Abstract
Background:
In Canada, studies on consumption of 100% fruit juice and nutrient intakes are limited.
Aim:
This study aimed to evaluate nutrient intakes and adequacy of intake by frequency of fruit juice consumption.
Methods:
Individuals ≥1 year (n = 34,351) participating in the Canadian Community Health Survey, 2004 with a 24-hour dietary recall and reported usual frequency of fruit juice consumption (assumed to be 100% juice) were categorized by frequency of consumption as <0.5, ≥0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times/day.
Results:
More frequent consumption of fruit juice (≥0.5 times/day) was associated with higher intakes of total fruits and vegetables, whole fruits, energy, total sugars, vitamin C and potassium. More frequent consumption of fruit juice was associated with improved intake adequacy of vitamin C for adults.
Conclusions:
Fruit juice consumption contributes to increased intakes of vitamin C and potassium as well as energy and total sugars, thus presenting a trade-off for consumers to balance.
Keywords: Dietary intakes, fruit juice, dietary surveys, nutrient adequacy, Canadian Community Health Survey, cross-sectional analysis
Introduction
In Canada, studies on consumption of 100% fruit juice and nutrient intakes are limited despite the availability of nationally representative dietary data for over a decade. Cross-sectional studies in the USA have indicated that consuming 100% fruit juice may contribute to higher intake and adequacy of commonly under-consumed nutrients as well as higher intake of whole fruits, but may also contribute to higher intake of total sugars and higher intake of energy (O’Neil et al., 2011, 2012).
In the 2019 updated nutrition guidance, Health Canada recommends that all beverages that are sources of sugar, including 100% fruit juice, be avoided and encourages consumers to instead drink water or eat whole fruit (Health Canada, 2019). There is an overall public health concern around the impact of fruit juice on sugar and caloric intake, though associations between 100% fruit juice consumption and diet quality among Canadians have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine and compare usual intake and adequacy of intake of select micronutrients typically found in fruit juice, as well as total sugars, energy and dietary fiber, among Canadians categorized by usual frequency of fruit juice consumption.
Methods
Data source and study population
The data source for this assessment was the Canadian Community Health Survey 2.2 (CCHS 2.2), a cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of the Canadian population conducted by Statistics Canada consisting of a general health questionnaire and a 24-hour dietary recall with data collected between January 2004 and January 2005 (Health Canada, 2006; Statistics Canada, 2008). Ethical approval was based on the authority of the Statistics Act of Canada. Approval to conduct the analyses presented in this paper was received from the Statistics Canada Research Data Centre Program. From a total sample of 35,107 in CCHS 2.2, the analysis in this paper excluded pregnant and breastfeeding women, infants, children consuming breastmilk, and individuals with invalid (as identified by Statistics Canada) or missing dietary recalls or a response on consumption of fruit juice in the questionnaire, resulting in a final analysis sample of 34,351 individuals.
Respondents were categorized into population groups aligning with the age- and sex-specific life-stage groups used by the Institute of Medicine for derivation of Dietary Reference Intakes. Population characteristics also include the prevalence of weight status classified as overweight/obese based on body mass index calculated from measured height and weight in 62% of the sample.
Categorization of fruit juice consumption
The CCHS 2.2 included a questionnaire that gathered information on the frequency of fruit and vegetable consumption (Health Canada, 2006). Respondents were asked to describe usual consumption as number of times (frequency) they consumed fruit juice such as orange, grapefruit or tomato; fruit excluding juice; green salad; potatoes excluding French fries, fried potatoes and potato chips; and carrots. Respondents were asked to describe their usual consumption of other vegetables in terms of number of servings. For each question, respondents reported frequency of intake as the number of times or servings per day, week, month or year. The questionnaire survey data files provide derived frequencies of fruit juice and whole fruit (excluding juice) consumption (0.0 to 20.0 times per day per fruit type), and the percent of individuals reporting consumption of fruits and vegetables five or more times per day.
For this study, we assumed that the questionnaire reflects the consumption of 100% fruit juice because it specifically refers to juices that are typically 100% juice (i.e. orange, grapefruit or tomato). Based on daily fruit juice consumption, respondents were categorized into one of three categories of daily frequency of consumption: <0.5, 0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times per day. Within these frequency categories, mean fruit juice consumption was 0.1 to 0.2, 1.0, and 2.4 to 2.8 times/day, respectively, across age–sex groups.
The 2015 CCHS-Nutrition survey provides updated dietary recalls, though it did not include a module on fruit and vegetable consumption (Health Canada, 2017). Thus the 2004 survey uniquely provides information to categorize typical frequency of fruit juice consumption and examine nutrient intakes.
