Content uploaded by Donna Pendergast
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Donna Pendergast on Apr 20, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
2
Journal of the HEIA
Vol. 27, No. 1, 2022 Eating without hunger:
Why we can’t stop, and what
we can do about it
Dr Nikki Boswell and Dr Donna Pendergast
This paper has been peer reviewed. It was presented at the national conference of the
Home Economics Institute of Australia, 27–29 September 2021.
Introduction
The rates of diet-related health problems and
obesity are undoubtedly some of the most critical
agendas of the 21st century. Despite decades of
public-health attention, education agendas and
personal efforts, rates of overweight and obesity
have continued to rise over the past 30 years,
with 63% of adults and 27% of children (aged
5–17 years) in Australia currently overweight
or obese (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS],
2013; ABS, 2015; Australian Institute of Health
and Welfare [AIHW], 2018; Olds et al., 2010).
Among young adults (18–24 years of age) in
particular, overweight and obesity increased by
18% over a three-year period (2014/15–2018)
(AIHW, 2018). Likewise, in a pattern evident
since 2007, national data indicate that 49% of
Australian adults fail to eat the recommended
intakes of fruit and 92% do not consume the
recommended intakes of vegetables (AIHW,
2018). Furthermore, Australian adults and
youth derive 33–41% of their daily energy from
discretionary foods: equivalent to 5–8 serves per
day, compared with the recommended 0–3 serves
per day (AIHW, 2018).
While diet is only one facet underpinning the
etiology of obesity, public-health attention and
education messages have largely promoted energy
balance and nutritious food choice as the primary
means of addressing this public-health issue. This
biomedical approach (i.e., kilojoule counting,
restriction of food type and/or quantity) to
diet-related health problems and obesity has not
only proven to be ineffective, but it also has the
potential to compromise peoples’ relationships
with food and eating occasions (Brewer et al.,
2018; Leahy, 2014; Lupton, 2015; Rothblum,
2018). This approach can contribute to repeated
cycles of dieting, accompanied by a sense of
failure, shame, guilt, diminished self-worth and
an increasing fixation on gaining control of
eating, which inadvertently perpetuate poor eating
habits, a lack of attunement to internal eating
cues, and eating without hunger (O’Loghlen
et al., 2021). A growing understanding of the
neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms
that underpin eating behaviours helps to explain
this phenomenon and why current public-health
efforts and individual approaches to improving
rates of diet-related health problems and obesity
are failing. It also paves the way for a new
generation of intervention that shifts the focus
away from a biomedical perspective (Brewer et al.,
2018; O’Loghlen et al., 2021).
This paper aims to ‘ignite’ a new approach to the
critical agenda of diet-related health problems and
obesity; an approach focused on understanding
hunger, on reinstating internal cues to eating,
and on generating food environments that allow
hunger to be honoured. This paper will examine
the underpinning factors that contribute to
eating without hunger and will help to build
an understanding of why current strategies
and approaches to diet-related health problems
are failing, after which strategies to reconnect
people with food and eating experiences will
be presented. Examining both individual and
population-level drivers of eating behaviours can
begin to resolve the incessant need to eat without
hunger, while supporting nutritious food choices
and overcoming the demeaning ‘diet cycle’ that
compromises a healthy relationship with food.
The importance of this understanding to home
economics educators—both in schools and in other
professional settings—cannot be understated.
Research about the potential positive influence
of home economics teachers (Ronto et al., 2016a)
and the influence of school environments on food
literacy have been increasingly highlighted (Ronto
et al., 2016b) as crucial components to address
diet-related health problems and obesity.
Contact details:
Dr Nikki Boswell
E. boswell.nikki@gmail.com
Dr Donna Pendergast
E. d.pendergast@griffith.edu.au
3
Eating without hunger: Why we can’t stop, and what we can do about it
To develop an understanding of what drives
eating, this paper starts with a review of the
literature on eating behaviours. The paper
then examines the relationship between eating
behaviours and diet quality, as well as changes
in eating behaviours occurring across the life
course. Individual and environmental factors
influencing eating behaviours and triggering
eating beyond hunger are also explored, followed
by a consideration of practical applications, with
the aim of fostering the ability to eat intuitively
and in accordance with genuine hunger.
Eating behaviours
Eating behaviours encompass a broad range of
actions related to food intake, choices, motives
and eating-related practices (LaCaille, 2013).
For the purpose of this paper, the term ‘eating
behaviours’ is specifically used to describe a
range of observable or subjectively measured
ways of behaving, as manifestations of complex
physiological, biological, psychological and
sociological eating-based determinants (Boswell
et al., 2018). From this perspective, eating
behaviours are driven by interactions between
internal neurobiological regulatory systems and
external factors, such as those within the food
environment (Jansen et al., 2012; Steinsbekk
et al., 2017). These interactions are consistent
with the behavioural susceptibility theory
which posits that when genetic susceptibility
and environmental circumstances interact,
‘obesogenic’ behaviours ensue (Llewellyn &
Fildes, 2017). This mediating role of eating
behaviours in the development of obesity is
shown by Boswell and colleagues (2018). A wide
body of literature supports the idea that, for both
adults and children, eating behaviours reflecting
a movement towards, or a desire for food (food
approach behaviours) are positively associated
with increased body weight, while behaviours
that involve movement away from food (food
avoidance eating behaviours) are associated with
decreased weight status (Mallan et al., 2017;
Spence et al., 2011; Vandeweghe et al., 2016;
Wardle et al., 2001; Webber et al., 2009). Thus,
an individual balance between food approach
and food avoidance eating behaviours is desirable
to achieve and maintain a healthy body weight.
In understanding this mediating role of eating
behaviours, various studies have suggested that
variances in eating behaviours precede the
development of obesity in infants and young
children, but not necessarily in older children,
in whom increases in weight status precede
obesogenic eating behaviours (Derks et al., 2018;
Mallan et al., 2014; van Jaarsveld et al., 2011;
van Jaarsveld et al., 2014). This change could be
underpinned by alterations in body composition
and/or metabolic roles of tissue, hormones, and
other underpinning neurobiological aspects of
hunger and appetite during childhood, as will
be discussed below in detail (Druce & Bloom,
2006; Soriano-Guillén et al., 2004; Spear, 2011;
Steinsbekk et al, 2017; Story et al., 2002; Yu &
Kim, 2012).
