Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 108, Issue 2, pp e145–e151 | Cite as

Socio-economic status and fruit juice consumption in Canada

  • Matthew ShuplerEmail author
  • Kim D. Raine
Quantitative Research
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The role of socio-economic status (SES) in fruit juice and fruit drink consumption is not well understood in a Canadian context. This study examines the relationship between SES and Canadian fruit juice and fruit drink consumption.

METHODS: The Canadian Community Health Survey (2011–2012), a cross-sectional survey that employs multistage cluster sampling, provided relevant data for a sample of 103 125 Canadians, aged 12 and older, living in the 10 provinces. Household income level decile, ranked at the health region level, was used as a surrogate measure of SES. Fruit juice and fruit drink consumption data were collected via self-report in telephone/in-person interviews. Multivariable gamma regression was used to model the relationship between SES and frequency of fruit juice and fruit drink consumption, adjusting for age, sex, diabetes status, daily fruit and vegetable consumption, education level, racial identity and physical activity.

RESULTS: A negative relationship was found, with a decreasing daily rate of fruit juice and fruit drink consumption associated with increasing SES. In the adjusted model, Canadians in the lowest SES category consumed fruit juice and fruit drinks at an average daily rate 1.18 times (95% CI: 1.14–1.23) that of Canadians in the highest SES category.

CONCLUSION: The negative association between health region-adjusted SES and fruit juice and fruit drink consumption highlights the potentially important role of socio-economic factors at a local level. Canadian policy that aims to lower fruit juice and fruit drink consumption, and thus sugar intake, should target financial avenues (such as making fruit juice less financially attractive by lowering the cost of whole fruit and vegetables) in addition to communicating health benefits.

Key Words

Fruit and vegetable juices socio-economic factors income 

Résumé

OBJECTIFS: Le rôle du statut socioéconomique (SSE) dans la consommation de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits dans le contexte canadien est méconnu. Notre étude porte sur la relation entre le SSE et la consommation canadienne de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits.

MÉTHODE: L’Enquête sur la santé dans les collectivités canadiennes (2011–2012), une enquête transversale qui emploie un échantillonnage en grappes à plusieurs degrés, a fourni des données pertinentes pour un échantillon de 103 125 Canadiens et Canadiennes de 12 ans et plus vivant dans les 10 provinces du pays. Le décile du revenu du ménage, classé au niveau de la région sanitaire, a servi de mesure auxiliaire du SSE. Les données sur la consommation autoévaluée de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits ont été recueillies au moyen d’entretiens en téléphone ou en personne. La régression gamma multivariée a permis de modéliser la relation entre le SSE et la fréquence de consommation de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits corrigée selon l’âge, le sexe, le statut à l’égard du diabète, la consommation quotidienne de fruits et de légumes, le niveau d’instruction, l’identité raciale et l’activité physique.

RÉSULTATS: Nous avons trouvé une relation négative: un taux décroissant de consommation quotidienne de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits était associé à la croissance du SSE. Selon le modèle corrigé, les Canadiens de la plus faible catégorie de SSE consommaient des jus de fruits et des boissons aux fruits à un taux moyen quotidien 1,18 fois supérieur (IC de 95 %: 1,14–1,23) à celui des Canadiens de la catégorie de SSE la plus élevée.

CONCLUSION: L’association négative entre le SSE corrigé selon la région sanitaire et la consommation de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits fait ressortir le rôle potentiellement important des facteurs socioéconomiques à l’échelon local. Les politiques canadiennes qui visent à réduire la consommation de jus de fruits et de boissons aux fruits, et donc l’apport en sucre, devraient envisager des mesures financières (comme de rendre les jus de fruits moins intéressants financièrement en réduisant le coût des fruits et légumes entiers) en plus de faire connaître les avantages pour la santé.

