Risk Factor - Unhealthy Diet
Risk Factor - Sodium
Used in
Fruit, fiber, and legume intake is incorporated as a risk factor in the following disease models:
Mechanism
Each dietary factor influences disease incidence through specific mechanisms and pathways:
- Low Fiber: Increases the risk of colorectal cancer, ischemic heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes.
- Low Fruit: Increases the risk of ischemic heart disease, stroke and colorectal cancer.
- Low Legumes: Increases the risk of ischemic heart disease, stroke, and colorectal cancer.
- High Sodium: Increases blood pressure, which is a major risk factor for ischemic heart disease and stroke.
The model uses Relative Risks (RRs) and Population Attributable Fractions (PAFs), derived from epidemiological studies, to quantify these relationships:
- Relative Risk (RR): Indicates how much more likely someone with a particular dietary habit (e.g., low fiber intake) is to develop a specific disease compared to someone with a healthier habit (e.g., adequate fiber intake). The RR is often specific to a certain level of intake (e.g., per 200g/day increase in fruit).
- Population Attributable Fraction (PAF): Represents the proportion of disease incidence in the entire population that can be attributed to the specific dietary risk factor.
How the Model Calculates Changes (Intervention Impact):
The interventions aim to shift dietary intake towards healthier patterns. This leads to changes in PAFs and, consequently, disease incidence.
-
Baseline Intake: The model starts with a baseline level of intake for each dietary factor (fiber, fruit, legumes, sodium) for each age and sex group.
-
Intervention Impact: Each intervention is assigned an impact that represents how much it changes dietary intake.
- Fiber: Front-of-pack labeling increases fiber intake by a specific amount (in grams per day).
- Fruit & Legumes: Public procurement and mass media campaigns increase fruit and legume intake. The impact is often modeled as an increase in servings (e.g., 80g portions) per day.
- Sodium:
- Reformulation: Reduces sodium content in processed foods (absolute reduction in milligrams or grams per day).
- Front-of-pack labeling: Reduces sodium intake by influencing consumer choices (often modeled as a percentage reduction).
- Knowledge/Education: Reduces sodium intake through behavior change (absolute reduction).
- Salt Reduction in Environment: Reduces sodium by restricting salt availability.
-
Coverage: The model considers the coverage of each intervention - the percentage of the target population reached.
-
Calculating Overall Intake Change: The model combines the impacts and coverage of the interventions to determine the overall change in dietary intake for each factor.
-
Calculating PAF Adjustment: After calculating the changes in dietary intake, the model recalculates the Population Attributable Fractions (PAFs) based on the new consumption levels. The model uses the dose-response relationships from epidemiological studies to determine how changes in intake translate to changes in disease risk. For example, for every 200g increase in fruit intake, the model applies the corresponding risk reduction based on the relative risk values. The PAF represents how much of the disease burden can be attributed to the current dietary pattern, and it decreases when intake patterns improve.
Specific Mechanisms and Examples:
-
Fiber, Fruit, and Legumes: The model uses a "per unit change" approach for these. For example:
- Fruit: The RR for ischemic heart disease is 0.92 per 200g/day increase in fruit intake. This means that for every 200g increase in daily fruit consumption, the risk of IHD is reduced by 8% (1 - 0.92 = 0.08). The interventions aim to increase fruit intake, and the model calculates the corresponding reduction in risk based on this "per 200g" RR.
- Fiber: The RR for ischemic heart disease is 0.81 per 8g/day increase in fiber intake. Interventions increase fiber intake, and the model calculates the risk reduction based on this "per 8g" RR.
-
Sodium and Blood Pressure: The sodium interventions have a two-step effect:
- Reduced Sodium Intake: Interventions reduce sodium intake (either absolutely or relatively).
- Reduced Blood Pressure: The reduced sodium intake leads to a reduction in mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the population. The model uses a coefficient (derived from research) that links sodium reduction to SBP reduction (e.g., a certain reduction in mmol of sodium leads to a specific reduction in mmHg of SBP).
- Reduced Risk of IHD and Stroke: The reduction in SBP, in turn, leads to a reduced risk of ischemic heart disease and stroke. The model uses RRs that link SBP levels to the risk of these diseases.
This indirect pathway (sodium -> blood pressure -> IHD/stroke) is crucial for modeling the impact of sodium reduction. The model accounts for this by updating the PAFs for IHD and stroke based on the change in SBP caused by the change in sodium intake.
In Summary
The model simulates the impact of dietary interventions by:
- Changing the intake levels of fiber, fruit, legumes, and sodium.
- These changes in intake lead to changes in Population Attributable Fractions (PAFs) for related diseases.
- For sodium, the model explicitly includes the intermediate step of blood pressure reduction.
- The adjusted PAFs, in turn, lead to changes in incidence rates for the associated NCDs.