Estimates of usual nutrient intakes and nutrient adequacy
The CCHS 2.2 included a 24-hour dietary recall component in which data were collected by a trained interviewer using a modified version of the 5-step Automated Multiple-Pass Method with a second 24-hour dietary recall from approximately 30% of the respondents (Statistics Canada, 2008). The dietary recalls were processed by Statistics Canada using compositional data available at the time of the survey (Health Canada, 2001; Statistics Canada, 2008). In this study, estimates of mean usual energy intake and mean usual nutrient intakes adjusted for energy were calculated by the frequency category of fruit juice consumption. Usual intake estimates were derived with the software for Intake Distribution Estimation (PC-SIDE). The prevalence of inadequate nutrient intakes was examined using the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) cut-point method (Institute of Medicine, 2000). For nutrients without an EAR (potassium and dietary fiber), the proportion of each age–sex group with usual intake above the Adequate Intake (AI) at the time of the analysis was determined.
Statistical analysis
Analysis of demographic variables was completed with Stata 12 using survey weights to adjust for differential probabilities of selection, non-response, season and day of the week. Bootstrap SVY commands in Stata were used to calculate the standard errors (SE) and confidence intervals for body weight status and usual frequency of intakes. Balanced repeated replication methods were used to create variance and SE estimates of usual intakes. PC-SIDE analyses included ratio adjustments for weekend versus weekday and energy (Dodd, 1996). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05 and a Bonferroni adjustment was applied to account for multiple comparisons.
Results
Population characteristics
The sample was categorized by reported usual frequency of fruit juice consumption classified as <0.5 times/day, including non-consumers (n = 13,832); ≥0.5 to <1.5 times/day (n = 13,485); or ≥1.5 times/day (n = 7034). Frequency of fruit juice consumption varied among age–sex groups: the predominant frequency of fruit juice consumption was ≥1.5 times/day among young children 1–3 years (46% of respondents); ≥0.5 to <1.5 times/day among children 4–8 years and boys and girls 9–13 and 14–18 years (39–42% of respondents); and <0.5 times/day for Canadian adults 19 years and older (46–55%). Across all age–sex groups, 15% of individuals reported never consuming fruit juice. Proportions of Canadians classified as overweight or obese did not significantly differ by frequency of fruit juice consumption category of <0.5, ≥0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times/day among children 4–17 years (28±1.5%, 28±1.4%, and 25±1.4%, respectively) or adults ≥19 years (62±1.3%, 59±1.4%, and 57±2.7%, respectively).
Increased frequency of fruit juice consumption was associated with higher proportions of Canadians consuming fruits and vegetables five or more times per day, and the most frequent (≥1.5 times/day) consumption of fruit juice was associated with the highest intake of whole fruit in age–sex groups other than females 9–13 years (Table 1).
Table 1.
Fruit and vegetable intake and usual intake of energy and total sugars among Canadians categorized by reported frequency of fruit juice consumption, CCHS, Cycle 2.2.
| Frequency of fruit juice consumption* | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.5 times/day (n = 13,832) |
≥0.5 to <1.5
times/day (n = 13,485) |
≥1.5 times/day (n = 7034) |
|||||||
| Population by sex and age | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | |||
| Whole fruit intake (excluding juice), mean times/day | |||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 years | 1.56 | ± 0.10 | b | 1.53 | ± 0.05 | b | 1.84 | ± 0.05 | a |
| M/F, 4–8 years | 1.17 | ± 0.05 | c | 1.38 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.56 | ± 0.05 | a |
| M, 9–13 years | 0.86 | ± 0.05 | c | 1.06 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.44 | ± 0.07 | a |
| F, 9–13 years | 1.11 | ± 0.06 | b | 1.21 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.50 | ± 0.06 | a |
| M, 14–18 years | 0.75 | ± 0.08 | c | 0.97 | ± 0.05 | b | 1.27 | ± 0.07 | a |
