To determine whether the Chinese heart-healthy diet (Sichuan cuisine version) (CHH diet-SC) was more expensive than the conventional Sichuan diet and explore the food groups and nutrients that mainly affected the cost of CHH diet-SC.

Cost analysis of 4-week intervention diets in the Sichuan center representing southwestern China in the CHH diet study.

A multicentre, parallel-group, single-blind, randomised feeding trial evaluating the efficacy of lowering blood pressure with the cuisine-based CHH diet.

Totally, fifty-three participants with hypertension aged 25–75 years in the Sichuan center were randomised into the control group (n 26) or the CHH diet-SC group (n 27).

The CHH diet-SC was more expensive than the control diet (¥27·87 ± 2·41 v. ¥25·18 ± 2·79 equals $3·90 ± 0·34 v. $3·52 ± 0·39, P < 0·001), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for a 1-mm Hg systolic blood pressure reduction was ¥9·12 ($1·28). Intakes and the cost of seafood, dairy products, fruits, soybeans and nuts, whole grains and mixed beans were higher for the CHH diet-SC than for the control diet (P < 0·001). Intakes of vitamin B1, vitamin B6, vitamin C, Mg and phosphorus were positively correlated with the cost (P < 0·05).

The CHH diet-SC costs more than the conventional Sichuan diet, partly due to the high cost of specific food groups. Positive correlations between the intakes of vitamin B1, vitamin B6, vitamin C, Mg, phosphorus and the dietary cost could be a direction to adjust the composition within the food groups to reduce the cost of the CHH diet-SC.

To determine whether a cardioprotective dietary intervention based on UK dietary guidelines was more expensive than a conventional UK diet.

Cost analysis of food records collected at baseline and after a 12-week dietary intervention of a cardioprotective diet v. conventional UK diet.

A randomized controlled dietary intervention study (CRESSIDA; ISRCTN 92382106) investigating the impact of following a diet consistent with UK dietary guidelines on CVD risk.

Participants were healthy UK residents aged 40–70 years. A sub-sample of participants was randomly selected from those who completed the cardioprotective dietary intervention (n 20) or the conventional UK dietary intervention (n 20).

Baseline diet costs did not differ between groups; mean daily food cost for all participants was £6·12 (sd £1·83). The intervention diets were not more expensive: at end point the mean daily cost of the cardioprotective diet was £6·43 (sd £2·05) v. the control diet which was £6·53 (sd £1·53; P=0·86).

There was no evidence that consumption of a cardioprotective diet was more expensive than a conventional dietary pattern. Despite the perception that healthier foods are less affordable, these results suggest that cost may not be a barrier when modifying habitual intake and under tightly controlled trial conditions. The identification of specific food groups that may be a cost concern for individuals may be useful for tailoring interventions for CVD prevention for individuals and populations.

To describe the diet costs of adults in the National Diet and Nutrition Study (NDNS) and explore patterns in costs according to sociodemographic indicators.

Cross-sectional diet diary information was matched to a database of food prices to assign a cost to each food or non-alcoholic beverage consumed. Daily diet costs were calculated, as well as costs per 10 MJ to improve comparability across differing energy requirements. Costs were compared between categories of sociodemographic variables and health behaviours. Multivariable regression assessed the effects of each variable on diet costs after adjustment.

The NDNS is a rolling dietary survey, recruiting a representative UK sample each year. The study features data from 2008–2010.

Adults aged 19 years or over were included. The sample consisted of 1014 participants.

The geometric mean daily diet cost was £2·89 (95 % CI £2·81, £2·96). Energy intake and daily diet cost were strongly associated. The mean energy-adjusted cost was £4·09 (95 % CI £4·01, £4·18) per 10 MJ. Energy-adjusted costs differed significantly between many subgroups, including by sex and household income. Multivariable regression found significant effects of sex, qualifications and occupation (costs per 10 MJ only), as well as equivalized household income, BMI and fruit and vegetable consumption on diet costs.

This is the first time that monetary costs have been applied to the diets of NDNS adults. The findings suggest that certain subgroups in the UK – for example those on lower incomes – consume diets of lower monetary value. Observed differences were mostly in the directions anticipated.