avalonadams

Photographs I was commissioned to take for an upcoming article by Haircare NZ on Wellington salon Z and Co. 

An investigative feature uncovering a culture of bullying and sexism onboard superyachts - as told by Kiwi women. 

Cracking down on Claims

Fonterra exaggerates study results to claim benefits of Milk for Schools campaign

Avalon Adams

Fonterra’s claims which link cow’s milk to improved bone health using a recent Massey University study have been criticised for exaggerating the study’s results.

The claims, which are posted on Fonterra’s Milk for Schools website, say children in the study who participate in their Milk for Schools campaign “had significantly improved bone health when compared to a control group recruited from schools that do not.”

While study leader Professor Marlena Kruger acknowledges the need to confirm her findings by a “larger and longer term study,” experts say Fonterra is making claims which the study’s results do not show.

“The claims are out of proportion with the study findings,” says Specialist Physician Dr. Marion Leighton.

“The current agreement in the scientific community is that anything with a p-value less than 0.05 is possibly significant. There were no statistically significant improvements in almost all areas [of the study], except bone mineral content in girls. This does not necessarily mean they have better bone health.”

While girls whole body bone mineral content shows a significant improvement in the study, with a p-value of 0.010, the increase in whole-body bone mineral content and the standard score for bone mineral content is insignificant.

The study also says that “on weekdays 85% of children in the control group were consuming at least two serves of either milk or milk products.” Professor Lumley from the University of Auckland Statistics Department says this weakens Fonterra’s claims as milk was being consumed by both groups.

“It’s not surprising that a small study would fail to provide strong evidence, especially when 85% of the children [in the control group] were already consuming the recommended 2+ servings of milk per day,” Lumley says.

Professor Lumley acknowledges Fonterra’s association of milk with improved bone health as rational but agrees that the claims exaggerate the study’s results.

“It’s certainly plausible that extra milk could increase bone mineral content, but I don’t think the study provides convincing evidence that it does. The p-values for the bone mineral measurements are not impressive (one just below the traditional cut-off and two not).”

Professor Lumley also notes that the study’s one statistically significant result only applies to girls, and this is not mentioned on the Milk for Schools website.

“There’s a slightly stronger indication [of improved bone health] in girls than boys, but Fonterra aren’t claiming milk should just be given to girls,” Lumley says.

Fonterra’s Milk for Schools campaign launched in 2013 and distributes free milk cartons to 70% of New Zealand primary schools. The campaign’s website advertises the benefits of milk for children’s bone health and uses Kruger’s study to show that Milk for Schools is having a positive effect.  

A quote from General Manager of Nutrition Angela Rowan is also included on Fonterra’s webpage of the study saying “the positive influence Fonterra Milk for Schools is having on children is clear.”

While Dr. Leighton says the positive effect of Milk for Schools on children’s bone health is not clear from the study as “they (participants) did not have significantly improved bone health,” Professor Lumley says the study’s results could contribute to this claim but that they cannot confirm it.

“Overall, the study is certainly consistent with a benefit of the Milk for Schools programme, but it doesn’t provide much evidence for a benefit,” Lumley says.

The actual study acknowledges its results as marginally significant and specifies limitations, saying the milk group was on average older, taller and had higher bone mineral density than the control group. It also says that lean body mass and whole body mass significantly contributed to children’s bone health.

While Fonterra’s claims do not acknowledge the same limitations as the study, they include a quote from study leader Professor Kruger which does speak on some of these.

The quote says “This was a really positive outcome, however it was a relatively small study. The results need to be confirmed by a larger and longer term study.”

While Professor Kruger would not comment on Fonterra’s claims saying “it was created by Fonterra and I was not involved,” she acknowledges the quote on their website as her own.

“The quote which is said to come from me, and is on the website, is true. It is meant to be in general. I teach bone health to children as well as in adults as part of my work at Massey, and I teach my students the role of peak bone mass, and the role that dairy foods play. I teach this topic to the Master's students as well. So this quote is 100% true,” Kruger says.

While Professor Lumley acknowledges Kruger’s quote as accurate saying “she’s right”, Dr. Leighton says the quote could be more reflective of the study’s results.

“Professor Kruger could say that these findings show a marginal change and may be worthy of further study but they do not show a significant improvement in bone health as they claim,” Leighton says.

The study consisted of 60 children participating in the Milk for Schools programme and 58 children who were not, with measurements being taken for bone mineral density, bone mineral content, body composition, and more.

Although Kruger is honest about the study’s shortcomings saying “I tried to mention limitations of the study which included that we did not analyse diets, or look at vitamin D status, and we did not assess physical activity,” Dr. Leighton criticizes the study’s size and duration.

“The study just wasn’t big enough,” says Dr. Leighton. “I think pre-pubertal children are not growing enough over a year to measure.”

