A new study at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill will examine whether adding the amount of walking it takes to burn off the calories in food items will lead consumers to make healthier choices.
Over one-third of adults in the US are obese, and obesity remains a significant risk factor for many serious health problems. In an effort to combat the obesity epidemic in the US, the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act established the requirement for restaurants with 20 or more locations to post calorie information on their menus boards. However, research has shown that calorie labeling may not actually lead to decreased calorie consumption.
The Effects of Physical Activity Calorie Expenditure (PACE) Food Labeling study, conducted in conjunction with Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina (BCBS), will test physical activity food labels using 3 BCBS cafeterias across the state. For example, cafeteria patrons considering a double cheeseburger would see that it would take about 196 minutes, or 5.6 miles, of walking to burn the calories it contains. Quickly comparing this to a hamburger (which contains far fewer calories), they would see that it would require about 78 minutes, or about 2.6 miles, of walking to burn the calories. This difference might persuade choosing the food item with fewer calories.
The National Institutes of Health funded the $2,332,953 study. Anthony Viera, MD, MPH, associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine and adjunct associate professor in the Public Health Leadership Program, and Alice Ammerman, DrPH, professor in the Department of Nutrition at UNC’s School of Public Health and director of the Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, will lead the project.
“We believe that labels displaying information about physical activity will allow people to better appreciate the trade-offs of high-calorie foods, and thereby influence them to make choices for foods with lower calories,” said Viera. “And we think that labeling foods like this may even have the extra benefit of promoting physical activity.”
“This is a great opportunity to learn whether we can improve lifestyle behavior through an innovative approach to policy and environmental change,” added Ammerman.
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01CA184473. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by the University of North Carolina School of Medicine via Newswise.
Note: Materials may be edited for content, style, and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the Medical Bag or its staff.