The perceived impact of the National Health Service on personalised nutrition service delivery among the UK public

Personalised nutrition (PN) has the potential to reduce disease risk and optimise health and performance. Although previous research has shown good acceptance of the concept of PN in the UK, preferences regarding the delivery of a PN service (e.g. online v. face-to-face) are not fully understood. It is anticipated that the presence of a free at point of delivery healthcare system, the National Health Service (NHS), in the UK may have an impact on end-user preferences for deliverances. To determine this, supplementary analysis of qualitative data obtained from focus group discussions on PN service delivery, collected as part of the Food4Me project in the UK and Ireland, was undertaken. Irish data provided comparative analysis of a healthcare system that is not provided free of charge at the point of delivery to the entire population. Analyses were conducted using the 'framework approach' described by Rabiee (Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proc Nutr Soc 63, 655-660). There was a preference for services to be led by the government and delivered face-to-face, which was perceived to increase trust and transparency, and add value. Both countries associated paying for nutritional advice with increased commitment and motivation to follow guidelines. Contrary to Ireland, however, and despite the perceived benefit of paying, UK discussants still expected PN services to be delivered free of charge by the NHS. Consideration of this unique challenge of free healthcare that is embedded in the NHS culture will be crucial when introducing PN to the UK.

Factors influencing European consumer uptake of personalised nutrition: results of a qualitative analysis

The aim of this research was to explore consumer perceptions of personalised nutrition and to compare these across three different levels of ‘‘medicalization’’: lifestyle assessment (no blood sampling); phenotypic assessment (blood sampling); genomic assessment (blood and buccal sampling). The protocol was developed from two pilot focus groups conducted in the UK. Two focus groups (one comprising only ‘‘older’’ individuals between 30 and 60 years old, the other of adults 18–65 yrs of age) were run in the UK, Spain, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Germany (N = 16). The analysis (guided using grounded theory) suggested that personalised nutrition was perceived in terms of benefit to health and fitness and that convenience was an important driver of uptake. Negative attitudes were associated with internet delivery but not with personalised nutrition per se. Barriers to uptake were linked to broader technological issues associated with data protection, trust in regulator and service providers. Services that required a fee were expected to be of better quality and more secure. An efficacious, transparent and trustworthy regulatory framework for personalised nutrition is required to alleviate consumer concern. In addition, developing trust in service providers is important if such services to be successful.

Sticking to the script? The co-production of Neighbourhood Planning in England

Efforts to engage with communities in spatial planning have been criticised as being tokenistic, vehicles for co-option or designed to promote neo-liberal agendas. The introduction of neighbourhood planning (NP) in England under the Localism Act (2011) is claimed by proponents to be a step change in the way that local communities are involved in planning their own areas. However, little empirical evidence has yet emerged to substantiate such claims, or provide details about the practices and experiences of NP. The paper highlights that there are numerous parties involved in the co-production of Neighbourhood Development Plans and there are numerous instances where ideas, policies and priorities that emerge from within neighbourhoods are being ‘rescripted’ to ensure conformity to a bounded form of collaboration.

Activation of the G-protein coupled receptor 30 (GPR30) has different effects on anxiety in male and female mice

The GPR30, a former orphan GPCR, is a putative membrane estrogen receptor that can activate rapid signaling pathways such as extracellular regulated kinase (ERK) in a variety of cells and may contribute to estrogen's effects in the central nervous system. The distribution of GPR30 in the limbic system predicts a role for this receptor in the regulation of learning and memory and anxiety by estrogens. Though acute G-1 treatment is reported to be anxiogenic in ovariectomised female mice and in gonadally intact male mice, the effect of GPR30 activation is unknown in gonadectomised male mice. In this study, we show that an acute administration of G-1 to gonadectomised male mice, but not female mice, was anxiolytic on an elevated plus maze task, without affecting locomotor activity. In addition, though G-1 treatment did not regulate ERK, it was associated with increased estrogen receptor (ER)alpha phosphorylation in the ventral, but not dorsal, hippocampus of males. In the female, G-1 increased the ERK activation solely in the dorsal hippocampus, independent of state anxiety. This is the first study to report an anxiolytic effect of GPR30 activation in male mice, in a rapid time frame that is commensurate with non-genomic signaling by estrogen.