Eating behaviours reflect the constructs of both
‘hunger’ (the physiological need for food to
sustain biological processes, i.e., homeostatic
hunger) and ‘appetite’ (the wanting or liking of
food or eating experiences beyond physiological
needs, i.e., hedonic appetite). Despite being
distinctly unique constructs, homeostatic hunger
and hedonic appetite share underpinning
neurobiological pathways (Boswell et al., 2018).
For instance, the hypothalamus plays a key
role in hedonic appetite through integrating
the sensory properties of food with the reward-
related midbrain (dopamine) neurocircuitry,
while also being a key site in which ghrelin, a
hormone that stimulates hunger, binds to the
growth receptors (Druce & Bloom, 2006; Perry
& Wang, 2012; Yu & Kim, 2012). Consequently,
this neurocircuitry system has an important
role in explaining the vulnerability of eating
behaviours to maladaptation that can contribute
to the risk of obesity (Berthoud, 2011; Lutter &
Nestler, 2009). Such behaviours reflect chronic
suppression of satiety (fullness) cues, so that
eating fails to cease once energy requirements
are satisfied, as well as chronic heightening of
hedonic eating behaviours, so that eating starts
or continues in the absence of hunger (Boswell
et al., 2018; Chodkowski et al., 2016; Cornier et
al., 2013; Webber et al., 2009). These disruptions
in stopping and starting eating may reflect
internal susceptibility to dysregulation of eating
behaviours or a vulnerability to external influence
on eating behaviours (Chaput & St-Onge, 2014;
Llewellyn & Fildes, 2017).
These differing underpinning mechanisms that
drive eating behaviours and help explain why
we eat when we aren’t hungry are influenced
by a range of factors. These include innate
and genetic factors; psychosocial factors, such
as socio-economic status; interpersonal factors,
such as parental feeding strategies and cultural
practices; environmental factors, such as the
access and availability of food and advertising;
as well as policies and practices underpinned by
sociocultural norms, expectations and values.
Eating behaviours
are driven by
interactions
between internal
neurobiological
regulatory systems
and external factors,
such as those
within the food
environment.
4
Journal of the HEIA Vol. 27, No. 1, 2022
Innate changes in eating behaviours
While much variability in eating behaviours
exists between individuals, humans are innately
programmed to display food approach behaviours
in response to the sensory properties of energy-
dense foods. This attraction ensures that energy
requirements are prioritised, while strong
neurobiological and psychological connections
are established that subconsciously remind us
when, where and how to obtain these energy-
dense foods. These connections can be seen in
the literature related to eating behaviours and
diet quality (Fildes et al., 2015). As nutritional
needs differ greatly across the life course, the
innate underpinning mechanisms that drive
eating behaviours also change over time.
Eating behaviours and diet quality
In addition to consistently showing a relationship
with weight status, eating behaviours also
relate to food preference and dietary intake.
Thus, eating behaviours relate to the quantity
of food eaten and to the types and quality
of food selected. For instance, young children
have innate preferences for sweet flavours and
aversions to bitter compounds such as those
found in vegetables, a situation believed to
be evolutionarily advantageous (Beauchamp &
Mennella, 2009; Ventura & Worobey, 2013;
Webber et al., 2009). Sweetness in foods indicates
readily available energy, so preferentially selecting
sweet foods ensures physiological needs for
energy are prioritised. To ensure this preferential
selection, consumption of sweet foods is
associated with opioid and dopamine signalling
in the mesolimbic region of the brain—the
reward centre—so we are motivated to continue
to select such ‘rewarding’ foods (Berridge et
al., 2009; Reichelt et al., 2015; Saper et al.,
2002). Similarly, as bitterness can indicate that
a food may be poisonous, behaviours such as
food refusal, ‘fussiness,’ and food neophobia
in young children are thought to be innately
adaptive behaviours, safeguarding a child from
new, unfamiliar and potentially harmful foods
(Beauchamp & Mennella, 2009; Ventura &
Worobey, 2013; Webber et al., 2009).
A study of two groups of children, aged 16
months and 3–4 years, showed these innate
eating behaviours and dietary preferences. Food
responsiveness1, a food approach eating behaviour,
was positively associated with preference for non-
core foods, while the food avoidance eating
1 Food Responsiveness is a subscale of the Children’s Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (as are Satiety Responsiveness,
Slowness in Eating, and Food Fussiness). Specif ically, the subscale Food Responsiveness captures a child’s tendency
to want and like food and eating occasions.
behaviours of satiety responsiveness, slowness
in eating and food fussiness were negatively
associated with liking vegetables (Fildes et al.,
2015). Non-core, ultra-processed foods (generally
energy-dense foods high in sugar, salt and added
fats) are formulated to maximise the activation
of hedonic neurological pathways so that the
reinforcing value of foods (liking) is altered and
inhibitory neural control is weakened (Boswell
et al., 2018). Evidence suggests that chronic
consumption of ultra-processed foods can result
in neuroadaptations and functional changes in
signalling in the reward circuitry of the brain
(Lutter & Nestler, 2009; Reichelt et al., 2015;
Saper et al., 2002). These changes may promote
cravings, anticipatory cues of future food
rewards and food-seeking through activation of
the dopamine circuitry, thus heightening the
preference for non-core foods and altering eating
behaviours (Lutter & Nestler, 2009; Reichelt et
al., 2015; Saper et al., 2002).
