The GAIA Study

Consumer Segmentation

From the 2,375 participants who shared they had experienced COVID-19, Ipsos identified five key respondent groups based on health, stress levels, and eating patterns. These insights reflect how different groups experience burnout differently. To create the segmentation, Ipsos grouped together respondents with similar traits. This approach helps in understanding the underlying behavioral drivers and motivations of survey respondents.

This analysis uncovered that the pandemic encouraged many people to start seriously thinking about their health. But some groups are having a harder time getting there than others. The GAIA study’s segmentation found that Americans with underlying comorbidities are having the hardest time when it comes to restructuring their nutrition. Most see the value in eating healthier, but Americans with underlying comorbidities tend to have trouble affording healthy foods compared to Americans who have the same view on healthy eating.

The stark contrast between two groups - Health Conscious and Unhealthy with Comorbidity, also known as ‘Forward Thinkers’ and ‘Fried Minds’, - underscores the powerful connection between nutrition and mental health outcomes.

At a Crossroads, segment five, predominantly ate processed animal-based meals, the Standard American Diet (SAD). This segment took a mental hit during the pandemic. They felt without the means to address their struggles and were overwhelmed by life’s difficulties. They felt tired, found it difficult to sleep, and frequently fought off feelings of worry, stress, and sadness.

On the other end of the health spectrum, Health Conscious, also named Forward Thinkers, predominantly ate a WFPB or vegan nutrition plan(57%). This segment was the most satisfied with their mental health and stress levels. They felt positive about their friendships and exercise habits. They felt energized, motivated, and satisfied about their work-life balance.

“If we examine the dietary extremes in our segmentation, we see an undeniable truth—nutrition isn't just about personal choice, but about systemic barriers that shape those choices,” said Chris Moessner, Senior Vice President at U.S. Ipsos Public Affairs. “This analysis doesn’t just tell us who eats what; it reveals the structural inequities that determine who has the privilege of eating for health and who is stuck in a cycle of poor nutrition and burnout. These segments help us craft more precise solutions, making public health messaging more effective and ensuring interventions reach those who need them most.”

1. Health Conscious / Forward Thinkers (this is the healthiest group in the film) (16% of respondents)

Health Conscious (16% of respondents): They were highly engaged in nutrition and exercise practices for optimal well-being with 74% reporting they exercised three times or more per week, the highest frequency of the segmentation groups. This group was the most likely to advocate for policy changes to improve food accessibility. This was the oldest group (average age 55), more female (55%) than male, and mostly located on the West Coast (24%) and South (44%). They were the most diverse of the healthy groups (50% White, 25% Hispanic, 18% Black). They were less stressed, exercised frequently, found ways to be healthy, and could afford to buy healthy food.

2. Healthy and Affluent / Easy Breathers (23% of respondents)

Healthy and Affluent (23% of respondents): These high-income individuals had access to fresh, organic food and were least likely to experience stress-related symptoms. 51% of this group reported following either a vegan or WFPB nutritional pattern. They were an older group, averaging 52 years of age, and male-dominant (59%). They were mostly White (72%), residing in the Midwest (28%) and South (28%). They were wealthy (top 20% earned over $150K), exercised daily, and rated their overall health and eating patterns as the highest.

3. Resilient / Moderately Mindfuls (29% of respondents)

These individuals were working toward better health, engaged in improving their nutrition and exercise habits but still faced accessibility barriers. This segment had an average age of 46 and is gender-balanced (52% female). They mostly resided in the South (48%) and were somewhat diverse (54% White, 23% Hispanic, 17% Black). They used the Coronavirus pandemic to turn toward healthy habits like more exercise.

4. At a Crossroads / Uphill Strugglers (13% of respondents)

They experienced confusion or lack of motivation regarding nutritional choices and were at risk of slipping into unhealthy habits without intervention. This group had an average age of 47 and was mostly female (63%). They were heavily located in the South (43%) and Midwest (24%) and were mostly White (64%). They had lower education levels (41% with high school or less) and 42% had an income of $50K or less.

5. Unhealthy with Comorbidity / Fried Minds (this is the least healthy group in the film) (18% of respondents)

They were struggling with chronic conditions such as hypertension and diabetes and were most likely to report high stress and mental health issues. This group had an average age of 45 and was female-dominant (64%). They were mostly located in the South (44%) and Midwest (24%) and were the least White of the unhealthy groups (49% White, 24% Hispanic, 19% Black). They were diverse, young (20% between 18-29 years old), and unhealthy, concerned about mental health and stressors, and experienced sadness. Only 17% of this group reported they are satisfied with their physical health.

The GAIA study’s segmentation analysis highlights the link between nutrition and burnout, providing clear examples of why certain communities are the hardest. Access and affordability issues around food often mean dietary choices aren't actually a choice.