No abstract

Food banks have grown substantially in Canada since the 1980s but little is known about patterns or predictors of engagement including frequency or duration of service use. This study examined food bank program data from a large food bank organization in Vancouver, Canada, finding that between January 1992 and June 2017, at least 116,963 individuals made over 2 million food bank visits. The majority of members were engaged for a short time and came for relatively few visits, but 9% of members engaged in longer-term episodic or ongoing usage over several years, accounting for 65% of all visits. Results from cluster and regression analyses found that documented health and mobility challenges, larger household size, primary income source, and older age were predictors of higher frequency and duration of service usage. Findings add to growing critical examinations of the ''emergency food system'' highlighting the need for better understanding of the broader social policies influencing food bank use.

Background: Few studies have described predictors of severe food insecurity among food bank users. A survey of 77 Vancouver food bank members assessed socio-demographic characteristics, food bank use and household food insecurity (HFI). Fisher's exact tests explored associations between member characteristics and severe HFI.Results: Participants reported low incomes and 84% relied on social assistance. On average, members used food banks twice per month, 54% were long-term users (>5 years) and 66% reported severe HFI. Neither frequency nor duration of food bank use were significantly associated with severe HFI. This study supports growing evidence that food bank use does not ameliorate severe HFI.

Food banks provide supplemental food to low-income households, yet little is known about the cardiovascular health of food banks members. This study therefore described cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors among food bank members and explored associations between food insecurity and CVD risk.Adults ≥18 years (n = 77) from three food bank sites in metro Vancouver, British Columbia completed surveys and physical assessments examining a range of socio-demographic variables and CVD risk factors. A composite measure of myocardial infarction (MI) risk called the INTERHEART score was assessed and household food insecurity was measured using the Household Food Security Survey Module. Regression models were used to explore associations between food insecurity and CVD risk measures, including the INTERHEART score.Ninety-seven percent of food bank members reported experiencing food insecurity, 65% were current smokers, 53% reported either chronic or several periods of stress in the past year, 55% reported low physical activity levels and 80% reported consuming fewer than five servings of fruit and vegetables daily. Prevalence of self-reported diabetes and hypertension were 13% and 29% respectively. Fifty-two percent of the sample were at high risk of non-fatal MI. No statistically significant associations were found between increased severity of food insecurity and CVD risk factors among this sample where both severe food insecurity and high CVD risks were prevalent.Food bank members were at elevated risk for CVD compared with the general population. Strategies are needed to reduce prevalence of food insecurity and CVD risk factors, both of which disproportionately affected food bank members.

12073 Background: Although poor diet and lifestyle has been associated with cancer development and progression, it is unclear how the diagnosis of cancer impacts diet and lifestyle. We examined the dietary patterns and overall nutrition of adults diagnosed with cancer versus those never diagnosed with cancer in the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Methods: NHIS adults who reported having cancer (n=2,853) and not having cancer (n=27,002) were identified. A dietary/lifestyle score was developed based on World Cancer Research Fund and American Institute for Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Recommendations (Table). Participants were given a score for each recommendation which was then summed as an overall score, with seven meeting all requirements fully and zero meeting none of the requirements. Results: The mean composite score for the cancer population was 4.28 ± 0.88 and for the noncancer population was 4.30 ± 0.90 (p = 0.18). Compared to patients without cancer, those with a cancer diagnosis had higher rates of adherence to recommendations for fruit/vegetable consumption (0.08 vs. 0.07, p <0.001) and limitation of sugar-sweetened beverages (0.77 vs. 0.74, p <0.001), but had lower rates of the recommended physical activity (0.43 vs. 0.49, p <0.001). Conclusions: Patients with and without diagnosis of cancer had mediocre adherence (4.3 out of 7) to lifestyle recommendations, although those with diagnosis of cancer had a higher consumption of fruits/vegetables, lower consumption of sugary beverages, and lower level of physical activity than those without cancer. The data suggests a cancer diagnosis may prompt change in people’s diet, but may limit their ability to exercise. The magnitude of lifestyle change that one can make after a cancer diagnosis may also be influenced by age or social connections. There is great opportunity for integrating healthy lifestyle interventions into routine cancer care. [Table: see text]