| F, 14–18 years | 0.83 | ± 0.05 | c | 1.01 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.32 | ± 0.08 | a |
| M, 19–50 years | 0.84 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.04 | ± 0.04 | a | 1.19 | ± 0.07 | a |
| F, 19–50 years | 1.13 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.28 | ± 0.06 | ab | 1.47 | ± 0.09 | a |
| M, ≥51 years | 1.09 | ± 0.05 | b | 1.15 | ± 0.03 | b | 1.56 | ± 0.13 | a |
| F, ≥51 years | 1.39 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.35 | ± 0.04 | b | 1.71 | ± 0.08 | a |
| Total fruit and vegetable intake (including fruit juice), % reporting ≥5 times per day | |||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 years | 25.7 | ± 3.4 | c | 38.5 | ± 2.9 | b | 81.5 | ± 1.9 | a |
| M/F, 4–8 years | 12.4 | ± 2.5 | c | 33.5 | ± 1.9 | b | 70.2 | ± 2.2 | a |
| M, 9–13 years | 6.5 | ± 1.4 | c | 21.9 | ± 2.2 | b | 65.6 | ± 2.8 | a |
| F, 9–13 years | 20.4 | ± 3.2 | b | 28.4 | ± 2.7 | b | 78.2 | ± 2.5 | a |
| M, 14–18 years | 8.4 | ± 2.4 | c | 17.9 | ± 2.0 | b | 62.6 | ± 3.2 | a |
| F, 14–18 years | 10.6 | ± 1.5 | c | 23.1 | ± 2.5 | b | 68.6 | ± 3.1 | a |
| M, 19–50 years | 9.3 | ± 1.1 | c | 25.1 | ± 2.2 | b | 67.6 | ± 3.2 | a |
| F, 19–50 years | 22.4 | ± 1.6 | c | 38.2 | ± 2.3 | b | 71.7 | ± 3.4 | a |
| M, ≥51 years | 17.0 | ± 1.5 | c | 37.9 | ± 2.0 | b | 75.6 | ± 3.9 | a |
| F, ≥51 years | 27.4 | ± 1.6 | c | 44.1 | ± 1.7 | b | 83.5 | ± 2.7 | a |
| Energy (kJ) | |||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 years | 5397 | ± 213 | c | 6104 | ± 159 | b | 6657 | ± 167 | a |
| M/F, 4–8 years | 7611 | ± 222 | b | 7766 | ± 142 | ab | 8209 | ± 151 | a |
| M, 9–13 years | 9837 | ± 339 | ab | 9205 | ± 276 | b | 10652 | ± 343 | a |
| F, 9–13 years | 8180 | ± 297 | 8242 | ± 192 | 8837 | ± 251 | |||
| M, 14–18 years | 11510 | ± 351 | b | 11719 | ± 444 | ab | 12598 | ± 368 | a |
| F, 14–18 years | 8012 | ± 243 | b | 8368 | ± 222 | ab | 8950 | ± 289 | a |
| M, 19–50 years | 10272 | ± 243 | b | 10954 | ± 230 | b | 12276 | ± 410 | a |
| F, 19–50 years | 7414 | ± 167 | b | 7912 | ± 163 | ab | 8184 | ± 301 | a |
| M, ≥51 years | 8560 | ± 188 | b | 8920 | ± 197 | ab | 9556 | ± 385 | a |
| F, ≥51 years | 6602 | ± 121 | b | 6832 | ± 109 | ab | 7309 | ± 276 | a |
| Total Sugars (g) | |||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 years | 79.3 | ± 4.2 | c | 90.8 | ± 2.6 | b | 110.0 | ± 3.0 | a |
| M/F, 4–8 years | 109.2 | ± 3.6 | 115.2 | ± 2.2 | 124.0 | ± 6.9 | |||
| M, 9–13 years | 121.9 | ± 5.7 | b | 130.4 | ± 6.2 | ab | 161.2 | ± 16.8 | a |
| F, 9–13 years | 108.1 | ± 4.2 | b | 119.2 | ± 4.2 | ab | 141.8 | ± 14.0 | a |
| M, 14–18 years | 148.6 | ± 7.7 | b | 150.8 | ± 5.6 | b | 179.4 | ± 6.2 | a |
| F, 14–18 years | 101.1 | ± 3.8 | 109.3 | ± 4.1 | 131.5 | ± 15.0 | |||
| M, 19–50 years | 104.7 | ± 3.5 | c | 120.9 | ± 3.9 | b | 147.7 | ± 7.3 | a |
| F, 19–50 years | 80.5 | ± 2.3 | c | 96.4 | ± 2.7 | b | 122.3 | ± 7.4 | a |
| M, ≥51 years | 84.5 | ± 2.1 | c | 95.9 | ± 2.6 | b | 131.1 | ± 8.0 | a |
| F, ≥51 years | 71.8 | ± 1.6 | c | 84.8 | ± 1.7 | b | 104.6 | ± 5.4 | a |
a, b, c Mean values within a row with unlike superscript letters are significantly different (p<0.05; Bonferroni-adjusted p<0.0167)
* Fruit juice assumed to be 100% juice
† Usual mean intakes and proportions below the EAR were estimated using PC-SIDE (Department of Statistics, Iowa State University) with balanced repeated replication methods and ratio adjustment for intake day, categorized as weekend/weekday, and energy intake.
Sample sizes by frequency category (<0.5, ≥0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times/day) in each age–sex group: M/F, 1–3 years (447, 740, 1006); M/F, 4–8 years (707, 1361, 1273); M, 9–13 years (566, 840, 743); F, 9–13 years (550, 867, 626); M, 14–18 years (752, 946, 697); F, 14–18 years (803, 948, 594); M, 19–50 years (2347, 1655, 640); F, 19–50 years (2618, 1641, 505); M, ≥51 years (2181, 1733, 409); F, ≥51 years (2861, 2754, 541).
Energy and sugars intake
Energy intake was higher among the most frequent (≥1.5 times/day) compared with the least frequent (<0.5 times/day) consumers of fruit juice for all age–sex groups other than boys and girls 9–13 years, and total sugars intake were higher with increased frequency of fruit juice consumption in age–sex groups other than children 4–8 and girls 14–18 years (Table 1).
