Search

COVID-19 has caused increased stress among U.S. adults, with many reporting concerns assisting their children with distance learning due to school closures. This study surveyed U.S. parents--most of whom were middle-aged, White, affluent, and female--to learn what types of distance learning activities parents engaged in with their children during COVID-19; whether these types of activities varied by the child's age; and whether there was an association between engaging in these activities and stress. Most parents engaged in Monitoring, Teaching or Technology support activities with their children. Although these activities varied by child's age, parents who reported engaging in any distance learning activity reported increased stress.

We examined the impact of distance learning-related parental stress due to COVID-19 on parental alcohol consumption using an online survey in May 2020 with a convenience sample of U.S. adults. This article focuses on the 361 parents who had children under the age of 18 living with them. Seventy-eight percent had children who were engaged in distance learning; 59% reported being stressed because they were not sure how to help their children with distance learning. Stressed parents reported consuming significantly more alcohol and binge drinking more often than parents who were not stressed by distance learning. We hope that public health professionals can use our findings to better target alcohol prevention programs aimed at parents to reduce parental stress, and hopefully, parental alcohol consumption.

Objectives. To identify relationships between US states' COVID-19 in-person activity limitation and economic support policies and drug overdose deaths among working-age adults in 2020. Methods. We used county-level data on 140 435 drug overdoses among adults aged 25 to 64 years during January 2019 to December 2020 from the National Vital Statistics System and data on states' COVID-19 policies from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker to assess US trends in overdose deaths by sex in 3138 counties. Results. Policies limiting in-person activities significantly increased, whereas economic support policies significantly decreased, overdose rates. A 1-unit increase in policies restricting activities predicted a 15% average monthly increase in overdose rates for men (incident rate ratio [IRR] = 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09, 1.20) and a 14% increase for women (IRR = 1.14; 95% CI = 1.09, 1.20). A 1-unit increase in economic support policies predicted a 3% average monthly decrease for men (IRR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.95, 1.00) and a 4% decrease for women (IRR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.93, 0.99). All states' policy combinations are predicted to have increased drug-poisoning mortality. Conclusions. The economic supports that states enacted were insufficient to fully mitigate the adverse relationship between activity limitations and drug overdoses. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(7):714–722. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307621) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective In July 2018 the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics released a benchmark encouraging early care and education (ECE) programs, including child care centers and family child care homes, to incorporate cultural and religious food preferences of children into meals. We examined the extent to which states were already doing so through their ECE licensing and administrative regulations prior to the release of the benchmark. This review may serve as a baseline to assess future updates, if more states incorporate the benchmark into their regulations. Methods For this cross-sectional study, we reviewed ECE regulations for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (hereafter states) through June 2018. We assessed consistency with the benchmark for centers and homes. We conducted Spearman correlations to estimate associations between the year the regulations were updated and consistency with the benchmark. Results Among centers, eight states fully met the benchmark, 11 partially met the benchmark, and 32 did not meet the benchmark. Similarly for homes, four states fully met the benchmark, 13 partially met the benchmark, and 34 did not meet the benchmark. Meeting the benchmark was not correlated with the year of last update for centers (P = 0.54) or homes (P = 0.31). Conclusions Most states lacked regulations consistent with the benchmark. Health professionals can help encourage ECE programs to consider cultural and religious food preferences of children in meal planning. And, if feasible, states may consider additional regulations supporting cultural and religious preferences of children in future updates to regulations., Author(s): Anna Ayers Looby [sup.1] [sup.2] , Natasha Frost [sup.2] , Sarah Gonzalez-Nahm [sup.3] , Elyse R. Grossman [sup.3] , Julie Ralston Aoki [sup.2] , Sara E. Benjamin-Neelon [sup.3] [sup.4] [...]