This impact of non-core, ultra-processed foods
on eating behaviours and food preference can
occur even before a child is born. Experimental
studies in rats show that offspring exposed in
utero to foods high in fat, sugar and salt through
the maternal diet had greater preference for
these foods in early life, and that these results
are possibly applicable to humans (Mühlhäusler
et al., 2008; Ong & Muhlhausler, 2011). In the
same way that the vulnerability of these innate,
neurobiological preferences for energy-dense
foods can be manipulated via food exposure,
these appetite systems are vulnerable to alteration
due to a range of interpersonal and environmental
factors. That is, alterations in appetite hormones
(including leptin, ghrelin and cortisol) have also
been noted as a result of genetic variances, early
life feeding practices, chronic stress, general
disadvantage and discrimination, and inadequate
sleep; all of which result in variations in hunger
and satiation, food preferences/cravings and
selective attention toward food (Beijers et al.,
2013; Cheon & Hong, 2017; Dubois et al.,
2007; McEwen & Gianaros, 2010; Sominsky &
Spencer, 2014; Taheri et al., 2004).
Why we eat when we aren’t
hungry—Influences on eating
behaviours
The literature reviewed shows that humans
are innately programmed to seek out energy
dense and highly rewarding foods, routinely
and subconsciously establishing neurological and
The impact of non-
core, ultra-processed
foods on eating
behaviours and
food preference can
occur even before a
child is born.
5
Eating without hunger: Why we can’t stop, and what we can do about it
psychological connections with food that ensures
prioritising energy intake. From an evolutionary
standpoint, it is advantageous to develop these
connections with food and eating experiences
so that we remember when, where and how to
satisfy physiological needs (Brewer et al., 2018).
In our modern food environment, however, these
connections to food and eating occasions can be
problematic and ultimately drive an incessant
desire to eat, even when we aren’t hungry.
At an environmental level, factors such as food
advertising and marketing, positioning food as
a reward, and using food for emotional comfort,
distort people’s psychological relationships
with food and eating, and establish cues that
trigger desires to eat (Brewer et al., 2018). Such
environments cause control of eating to be biased
away from innate regulatory systems, instead
allowing external, learned behavioural processes
to become dominant (Brewer et al., 2018).
These learned processes can manipulate the
innate neurobiological regulatory mechanisms,
creating a potent interaction between innate
eating behaviours and the food environment that
undermines the ability to eat in accordance with
true hunger (Anderson et al., 2016; Brewer et
al., 2018).
The impact of food cues is shown in an
experimental study of children (aged 7–11 years)
who were exposed to food advertising while
viewing a cartoon. During the experiment, the
subjects consumed 45% more of a given snack
compared with children shown a cartoon with
non-food advertising (Zimmerman & Shimoga,
2014). Similarly, results of an experimental study
of university students (aged 18 years or older)
showed that those exposed to food advertising
chose 28% more unhealthy snacks than those
exposed to non-food advertising (Zimmerman &
Shimoga, 2014).
Using food as a reward for eating fewer desirable
foods or for engaging in desired behaviours
establishes a food cue that alters eating behaviours
by positioning food as an extrinsic and highly
desirable commodity. This was seen in a study of
Australian children aged 2–5 years, where the use
of food as a reward, among other non-responsive
feeding strategies, was related to increases in food
fussiness, food responsiveness and weight status
(Boswell et al., 2019). While the direction of
the relationship between eating behaviours and
food rewards as an external eating cue cannot
be determined from this study, results from the
NOURISH randomised control trial show that
using responsive feeding practices, including
not using food as a reward, resulted in children
displaying less food responsiveness and more
satiety responsiveness at the 3.5-years follow up
(Magarey et al., 2016). Reflective of this, shared
environmental factors are reported to explain
41% of food responsiveness, 28% of satiety
responsiveness, 47% of enjoyment of food, 16%
of slowness in eating, and 46% of food fussiness
(Herle et al., 2017; Llewellyn et al., 2010; Smith
et al., 2017).
Likewise, food cues related to emotional
discomfort are also established when food is offered
or used to soothe emotional distress. Emotional
eating—both overeating and undereating—is
explained almost exclusively by environmental
conditioning (i.e., no innate underpinnings),
unlike other eating behaviours, which are
explained by a combination of environmental
and innate (or genetic) factors (Herle et al.,
2017; Llewellyn et al., 2010; Smith et al., 2017).
While equivalent studies of eating behaviours in
adults are not available, unique environmental
factors have been reported to account for 57%
(95% confidence interval [CI] 50–65%) of the
variance in adult restrained eating, with genetics
accounting for the remaining 43% of variance
in this eating behaviour (Schur et al., 2009).
It should be noted, however, that other studies
have found vastly inconsistent results (Schur et
al., 2009).
Given that the modern food environment is
laden with energy-dense foods and a plethora
of food cues, the dominance of environmental
influences on eating is understandable, although
there is a systemic lack of acknowledgement
of these external food cues. Instead, there is a
dominant culture of ‘individual responsibility’,
wherein overeating is regarded as a fundamental
flaw of the individual, attributed to a lack of
self-control or willpower. This idea of ‘individual
responsibility’ is perpetuated by a lucrative
weight-loss and diet industry, as well as by public-
health initiatives that overemphasise individual
behaviour as the central determinant in weight
status. A coinciding common discourse confuses
high body weight as a health concern with high
body weight as an unfavourable measure of
self-worth and personal value. As reported in
Australia in 2017, 54% of adolescent girls and
19% of adolescent boys aged 14–15 years said
that they had been afraid of gaining weight in
the last four weeks, and 23% girls and 12%
boys reported engaging in dieting behaviours
(O’Connor et al., 2017).
Emotional eating—
both overeating and
undereating—is
explained almost
exclusively by
environmental
conditioning.
6
Journal of the HEIA Vol. 27, No. 1, 2022
Intuitive eating is
at the heart of
eating according to
genuine hunger.
Dieting protocols that typically involve restriction,
deprivation and limitations around food deny
physiological hunger and attempt to ‘out will’ the
established psychological and neurological cues
and triggers that drive eating. Ultimately this
results in heightened attention to food and eating
because humans are evolutionarily programmed
to ensure their physiological needs are met
(Rothblum, 2018). The goal-conflict theory
further explains the friction between wanting
to abide by dieting protocols to achieve weight
loss and predispositions towards energy-dense,
highly palatable foods, which contribute to ‘loss
of control’ in eating, particularly in the presence
of sophisticated food cues such as advertising and
marketing (Brewer et al., 2018; O’Connor et al.,
2017). Up to 43% of Australian adolescent girls
and 20% of boys are reported to have experienced
such ‘loss of control’ in relation to eating (Brewer
et al., 2018; O’Connor et al., 2017).
