Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-dljnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T04:54:34.879Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Size makes a difference

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2007

Jeppe Matthiessen,
Sisse Fagt,
Anja Biltoft-Jensen,
Anne Marie Beck and
Lars Ovesen
Jeppe Matthiessen*
Affiliation:
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
Sisse Fagt
Affiliation:
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
Anja Biltoft-Jensen
Affiliation:
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
Anne Marie Beck
Affiliation:
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
Lars Ovesen
Affiliation:
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
*
*Email: jem@fdir.dk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
Objective:

To elucidate status and trends in portion size of foods rich in fat and/or added sugars during the past decades, and to bring portion size into perspective in its role in obesity and dietary guidelines in Denmark.

Data sources:

Information about portion sizes of low-fat and full-fat food items was obtained from a 4-day weighed food record (Study 1). Trends in portion sizes of commercial foods were examined by gathering information from major food manufacturers and fast food chains (Study 2). Data on intakes and sales of sugar-sweetened soft drinks and confectionery were obtained through nation-wide dietary surveys and official sales statistics (Study 3).

Results:

Study 1: Subjects ate and drank significantly more when they chose low-fat food and meal items (milk used as a drink, sauce and sliced cold meat), compared with their counterparts who chose food and meal items with a higher fat content. As a result, almost the same amounts of energy and fat were consumed both ways, with the exception of sliced cold meat (energy and fat) and milk (fat). Study 2: Portion sizes of commercial energy-dense foods and beverages, and fast food meals rich in fat and/or added sugars, seem to have increased over time, and in particular in the last 10 years. Study 3: The development in portion sizes of commercial foods has been paralleled by a sharp increase of more than 50% in the sales of sugar-sweetened soft drinks and confectionery like sweets, chocolate and ice creams since the 1970s.

Conclusions:

Larger portion sizes of foods low in fat and commercial energy-dense foods and beverages could be important factors in maintaining a high energy intake, causing over-consumption and enhancing the prevalence of obesity in the population. In light of this development, portion size ought to take central place in dietary guidelines and public campaigns.

Keywords

Portion sizeFat and added sugarsObesityDietary guidelines

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , February 2003, pp. 65 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © CABI Publishing 2003

References

1Matthiessen, J, Andersen, NL, Ovesen, L. The role of diet and physical activity in the increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity in Denmark 1985–1995 [in Danish with an English summary]. J. Dan. Med. Assoc. 2001; 163: 2941–5.Google Scholar
2Heini, AF, Weinsier, RL. Divergent trends in obesity and fat intake patterns: the American paradox. Am. J. Med. 1997; 102: 259–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Allred, JB. Too much of a good thing? An overemphasis on eating low-fat foods may be contributing to the alarming increase in overweight among US adults. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1995; 95: 417–8.Google Scholar
4Rolls, BJ, Miller, D. Is the low-fat message giving people a license to eat more? J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 1997; 16: 535–43.Google ScholarPubMed
5Rolls, BJ, Engell, D, Birch, LL. Serving portion size influences 5-year-old but not 3-year-old children's food intakes. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2000; 100: 232–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Edelman, B, Engell, D, Bronstein, P, Hirsch, E. Environmental effects on the intake of overweight and normal-weight men. Appetite 1986; 7: 71–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Prentice, A, Jebb, SA. Obesity in Britain: gluttony or sloth? Br. Med. J. 1995; 311: 437–9.Google Scholar
8Astrup, A. Macronutrient balances and obesity: the role of diet and physical activity. Public Health Nutr. 1999; 2: 341–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Hess, MA. Portion Photos of Popular Foods. The American Dietetic Association and Center for Nutrition Education, University of Wisconsin–Stout, 1997.Google Scholar
10Young, LR, Nestle, M. The contribution of expanding portion sizes to the US obesity epidemic. Am. J. Public Health 2002; 92: 246–9.Google Scholar
11. Young, LR. Portion sizes in the American food supply: issues and implications. Dissertation, New York University, New York, 2000.Google Scholar
12Young, LR, Nestle, M. Portion sizes in dietary assessment: issues and policy implications. Nutr. Rev. 1995; 53: 149–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Peregrin, T. A super-sized problem: restaurants chains piling on the food. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2001; 101: 620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Kjøller, M, Rasmussen, NK. Danish Health and Morbidity Survey 2000 & Trends since 1987 [in Danish with an English summary ]. Copenhagen: Statens Institut for Folkesundhed (National Institute of Public Health), 2002.Google Scholar
15. Fagt, S, Trolle, E. The Supply of Food in 1955–1999. Development in Danish Diet – Consumption, Food, Purchases and Eating Habits [in Danish]. FødevareRapport 2001:10. Copenhagen: Fødevaredirektoratet (Danish Veterinary and Food Administration), 2001.Google Scholar
16. ACNielsen, AIM A/S. ScanTrack (Markedsundersøgelser af dagligvarehandlen i Danmark) [Market Surveys of the Grocery Trait in Denmark]. Copenhagen: ACNielsen AIM A/S, 2002.Google Scholar
17 Vilstrup Research. Konkurrent-undersøgelse på impuls-ismarkedet [Competitor Survey on Impulse Ice-market]. Copenhagen: Vilstrup Research, 2001.Google Scholar
18. Okholm, B, Jakobsen, J, Saxholt, E. Chipsprodukter. Markedsundersøgelse [Crisp Products. Market Survey]. Internal Report. Århus: Levnedsmiddelstyrelsen (National Food Agency), 1997.Google Scholar
19Danish, Estrella A/S. Kartoflens historie [History of the Potato, online]. Available at http://www.estrella.dk. Accessed 8 May 2002.Google Scholar
20 McDonalds restaurant-keepers in Denmark [in Danish]. McDonald's Avisen [McDonald's Newspaper], Summer 2001.Google Scholar
21. Haraldsdóttir, J, Holm, L, Jensen, JH, Møller, A. Dietary Habits in Denmark 1985. 1. Main Results [in Danish with an English summary]. Publication No. 136. Copenhagen: Levnedsmiddelstyrelsen (National Food Agency), 1986.Google Scholar
22. Andersen, NL, Fagt, S, Groth, MV, Hartkopp, HB, Møller, A, Ovesen, L, Warming, DL. Danish Dietary Habits 1995. Main Results [in Danish with an English summary]. Publication No. 235. Copenhagen: Levnedsmiddelstyrelsen (National Food Agency), 1996.Google Scholar
23Goldberg, GR, Black, AE, Jebb, SA, Clo, TJ, Murgatroyd, PR, Coward, WA, et al. . Critical evaluation of energy intake using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 1. Derivation of cut-off values to identify underreporting. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1991; 45: 569–82.Google Scholar
24. Groth, MV, Fagt, S. Danish Dietary Habits 1995. Technical Rep:ort 1. Organization, Implementation and Data Quality of the Dietary Survey 1995 [in Danish]. Internal Report. Copenhagen: Levnedsmiddelstyrelsen (National Food Agency), 1995.Google Scholar
25Told, & Skat, (Danish Ministry of Taxation, Central Customs and Tax Administration). Chokoladeafgift [Tax on chocolate]. In: Rapport om grænsehandel [Report on Borderline Trading], 2000 [online]. Available at http://www.skat.dk/pub1/rapporter/graensehandel/kap12.htm. Accessed 8 May 2002.Google Scholar
