Drinking sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), instead of plain water, is associated with poorer health outcomes and a higher risk of developing diet-related chronic diseases. However, public distrust of the local water supply may deter the intake of plain drinking water. A recent study investigated the perceptions of tap and bottled water safety, as well as plain water and SSB intake of participants following reports on drinking water quality violations in the US, specifically the Flint water crisis. Researchers used survey data on 4,041 American adults in 2018. They found that 1 in 7 adults did not think their tap water at home was safe to drink, 2 in 5 adults thought bottled water was safer than tap water, and 1 in 4 adults did not like the taste of their local tap water. Those with negative perceptions of tap water safety and taste reported low tap water intake and were more likely to consume bottled water. The study also identified an association between perceiving bottled water as safer than tap water and a higher SSB intake. This research provides guidance for effective interventions to promote water consumption and address perceptions of water safety. The study was published in the American Journal of Public Health Promotion by the following researchers: Sohyun Park, Stephen Onufrak, and Heidi Blanck of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Angie Cradock of Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Anisha Patel of Stanford University, and Christina Hecht of the Nutrition Policy Institute.

Healthy default beverage laws require restaurants to list healthier beverages—such as water or unflavored milk as opposed to sugary drinks—as the default option for children's meals. These laws intend to address unhealthy beverage consumption by young children, directing consumers toward healthier beverage choices at no additional cost. New research evaluates the adherence of children's meals to healthy default beverage laws from online restaurant meal ordering platforms available in Los Angeles, Baltimore, and New York City. Among over 100 of the top-grossing restaurant chains sampled, fewer than 3% of online children meal orders in any jurisdiction adhered to the strictest interpretation of the healthy default beverage laws. Varying adherence to healthy default beverage laws by jurisdiction was found and may be attributable to differing definitions of a healthy beverage. For example, California's law considers non-flavored milk and water as healthy default beverage options, while Baltimore and New York laws also allow 100% juice and flavored milk. Policy can be optimized by clearly defining  healthy beverages, bundled children's meals, and what constitutes adherence to the law for online ordering platforms. The study, published in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine, was conducted by Daniel Zaltz and Sara Benjamin-Neelson of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Danielle Lee, Gail Woodward-Lopez, and Lorrene Ritchie of the Nutrition Policy Institute, and Sara Bleich of Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health with partial support from a grant from the National Institutes of Health (no. T32DK062707).

The federal Special Supplemental Nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children, known as WIC, aims to safeguard the health of over 6 million low-income women, infants, and children up to age 5 in the United States by providing nutritious foods, information on healthy eating, and referrals for additional services. Nutrition education is an essential feature of WIC, making it unique compared to other federal nutrition programs. Researchers evaluated differences in WIC participants' perceptions and satisfaction with WIC nutrition education and services by race, ethnicity, and language preference in a sample of nearly 3000 California WIC participants surveyed in 2019. Spanish-speaking Hispanic participants reported the highest levels of satisfaction with WIC nutrition education compared to other groups. Hispanic participants were also more likely to change their behaviors after receiving WIC nutrition education compared to non-Hispanic White and Black participants. Participants prefer to receive WIC nutrition education through a variety of methods including in-person one-on-one, video/DVD, online, group sessions, and two-way text messaging. Across all groups, participants reported that the fruits and vegetables they receive in the child WIC food package was the top reason for continuing to participate in WIC. These findings can inform efforts to improve WIC participant retention. The study was published in the journal Nutrients. Study contributors include Alana Chaney and Lauren Au from UC Davis, Lorrene Ritchie and Marisa Tsai from the UC Nutrition Policy Institute, Shannon Whaley, Catherine Yepez, and Martha Meza from Public Health Foundation Enterprises-WIC, a program of Heluna Health, Hallie Randel-Schreiber from the San Francisco Department of Public Health, and Susan Sabatier and Adrian Young from the California Department of Public Health, WIC Division. The research was funded by The David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the California Department of Public Health WIC Division.

The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) lifts more families with children out of poverty than any other social safety net support in the United States. The EITC and the CalEITC provide income support up to $6000 for qualifying economically disadvantaged California families, but studies suggest that at least 20% of eligible families are not accessing the benefits. The Assessing California Communities' Experiences with Safety Net Supports Survey (ACCESS) study was launched to understand awareness, access, and barriers to EITC take-up. A recent ACCESS publication shows that among 411 EITC-eligible California female caregivers of young children interviewed from August 2020 to April 2021, 9% did not receive EITC benefits because they did not file taxes. Another 16% did file taxes but did not get the EITC despite being eligible. The people least likely to receive the EITC may be those who would benefit from it most: people who speak a primary language other than English, younger parents/caregivers, and those with lower incomes. Differences in EITC receipt were found according to how tax filers filed their taxes. The paper, published in the Health Affairs Journal, was written by co-first authors Wendi Gosliner from the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources Nutrition Policy Institute and Rita Hamad from UC San Francisco, as well Erika Brown, Mekhala Hoskote, Kaitlyn Jackson from UC San Francisco, and senior author Lia Fernald from UC Berkeley. The research was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation with additional support from the Tipping Point Foundation and the UC Berkeley Population Center.