Given these contradictions in dieting protocols
and population-level data indicating the lack of
efficiency of public-health initiatives to curb rates
of obesity and diet-related health problems, the
following section discusses the opportunities for
alternative approaches to reducing our incessant
desire to eat. These consider neurobiological
drivers of food intake, so we can begin to eat
more mindfully and in response to ‘true’ hunger.
Eating in response to hunger
As has been discussed throughout this paper,
eating behaviours, as related to the quality and
quantity of the food we eat, are shaped by
both innate intrapersonal factors as well as
environmental factors. While the degree of
innate versus environmental influence varies
with different conceptualised eating behaviour
‘traits’, focusing attention on environmental
variability provides a promising opportunity
to develop a new era in addressing diet-related
health problems and obesity.
Since a traditional dieting approach is not
compatible with the drivers of eating, and the
current obesogenic environment sabotages
most dieting efforts, we need an approach that
understands the determinants and drivers of
eating. Traditionally, weight-based outcomes
have been used as a measure of success for both
individual diets and public-health initiatives.
However, given the lack of long-term efficacy
of ‘diets’—both at an individual level and as
public-health interventions—and the clear
relationship between eating behaviours and the
quality and quantity of foods eaten, focusing
future approaches on such behaviours has merit.
Such behaviour-based outcomes, which move
attention away from weight, are often referred to
as ‘health-focused’ or ‘non-diet’ approaches. Such
approaches have the potential to minimise the
neural maladaptation that chronic consumption
of ultra-processed foods can produce and allow
eating to satisfy genuine hunger.
Intuitive eating
Intuitive eating is at the heart of eating according
to genuine hunger. This health-focused strategy
is directed at the individual, giving inner
permission to let go of dieting rules to embrace
‘process-integrating attunement of mind, body
and food’ (Tribole & Resch, 2012, p. 204). This
essentially refers to eating based on hunger and
satiety cues, driven by a strong connection with
internal signals (Tribole & Resch, 2012, p. 204).
Intuitive eating is based on four components
intended to remove the barriers that interfere
with internal awareness, while creating a sense of
body appreciation.
These components of intuitive eating are as
follows:
1) Unconditional permission to eat when hungry
and to eat whatever food is desired
By giving permission to eat when hungry
and to eat what is desired, the ‘forbidden-
fruit’ effect of restriction can be reduced so
it is okay to eat to satiety and to enjoy the
eating experience. By allowing free choice,
foods begin to lose their emotional charge—
removing the guilt, shame or rebellion
associated with eating. Removing or reducing
the emotional power of food moves away from
the detrimental ‘diet cycle’ so that self-worth
and moral value are disassociated from food,
eating and body weight.
2) A focus on eating for physical rather than
emotional reasons
This component aims to enhance sensitivity
to interoceptive signals of hunger as distinct
from emotional cues to eat. Mindfulness
practices such as meditation; eating slowly and
without distraction (for example, by electronic
devices); deep breathing, particularly before
a meal; and deep reflection on interoceptive
sensations before, during and after a meal
help to generate body awareness and the
ability to distinguish between true hunger and
emotional cues.
3) Reliance on internal hunger and satiety cues to
determine when and how much to eat
Once a person develops awareness of
7
Parents are described
as being responsible
for what, when and
where a child eats,
while the child is
responsible for how
much and whether
they eat.
Eating without hunger: Why we can’t stop, and what we can do about it
interoceptive sensations of hunger and satiety,
a strong reliance on these cues must be
cultivated and acted upon.
4) Body-food choice congruence
This component of intuitive eating is focused
on using gentle nutrition—the ongoing
curiosity and flexibility to discover how eating
particular foods makes you feel physically—
to encourage food choices that meet both
physical and sensory needs. While all foods
are acceptable and emotionally neutral,
attention is paid to how the body internally
responds to certain foods (i.e., not weight
associations), so that foods that contribute to
better body function are chosen more often
(Satter, 1990). The sensory properties of food
are, however, very important. Aspects such
as appetite should be respected and given
detailed attention to allow informed decisions
as to whether food and eating experiences are
truly being enjoyed.
Food environments
While intuitive eating is typically a conscious
and individual action, creating healthy food
environments incidentally allows and provides
reinforcing support for genuine hunger to
dominate drivers of eating. Ensuring children
have access to these healthy food environments
(for example, at school and especially in the
classroom) is important to protect attunement to
genuine hunger and to prevent maladaptation of
eating behaviours over the life course.
Intuitive feeding practices
Division of responsibility is considered to be the
most useful reference model when it comes to
supporting children to be intuitive eaters (Satter,
1990). In this model, parents are described as
being responsible for what, when and where
a child eats, while the child is responsible
for how much and whether they eat (Satter,
1990). By implementing this feeding practice,
parents do not pressure, bribe, coerce or reward
children for eating, and children are supported
to authentically eat to satiety from a selection
of foods. Like in intuitive eating, foods are not
given emotional or moral purposes—they are not
categorised as ‘good’ or ‘bad’.
It is important for all caregivers, including
teachers, to maintain the division of responsibility
for a child’s eating so as not to undermine a
child’s natural hunger and satiety cues. In this
regard, teachers should not prescribe which
foods a child eats from their lunchbox or in
what order, nor should they provide food as a
reward or incentive for desired behaviour or
for academic achievements. Food as a reward
not only undermines attunement with internal
signals and strengthens external food cues, but it
also has the potential to have detrimental impacts
on student learning and behaviour (Fedewa &
Davis, 2015).
Food-positive and value-neutral approach
Food and nutrition education are important
across the healthcare and education sectors. To
further generate a healthful food environment
that enables attunement with genuine hunger,
a food-positive and value-neutral approach
should be taken in delivering key messages.
Food should remain emotionally and morally
neutral (i.e., not ‘good’ or ‘bad’), and the positive
benefits of foods should be emphasised, such
as the ways they make our bodies feel, grow
and function, as well as food’s diverse social
and cultural roles and values. This approach is
consistent with the body-food choice congruence
components of intuitive eating and a strengths-
focused approach as prescribed in the Australian
Curriculum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment
and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2013).