To assess whether and how beverage companies incentivize universities to maximize sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) sales through pouring rights contracts. Cross-sectional study of contracts between beverage companies and public U.S. universities with 20,000 or more students active in 2018 or 2019. We requested contracts from 143 universities. The primary measures were presence of financial incentives and penalties tied to sales volume. 124 universities (87%) provided 131 unique contracts (64 Coca-Cola, 67 Pepsi). 125 contracts (95%) included at least one provision tying payments to sales volume. The most common incentive type was commissions, found in 104 contracts (79%). Nineteen contracts (15%) provided higher commissions or rebates for carbonated soft drinks compared to bottled water. Most contracts between universities and beverage companies incentivized universities to market and sell bottled beverages, particularly SSBs. Given the health risks associated with consumption of SSBs, universities should consider their role in promoting them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Excessive screen media use has been associated with a number of negative health outcomes in young children, including increased risk for obesity and comparatively lagging cognitive development. The purpose of this study was to assess state licensing regulations restricting screen media use for children under 24 months old in early care and education (ECE) and to compare regulations to a national standard. Methods We reviewed screen media use regulations for all US states for child care centers ('centers') and family child care homes ('homes') and compared these regulations to a national standard discouraging screen media use in children under 24 months of age. We assessed associations between state geographic region and year of last update with the presence of regulations consistent with the standard. In centers, 24 states had regulations limiting screen media use for children under 24 months of age and 19 states had regulations limiting screen media use in homes. Results More states in the South and fewer states in the Midwest had regulations limiting screen media use. The association between geographic region and regulations was not significant for centers (p = 0.06), but was for homes (p = 0.04). The year of last update (within the past 5 years versus older than 5 years) was not associated with regulations for centers (p = 0.18) or homes (p = 0.90). Discussion Many states lacked screen media use regulations for ECE. States should consider adding screen media use restrictions for children under 24 months based on current research data and current recommendations in future regulations updates., Author(s): Sarah Gonzalez-Nahm [sup.1] , Elyse R. Grossman [sup.1] , Natasha Frost [sup.2] , Carly Babcock [sup.1] , Sara E. Benjamin-Neelon [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (Aff1) 0000 0001 2171 9311, grid.21107.35, [...]