Mots Clés

jus de fruits et de légumes facteurs socioéconomiques revenu 

References

  1. 1.
    Singh GM, Micha R, Khatibzadeh S, Lim S, Ezzati M, Mozaffarian D. Estimated global, regional, and national disease burdens related to sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in 2010. Circulation 2015;132(8):639–66. PMID: 26124185. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.010636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Imamura F, O’Connor L, Ye Z, Mursu J, Hayashino Y, Bhupathiraju SN, et al. Consumption of sugar sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, and fruit juice and incidence of type 2 diabetes: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and estimation of population attributable fraction. BMJ 2015; 351:h3576. PMID: 26199070. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h3576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization. Guideline: Sugars Intake for Adults and Children. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2015.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Langlois K, Garriguet D. Sugar consumption among Canadians of all ages. Health Rep 2011;22(3):23–27. PMID: 22106786.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brisbois T, Marsden S, Anderson G, Sievenpiper J. Estimated intakes and sources of total and added sugars in the Canadian diet. Nutrients 2014; 6(5):1899–912. PMID: 24815507. doi: 10.3390/nu6051899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clemens R, Drewnowski A, Ferruzzi MG, Toner CD, Welland D. Squeezing fact from fiction about 100% fruit juice. Adv Nutr 2015;6(2):236S–43S. PMID: 25770266. doi: 10.3945/an.114.007328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Health Canada. Canada News Centre–Health Canada Statement on Fruit Juice. 19:30:00.0. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, 2015. Available at: http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=977959 (Accessed September 30, 2015).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Park S, Onufrak S, Sherry B, Blanck HM. The relationship between health-related knowledge and sugar-sweetened beverage intake among US adults. J Acad Nutr Diet 2014;114(7):1059–66. PMID: 24360502. doi: 10.1016/ j.jand.2013.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Larson NI, Story MT, Nelson MC. Neighborhood environments: Disparities in access to healthy foods in the U.S. Am J Prev Med 2009;36(1):74–81.e10. PMID: 18977112. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.09.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morland K, Wing S, Roux AD. The contextual effect of the local food environment on residents’ diets: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study. Am J Public Health 2002;92(11):1761–68. PMID: 12406805. doi: 10. 2105/AJPH.92.11.1761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Daniel M, Kestens Y, Paquet C. Demographic and urban form correlates of healthful and unhealthful food availability in Montréal, Canada. Can J Public Health 2009;100(3):189–93. PMID: 19507720.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gould AC, Apparicio P, Cloutier M-S. Classifying neighbourhoods by level of access to stores selling fresh fruit and vegetables and groceries: Identifying problematic areas in the city of Gatineau, Quebec. Can J Public Health 2012; 103(6):e433–37. PMID: 23618023.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ball K, Lamb KE, Costa C, Cutumisu N, Ellaway A, Kamphuis CBM, et al. Neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage and fruit and vegetable consumption: A seven countries comparison. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2015; 12:68. PMID: 25997451. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0229-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Drewnowski A. The Nutrient Rich Foods Index helps to identify healthy, affordable foods. Am J Clin Nutr 2010;91(4):1095S–101S. PMID: 20181811. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2010.28450D.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Monsivais P, Rehm CD. Potential nutritional and economic effects of replacing juice with fruit in the diets of children in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2012;166(5):459–64. PMID: 22566547. doi: 10.1001/ archpediatrics.2011.1599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey–Annual Component (CCHS): Detailed Information for 2012. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2013. Available at: http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=3226 (Accessed October 18, 2015).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tu AW, Masse LC. The relationship between income and weight control strategies among Canadian adults. Can J Public Health 2012;103(6):438–42. PMID: 23618024.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Attorp A, Scott JE, Yew AC, Rhodes RE, Barr SI, Naylor P-J. Associations between socioeconomic, parental and home environment factors and fruit and vegetable consumption of children in grades five and six in British Columbia, Canada. BMC Public Health 2014;14:150. PMID: 24517088. doi: 10. 1186/1471-2458-14-150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Che J, Chen J. Food insecurity in Canadian households. Health Rep 2001; 12(4):11–22. PMID: 15069808.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Canada’s Action Plan for Food Security: A Response to the World Food Summit. Ottawa, ON: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 1998; 1–54. Available at: http://www.agr.gc.ca/misb/fsec-seca/pdf/ action_e.pdf (Accessed April 18, 2017).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Statistics Canada. Income Research Paper Series: Low Income Lines, 2009–2010, Table 2: Low Income Cut-Offs (1992 Base) Before Tax. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2011.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Macdiarmid J, Blundell J. Assessing dietary intake: Who, what and why of under-reporting. Nutr Res Rev 1998;11(2):231–53. PMID: 19094249. doi: 10. 1079/NRR19980017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Statistics Act, Revised Statutes of Canada (1985, c. S-19). Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2005. Available at: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/S-19/FullText. html (Accessed October 19, 2015).
  24. 24.
    The University of British Columbia Board of Governors. Policy 89: Research Involving Human Participants. Vancouver, BC: The University of British Columbia, 2012. Available at: http://universitycounsel.ubc.ca/files/2012/06/ policy89.pdf (Accessed October 19, 2015).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Drewnowski A, Rehm CD. Socioeconomic gradient in consumption of whole fruit and 100% fruit juice among US children and adults. Nutr J 2015;14(1):3. PMID: 25557850. doi: 10.1186/1475-2891-14-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Giskes K, van Lenthe FJ, Kamphuis CBM, Huisman M, Brug J, Mackenbach JP. Household and food shopping environments: Do they play a role in socioeconomic inequalities in fruit and vegetable consumption? A multilevel study among Dutch adults. J Epidemiol Community Health 2008; 63(2):113–20. PMID: 18801797. doi: 10.1136/jech.2008.078352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Minaker LM, Raine KD, Wild TC, Nykiforuk CIJ, Thompson ME, Frank LD. Construct validation of 4 food-environment assessment methods: Adapting a multitrait-multimethod matrix approach for environmental measures. Am J Epidemiol 2014;179(4):519–28. PMID: 24264292. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Glanz K, Basil M, Maibach E, Goldberg J, Snyder D. Why Americans eat what they do: Taste, nutrition, cost, convenience, and weight control concerns as influences on food consumption. J Am Diet Assoc 1998;98(10):1118–26. PMID: 9787717. doi: 10.1016/S0002-8223(98)00260-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Andreyeva T, Long MW, Brownell KD. The impact of food prices on consumption: A systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food. Am J Public Health 2010;100(2):216–22. PMID: 20019319. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.151415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Malik VS, Popkin BM, Bray GA, Després J-P, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages and risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis. Diabetes Care 2010;33(11):2477–83. PMID: 20693348. doi: 10.2337/dc10-1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Glanz K, Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Frank LD. Healthy nutrition environments: Concepts and measures. Am J Health Promot 2005;19(5):330–33. PMID: 15895534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Population and Public HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Health and Nutrition, School of Public HealthUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations