Low-carbohydrate diets (LCDs) have regained popularity in recent years, but public awareness and perceived healthfulness of LCDs have not been explored. We describe population awareness, use, and perceptions of the healthfulness of LCDs and examine differences by sociodemographic and communication variables.
Nationally representative data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2005) were analyzed by using multivariate logistic regression to examine independent correlates of awareness, use, and perceptions of the healthfulness of LCDs.
Awareness of LCDs in the United States was high (86.6%). Independent correlates of awareness included being a college graduate, being non-Hispanic white, and having a high body mass index (BMI). Among respondents who were aware of LCDs, approximately 17% had tried LCDs during the last year. Independent correlates of LCD use included being a woman and having a high BMI. One-third of respondents who were aware of LCDs agreed that they are a healthy way to lose weight. Independent correlates of perceived LCD healthfulness included not being a high school graduate and being likely to change behavior in response to new nutrition recommendations.
This study is among the first to explore correlates of awareness, use, and perceptions of LCDs in a nationally representative sample. Despite high levels of awareness of LCDs, these diets are not used frequently and are not perceived as being healthy.
Since the publication of
In 2005, dietary experts from government, academia, and industry convened the International Life Sciences Institute North America Technical Committee on Carbohydrates to review scientific evidence about the healthfulness of LCDs. This committee identified gaps in existing research, including a need to assess awareness and trends in adoption of LCDs (
The purpose of our research was to use national data to explore the correlates of awareness, use, and perceptions of LCDs, including sociodemographic characteristics and key communication variables. The efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of LCDs have been a matter of scientific debate. Given the controversy surrounding these issues, we neither endorse nor denounce LCDs but rather describe national patterns. To our knowledge, the 2005 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) provides the first available nationally representative data that document awareness, use, and perceptions of LCDs, and we help fill a gap in the literature by analyzing these data to reveal trends.
We analyzed data from HINTS 2005. HINTS collects nationally representative data about the American public's need for, access to, and use of health-related information, including data that assess knowledge and attitudes about and behavior concerning nutrition and diet.
Data for HINTS were collected from February through August 2005. The list-assisted sample design followed a random-digit–dial format, in which all US telephone exchanges were included. One adult from each household was selected for an interview, which was conducted in English or Spanish on the basis of respondent preference. The total sample was 5,586 adults. The response rate for the household screener was 34.0%, and the response rate for extended interview was 61.3%, resulting in an overall response rate of 20.8%. All respondents provided sociodemographic information and answered questions about awareness, use, and perceptions about LCDs, and half of respondents were randomly assigned questions about nutrition-related behavior and information seeking. Details about sampling design are published elsewhere (
To assess behavioral reactions to nutrition recommendations, respondents were asked, "Think about the last time you heard a new recommendation about nutrition. Which of the following things did you do in response to the new recommendation?" Response options were coded dichotomously: "I changed what I do" and "I did not change what I do" or "I waited to get more information." To assess confusion about nutrition recommendations, respondents were asked to rate on a 4-point scale their agreement (
Outcome variables for our study were awareness of LCDs, use of LCDs, and perceptions about the healthfulness of LCDs. Responses to these 3 questions were yes or no. Awareness of LCDs was assessed for all respondents by asking a question about highly visible LCDs instead of providing an explicit definition of LCDs: "Are you aware of low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets such as the Atkins Diet, the Zone, Sugar Busters, or the South Beach Diet?" Use of LCDs was assessed by asking respondents who were aware of LCDs the following question: "Have you tried a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet in the past 12 months?" (In our analyses, respondents who had never heard of LCDs (n = 584) were designated as having never tried LCDs.) Perception of the healthfulness of LCDs was assessed by asking respondents who were aware of LCDs the following question: "Do you think that a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet is a healthy way to lose weight?"
We used SUDAAN version 9.0.1 (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina) to estimate standard errors of point estimates for the complex survey data. All data were weighted to provide representative estimates of the adult US population. Descriptive analyses were conducted for all variables. The Pearson correlation and the χ2 test were conducted to examine associations among variables. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine independent correlates of awareness, use, and perceived healthfulness of LCDs. Variables that were significantly (
Weighted percentages for sociodemographic characteristics of the sample are summarized in
Because of the lack of consensus among health professionals about LCDs, using these diets to manage weight is controversial. Insight into the correlates of awareness, use, and perceptions of LCDs helps show how sociodemographic characteristics and communication behaviors relate to the way people react to an environment of multiple and occasionally contradictory nutrition messages. Our results showed high awareness of LCDs among Americans, which is not surprising because data for HINTS 2005 were collected when LCDs were highly publicized in the media.
