Nakamura Ryota, Suhrcke Marc, Jebb Susan A, Pechey Rachel, Almiron-Roig Eva, Marteau Theresa M
From the Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom (RN, MS, SAJ, RP, and TMM); the Health Economics Group, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom (RN and MS); the Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom (RN and MS); the UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom (RN and MS); the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom (SAJ); and the Medical Research Council Human Nutrition Research, Elsie Widdowson Laboratory, Cambridge, United Kingdom (EA-R).
Am J Clin Nutr. 2015 Apr;101(4):808-16. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.094227. Epub 2015 Feb 11.
There is a growing concern, but limited evidence, that price promotions contribute to a poor diet and the social patterning of diet-related disease.
We examined the following questions: 1) Are less-healthy foods more likely to be promoted than healthier foods? 2) Are consumers more responsive to promotions on less-healthy products? 3) Are there socioeconomic differences in food purchases in response to price promotions?
With the use of hierarchical regression, we analyzed data on purchases of 11,323 products within 135 food and beverage categories from 26,986 households in Great Britain during 2010. Major supermarkets operated the same price promotions in all branches. The number of stores that offered price promotions on each product for each week was used to measure the frequency of price promotions. We assessed the healthiness of each product by using a nutrient profiling (NP) model.
A total of 6788 products (60%) were in healthier categories and 4535 products (40%) were in less-healthy categories. There was no significant gap in the frequency of promotion by the healthiness of products neither within nor between categories. However, after we controlled for the reference price, price discount rate, and brand-specific effects, the sales uplift arising from price promotions was larger in less-healthy than in healthier categories; a 1-SD point increase in the category mean NP score, implying the category becomes less healthy, was associated with an additional 7.7-percentage point increase in sales (from 27.3% to 35.0%; P < 0.01). The magnitude of the sales uplift from promotions was larger for higher-socioeconomic status (SES) groups than for lower ones (34.6% for the high-SES group, 28.1% for the middle-SES group, and 23.1% for the low-SES group). Finally, there was no significant SES gap in the absolute volume of purchases of less-healthy foods made on promotion.
Attempts to limit promotions on less-healthy foods could improve the population diet but would be unlikely to reduce health inequalities arising from poorer diets in low-socioeconomic groups.
价格促销会导致不良饮食以及与饮食相关疾病的社会模式,这一担忧日益加剧,但证据有限。
我们研究了以下问题:1)与更健康的食品相比,不健康食品是否更有可能被促销?2)消费者对不健康产品促销的反应是否更强烈?3)因价格促销而产生的食品购买行为是否存在社会经济差异?
我们运用分层回归分析了2010年英国26986户家庭在135个食品和饮料类别中购买11323种产品的数据。各大超市在所有分店实行相同的价格促销。每周对每种产品进行价格促销的商店数量用于衡量价格促销的频率。我们使用营养成分分析(NP)模型评估每种产品的健康程度。
共有6788种产品(60%)属于更健康类别,4535种产品(40%)属于不健康类别。无论是在类别内部还是类别之间,产品的健康程度在促销频率上均无显著差异。然而,在我们控制了参考价格、价格折扣率和品牌特定效应后,不健康类别产品因价格促销导致的销售额增长幅度大于健康类别产品;类别平均NP得分每增加1个标准差,意味着该类别变得更不健康,销售额会额外增加7.7个百分点(从27.3%增至35.0%;P<0.01)。高社会经济地位(SES)群体因促销导致的销售额增长幅度大于低社会经济地位群体(高SES群体为34.6%,中SES群体为28.1%,低SES群体为23.1%)。最后,因促销购买的不健康食品的绝对数量在SES方面无显著差异。
限制对不健康食品的促销措施可能会改善总体饮食,但不太可能减少低社会经济群体因不良饮食导致的健康不平等。