This approach is particularly useful in nutrition
education for children and adolescents when it
focuses on short-term benefits, such as improved
concentration and sustained energy for sports
performance. During this developmental period
future consequences are abstract and provide
little motivation for young people to change their
behaviour (Bryan et al, 2019; Neumark-Sztainer
et al., 1999). Regarding diet-related health
problems in older students, again it is important
to emphasise a food-positive approach and to
acknowledge the role of the complete diet. Single
nutrients (i.e., sugars, fats or carbohydrates)
should not be vilified as this emphasises a ‘diet
culture’ and can have a detrimental impact on
relationships with food.
Developing and using sensory vocabulary helps
in teaching from a food-positive perspective. This
also helps align body-food choice congruence
by moving away from the idea that foods are
‘good’ or ‘bad’, and alternatively assigning
sensory properties to food such as crunchy,
warm, smooth, creamy etc., while also respecting
appetite preferences and the value in enjoying
eating. A food-positive approach should use food
and nutrition education to neutralise weight bias
and stigma. Educators and healthcare providers
also need to reflect on their own implicit and
explicit attitudes towards body weight and the
messages they deliver, either intentionally or
unintentionally. Attention should be strictly
8
Journal of the HEIA Vol. 27, No. 1, 2022
Being mindful of cues
and triggers to eat
means asking, ‘Is this
what I choose in this
moment?’, without
passing judgement
on that choice.
focused on healthy behaviours, body acceptance
and self care. Educators should be proactive
in emphasising in all communications that
weight bias, stigma, shaming and bullying are
unacceptable.
Mindful architecture
To be able to predict eating behaviours consistently
and to trust our ability to intuitively attend
to hunger and satiety, we need environments
shaped to support our freedom of choice, with
no unconscious bias introduced by food cues
and triggers. Ideally, messages coming from
the environment would consistently reinforce
internal awareness to allow mindful and conscious
decision-making about when and what to eat.
Much must be done at a macro level to combat
excessive and deceptive food advertising and
marketing, including the density and proximity
of food outlets. Much can also be done at
a micro-environment level to create mindful
environments that support intuitive eating.
Within schools, intuitive feeding practices and
food-positive approaches should be guaranteed
by being included in policy documents and
explicit training. Schools, workplaces and
hospitals should also focus on ‘nudging’ tactics
that support healthful choices as being the easiest
choices. Initiatives such as the National Healthy
School Canteens – Guidelines for healthy foods
and drinks supplied in school canteens (Australian
Government Department of Health, 2013) and
the Smart Choices Food and Drink Supply Strategy
for Queensland Schools (Queensland Government
Department of Education, 2020) have already
seen strategies such as increasing the visibility and
accessibility of healthier foods result in increased
consumption of these products (Thorndike et
al., 2014; Wilson et al., 2016). Supporting
intuitive eating involves specifically restructuring
the environment so that cues and triggers that
promote consumption of less nutritious foods are
removed, and food selections can be made more
mindfully.
Micro-environment ‘nudging’ can also involve
personal eating spaces such as within cars, offices
and homes. Filling the personal environments
with satisfying food choices that contribute
positively towards bodily function facilitates
nutritious food choices. To maximise the
potential of such nudging, however, habitual
cues and triggers that drive eating in the absence
of hunger must be addressed. Mindful practices
are helpful in attending to such cues and triggers
by encouraging a consciousness and awareness
of the circumstances and emotions surrounding
the desire to eat in the absence of hunger.
Being mindful of cues and triggers to eat means
asking, ‘Is this what I choose in this moment?’,
without passing judgement on that choice. Such
moments of reflection and consciousness about
choices to eat build capacity for intuitiveness
by breaking the ‘autopilot mode’ that underpins
habitual eating in the absence of hunger, even if
the choice is to eat in that moment.
Summary and implications for
home economists
Much of what drives our eating happens
in the subconscious mind as a result of the
interaction between innate drivers of food intake
and environmental triggers or cues. It is not
surprising, therefore, that traditional approaches
to reducing rates of diet-related health problems
and obesity— through public-health initiatives
or personal dieting strategies—largely fail.
By considering the underpinning factors that
drive our incessant desire to eat, a new era of
professional and personal practice focused on
enabling intuitive eating can emerge. Much needs
to be done to develop sociocultural norms and
practices and to create supportive environments
that will allow eating in accordance with true
hunger.
There are clear implications for home economics
teachers and community educators for including
understanding of eating behaviours as part of
formal and informal learning. Yet the ongoing
marginalisation of home economics as a field of
study has compromised the potential of the field
to maximise impact in this area. One of the most
powerful acknowledgements of the potential for
home economics education to positively address
food-related health, including eating behaviours,
was published more than a decade ago in the
prestigious Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA), where Lichtenstein and
Ludwig (2010) urged policy makers to ‘bring
back home economics’ as a key strategy to address
the obesity crisis, arguing it ‘may be among the
best investments society could make’ (p. 1858).
Furthermore, Pendergast and Dewhurst (2012)
published findings from a survey of 1188 home
economics teachers that explored the contribution
of home economics to food literacy education.
The study, with respondents from 36 countries
around the world, affirmed that home economics
education utilises a broad understanding of
food literacy, incorporating a wide range of
elements that should be introduced in the early
years of childhood in partnerships with key
9
Much of what drives
our eating happens
in the subconscious
mind as a result
of the interaction
between innate
drivers of food intake
and environmental
triggers or cues.
Eating without hunger: Why we can’t stop, and what we can do about it
players including teachers, parents and the wider
community—including eating behaviours as the
third-most important aspect of food literacy.
The authors conclude ‘[T]his study reaffirms the
importance of Home Economics. It gives Home
Economics educators a platform to become
global leaders in tackling the obesity problem
that is challenging policy makers worldwide and
to contribute to other contemporary food issues’
(p. 257). We encourage this intentional action,
highlighting the importance of developing
an understanding of eating behaviours as
fundamental to addressing the global food and
obesity crisis.