Respondents who were highly educated, were non-Hispanic white, and had a high BMI were most likely to be aware of LCDs. Among respondents who were aware of LCDs, those with a low level of education and who reported a high likelihood of changing their behavior in response to new nutrition recommendations were more likely to perceive LCDs as a healthy way to lose weight. This pattern of awareness is consistent with the "knowledge gap" theory that health knowledge is unequally distributed. This gap is characterized by a discrepancy between people from high socioeconomic status (SES) groups who tend to have more information (or are "information rich") than do people from low SES groups (who are "information poor") (
Estimates of LCD use in our sample were approximately 5 times greater than those found in a previous study, which reported a prevalence of 3.4% (
HINTS 2005 was not a prospective study. Therefore, results of our analyses provide a cross-sectional view of public perceptions of LCDs. Response rates for HINTS 2005, although comparable to those of other national telephone surveys, reflect the low response rates for telephone surveys in general (
Results of our study provide insight into the sociodemographic and communication behavior correlates of awareness, use, and perceived healthfulness of LCDs in a nationally representative sample. This insight can shape efforts to promote awareness and use of evidence-based nutrition recommendations to bolster public knowledge of healthful dietary practices.
Awareness, Use, and Perceptions of Low-Carbohydrate Diets by Participants (N = 5,586)
| No. Who Are Aware of LCDs (%) | No. Who Perceive LCDs as Healthy (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 4,844 (86.6) | 1,015 (16.8) | 1,408 (33.7) | |
| Male | 1,591 (83.1) | 291 (13.7) | 503 (37.5) |
| Female | 3,253 (89.8) | 724 (19.6) | 905 (30.5) |
| <.001 | <.001 | <.001 | |
| <High school | 444 (63.8) | 104 (13.9) | 194 (53.9) |
| High school graduate | 2,719 (88.7) | 543 (16.6) | 803 (34.1) |
| College graduate | 1,632 (96.0) | 362 (19.7) | 392 (24.2) |
| <.001 | .02 | <.001 | |
| Non-Hispanic white | 3,848 (93.3) | 787 (17.8) | 1,012 (28.4) |
| Non-Hispanic black | 348 (75.1) | 68 (14.6) | 132 (46.8) |
| Hispanic | 329 (64.5) | 78 (11.4) | 149 (52.9) |
| Other | 244 (81.8) | 66 (21.4) | 80 (40.6) |
| <.001 | .009 | <.001 | |
| <25,000 | 953 (75.5) | 174 (13.4) | 351 (44.4) |
| 25,000-49,999 | 1,094 (85.6) | 224 (16.3) | 313 (34.4) |
| 50,000-74,999 | 880 (94.5) | 206 (21.7) | 238 (32.1) |
| ≥75,000 | 1,110 (94.0) | 272 (20.6) | 291 (27.1) |
| <.001 | .002 | .001 | |
| Yes | 344 (82.2) | 101 (25.1) | 145 (51.6) |
| No | 1,232 (90.6) | 294 (19.8) | 372 (34.0) |
| .005 | .17 | .001 | |
| Agree | 1,964 (86.7) | 408 (16.3) | 577 (32.9) |
| Disagree | 442 (85.6) | 94 (15.8) | 135 (32.8) |
| .70 | .80 | .98 | |
| Television | |||
| A lot/some | 969 (95.0) | 212 (20.1) | 266 (29.9) |
| A little/not at all | 580 (92.9) | 129 (18.9) | 155 (25.2) |
| .28 | .60 | .14 | |
| Newspapers | |||
| A lot/some | 741 (94.8) | 165 (21.1) | 204 (30.6) |
| A little/not at all | 704 (94.4) | 149 (17.9) | 188 (26.1) |
| .83 | .20 | .21 | |
| Magazines | |||
| A lot/some | 912 (95.7) | 218 (21.8) | 251 (28.5) |
| A little/not at all | 530 (92.9) | 97 (16.2) | 140 (28.3) |
| .20 | .06 | .97 | |
| Internet | |||
| A lot/some | 417 (98.0) | 119 (24.5) | 98 (22.4) |
| A little/not at all | 642 (95.4) | 130 (15.9) | 167 (24.9) |
| .13 | .009 | .47 | |
| Health care professionals | |||
| A lot/some | 581 (93.2) | 144 (23.8) | 170 (32.3) |
| A little/not at all | 996 (94.9) | 204 (17.0) | 257 (25.6) |
| .33 | .01 | .02 | |
| 18-34 | 874 (83.9) | 153 (12.2) | 233 (29.4) |
| 35-49 | 1,322 (87.7) | 306 (19.7) | 359 (33.2) |
| 50-64 | 1,381 (90.6) | 331 (19.8) | 404 (34.8) |
| 65-74 | 717 (89.4) | 152 (19.4) | 225 (41.0) |
| ≥75 | 539 (76.4) | 73 (11.8) | 184 (46.4) |
| <.001 | <.001 | <.001 | |
| Mean body mass index | 27.2 | 29.1 | 27.4 |
| <.001 | .01 | <.001 | |
Abbreviation: LCDs, low-carbohydrate diets.