Usual micronutrient intakes and prevalence of inadequate intakes
Within all age–sex groups, mean daily vitamin C intake was significantly higher with increased frequency of fruit juice consumption (Table 2). The proportions of boys 9–13 and 14–18 years and all adults with vitamin C intake below the EAR were lowest among moderately frequent and the most frequent juice consumers (≥0.5 times/day). More frequent consumption of fruit juice was associated with higher intake of magnesium and lower prevalence of inadequate magnesium intake among the most versus least frequent consumers of fruit juice in children age 1–3 years, older women and subpopulations of males 14 years and older. Few differences in intake or adequacy of intake of vitamins A and D and calcium were observed (Table 2).
Table 2.
Micronutrient intakes and proportions with usual intakes below the estimated average requirement (EAR) among Canadians categorized by reported frequency of 100% fruit juice intake, CCHS, Cycle 2.2.
| Nutrient | Usual intake* | Proportions with usual intakes below the EAR*,† | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.5 times/day | ≥0.5 to <1.5 times/day | ≥1.5 times/day | <0.5 times/day | ≥0.5 to <1.5 times/day | ≥1.5 times/day | ||||||||||||||
| Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | ||||||||
| Vitamin C (mg) | |||||||||||||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 y | 70 | 6.4 | c | 124 | 6.0 | b | 180 | 6.2 | a | <1% | 0.49 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| M/F, 4–8 y | 99 | 7.0 | c | 126 | 4.8 | b | 180 | 6.6 | a | <1% | 0.82 | - | <1% | 0.05 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| M, 9–13 y | 102 | 6.9 | b | 113 | 8.0 | b | 209 | 12.5 | a | 7.6 | 2.75 | a | <1% | 0.62 | b | <1% | 0.04 | b | |
| F, 9–13 y | 94 | 7.9 | c | 127 | 8.5 | b | 193 | 10.4 | a | <1% | 1.78 | - | <1% | 0.14 | - | <1% | 0.11 | - | |
| M, 14–18 y | 91 | 6.7 | c | 149 | 8.7 | b | 243 | 14.2 | a | 24.0 | 7.66 | a | 4.1 | 2.32 | b | <1% | 0.45 | b | |
| F, 14–18 y | 96 | 6.5 | c | 144 | 7.8 | b | 205 | 11.1 | a | 11.2 | 6.16 | 2.4 | 1.60 | <1% | 0.30 | ||||
| M, 19–50 y | 89 | 4.4 | c | 155 | 6.9 | b | 224 | 14.4 | a | 45.6 | 4.58 | a | 8.7 | 2.41 | b | 4.1 | 2.08 | b | |
| F, 19–50 y | 84 | 3.5 | c | 137 | 5.3 | b | 209 | 14.2 | a | 33.4 | 3.44 | a | 2.3 | 1.45 | b | <1% | 14.04 | b | |
| M, ≥51 y | 92 | 4.7 | c | 135 | 4.9 | b | 251 | 22.7 | a | 45.5 | 3.54 | a | 13.4 | 2.36 | b | 1.3 | 1.06 | c | |
| F, ≥51 y | 89 | 3.2 | c | 131 | 3.6 | b | 164 | 10.9 | a | 30.8 | 2.87 | a | 5.0 | 1.10 | b | <1% | 0.69 | c | |
| Vitamin A (mcg RAE) | |||||||||||||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 y | 476 | 24.9 | 546 | 25.5 | 518 | 20.2 | 5.5 | 2.27 | <1% | 0.37 | - | <1% | 0.22 | - | |||||
| M/F, 4–8 y | 580 | 26.9 | 582 | 19.2 | 593 | 19.9 | 2.7 | 1.27 | 1.3 | 0.92 | 1.3 | 0.85 | |||||||
| M, 9–13 y | 664 | 47.3 | 669 | 26.9 | 663 | 33.7 | 17.9 | 5.89 | 13.6 | 3.85 | 12.5 | 4.52 | |||||||
| F, 9–13 y | 569 | 35.7 | 572 | 32.1 | 648 | 38.8 | 18.6 | 8.24 | 21.6 | 5.89 | 14.4 | 5.20 | |||||||
| M, 14–18 y | 615 | 47.1 | 695 | 30 | 673 | 41.5 | 60.1 | 7.96 | 39.7 | 8.75 | 46.6 | 10.46 | |||||||