While Professor Kruger’s quote on Fonterra’s Milk for Schools website addresses Dr. Leighton’s concerns saying “The results need to be confirmed by a larger and longer term study,” Dr. Leighton says Fonterra’s claims do not address this.

“They have made claims on results that could be a coincidence and they need to do a bigger and better study,” Leighton says.

Dr. Leighton also addresses the information that 85% of the study’s control group had two serves of dairy a day, questioning Milk for School's role in New Zealand children’s dairy intake.

“If 85% of kids are getting two serves of dairy a day [without the Milk for Schools campaign] then do we really need Milk for Schools?” says Leighton.

The Milk for Schools website says it “provides dairy nutrition to more than 140,000 children every school day,” saying “at least 2-3 servings of milk or milk products are recommended every day for children aged 12 years and under.”

Dr. Leighton acknowledges milk as a good source of calcium but questions whether it is the best source.

“Right now in New Zealand, especially for children who are in poverty, milk may be the best source of calcium if they do not know how to get their calcium from other places or do not have the resources to do so.”

“The issue is not about calcium, but about milk being the best source of calcium. The question isn’t ‘is calcium good for us?’ It’s ‘is dairy the best source of calcium?’” Leighton says.

Graduate Statistics Invalid 

Technically employed, practically jobless: NZ graduates struggle to find relevant employment. 

Many New Zealand graduates are struggling to find jobs relevant to their degrees and criticise the Ministry of Education for delivering invalid statistics. 

Statistics show that 77% of graduates are employed after completing their studies. A figure recorded by the Ministry of Education on website, ‘Education Counts’. However, students say that these results do not take into account the relevance of jobs to graduates’ degrees, and many ex-students are working roles unrelated to their study. 

Massey University Graduate, Verity Morrison agrees that government statistics on graduate employment are invalid. 

“I think that selectiveness is very misleading and does give you a false sense of hope, when you go to uni, that everything’s going to be fine and you will be able to get a job in that field,” says Morrison.

“I know a lot of people who work in retail still, after uni. Yes, they’re employed, but are they employed in a fulfilling job that they needed their degree for?,” she says. 

In a 2013 news interview, Former Massey University Vice Chancellor Steve Maharey defends the expectation of university degrees leading to employment. 

“Universities aren't, and shouldn't be, just job factories,” says Maharey. 

Maharey also agrees that graduate employment statistics are not reliable. 

“(Students) should choose where they study based on reputation and success. But that relies on accurate information about where graduates end up. And that's not easy to find,” he says. 

New Zealand School of Tourism graduate, Rachel Stilborn said pressure pushed her to study rather than statistics. 

“I just felt pressured because my sister was going to uni.” 

Stilborn also says that despite gaining a Diploma in Tourism, she still feels there is a stigma around going to university. 

“I still feel this pressure that if you go to uni you’re going to do good. It’s like ‘you’re better, you’ve gone to uni’. I even felt like at Hannah’s (my sister’s) graduation, Mum and Dad were a lot prouder,” she says.

Morrison attributed the perception of university leading to employment, to secondary schools. 

“I think people are going to uni too young without realising what they want to do with their lives. This is being pushed by the way that they’re taught at high school and the stigma around not going to uni,” she says. 

Morrison says high schools “need to learn the separation between getting a job and going to uni to learn.”

Decline in Student Memberships at Uni Gym 

Only 8 percent of Massey Wellington students attend the discounted, on-campus gym. 

Massey Gym Manager, Kane Carter says the Wellington university gym has been experiencing a steady decline in memberships over the past five years. 

Some students have said they choose not to go to the gym because of its restricted space and dated facilities. 

The gym currently has only 350 student members, with around 300 of these being Massey students. This is only a minor fraction of the 4000 students at Massey’s Wellington Campus. 

Gym Manager Kane Carter says he feels “considering the population, [student memberships] could be higher”. 

“I definitely think if there is that many students and only that many signed up at the moment that I presume a lot have gone to other gyms for whatever reasons, are playing sports or doing classes elsewhere, which is fine but we do want Massey University gym to be the preferred gym for Massey University students.” 

In a recent student survey on the ‘Massey Wellington Deals’ Facebook page, five students commented on the size and age of the gym. 

One student, Shona Macleod says, “I used to go to the Massey gym but changed to a gym in the city because Massey gym was old, cramped and I didn’t enjoy working out there.” 

Another student, Kate Andrews said she had been a member of the gym but changed due to similar reasons. 

“I went to Massey gym in first year but didn't like it because it was smaller and not that exciting/made working out kinda boring for me, so I've changed to a gym in the city. The prices were great but I'd rather pay more and actually enjoy going,” she says. 

The size of the gym was also commented on by Carter who says, it would be ideal to have a bigger facility for people wanting to do circuits, stretching, boxing or that sort of stuff. 

Carter says the facility would need to make some changes, especially in terms of space, to entice more students to join.