Sample sizes vary by item because of missing data; responses of "don't know" and "refused" were coded as missing.
Includes all participants who responded that they had tried an LCD during the past 12 months. We classified respondents who reported not being aware of LCDs (n = 584) as not having tried LCDs.
Inclusion of nutrition-related behavior and information-seeking questions in the multivariate model substantially reduced the sample sizes because only half of the total sample was randomized to receive these questions.
Body mass index calculated as [weight (lb)/(height [in])2] x 703; respondents self-reported weight in pounds and height in feet and inches.
Correlates of Awareness, Use, and Perceived Healthfulness of Low-Carbohydrate Diets, Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS), United States, 2005
| Respondent Characteristic | Model A | Model B | Model C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aware of LCDs (n = 1,658), OR (95% CI) | Use LCDs | Believe LCDs Are Healthy (n = 935), OR (95% CI) | |
| Male | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| Female | 1.47 (0.87-2.51) | 1.67 (1.09-2.55) | 0.71 (0.45-1.10) |
| .15 | .02 | .12 | |
| NA | 1.00 (1.00-1.00) | 1.00 (0.98-1.03) | |
| NA | .99 | .84 | |
| <High school | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| High school graduate | 3.48 (1.64-7.37) | 1.25 (0.27-5.92) | 0.23 (0.09-0.56) |
| College graduate | 10.10 (3.82-26.75) | 1.64 (0.32-8.53) | 0.17 (0.06-0.45) |
| <.001 | .34 | .003 | |
| Non-Hispanic white | Ref | Ref | Ref |
| Non-Hispanic black | 0.16 (0.08-0.34) | 0.86 (0.34-2.18) | 1.88 (0.79-4.47) |
| Hispanic | 0.24 (0.13-0.47) | 1.70 (0.48-6.02) | 1.32 (0.53-3.29) |
| Other | 0.38 (0.11-1.31) | 0.64 (0.18-2.20) | 2.17 (0.79-5.97) |
| <.001 | .69 | .15 | |
| 1.00 (0.99-1.01) | 1.00 (0.99-1.00) | 0.99 (0.99-1.00) | |
| .69 | .45 | .06 | |
| 1.09 (1.02-1.17) | 1.06 (1.03-1.10) | 0.99 (0.95-1.03) | |
| .01 | <.001 | .70 | |
| No | Ref | NA | Ref |
| Yes | 0.62 (0.33-1.15) | NA | 3.04 (1.88-4.91) |
| .13 | NA | <.001 | |
| A lot/some | NA | Ref | NA |
| Little/not at all | NA | 1.00 (0.66-1.51) | NA |
| NA | .02 | NA | |
| A lot/some | NA | Ref | Ref |
| Little/not at all | NA | 0.61 (0.40-0.93) | 0.82 (0.56-1.19) |
| NA | .99 | .29 | |
Abbreviations: LCDs, low-carbohydrate diets; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; Ref, referent; NA, not applicable.
Includes all participants who responded that they had tried an LCD in the last 12 months.
The 10-level categorical variable for income was treated as continuous in this model.
Body mass index calculated as [weight (lb)/(height [in])2] x 703; respondents self-reported weight in pounds and height in feet and inches.
Inclusion of nutrition-related behavior and information-seeking questions in the multivariate model substantially reduced the sample sizes because only half of the total sample was randomized to receive these questions. Information-seeking questions about the Internet and health care professionals referred to activities performed during the past 12 months.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above. URLs for nonfederal organizations are provided solely as a service to our users. URLs do not constitute an endorsement of any organization by CDC or the federal government, and none should be inferred. CDC is not responsible for the content of Web pages found at these URLs.