Article type
Abstract
Background: Little is known about the public’s values and preferences related to dietary fat intake, particularly with respect to the current evidence on association between saturated fat (SF) and health outcomes. The study is a part of NutriRECS Collaboration and will inform public health nutrition guidelines on SF.
Objectives: To investigate values and preferences related to reducing foods high in SF in response to evidence-based information about the effect of such change on cardiovascular health risk—myocardial infarction (MI) as an outcome.
Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted in Brazil, Canada, China, Croatia, Poland, Spain, and the United States. Using a common questionnaire, we gathered information on demographic characteristics of the respondents, their lifestyle, and medical history. We stratified participants into 1 of 4 baseline cardiovascular (CV) risk categories. Based on a high-quality Cochrane 2020 systematic review and meta-analysis, the respondents were presented with infographics on absolute risk reduction (ARR) of MI if they reduced their SF intake—for participants with low CV risk, it was 2 fewer MI cases per 1000 people; for moderate, 7 fewer; for high, 18 fewer; and for very high, 24 fewer MI cases. The certainty of the presented evidence was low. Participants were asked how likely, given this potential reduction, they were to reduce their SF intake.
Results: Over 50% of respondents were willing to reduce their SF intake when they learned about the low-certainty evidence and the relatively small ARR of MI. Women were more willing to reduce their SF intake (β = -0.53, P < 0.001), as were people with nonomnivore dietary pattern (β = 0.22, P = 0.02) and a recent history of a low-fat diet (β = 0.88, P < 0.001). In contrast, those with a history of high-fat diet were less willing (β = -0.44, P < 0.001). There were no associations between the 4 CV risk groups and level of willingness.
Conclusions: Any prior experience of changing one's diet may increase cognitive and behavioral flexibility; however, strong convictions about SF could stay in conflict with dietary recommendations and interfere with the process of dietary change. Identifying individual attitudes towards fats and evidence-based information could enhance guidelines implementation process.
Objectives: To investigate values and preferences related to reducing foods high in SF in response to evidence-based information about the effect of such change on cardiovascular health risk—myocardial infarction (MI) as an outcome.
Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted in Brazil, Canada, China, Croatia, Poland, Spain, and the United States. Using a common questionnaire, we gathered information on demographic characteristics of the respondents, their lifestyle, and medical history. We stratified participants into 1 of 4 baseline cardiovascular (CV) risk categories. Based on a high-quality Cochrane 2020 systematic review and meta-analysis, the respondents were presented with infographics on absolute risk reduction (ARR) of MI if they reduced their SF intake—for participants with low CV risk, it was 2 fewer MI cases per 1000 people; for moderate, 7 fewer; for high, 18 fewer; and for very high, 24 fewer MI cases. The certainty of the presented evidence was low. Participants were asked how likely, given this potential reduction, they were to reduce their SF intake.
Results: Over 50% of respondents were willing to reduce their SF intake when they learned about the low-certainty evidence and the relatively small ARR of MI. Women were more willing to reduce their SF intake (β = -0.53, P < 0.001), as were people with nonomnivore dietary pattern (β = 0.22, P = 0.02) and a recent history of a low-fat diet (β = 0.88, P < 0.001). In contrast, those with a history of high-fat diet were less willing (β = -0.44, P < 0.001). There were no associations between the 4 CV risk groups and level of willingness.
Conclusions: Any prior experience of changing one's diet may increase cognitive and behavioral flexibility; however, strong convictions about SF could stay in conflict with dietary recommendations and interfere with the process of dietary change. Identifying individual attitudes towards fats and evidence-based information could enhance guidelines implementation process.