Comment on: ‘The nutritional content of supermarket beverages: a cross-sectional analysis of New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK’ by Chepulis et al.

Abstract

Madam The paper by Chepulis et al. (1) published online by this journal contains errors, inconsistencies, unsubstantiated statements and a lack of evidence to support its conclusions. The following comments refer to the different sections of the paper as published.

Sugar-sweetened beverages: still cause for concern in New Zealand and Australia

“…However, our data and results did not report that the US FDA was suggesting or endorsing container size, but rather we were using this as comparative information for a reference serving size for these different beverage categories v. what was actually likely to be consumed in one sitting. We did not imply that container sizes are regulated (as indicated in Ms Rich’s letter ( 1 ) ) nor did we suggest anywhere that such regulations were being ignored. Nevertheless, given consistent research demonstrating that larger portion sizes can lead to overconsumption and excess energy intake ( 7 ) , policies to limit the availability of large single-serving SSB should be and are being enacted by government agencies ( 8 – 10 ) .…”

“…We would like to respond to the letter submitted to Public Health Nutrition by Ms Rich of the Food and Grocery Council of New Zealand ( 1 ) in response to our article ‘The nutritional content of supermarket beverages: a cross sectional analysis of New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK’ ( 2 ) .…”