parents’ attitudes toward sweetening and...
TRANSCRIPT
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org1
Dave Tuchler | Tate & Lyle | July 12, 2010 | Dallas, TX
Parents’ Attitudes Toward Sweetening and Sweeteners
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org Confidential
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org2
• Transform corn and sugar to value-added ingredients
• $6 billion global sales• 5,700 employees• London-based• US HQ: Decatur, IL• Serve food, beverage,
pharmaceutical, cosmetic, paper and building industries
A Global Supplier of Renewable Food Ingredients
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org3
A Global Supplier of Renewable Food Ingredients
FOOD STARCHESUsed by food and drink producers to add texture and body and to enhance mouthfeel
CORN SWEETENERSUsed in soft drinks and foods to provide sweetness, mouthfeel and energy
ACIDULANTSUsed to enhance flavor and preserve a wide range of foods, beverages and pharmaceuticals
SUGAR & SYRUPSFor food and beverage ingredient use; also a strong retail presence in the UK
SUCRALOSEA no-calorie high-intensity sweetener used in over 4,000 foods and beverages worldwide (also known as SPLENDA® Sucralose)
SPLENDA® and the SPLENDA® logo are trademarks of McNeil Nutritionals, LLC
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org4
• Value-added, full-service (R&D, quality, customer service)
• Fact driven– Regular global consumer
research – 16 major studies since 2004
– Focus: sweetener attitudes, moms, trends
• Good health driven by moderation, balance in calories, and exercise
Caloric balance is like a scale. To remain in balance and maintain your body weight, the caloriesconsumed (from foods) must be balanced by the calories used (in
normal body functions, daily activities, and exercise).*
Tate & Lyle’s Approach
Caloric Balance Equation
CALORIES IN
FoodBeverages
CALORIES OUTBody FunctionsPhysical Activity
*Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org5
1970-2000:• Calories per capita
among school-aged children remained relatively constant from 1970 until the mid-1980s, then increased
• Energy increase is derived largely from carbohydrates
Source: Food Consumption Data System, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
More Calories In- And The Mix is Changing
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org6
*Centers for Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, May 2004**Centers for Disease Control ***NPD Group****Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, August 2008*****National Bicycle Dealers Assn
Fewer Calories Out
• 45% of high school children had insufficient or no physical activity in 2003*
• In 2005, 28.4% of children had daily participation in school PE in 2005, vs. 41.6% in 1991**
• Since 2000, over 100 million video game consoles were sold in the US***
• In 2001, only 13% of children walked or biked to school, vs. 41% in 1969****
• 10.2 million bikes sold in the US in 2009, down from 15.2 million in 1973*****
HAPPY
FLABBY
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org7
If You’re Not Sure Kids’ Habits HaveChanged That Much in 20 Years
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org8
School Nutrition Directors are on the Front Line, and Under Extreme Pressure
Pressing Issues Identified by SN Directors
District Level National Level
Top TierFunding 51%
Cost of food/food preparation 49%
Funding 62%
Childhood obesity 51%
Middle Tier
Local school wellness policy implementation
Childhood obesity
Employee recruitment /retention
Food safety/HACCP
State or local nutrition policies
Customer satisfaction
Cost of food/food preparation
Local school wellness policy implementation
Food safety/HACCP
Employee recruitment /retention
State or local nutrition policies
SNA 2007 Trends Report
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org9
Milk Consumption“There has been an 88% decrease in total calories contained in all* beverages shipped to schools since 2004.”
Some Great Progress Has Been Made- But not with overall milk consumption
Source: USDA
*Unfortunately, this does not include milk.Milk consumption has been steadily declining.
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org10
• Milk is critical to nutrition– Important source of key nutrients for school-aged kids*– 8 oz milk is a required offering in all NSLP and SBP
meals
• Flavored milk drives the entire school milk category– 66% of all milk served in schools**– When flavored milk is removed, overall milk
consumption declines and a lot of milk is wasted***
*Source: USDA, Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2005**Source: USDA, School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Studies I and III, 2005***Source: Murphy, Douglass, Johnson - Journal of the American Dietetic Assn, 2008
Milk is Key to Children’s Nutrition- And flavored milk is the key to milk consumption
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org11
Excellent Low-fat Flavored Milks Exist- But is it possible to further lower calories and sugar?
Full-Calorie vs. Low-Fat Chocolate Milk
Typical Full-Calorie Chocolate Milk Typical Low-Fat Chocolate Milk
Calories Per Serving (8oz) 240 150-170
Sugar Per Serving 27 grams 24-27 grams
Fat Per Serving 8 grams 2.5 grams
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org12
Typical Full-calorie
Chocolate Milk
Typical Low-Fat
Chocolate MilkOption A Option B Option C
Calories Per Serving (8oz) 240 170 160 140 110
Sugar per serving 27 grams 25-27 grams 25 grams 19 grams 12 grams
Fat per serving 8 grams 2.5 grams 2.5 grams 2.5 grams 2.5 grams
Sweetener(s) Sugar or HFCS Sugar or HFCS Sucrose, Fructose
HFCS, Sucralose Sucralose
Additional Low-fat Milk Options Exist- All are real products, commercially available now
Other Low-Fat Milk Options
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org13
Meet nutrition requirements
Cost effective
Tastes good
Suitable for kids 5-18
Realistic Solutions Must Meet Key Targets
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org14
14
• “I always avoid…”• “I will not give my child…”• “All good Moms reject…”
• Anecdotal evidence• “It’s from the internet, it
must be true”• Focus Group Syndrome• Opinion without context
What Do Moms Think About Sweeteners?
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org15
• 2004/05 – Overall Health & Wellness Attitudes – Quantitative (US, UK, France, Germany)• 2005 – Attitudes – Dairy – US – Qualitative• 2005 – Moms & Kids – Perceptions/Attitudes – Qual.• 2005 – SPLENDA® Logo – perceptions (US) – Quant.• 2006 – Health, Sweetening Attitudes (Canada) – Qual.• 2006 - Health, Sweetening Attitudes – Hispanics (US) – Qual.• 2006 – Sugar Blending – perceptions/appeal (US) - Qual/Quant.• 2007 – Sugar Blending – how to communicate blending (US) - Qual.• 2007 - European Sweetening Attitudes – Quant. (UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Russia)• 2007/08 – Overall Health & Wellness Attitudes (China) – Qual/Quant.• 2008 – Sweeteners/ Logo – perceptions (US) – Quant. (4000)
- diabetic, ethnic, parents/children, category-specific detail• 2008 – SPLENDA® Logo – on-package perceptions (Mexico) – Quant.• 2009 – Sweeteners/ Logo/Natural – perceptions (US) – Qual/Quant. (1087)• 2010 – SPLENDA® Logo /sweetener perceptions (Australia)• 2010 – European Sweetening Attitudes – Quant. (UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain) (5000)• 2010 – Sweeteners and Sweetening habits (US) – Quantitative (3000)
Summary of proprietary Tate & Lyle consumer insights research
Tate & Lyle Consistently Tracks These Attitudes
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org16
Consumers Think Some ProductsContain Too Much Sugar
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
25%33%26%10%6%
30%31%26%8%5%
61%
Base = 329
Base = 758
“I think products often contain too much sugar”
Adults
Parents
Source: Illuminas US Online Study September 2009
58%
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org17
Which, if any, of the following have you heard of?*
Source: Illuminas US Online Study September 2009
*Aided Awareness
Base = 1087
50%+ Awareness
Not All Sweeteners Are Created Equal- Most well known sweeteners are familiar 60-90% of Americans
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org18
Which would you be most (least) comfortable with being used as ingredients in the food and drinks you consume?
Choose up to three.
Most Comfortable
Not highly controversial
Felt Least Comfortable
Base = 1087
Sweeteners Have Fans & DetractorsSome more positive, some more negative, some polarizing, some not
Source: Illuminas US Online Study September 2009
15% or more felt ‘Least Comfortable’
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org19
15%24%29%15%17%
On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is ‘not at all comfortable’ and 5 is ‘extremely comfortable,’ please indicate how comfortable you are with the following sweetening ingredients being used in the food and drink products you consume.