References
Anderson, G. H., Hunschede, S., Akilen, R., & Kubant,
R. (2016). Physiology of food intake control in
children. Advances in Nutrition, 7(1), 232S–240S.
https://doi.org /10.3945/an.115.009357
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Australian
Health Survey: Updated results, 2011–2012. Cat. no.
4364.0.55.003. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/
abs@.nsf/Lookup/4364.0.55.003main+featur
es12011-2012
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015). National Health
Surve y: First results , 2014–15. Cat. no. 436 4.0.55.001.
https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/
Deta ilsPag e/4364.0.55.0 012014-15
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority. (2013). Health and Physical Education
propositions. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.
au/f-10-curriculum/health-and-physical-education/
key-ideas/
Australian Government Department of Health. (2013).
National Healthy School Canteens—Guidelines for
healthy foods and drinks supplied in school canteens.
https://ww w.health.gov.au/resources/publications/
national-healthy-school-canteens-guidelines-for-
healthy-foods-and-drinks-supplied-in-school-
canteens
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2018).
Australia’s health 2018. Cat. no. AUS 221. https://
www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/
australias-health-2018/contents/table-of-contents
Beauchamp, G. K., & Mennella, J. A. (2009). Early
flavor learning and its impact on later feeding
behavior. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and
Nutrition, 48(Suppl. 1), S25–S30. https://doi.
org/10.1097/MPG.0b013e31819774a5
Beijers, R., Riksen-Walraven, J. M., & de Weerth, C.
(2013). Cortisol regulation in 12-month-old human
infants: Associations with the infants’ early history
of breastfeeding and co-sleeping. Stress (Amsterdam,
Netherlands), 16(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.31
09/10253890.2012.742057
Berridge, K. C., Robinson, T. E., & Aldridge, J.
W. (2009). Dissecting components of reward:
‘Liking’, ‘wanting’, and learning. Current Opinion in
Pharmacology, 9(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
coph.2008.12.014
Berthoud, H.-R. (2011). Metabolic and hedonic drives
in the neural control of appetite: Who is the boss?
Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 21(6), 888–896.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.004
Boswell, N., Byrne, R., & Davies, P. S. W. (2018).
Aetiology of eating behaviours: A possible
mechanism to understand obesity development
in early childhood. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral
Reviews, 95, 438–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
neubiorev.2018.10.020
Boswell, N., Byrne, R. & Davies, P. S.W. (2019). Family
food environment factors associated with obesity
outcomes in early childhood. BMC Obesity, 6(17).
http s: //do i.org/10.118 6/s406 08- 019 -0241-9
Brewer, J. A., Ruf, A., Beccia, A. L., Essien, G. I.,
Finn, L. M., van Lutter veld, R., & Mason, A.
E. (2018). Can mindfulness address ma ladaptive
eating behaviors? W hy traditional diet plans fail
and how new mechanistic insights may lead to
novel interventions. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1418.
http s: //do i.org/10. 3389/fp syg.2 018.01418
Bryan, C. J., Yeager, D. S., & Hinojosa, C. P. (2019). A
values-alignment intervention protects adolescents
from the effects of food marketing. Nature Human
Behaviour, 3(6), 596–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41562-019-0586-6
Chaput, J.-P., & St-Onge, M.-P. (2014). Increased food
intake by insufficient sleep in humans: Are we
jumping the gun on the hormona l explanation?
Frontiers in Endocrinology, 5, 1–3. http s: //doi.
org/10.3389/fendo.2014.00116
Cheon, B. K., & Hong, Y.-Y. (2017). Mere experience
of low subjective socioeconomic status stimulates
appetite and food intake. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States
of America, 114(1), 72–77. https: //doi.or g/10.1073/
pn a s.1607 33 0114
Chodkowski, B. A., Cowan, R. L., & Niswender, K.
D. (2016). Imbalance in resting state functional
connectivity is associated with eating behaviors and
adiposity in children. Heliyon, 2(1), e00058. http s: //
doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2015.e00058
Cornier, M.-A., McFadden, K. L., Thomas, E. A.,
Bechtell, J. L., Eichman, L. S., Bessesen, D. H., &
Tregellas, J. R. (2013). Differences in the neuronal
response to food in obesity-resistant as compared to
obesity-prone individuals. Physiology & Behavior,
110 – 111, 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
phy sb eh .2 013. 01.0 02
Derks, I. P. M., Sijbrands, E. J. G., Wake, M., Qureshi,
F., van der Ende, J., Hillegers, M. H. J., Jaddoe, V.
W. V., Tiemeier, H., & Jansen, P. W. (2018). Eating
behavior and body composition across childhood:
A prospective cohort study. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 15(1), 96.
http s: //do i.org/10.118 6/s129 66-018 - 0725 -x
Druce, M., & Bloom, S. R. (2006). The regulation of
appetite. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 91(2),
183 –187. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2005.073759
Dubois, L., Farmer, A., Girard, M., Peterson, K., &
Tatone-Tokuda, F. (2007). Problem eating behaviors
related to social factors and body weight in preschool
children: A longitudinal study. International Journal
of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 4, 9.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-4-9
Fedewa, A. L., & Davis, M. C. (2015). How food as a
reward is detrimental to children’s health, learning,
and behavior. Journal of School Health, 85(9), 648–
658. htt p s://doi. org /10.1111/jo sh.1229 4
Fildes, A., Mallan, K. M., Cooke, L., van Jaarsveld, C.
H. M., Llewellyn, C. H., Fisher, A., & Daniels,
L. (2015). The relationship between appetite and
food preferences in British and Australian children.