This Viewpoint discusses the potential of state taxation of cannabis products to curb use and raise revenue for public services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prior to the COVID‐19 pandemic, nearly 60% of children under 5 years of age were cared for in out‐of‐home child care arrangements in the United States. Thus, child care provides an opportunity to identify and address potential child maltreatment. However, during the pandemic, rates of reporting child maltreatment decreased—likely because children spent less time in the presence of mandated reporters. As children return to child care, states must have regulations in place to help child care providers prevent, recognize and report child maltreatment. However, little is known about the extent to which state regulations address child maltreatment. Therefore, the purpose of this cross‐sectional study was to assess state regulations related to child maltreatment and compare them to national standards. Method: We reviewed state regulations for all 50 states and the District of Columbia for child care centres ('centres') and family child care homes ('homes') through 31 July 2021 and compared these regulations to eight national health and safety standards on child maltreatment. We coded regulations as either not meeting, partially meeting or fully meeting each standard. Results: Three states (Colorado, Utah and Washington) had regulations for centres, and one state (Washington) had regulations for homes that at least partially met all eight national standards. Nearly all states had regulations consistent with the standards requiring that caregivers and teachers are mandated reporters of child maltreatment and requiring that they be trained in preventing, recognizing and reporting child maltreatment. One state (Hawaii) did not have regulations consistent with any of the national standards for either centres or homes. Conclusions: Generally, states lacked regulations related to the prevention, recognition and reporting of child maltreatment for both centres and homes. Encouraging states to adopt regulations that meet national standards and further exploring their impact on child welfare are important next steps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Many universities maintain pouring rights contracts (PRCs) with beverage companies wherein one company exchanges sponsorship payments for exclusive beverage marketing rights. Separately, universities may have healthy beverage initiatives (HBIs) to encourage healthier choices on campus. This study aimed to assess how and how frequently PRCs included provisions related to health and nutrition to examine how PRCs may support or undermine HBIs. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: U.S. public universities with >20,000 students. Sample: 131 PRCs obtained from 124 of 143 universities in 2019-2020. Measures: Primary outcomes were the presence of provisions that could encourage or discourage promotion of healthy beverages (water, diet soda, unsweetened coffee or tea, and 100% juice), and any other provisions explicitly or implicitly referencing health or nutrition. Analysis: Descriptive statistics. Results: Twelve contracts (9%) had explicit commitments from the company or university to promote healthy beverages or adhere to nutrition standards, including five committing to support HBIs, four committing to healthy vending policies, and three describing activities to promote healthy beverage brands. Ten (8%) had provisions explicitly inhibiting water promotion and 55 (42%) had provisions that could be interpreted that way. Eleven (8%) included other health and nutrition provisions, such as funding for unspecified wellness activities. Conclusion: Most university beverage contracts did not expressly aim to support healthy choices, and more than half had provisions potentially limiting universities' ability to implement HBIs. When present, nutrition standards were weak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol is responsible for 4,300 deaths a year in the U.S. among persons under 21. Alcohol companies innovate rapidly and produce new products, some of which prove popular among young people. The 18 “control jurisdictions” in the U.S. - those that exercise monopoly control over some aspect of alcohol distribution - have the ability to govern which products become available within their borders and have, at times, exercised that authority to block particular products from sale. Objectives: This paper is an exploratory study examining how states use regulatory authority in control jurisdictions to restrict the sale of new alcohol products within their borders, and the reasoning used to justify those decisions. Methods: The authors, collaborating with the National Alcohol Beverage Control Association, surveyed control state officials regarding procedures and policies governing the sale of new products in their jurisdictions. Results: Control jurisdictions have banned/restricted different products (e.g., grain alcohol and alcoholic energy drinks) for a variety of reasons (e.g., flavorings/packaging appealing to underage drinkers, blurring of distinctions between alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks, and judgment that the product was not socially responsible). Conclusions/ Importance: Although U.S. control jurisdictions universally have the authority to limit access to problematic alcohol products; they vary in the degree to which they use it. These states need to take action, and as of now, there is no systematic reasoning behind when and how states make decisions to ban/restrict these products. Greater exploration of regulatory authority in this arena could be protective of public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Child-targeted marketing can influence children's food preferences and childhood consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with negative health outcomes in both childhood and adulthood. This study explores how beverage companies are using pouring rights contracts (PRCs) with U.S. public universities to market SSBs to youth under 18 years of age. We obtained 139 PRCs (64 Coca-Cola, 67 Pepsi, 8 Gatorade) from 132 universities between June 2019 and August 2020. Each contract was coded by two reviewers who extracted quotes relevant to youth-targeted marketing activities. Twenty-two contracts in our sample (16%) contained a total of 25 provisions related to youth-targeted marketing. Nearly all youth-targeted marketing provisions (n = 24 of 25) were tied to university athletics. Most provisions (n = 19) described the marketing of specific beverages or involved the use of brand names that are also beverages (e.g., "Gatorade," "Coca-Cola"). Fifteen contracts included advertising or support for youth summer camps; five contracts allowed the beverage company to sponsor free experiences for children at university athletic events; three contracts allowed advertising at high school athletic events hosted at university facilities; and two contracts established programs for "underprivileged" or "disadvantaged" youth. Five contracts acknowledged that their provisions may be affected by laws or self-regulatory policies that limit advertising to children. Beverage companies should reconsider marketing to youth through PRCs, universities should carefully consider PRCs with youth-targeted provisions, and the government should further regulate and prevent youth-targeted marketing., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The Center for Science in the Public Interest’s work on university pouring rights is funded through grants from Bloomberg Philanthropies (Grant ID: 71208, www.bloomberg.org) and the From Now On Fund (fnofund.org). None of the authors declare a conflict of interest., (© 2022 The Authors.)