| F, 14–18 y | 507 | 27.2 | 513 | 25.6 | 584 | 48.5 | 49.7 | 8.06 | 49.7 | 5.53 | 42.5 | 7.91 | |||||||
| M, 19–50 y | 638 | 35.4 | b | 705 | 40.2 | b | 857 | 54.7 | a | 58.6 | 4.46 | a | 40.4 | 11.41 | ab | 25.4 | 8.60 | b | |
| F, 19–50 y | 598 | 34.2 | 588 | 24.5 | 685 | 69.0 | 42.7 | 4.81 | 37.5 | 5.10 | 23.0 | 14.98 | |||||||
| M, ≥51 y | 766 | 89.4 | 757 | 38.4 | 784 | 76.3 | 53.6 | 3.47 | 41.4 | 5.48 | 33.5 | 9.71 | |||||||
| F, ≥51 y | 612 | 24.7 | 645 | 24 | 689 | 62.6 | 42.3 | 4.08 | a | 22.9 | 7.80 | b | 28.5 | 9.00 | ab | ||||
| Vitamin D (mcg) | |||||||||||||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 y | 6.8 | 0.32 | 6.5 | 0.28 | 6.2 | 0.23 | 97.6 | 11.91 | 89.8 | 2.53 | 90.9 | 1.85 | |||||||
| M/F, 4–8 y | 6.0 | 0.31 | 6.1 | 0.22 | 5.6 | 0.20 | 90.9 | 3.05 | 94.8 | 1.73 | 99.1 | 9.93 | |||||||
| M, 9–13 y | 7.2 | 0.43 | a | 7.3 | 0.29 | a | 6.3 | 0.31 | b | 83.5 | 3.93 | a | 86.1 | 3.00 | a | 96.4 | 1.66 | b | |
| F, 9–13 y | 5.6 | 0.38 | 5.4 | 0.30 | 5.6 | 0.30 | 95.2 | 2.38 | 95.9 | 2.30 | 98.7 | 0.89 | |||||||
| M, 14–18 y | 7.3 | 0.43 | 7.5 | 0.38 | 6.2 | 0.48 | 84.1 | 4.32 | 81.1 | 3.89 | 90.9 | 3.79 | |||||||
| F, 14–18 y | 4.9 | 0.33 | 4.8 | 0.54 | 4.4 | 0.27 | 96.9 | 1.87 | 96.6 | 2.50 | >99% | 9.90 | |||||||
| M, 19–50 y | 4.8 | 0.21 | b | 6.1 | 0.43 | a | 6.3 | 0.43 | a | 96.4 | 1.10 | 93.8 | 10.08 | 92.4 | 10.13 | ||||
| F, 19–50 y | 4.4 | 0.24 | 4.8 | 0.25 | 4.9 | 0.43 | 98.1 | 0.77 | 96.9 | 1.23 | 97 | 1.91 | |||||||
| M, ≥51 y | 6.2 | 0.47 | 7.6 | 0.80 | 6.9 | 1.02 | 87.4 | 3.53 | 73.3 | 8.83 | 84.3 | 6.95 | |||||||
| F, ≥51 y | 4.5 | 0.31 | 5.1 | 0.29 | 5.4 | 0.38 | 95.1 | 10.78 | 94.2 | 1.85 | 95.6 | 2.42 | |||||||
| Calcium (mg) | |||||||||||||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 y | 1060 | 48.8 | 1025 | 35.2 | 1004 | 29.6 | 3.9 | 1.22 | 2.1 | 0.91 | 2.2 | 0.69 | |||||||
| M/F, 4–8 y | 1043 | 43.2 | 1008 | 22.6 | 1002 | 24.4 | 22.0 | 3.99 | 14.5 | 3.87 | 22.2 | 3.58 | |||||||
| M, 9–13 y | 1160 | 50.9 | 1165 | 43.4 | 1135 | 43.0 | 49.5 | 5.33 | 43.9 | 6.05 | 47.4 | 6.27 | |||||||
| F, 9–13 y | 936 | 43.3 | 920 | 31.0 | 1009 | 40.9 | 75.7 | 5.86 | 79.2 | 4.49 | 66.6 | 6.67 | |||||||
| M, 14–18 y | 1141 | 50.5 | 1237 | 44.1 | 1162 | 56.5 | 47.6 | 6.71 | 36.9 | 5.15 | 41.3 | 12.6 | |||||||
| F, 14–18 y | 852 | 36.7 | 827 | 29.0 | 863 | 35.8 | 81.5 | 3.84 | 89.4 | 3.85 | 84.8 | 4.70 | |||||||
| M, 19–50 y | 834 | 24.4 | c | 956 | 30.5 | b | 1138 | 54.3 | a | 51.1 | 3.48 | a | 29.8 | 5.37 | b | 14.8 | 4.36 | c | |
| F, 19–50 y | 749 | 20.4 | 788 | 25.1 | 818 | 42.9 | 62.7 | 3.44 | 55.7 | 4.87 | 50.8 | 7.78 | |||||||
| M, 51–70 y | 779 | 26.9 | 822 | 29.9 | 750 | 51.0 | 59.6 | 4.45 | 52.1 | 4.48 | 65.6 | 11.6 | |||||||
| M, ≥71 y | 617 | 28.1 | c | 719 | 30.4 | b | 936 | 81.8 | a | 94.1 | 2.06 | a | 87.3 | 3.19 | ab | 62.0 | 13.9 | b | |
| F, ≥51 y | 653 | 17.4 | b | 705 | 14.9 | a | 752 | 40.3 | a | 94.0 | 1.59 | 90.4 | 1.66 | 84.7 | 4.89 | ||||
| Magnesium (mg) | |||||||||||||||||||
| M/F, 1–3 y | 198 | 7.3 | b | 213 | 5.2 | ab | 221 | 5.5 | a | <1% | 0.03 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| M/F, 4–8 y | 240 | 7.5 | 250 | 4.9 | 251 | 5.4 | <1% | 0.14 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | ||||