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and
Physical Activity, 12, 116. ht tps://doi.org /10.1186/
s12966-015-0275-4
Herle, M., Fildes, A., Steinsbekk, S., Rijsdijk, F., &
Llewellyn, C. H. (2017). Emotional over- and
under-eating in early childhood are learned not
inherited. Scientific Reports. 7(9092). https ://
www.researchgate.net/publication/319208361_
Emotional_over-_and_under-eating_in_early_
childhood_are_learned_not_inherited
10
Journal of the HEIA Vol. 27, No. 1, 2022
Jansen., P. W., Roza, S. J., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Mackenbach,
J. D., Raat, H., Hofman, A., Verhulst, F. C., &
Tiemeier, H. (2012). Children’s eating behavior,
feeding practices of parents and weight problems
in early childhood: Results from the population-
based Generation R Study. International Journal
of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
9(130). https://ijbnpa.biomedcentral.com/
articles/10.1186/1479-5868-9-130
LaCaille, L. (2013). Eating Behavior. In M. D. Gellman
& J. R. Turner (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Behavioral
Medicine (pp. 641–642). Springer New York.
Leahy, D. (2014) Assembling a health[y] subject: Risky
and shameful pedagogies in health education.
Critical Public Health, 24(2),171–181. ht tps://doi.
or g /10 .1080 / 095 8159 6.2013. 8 7150 4
Lichtenstein, A. H., & Ludwig, D. S. (2010). Bring
back Home Economics education. Journal of the
American Medical Association, 303(18), 1857–1858.
http://ja ma.ama-a ssn.org /cont ent/303/18/1857.fu l l
Llewellyn, C. H., & Fildes, A. (2017). Behavioura l
Susceptibility Theory: Professor Jane Wardle and
the role of appetite in genetic risk of obesity.
Current Obesity Reports, 6(1), 38–45. https ://d oi.
org /10.1007/s13679 -017-0247-x
Llewellyn, C. H., van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Johnson,
L., Carnell, S., & Wardle, J. (2010). Nature
and nurture in infant appetite: Analysis of the
Gemini twin birth cohort. The American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition, 91(5), 1172–1179. http s://doi.
org/10.3945/ajcn.2009.28868
Lupton, D., (2015) The pedagogy of disgust: The
ethical, moral and political implications of using
disgust in public health campaigns. Critical Public
Health, 25(1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.108 0/09581
596.2014.885115
Lutter, M., & Nestler, E. J. (2009). Homeostatic and
hedonic signals interact in the regulation of food
intake. The Journal of Nutrition, 139(3), 629–632.
https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.108.097618
Magarey, A., Mauch, C., Mallan, K., Perry, R., Elovaris,
R., Meedeniya, J., Byrne, R., & Daniels, L. (2016).
Child dietary and eating behavior outcomes up
to 3.5 years after an early feeding intervention:
The NOURISH RCT. Obesity, 24(7 ), 1537–15 45.
https://doi.org /10.10 02/oby.21498
Mallan, K. M., Nambiar, S., Magarey, A. M., &
Daniels, L. A. (2014). Satiety responsiveness in
toddlerhood predicts energy intake and weight
status at four years of age. Appetite, 74, 79 –85.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.a ppet.2 013.12.001
Mallan, K. M., Fildes, A., de la Piedad Garcia, X.,
Drzezdzon, J., Sampson, M., & Llewellyn, C.
(2017). Appetitive traits associated with higher
and lower body mass index: Evaluating the validity
of the adult eating behaviour questionnaire in
an Australian sample. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 14 (1),
130. http s://doi.org /10.1186/s12966 - 017- 0587-7
McEwen, B. S., & Gianaros, P. J. (2010). Central role
of the brain in stress and adaptation: Links to
socioeconomic status, health, and disease. Annals of
the New York Academy of Sciences, 1186(1), 190–222.
ht tps://doi .or g/10 .1111/j.1749- 6 632 . 2009.05331.x
Mühlhäusler, B. S., Adam, C. L., & McMillen, I. C.
(2008). Maternal nutrition and the programming
of obesity: The brain. Organogenesis, 4(3), 144–152.
https://doi.org/10.4161/org.4.3.6503
Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., Perry, C., &
Casey, M. A. (1999). Factors inf luencing food
choices of adolescents: Findings from focus-
group discussions with adolescents. Journal of the
American Dietetic Association, 99(8 ), 929 –93 7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8223(99)00222-9
O’Connor, M., Warren, D., & Daraganova, G. (2017).
Chapter 11. Eating problems in mid-adolescence. In
Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of
Australian Children (LSAC) Annual Statistical Report
2017. Australian Institute of Family Studies. ht tps ://
aifs.gov.au/publications/guia-annual-statistical-
repo rt-2017
Olds, T. S., Tomkinson, G. R., Ferrar, K. E., & Maher,
C. A. (2010). Trends in the prevalence of childhood
overweight and obesity in Australia between 1985
and 2008. International Journal of Obesity (2005),
34, 57–66. https://doi .org/10.1038/ijo.2009.211
O’Loghlen, E., Grant, S., & Galligan, R. (2021). Shame
and binge eating pathology: A systematic review.
Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 1–17. http s: //
doi.org/10.1002/cpp. 2615
Ong, Z. Y., & Muhlhausler, B. S. (2011). Maternal
“junk-food” feeding of rat dams alters food choices
and development of the mesolimbic reward pathway
in the offspring. The FASEB Journal, 25(7), 2167–
2179. https://doi.or g/10.109 6/f j.10-178392
Pendergast , D., & Dewhurs t, Y. (2012). Home economic s
and food literacy: A n international investigation.
International Journal of Home Economics. 5(2). 245–
263. http://hdl.handle.net/10072/49542
Perry, B., & Wang, Y. (2012). Appetite regulation and
weight control: The role of gut hormones. Nutrition
& Diabetes, 2(1), e26. https://doi .org/10.103 8/
nutd.2011.21
Queensland Government Department of Education.
(2020). Smart Choices Food and Drink Supply
Strategy for Queensland Schools (Version 1.4). https ://
education.qld.gov.au/student/Documents/smart-
choices-strategy.pdf
Reichelt, A. C., Westbrook, R. F., & Morris, M. J.
(2015). Integration of reward signalling and appetite
regulating peptide systems in the control of food-cue
responses. British Journal of Pharmacology, 172(22),
5225 –5238. ht t ps: //d oi.or g /10.1111 /bp h.13321
Ronto, R., Ball, L., Pendergast, D., & Harris, N. (2016a)
The role of home economics teachers in enhancing
adolescents’ food literacy to develop healthy dietary
behaviours. Journal of the Home Economics Institute
of Australia, 23(1), 11–19. https://search.informit.
com.au/documentSummary;dn=609259338426220
;res=IELIND
Ronto, R., Ball, L., Pendergast, D., & Harris, N.