14%26%35%14%11%
68% Total Comfortable/ Not Uncomfortable
32% Total Uncomfortable
25% Total Uncomfortable
75% Total Comfortable/ Not Uncomfortable
Comfort Level with High Fructose Corn Syrup
Comfort Level with Fructose
Extremely comfortable
Somewhatcomfortable
Neither comfortableOr uncomfortable
Somewhat uncomfortable
Extremely uncomfortable
Majority of Consumers are NOT Negativeabout HFCS or Fructose
Base= Total Sample (1004) Source: Illuminas US Online Study May 2009
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org20
*For this question, non-acceptance is indicated by disagree rating – neutral classified as ‘no objection’
Source: Illuminas US Online Study January 2008
Appeal of Sweeteners Must be Measuredin Context of Benefits
I’d like to see the amount of sugar in food and drink products for my child reduced through the replacement of some sugar with a no-calorie sweetener, provided it doesn’t change the taste.
of Parents of Children 3-15 Accept Use of No-Calorie Sweeteners to Reduce Sugar
% Neutral/Somewhat or Strongly Agree
Age of Oldest Child in Household
Age 3-5 66%
Age 6-8 78%
Age 9-12 75%
Age 13-15 74%
Base = 416
Base = 260
Base = 269
Base = 260
72%
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org21
80% Of Parents Accept The Use of Sucralose To Reduce Sugar Levels For Their Children
Consistent with 2007 measurementBase = 329
As you may be aware, sucralose provides sweetness but has no calories. How appealing is it to replace some of the sugar with a small amount of sucralose in the food and drink products you buy for consumption by your oldest child under 16?
Source: Illuminas US Online Study September 2009
18%24%35%8%12%
2009
80% Appeal/Accept
Very appealing
Somewhat appealing
Neither appealing nor unappealing
Somewhat unappealing
Not at all appealing
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org22
Moms evaluated labels of two chocolate milk options for their kids(test material did not have red highlight circles)
Chocolate milk served in schools currently has 170 calories per 8 oz. serving. It is possible to reduce the calories to 120 through a formulation change to reduce added sugars.
Which version of chocolate milk would you prefer for your oldest child under 16?
Source: Illuminas US Online Study January 2008
The Chocolate Milk Test
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org23
• Even 54% of HIS Rejecterschose the Sucralose version!
• What people say is often different from what they do
70% of Parents Preferred a Sucralose SweetenedReduced Sugar Chocolate Milk Over a Typical Low-Fat Milk
Source: Illuminas US Online Study January 2008
15%Selected 70%
Selected
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org24
Which version of chocolate milk would you prefer for your oldest child aged under 16?
Base = Parents who expressed
a preference
Base = 1205
82%
Source: Illuminas US Online Study January 2008
Appeal was strong across all children’s age groups
With Sucralose 70%
Without Sucralose 15%
No preference 9%
Neither 6%
Total Parents
78%
Age 3-5Base = 386
78%
Age 6-8Base = 228
82%
Age 9-12Base = 232
80%
Age 13-15Base = 241
90%
Preference for reducedcalorie milk
Of those with a preference
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org25
Base = 831
You said that you prefer Option B [with sucralose] of the chocolate milk for your child. Why do you feel this way?
The Driver Was Calorie/Sugar Reduction
Base = 1205
Source: Illuminas US Online Study January 2008
70%
1%
3%
3%
3%
10%
13%
32%
34%
Good/same taste
Contains skim milk/other ingredients
Contains protein
No/less sodium/carbs
No/less fat
Healthy/Nutritious
No/less sugar
No/less calories
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org26
NEW UPDATE – 2010 STUDY
Drink A Drink B Prefer A (%) Prefer B (%) Either (%) Neither (%)
Reference (full HFCS) - 170 Calories Sugar and Fructose blend - 160 Calories 3 4 78 16
Reference (full HFCS) - 170 Calories Optimized - HFCS and Sucralose blend - 140 Calories 9 69 14 8
Reference (full HFCS) - 170 Calories Sucralose - 110 Calories 6 81 11 2
Reference (full HFCS) - 170 Calories Optimized - Sugar and Sucralose blend - 140 Calories 5 78 13 5
Reference (full Sugar) - 170 Calories Sucralose - 110 Calories 7 85 6 3
- Consumers (parents) chose between ‘Reference’ (170 calories, either HFCS or sugar-sweetened), and one alternative (calories and sweeteners noted)-(full ingredient labels were shown)
Key Takeaways:- Majority (69%-85%) chose the reduced calorie/sugar alternative-10 calorie difference does not seem to be enough to change people’s minds- in sucralose-sweetened version, preference was almost identical even when reference was sugar-sweetened (vs HFCS)
Copyright © 2009-2010 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org27
Summary
• Schools have tremendous influence over kids’ health
• Driving milk consumption is important– And flavored milk drives overall milk consumption
• Options exist that can help in the goal of further reducing calories– And a wide variety of sweeteners is acceptable to parents
• The growing obesity problem requires courage in challenging conventional wisdom, to deliver solutions that make a difference
– Chocolate milk is an excellent opportunity