26Coca-Cola Company Denmark. Coca-Cola historier [Coca-Cola histories]. Coca-Cola Magazine [online]. Available at http://www.cocacola.dk. Accessed 8 May 2002.Google Scholar
27 Frisko. Historien om Frisko – Fortalt med tidens isskilte [Frisko history – told by the signs of ice at the time, online]. Available at http://www.frisko.dk. Accessed 8 May 2002.Google Scholar
28. Møller, A, Saxholt, E. Levnedsmiddeltabeller [Food Composition Tables], 4th ed. Copenhagen: Levnedsmiddelstyrelsen (National Food Agency), 1996.Google Scholar
29 McDonalds restaurant-keepers in Denmark [in Danish]. McDonald's Avisen [McDonald's Newspaper], Autumn 2001.Google Scholar
30 Nordiska Ministerrådet (Nordic Council of Ministers). Nordiska Näringsrekommendationer 1996 [Nordic Nutrition Recommendations, in Swedish]. Nord 1996:28. Copenhagen: Nordisk Ministerråd, 1996.Google Scholar
31Harnack, LJ, Jeffery, RW, Boutelle, KN. Temporal trends in energy intake in the United States: an ecological perspective. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000; 71(6): 1478–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. Knuthsen, P, Peetz-Schou, M. Fat Content in Homemade Sauces [in Danish]. FødevareRapport 2002:5. Copenhagen: Fødevaredirektoratet (Danish Veterinary and Food Adminstration), 2002.Google Scholar
33Andersen, LT, Jensen, H, Haraldsdóttir, J. Typiske vægte for madvarer [Typical weights for food items]. Scand.J. Nutr 1996; 4(Suppl. 32): S129–52.Google Scholar
34Astrup, A, Grunwald, GK, Melanson, EL, Saris, WH, Hill, JO. The role of low-fat diets in body weight control: a meta-analysis of ad libitum dietary intervention studies. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2000; 24: 1545–52.Google Scholar
35Hill, J, Peters, J. Environmental contributions to the obesity epidemic. Science 1998; 280: 1371–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36Fogelholm, M, Männistö, S, Vartiainen, E, Pietinen, P. Determinants of energy balance and overweight in Finland 1982 and 1992. Int. J. Obes. 1996; 20: 1097–104.Google ScholarPubMed
37Stubbs, RJ, Harbron, CG, Murgatroyd, PR, Prentice, AM. Covert manipulation of dietary fat and energy density: effect on substrate flux and food energy intake in men eating ad libitum. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1995; 62: 316–29.Google Scholar
38Stubbs, RJ, Ritz, P, Coward, WA, Prentice, AM. Covert manipulation of the ratio of dietary fat to carbohydrate and energy density: effect on food energy intake and energy balance in free-living men eating ad libitum. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1995; 62: 330–7.Google Scholar
39Bell, EA, Rolls, BJ. Energy density of foods affects energy intake across multiple levels of fat content in lean and obese women. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2001; 73: 1010–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40 McDonald's Denmark A/S. Om McDonald's [About McDonald's, online]. Available at http://www.mcdonalds.dk. Accessed 8 May 2002.Google Scholar
41 Jysk Analyseinstitut A/S. Convenience rapporten'01 [Report on Convenience'01]. Aalborg: Jysk Analyseinstitut A/S, 2001.Google Scholar
42 Perception Research & Consulting. Danskere og kvalitetsmad [Danes and Quality Food]. Copenhagen: Perception Research & Consulting, 2001.Google Scholar
43. Fagt, S, Groth, MV, Andersen, NL. Dietary Habits in Denmark 1995, Food and Meals [in Danish with an English summary]. FødevareRapport 2000:06. Copenhagen: Fødevaredirektoratet (Danish Veterinary and Food Administration), 1999.Google Scholar
44Lin, B-H, Guthrie, J, Frazao, E. American children's diets not making the grade. In: Mentzer, Morrison R, ed. Examining the Well-being of Children. Food Review, 24–2. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2001; 8–17.Google Scholar
45Johansson, L, Solvoll, K, Bjorneboe, GE, Drevon, CA. Under- and overreporting of energy intake related to weight status and lifestyle in a nationwide sample. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1998; 68: 266–74.Google Scholar
46Lyhne, N, Ovesen, L. Added sugars and nutrient density in the diet of Danish children. Scand. J. Nutr. 1999; 43: 4–7.Google Scholar
47Sundin, B, Granath, L. Sweets and other sugary products tend to be the primary etiologic factors in dental caries. Scand. J. Dent. Res. 1992; 100: 137–9.Google ScholarPubMed
48Majewski, RF. Dental caries in adolescents associated with caffeinated carbonated beverages. Pediatr. Dent. 2001; 23: 198–203.Google Scholar
49Ludwig, DS, Peterson, KE, Gortmaker, SL. Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis. Lancet 2001; 257: 505–8.Google Scholar
50Wedderkopp, N, Andersen, LB, Hansen, HS, Froberg, K. Childhood obesity, with particular reference to Denmark [in Danish with an English summary]. J. Dan. Med. Assoc. 2001; 163: 2907–12.Google Scholar
51 Forbrugerstyrelsen, Statens Husholdningsråd (National Consumer Agency of Denmark, The Danish Government Home Economics Council). De Syv kostråd [The Seven Dietary Guidelines]. Copenhagen: Forbrugerstyrelsen, 1995.Google Scholar