% but there was no detectable impact on their frequency of consumption or on BMI. There were no detectable effects on any of these outcomes for girls. The reason for the gender difference is unclear but may be due to girls being less sensitive to price in their demand for SSBs.
“This study’s finding that the tax reduces the probability that boys consume SSBs is some of the first evidence anywhere that SSB taxes can reduce youth consumption,” Cawley says. “We’re continuing to study these taxes in different countries and look forward to building the evidence base using data from around the globe.”
— Source: Cornell University