Interventions
Intervention Table
| Category | Code | Name |
|---|---|---|
| Unhealthy diet | U1 | Reduce nutrient intake (incl. salt) through the reformulation of food products to contain less salt and the setting of target levels for the amount of salt in foods and meals |
| Unhealthy diet | U2 | Reduce nutrient intake (incl. salt) through the establishment of a supportive environment in public institutions such as hospitals, schools, workplaces and nursing homes, to enable lower sodium options to be provided |
| Unhealthy diet | U3 | Reduce nutrient intake (incl. salt) through a behaviour change communication and mass media campaign |
| Unhealthy diet | U4 | Reduce nutrient intake (incl. salt) through the implementation of front-of-pack labelling |
| Unhealthy diet | U5 | Eliminate industrial trans-fats through the development of legislation to ban their use in the food chain |
| Unhealthy diet | U6 | Reduce sugar consumption through effective taxation on sugar-sweetened beverages |
| Unhealthy diet | U7 | Implement WHO’s set of recommendations on the marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to children, including mechanisms for monitoring |
| Unhealthy diet | U8 | Implement subsidies to increase the intake of fruits and vegetables |
| Unhealthy diet | U9 | Promote and support exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months of life, including promotion of breastfeeding |
| Unhealthy diet | U10 | Replace trans-fats and saturated fats with unsaturated fats through reformulation, labelling, fiscal policies or agricultural policies |
| Unhealthy diet | U11 | Implement nutrition labelling to reduce total energy intake (kcal), sugars, sodium and fats |
| Unhealthy diet | U12 | Limiting portion and package size to reduce energy intake and the risk of overweight/obesity |
| Unhealthy diet | U13 | Implement nutrition education and counselling in different settings (for example, in preschools, schools, workplaces and hospitals) to increase the intake of fruits and vegetables |
| Unhealthy diet | U14 | Implement mass media campaign on healthy diets, including social marketing to reduce the intake of total fat, saturated fats, sugars and salt, and promote the intake of fruits and vegetables |
This document describes how the model addresses dietary risk factors, specifically focusing on unhealthy diet components including low intake of fiber, fruits, and legumes, as well as high sodium intake. These dietary factors are linked to various non-communicable diseases (NCDs).
U1
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Saturated fatty acids | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fiber | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fruits | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Legumes | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
U2
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Saturated fatty acids | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fiber | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fruits | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Legumes | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
U3
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Knowledge: Education and Communication | 10 | 95 | Y |
U4
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Saturated fatty acids | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fiber | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Fruits | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Legumes | Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | 10 | 95 | Y |
U6
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiber | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
U7
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiber | Public food procurement and service policies | 10 | 95 | Y |
U10
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Knowledge: Education and Communication | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Legumes | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
U11
| Nutrient | Label | Baseline | Target | Active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium | Adopt Standards: Strategies to combat misleading marketing | 10 | 95 | Y |
| Legumes | Harness industry for reformulation | 10 | 95 | Y |
Assumptions
Relative Risks
References for relative risks come from
- Micha 2018
- Reynolds et al. 2019
Sodium intake (g/day)
| Sex - Condition | 15 to 19 | 20 to 24 | 25 to 29 | 30 to 39 | 40 to 49 | 50 to 59 | 60 to 69 | 70 to 79 | 80 to 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male - IHD | 1.90 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 |
| Male - Stroke | 1.90 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 |
| Female - IHD | 1.90 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 |
| Female - Stroke | 1.90 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 | 5.60 |
Fiber intake (g/day)
| Sex - Condition | 15 to 19 | 20 to 24 | 25 to 29 | 30 to 39 | 40 to 49 | 50 to 59 | 60 to 69 | 70 to 79 | 80 to 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male - IHD | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 |
| Male - Diabetes | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 |
| Female - IHD | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.81 |
| Female - Diabetes | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 |
Fruit intake (g/day)
| Sex - Condition | 15 to 19 | 20 to 24 | 25 to 29 | 30 to 39 | 40 to 49 | 50 to 59 | 60 to 69 | 70 to 79 | 80 to 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male - IHD | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 |
| Male - Stroke | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
| Female - IHD | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 |
| Female - Stroke | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
Legume intake (g/day)
| Sex - Condition | 15 to 19 | 20 to 24 | 25 to 29 | 30 to 39 | 40 to 49 | 50 to 59 | 60 to 69 | 70 to 79 | 80 to 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male - IHD | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 |
| Male - Stroke | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
| Female - IHD | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.92 |
| Female - Stroke | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
Impact on Prevalence
| Intervention | Sex | 15-19 | 20-24 | 25-29 | 30-39 | 40-49 | 50-59 | 60-69 | 70-79 | 80-100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sodium: Harness industry for reformulation | Male | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
| Female | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | |
| Sodium: Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | Male | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 |
| Female | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | 0.064 | |
| Sodium: Behaviour change communication and mass media campaigns | Male | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 |
| Female | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | 0.486 | |
| Sodium: Public food procurement and service policies | Male | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 |
| Female | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | |
| Saturated fatty acids: Public food procurement and service policies | Male | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 |
| Female | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | |
| Saturated fatty acids: Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | Male | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 |
| Female | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | 0.0295 | |
| Sugar-sweetened beverages: Public food procurement and service policies | Male | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 |
| Female | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | |
| Fiber: Adopt Standards: Front of Pack Labelling | Male | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Female | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| Fruits: Public food procurement and service policies | Male | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| Female | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.76 | |
| Fruits: Harness industry for reformulation | Male | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| Female | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | |
| Fruits: Behaviour change communication and mass media campaigns | Male | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
| Female | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | |
| Legumes: Public food procurement and service policies | Male | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 |
| Female | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | |
| Legumes: Behaviour change communication and mass media campaigns | Male | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
| Female | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
Data Viewer
Below is a CSV viewer showing the fruit, fiber, and legumes data files used in this model:
No data to display.