| M, 9–13 y | 289 | 9.7 | 286 | 7.1 | 310 | 9.3 | 3.2 | 1.53 | 2.2 | 1.30 | <1% | 0.28 | - | ||||||
| F, 9–13 y | 240 | 10.0 | 258 | 8.1 | 268 | 9.2 | 20.6 | 6.89 | a | 7.3 | 3.47 | ab | 4.4 | 2.53 | b | ||||
| M, 14–18 y | 308 | 9.5 | b | 340 | 9.1 | a | 354 | 11.1 | a | 73.1 | 5.70 | a | 51.3 | 9.35 | ab | 41.1 | 10.70 | b | |
| F, 14–18 y | 245 | 7.4 | 261 | 6.4 | 265 | 8.7 | 87.4 | 3.66 | 79.8 | 3.93 | 77.4 | 7.77 | |||||||
| M, 19–30 y | 325 | 11.3 | b | 357 | 12.4 | ab | 400 | 23.3 | a | 56.1 | 7.43 | a | 36.4 | 7.22 | ab | 19.8 | 8.12 | b | |
| F, 19–30 y | 264 | 9.0 | 290 | 11.1 | 286 | 15.1 | 45.7 | 7.70 | 19.1 | 12.9 | 29.5 | 13.0 | |||||||
| M, 31–50 y | 340 | 9.8 | b | 356 | 10.2 | ab | 403 | 20.1 | a | 63.2 | 4.83 | a | 51.4 | 6.50 | a | 16.7 | 9.88 | b | |
| F, 31–50 y | 286 | 7.5 | 306 | 8.9 | 279 | 11.5 | 41.8 | 4.15 | 27.8 | 9.17 | 38.0 | 11.90 | |||||||
| M, ≥51 y | 318 | 6.2 | b | 342 | 6.7 | a | 368 | 15.0 | a | 70.9 | 3.11 | a | 58.5 | 3.79 | b | 41.8 | 9.26 | b | |
| F, ≥51 y | 268 | 4.8 | b | 280 | 4.8 | ab | 297 | 10.0 | a | 51.4 | 3.27 | a | 43.6 | 3.06 | ab | 31.7 | 5.53 | b | |
EAR: Estimated Average Requirement; F: female; M: male.
a, b, c Mean values within a row with unlike superscript letters are significantly different (p<0.05; Bonferroni-adjusted p<0.0167)
* Fruit juice assumed to be 100% juice; usual mean intakes and proportions below the EAR were estimated using PC-SIDE (Department of Statistics, Iowa State University) with balanced repeated replication methods and ratio adjustment for intake day, categorized as weekend/weekday, and energy intake.
† “-” indicates statistical comparisons were not conducted.
Sample sizes by frequency category (<0.5, ≥0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times/day) in each age–sex group: M/F, 1–3 years (447, 740, 1006); M/F, 4–8 years (707, 1361, 1273); M, 9–13 years (566, 840, 743); F, 9–13 years (550, 867, 626); M, 14–18 years (752, 946, 697); F, 14–18 years (803, 948, 594); M, 19–50 years (2347, 1655, 640); F, 19–50 years (2618, 1641, 505); M, ≥51 years (2181, 1733, 409); F, ≥51 years (2861, 2754, 541).
Fiber intake was significantly higher with increased frequency of fruit juice consumption among populations of children and men (Figure 1(a)) and potassium intakes were higher with increased frequency of fruit juice consumption in all age–sex groups (Figure 1(b)), though proportions of individuals exceeding the fiber and potassium AIs did not substantially differ (data not shown).
Figure 1.
Fiber (a) and potassium (b) intake among Canadians categorized by reported frequency of fruit juice consumption, CCHS, Cycle 2.2 (Mean values of intake). Fruit juice assumed to be 100% juice; usual mean intakes were estimated using PC-SIDE (Department of Statistics, Iowa State University) with balanced repeated replication methods and ratio adjustment for intake day, categorized as weekend/weekday, and energy intake.
a, b, c Bars within an age–sex group with unlike superscript letters are significantly different (p<0.05; Bonferroni-adjusted p<0.0167).
