I reviewed this manuscript with a strong interest as it is a well-designed RCT.

I also read the study design paper. I do recognize and appreciate the challenges of conducting a good nutrition/ diet related outcome study.

In order to broaden the audience and improve educational values for readers, please elaborate the technical terms such as metabolic syndrome severity score and behavioral change wheel.

From protocol, meal kit home delivery service was used, please explain how the important ingredients such as fat, salt and sugar amount in those packages were controlled. I did not notice about this in the study design paper. If it is not controlled for, this fact should be discussed in the weaknesses of the study.

There are methods to verify the adherence of Mediterranean dietary pattern in the control cohort by study protocol. What is the adherence % in both cohorts at the end of 12 weeks?

Is Mediterranean diet score (PyMDS) for adherence of the diet ? I did not see this in the protocol. Please explain and elaborate.

I would emphasize the following points in discussion

Please discuss the similarity and difference between regular habitual diet and control Mediterranean diet. This will significantly impact outcome and can affect adherence. If there is significant difference between those two diet patterns, the adherence may not be the same.

This is always a challenge with dietary intervention studies. Dietary habit is very difficult to change despite having enforcement and counselling.

Metabolic syndrome severity score: do you use the original score by Gurka and DeBoer or modified according to New Zealand ethnicity Māori ? The paper of Jeremy Kreb in the reference of MetSSS showed difference in scoring among ethnicities of New Zealand .

Physical activity: I noticed in the study design paper, physical activity was recorded and monitored by the international physical activity questionnaire score. Any difference in those score between two cohorts ?

Is there any rationale to use the age cutoff 49 and 42 for subgroup analysis?

Authors were able to improve the quality of paper and satisfy the questions of reviewers.