(2016b). Environmental factors of food literacy in
Australian high schools: Views of home economics
teachers. International Journal of Consumer Studies.
41(1), 19–27. ht t ps: //d oi .or g /10.1111/ijc s .123 0 9
Rothblum, E. D. (2018). Slim chance for permanent
weight loss. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 6(1),
63–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/arc0000043
Saper, C. B., Chou, T. C., & Elmquist, J. K. (2002).
The need to feed: Homeostatic and hedonic control
of eating. Neuron, 36(2), 199–211. htt ps://doi.
org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00969-8
Satter, E. (1990). The feeding relationship: Problems
and interventions. The Journal of Pediatrics, 117(2,
Part 2): S181–S189. https://doi.org/10.1016/S 0022 -
3476(05)8 0017-4
Schur, E., Noonan, C., Polivy, J., Goldberg, J., &
Buchwald, D. (2009). Genetic and environmental
influences on restrained eating behavior.
International Journal of Eating Disorders, 42(8),
765–772. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.20734
Smith, A. D., Herle, M., Fi ldes, A., Cooke, L ., Steinsbek k,
S., & Llewellyn, C. H. (2017). Food fussiness
and food neophobia share a common etiology in
early childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 58(2), 189–196. https ://doi.o rg/10.1111/
jcpp.12647
Sominsk y, L., & Spencer, S. J. (2014). Eating b ehavior and
stress: A pathway to obesity. Frontiers in Psychology,
5, 434. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00434
11
Eating without hunger: Why we can’t stop, and what we can do about it
Soriano-Guillén, L., Barrios, V., Chowen, J. A., Sánchez,
I., Vila, S., Quero, J., & Argente, J. (2004). Ghrelin
levels from fetal life through early adulthood:
Relationship with endocrine and metabolic
and anthropometric measures. The Journal of
Pediatrics, 144(1), 30–35. htt ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpeds.2003.08.050
Spear, L. P. (2011). Rewards, aversions and affect
in adolescence: Emerging convergences across
laboratory animal and human data. Developmental
Cognitive Neuroscience, 1(4), 390–403. htt p://doi.
org /10.1016/j.dcn. 2011.08.001
Spence, J. C., Carson, V., Casey, L., & Boule, N. (2011).
Examining behavioural susceptibility to obesity
among Canadian pre-school children: The role of
eating behaviours. International Journal of Pediatric
Obesity, 6(2–2), e501–e507. https://doi.org/10.3109/
17477166.2010.512087
Steinsbe kk, S., Llewe llyn, C. H., Filde s, A., & Wichstr øm,
L. (2017). Body composition impacts appetite
regulation in middle childhood. A prospective study
of Norwegian community children. International
Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity,
14, 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0528-5
Story, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & French, S. (2002).
Individual and environmental influences on
adolescent eating behaviors. Journal of the Academy
of Nutrition and Dietetics, 102(3), S40–S51. https ://
doi.org/10.1016/s00 02 -8223(02)90421-9
Taheri, S., Lin, L., Austin, D., Young, T., & Mignot,
E. (2004). Short sleep duration is associated with
reduced leptin, elevated ghrelin, and increased body
mass index. PLOS Medicine, 1(3), e62. ht tps://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0010062
Thorndike, A. N., Riis, J., Sonnenberg, L. M., &
Levy, D. E. (2014). Traffic-light labels and choice
architecture: Promoting healthy food choices.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46(2), 14 3–
149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.002
Tribole, E., & Resch, E. (2012). Intuitive eating: A
revolutionary program that works (3rd ed.). St
Martin’s Press.
Vandeweghe, L., Vervoort, L., Verbeken, S., Moens,
E., & Braet, C. (2016). Food approach and food
avoidance in young children: relation with reward
sensitivity and punishment sensitivity. Frontiers
in Psychology, 7, 928. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2016.00928
van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Llewellyn, C. H., Johnson,
L., & Wardle, J. (2011). Prospective associations
between appetitive traits and weight gain in infancy.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 94(6),
156 2 –1567. h ttps ://doi.o rg/10.3 945/ajcn.111.015818
van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Boniface, D., Llewellyn, C.
H., & Wardle, J. (2014). Appetite and growth:
A longitudinal sibling analysis. JAMA Pediatrics,
168(4), 345–350. htt ps://doi.org /10.10 01/
jamapediatrics.2013.4951
Ventura, A. K., & Worobey, J. (2013). Early influences
on the development of food preferences.
Current Biology, 23(9), R401–R408. ht tps://doi.
org /10.1016/j.cub. 2013.02.037
Wardle, J., Guthrie, C. A., Sanderson, S., & Rapoport,
L. (2001). Development of the Children’s Eating
Behaviour Questionnaire. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(7), 963–970. htt ps://
doi.org /10.1111/146 9-7610.007 92
Webber, L., Hill, C., Saxton, J., Van Jaarsveld, C. H. M.,
& Wardle, J. (2009). Eating behaviour and weight
in children. International Journal of Obesity, 33(1),
21–28. https://doi.org /10.1038/ijo.2008.219
Wilson, A. L ., Buckley, E., Buckley, J. D., &
Bogomolova, S. (2016). Nudging healthier food
and beverage choices through salience and priming.
Evidence from a systematic review. Food Quality
and Preference, 51, 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodqual.2016.02.009
Yu, J. H., & Kim, M.-S. (2012). Molecular mechanisms
of appetite regulation. Diabetes & Metabolism
Journal, 36(6), 391–398. https://doi.org/10.4093/
dmj.2012.36.6.391
Zimmerman, F. J., & Shimoga, S. V. (2014). The effects
of food advertising and cognitive load on food
choices. BMC Public Health, 14, 342. htt ps://doi .
org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-342
2023
SCHOLARSHIPS
more information / application form
www.omalleytrust.org.au
For undergraduate and
postgraduate students of
home economics and
related areas of study