Sample sizes by frequency category (<0.5, ≥0.5 to <1.5, or ≥1.5 times/day) in each age–sex group: M/F, 1–3 years (447, 740, 1006); M/F, 4–8 years (707, 1361, 1273); M, 9–13 years (566, 840, 743); F, 9–13 years (550, 867, 626); M, 14–18 years (752, 946, 697); F, 14–18 years (803, 948, 594); M, 19–50 years (2347, 1655, 640); F, 19–50 years (2618, 1641, 505); M, ≥51 years (2181, 1733, 409); F, ≥51 years (2861, 2754, 541).
Discussion
The current study examined select nutrient intakes and adequacy of intakes among Canadians categorized by frequency of consumption of fruit juice assumed to be 100% fruit juice, and thus begins to provide information on nutrient adequacy associated with 100% fruit juice intake. Results show that more frequent consumption of fruit juice is associated with more frequent consumption of total fruits and vegetables across all age–sex groups, and higher usual intakes of vitamin C and potassium adjusted for energy. Moderate or more frequent consumption of fruit juice (≥0.5 times/day) was also associated with improved nutrient adequacy for vitamin C among adults.
The small but increased nutrient intakes with more frequent fruit juice consumption observed in this study are consistent with findings from research on dietary intakes by children and adults from 2003–2006 in the USA and more recently from adults in France (Bellisle et al., 2017; O’Neil et al., 2011, 2012), as are the findings of decreased prevalence of nutrient inadequacy (O’Neil et al., 2011, 2012). It is important to note, however, that the higher nutrient intakes among more frequent consumers of fruit juice may be attributed in part to small but statistically significant increases in the frequency of whole fruit intake and intake of total fruits and vegetables. Analyses in the USA also show that consumers of fruit juice have higher intakes of whole fruit compared with non-consumers, although consumption of total vegetables did not differ between juice consumers and non-consumers (O’Neil et al., 2011, 2012). The current study did not quantify contributions of fruit juice to total nutrient intakes or total fruit and vegetable intakes. The differences in nutrient intakes observed by frequency of fruit juice consumption, although small, may nonetheless be relevant given that many Canadians have inadequate intakes of several micronutrients in fruit juice such as vitamin C and magnesium (Health Canada, 2016). In fact, reported increases in the prevalence of inadequate intakes of vitamin C among adults between 2004 and 2015 have been attributed to declines in the consumption of fruit juice (Garriguet, 2019).
In addition to higher intakes of some nutrients, however, increased frequency of fruit juice consumption was also associated with higher intake of energy and total sugars, which is also consistent with previous studies (Bellisle et al., 2017; O’Neil et al., 2011) and of potential concern. Recommendations to limit or reduce the intake of sugars are widely supported, though specific guidance varies (Mela and Woolner, 2018). Many 100% fruit juices are good sources of nutrients including vitamin C, but juice is also energy-dense (Rampersaud, 2007), and given its potential for contributing to higher energy intake, moderating intake is important. The trade-off of modest portions of 100% fruit juice to help bridge the gap of inadequate total fruit and vegetable consumption and meet requirements for vitamin C and to a small extent magnesium while increasing intake of potassium therefore appears to be higher intakes of energy and total sugars.
Major strengths of the current analysis include use of a large nationally representative sample of Canadians and use of frequency data in combination with intake data. Categorization based on reported frequency of fruit juice consumption provided a means to distinguish among frequency of intake over a period of time (per day, week, month or year), thus minimizing the potential for misclassification based on a single recall. As previously noted, the 2004 survey uniquely provides information to categorize typical frequency of fruit juice consumption and examine nutrient intakes, as the 2015 CCHS-Nutrition survey did not include a module on fruit and vegetable consumption (Health Canada, 2017).
It is also important to consider limits of this study. As a cross-sectional data analysis, it is not possible to examine causal effects. The questionnaire used to categorize frequency of fruit juice consumption does not account for each respondent’s portion size, and consequently frequency data may not reflect the total amount of fruit juice consumed. Misclassification by frequency of intake was possible if responses included intake of products containing less than 100% fruit juice, such as fruit drinks or fruit punch. The food consumption data were self-reported and therefore prone to recall bias. In addition, consumption of fruit juice by Canadians has declined since 2004 as a result of smaller quantities consumed and a smaller proportion of the population consuming fruit juice (Garriguet, 2019; Tugault-Lafleur and Black, 2019), therefore the frequency of intake distributions may not reflect current consumption patterns.
