Researchers identify “food deserts” role in poor nutritional snack consumption

02 Jul 2024 --- A new study by scientists from the University of Michigan (U-M) and University of Alabama-Birmingham, US, examines the associations of urbanicity- and rurality-tailored measures of food store availability and neighborhood socioeconomic status (NSES) with the intake of snacks and sweets in a national sample of middle and older age adults.

The study found that people living in lower-income neighborhoods and areas without local food stores eat more snacks and sweets than those in higher-income areas and neighborhoods with many food stores.

“A lot of research on the residential food environment and dietary intake focuses on fruit and vegetable consumption and overall diet quality, leaving far less known about the intake of snacks and sweets,” says Ian-Marshall Lang, researcher at U-M’s School of Kinesiology and first author of the study.

The researchers looked at the overall consumption of snacks and sweets and four subcategories — bakery sweets, candy and desserts, savory snacks and crackers, nutrition bars and low-fat snacks and sweets.

In other industry developments, another recent study revealed that ultra-processed foods (UPFs) with mainly plant-based ingredients are not necessarily healthier, which links these to a higher risk of cardiovascular diseases and death. The researchers advise consumers to eat “fresh and minimally processed options.”

More stores equals less snacking
The key findings of the study, published in the Journal of Nutrition, show that people who live in neighborhoods with many food stores ate 9% fewer snacks and sweets overall, 10% fewer sweet bakery products and 6% fewer candies and desserts than people in neighborhoods without food stores nearby.

People living in the highest income areas were found to eat 11% fewer snacks and sweets overall, 19% fewer bakery products and 6% fewer savory snacks and crackers. Higher-income households eat more nutrition bars, low-fat snacks and sweets than lower-income households.

Lang notes: “US-based studies that have examined food store availability and intake of snacks and sweets among adults have been limited to select cities and specific store types. The size of the study and the novelty of our methods help fill these gaps in the literature.”

The study found that people living in USDA-defined food deserts ate the same amount of snacks and sweets as people who did not live in these food deserts. One reason could be that the USDA defines food stores as large supermarkets such as Walmart or Meijer.

The current study defines primary food stores as places where 94% of US households do the majority of their food shopping regardless of income. This includes supermarkets, supercenters and select food retailers (small grocery stores, fruit and vegetable markets, bakeries, convenience stores and drug stores).

Meanwhile, a 30-plus-year US study found that higher consumption of most UPFs is linked to a “slightly higher” risk of death. The researchers found the strongest association for ready-to-eat meat, poultry and seafood-based products, sugary drinks, dairy-based desserts and highly processed breakfast foods. Moreover, a higher diet quality seems to mitigate these associated risks.

Prepping future programming
The researchers hypothesized that people in neighborhoods without food stores most likely buy more shelf-stable foods like snacks and sweets or buy food at less traditional food stores like dollar stores, which carry fewer healthy options.

They used data from 21,204 participants in the ongoing REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study, sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and housed at the University of Alabama-Birmingham.

“In identifying potential settings for future programming and interventions that target snacks and sweets intake, it may be important to consider places devoid of primary food retailers rather than places only devoid of large traditional supermarkets,” says Lang.

“Though we didn’t look at the health impacts of snacks and sweets consumption in this paper, we do know from previous research that consumption of snacks and sweets like the ones examined in this study is associated with higher calorie intake and body weight in adults.”

“We also know that making even small, positive dietary changes — like swapping one calorie-dense snack or sweet for a more nutrient-dense snack like fresh fruit — can benefit population health,” Lang concludes.

In addition, UPF consumption is consistently associated with an increased risk of developing 32 adverse health outcomes, including cancer, adverse mental, respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and metabolic health issues and all-cause mortality in the latest review. UPFs are industrial formulations primarily made of chemically modified substances derived from food and prepared with taste, texture, appearance and durability enhancers.

By Inga de Jong

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com