Our results do not provide insight into the effects of such specific measures. Finally, it should be mentioned that our study population had a relatively high income level and also that it is unknown whether our results are generalizable outside the Dutch setting. Future research is warranted to validate our results in real supermarkets and among different MEK activity populations. This study provides new evidence into the effectiveness of varying price discounts and price increase

schemes on food purchases within a Dutch web-based supermarket. Results revealed that decreasing healthy food prices is effective in stimulating the purchase of these products. However, these manipulations also resulted buy VX-809 in higher food and calorie purchases overall. This effect was not equilibrated by supplementing the price decreases with taxing unhealthier foods up to 25%. Also, these increased taxes did not significantly discourage unhealthier food purchases. This implicates that the studied pricing strategies do not improve overall diet quality. Future research is required to examine the effects of the studied pricing strategies outside the Dutch situation. The following are the supplementary materials related to this

article. Supplementary Table A.1.   Effects of varying price discount levels on the percentage of healthy food products purchased within eight different product categories, The Netherlands (2010)a. The authors declare that there

are no conflicts of interest. We would like to thank Kim Dolstra, Lennart Roest and Marcel Mekkes for their excellent help with the data collection. This work was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) — project number: 50-50105-96-426 — and a special Software Development Fund of VU University Amsterdam Edoxaban which is dedicated to SARA Computing and Networking Services Amsterdam for use in the development of new scientific software tools (VU — SARA collaboration). “
“The author regrets that in the above published paper, there was an error in paragraph ME-4.1, report on the setting of the biological sample collection; amount of sample; nature of collecting procedures; participant conditions; time between sample collection and relevant clinical or physiological endpoints. The last sentence of the first paragraph should have read, “For example, position of the study subjects, such as orthostatism decreases plasma volume, so that proteins and cholesterol levels can be increased by 5–15% relative to the supine. “
“Figure options Download full-size image Download as PowerPoint slide Picture legend: Toni Yancey and Jim Sallis, with the October 2009 issue of PM they had guest edited. “I was diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer earlier this year.