In summary, results from this focused study show that among Canadians, more frequent consumption of fruit juice (assumed to be 100% juice) independent of caloric intake was associated with higher usual intakes of vitamin C and potassium, and improved intake adequacy of vitamin C for adults. More frequent consumption of fruit juice was also associated with higher mean intakes of whole fruit and total vegetables and fruit. Along with increased intake of select nutrients, more frequent consumption of 100% fruit juice is a source of higher energy and total sugars, thus presenting a trade-off for consumers to balance.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental Material, UK_ExclusiveLicense-PDF for Frequency of fruit juice consumption and association with nutrient intakes among Canadians by Mary M Murphy, Leila M Barraj, Tristin D Brisbois and Alison M Duncan in Nutrition and Health
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Carmina Ng and Dave Haans at the Statistics Canada Toronto Region Research Data Centre for support in accessing the CCHS 2.2 data, and Brenda Sims, Professor (retired), of the University of North Texas for editorial assistance.
Footnotes
Authors’ contributions: TDB conceived the study question. MMM and LMB drafted the study protocol with input from TDB and AMD. MMM, LMB and AMD completed all data analyses with LMB overseeing all statistical analyses. All authors contributed to interpretation of the findings. MMM prepared a first draft of the manuscript with input from all authors. All authors read, critically reviewed, edited, and approved the final manuscript.
Availability of data and materials: The CCHS 2.2 data used to complete this analysis were accessed at the Statistics Canada Toronto Region Research Data Centre. Approval to conduct the analyses presented in this paper was received from the Statistics Canada Research Data Centre Program.
Declaration of conflicting interests: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: MMM and LMB are employees of Exponent, Inc.; PepsiCo, Inc. is a client of Exponent, Inc. TDB is an employee of PepsiCo. AMD has no conflicts.
Ethical approval: Ethical approval was based on the authority of the Statistics Act of Canada.
Funding: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by PepsiCo R&D; the opinions in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of PepsiCo, Inc.
ORCID iD: Mary M Murphy 
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6385-2337
Supplemental Material: Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
- Bellisle F, Hébel P, Fourniret A, et al. (2018) Consumption of 100% Pure Fruit Juice and Dietary Quality in French Adults: Analysis of a Nationally Representative Survey in the Context of the WHO Recommended Limitation of Free Sugars. Nutrients 7; 10(4): E459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dodd KW. (1996) A Technical Guide to C-SIDE (Software for Intake Distribution Estimation). CARD Technical Reports. 15. [Google Scholar]
- Garriguet D. (2019) Changes in beverage consumption in Canada. Health Reports 17; 30(7): 20–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Health Canada (2001) Canadian nutrient file: Compilation of Canadian food composition data, version 2001b. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. [Google Scholar]
- Health Canada (2006) Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2.2, Nutrition (2004): A guide to accessing and interpreting the data Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/surveill/cchs-guide-escc-eng.pdf (accessed 13 January 2016).
- Health Canada (2016) Evidence review for dietary guidance: Summary of results and implications for Canada’s Food Guide, 2015. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/canada/health-canada/migration/publications/eating-nutrition/dietary-guidance-summary-resume-recommandations-alimentaires/alt/pub-eng.pdf (accessed 31 January 2019).
- Health Canada (2017) Reference guide to understanding and using the data, 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey—Nutrition. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutrition/food-nutrition-surveillance/health-nutrition-surveys/canadian-community-health-survey-cchs/reference-guide-understanding-using-data-2015.html (accessed 31 January 2019).
- Health Canada (2019) Canada’s dietary guidelines for health professionals and policy makers Canada/ca/FoodGuide. Available at: https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/guidelines/ (accessed 31 January 2019).
- Institute of Medicine (2000) Dietary Reference Intakes: Applications in Dietary Assessment. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mela DJ, Woolner EM. (2018) Perspective: Total, added, or free? What kind of sugars should we be talking about? Advances in Nutrition 9(2): 63–69. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- O’Neil CE, Nicklas TA, Zanovec M, et al. (2011) Diet quality is positively associated with 100% fruit juice consumption in children and adults in the United States: NHANES 2003-2006. Nutrition Journal 10: 17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- O’Neil CE, Nicklas TA, Rampersaud GC, et al. (2012) 100% orange juice consumption is associated with better diet quality, improved nutrient adequacy, decreased risk for obesity, and improved biomarkers of health in adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2003-2006. Nutrition Journal 11: 107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rampersaud GC. (2007) A comparison of nutrient density scores for 100% fruit juices. Journal of Food Science 72(4): S261–S266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Statistics Canada (2008) Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) Cycle 2.2, 2004: Nutrition – General Health (including Vitamin & Mineral Supplements) & 24-Hour Dietary Recall Components User Guide. Available at: http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/document/5049_D24_T9_V1-eng.pdf (accessed 13 January 2016).
- Tugault-Lafleur CN, Black JL. (2019) Differences in the quantity and types of foods and beverages consumed by Canadians between 2004 and 2015. Nutrients 11(3): E526. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supplemental Material, UK_ExclusiveLicense-PDF for Frequency of fruit juice consumption and association with nutrient intakes among Canadians by Mary M Murphy, Leila M Barraj, Tristin D Brisbois and Alison M Duncan in Nutrition and Health