Auckland, Aug 29 (The Conversation) Manufacturers of baby and toddler foods employ a variety of tactics to market their products as being healthy, using imagery and promises like “sugar-free” to attract parents. However, recent research reveals that many of these claims are misleading.
The study examined 210 food products for infants and toddlers available in New Zealand supermarkets. Packaging frequently featured claims and depicted images of fruits and vegetables, which often misrepresented the primary ingredients.
The significance of the first thousand days of a child’s life cannot be overstated; it's a period when optimal nutrition is crucial for growth, health, and lifelong eating habits. However, manufacturers exploit parents' desire for convenience, often using claims that falsely promote products as nutritious.
On-package claims are influential marketing tools that significantly affect consumer perceptions and buying choices, often creating a misleading health image around nutrient-poor products.
Cluttered with Claims Foods analyzed in the study contained an average of seven to eight claims, with some boasting up to 15. These often centered on what the products lacked, like “additive-free” or “color-free,” drawing attention away from the actual contents which may include high sugar levels or highly processed ingredients.
Other claims suggested the foods were beneficial for development or were an easy parenting choice, targeting parents intent on providing the best for their children amidst busy routines. This means parents are burdened with the task of discerning these claims to find genuinely healthy options.
Images of fruit adorned 60% of the packages, and 40% had vegetable images, yet most contained little or no whole fruits and vegetables. Products that showcased vegetables often included merely vegetable juice or powder, and the fruit images generally corresponded to processed sugars such as fruit pastes and concentrates.
Disturbingly, one in five products contained less than 5% fruit. These images mislead caregivers into perceiving health benefits and can heavily influence purchasing decisions. Allowing industries to use such deceptive packaging when their products include no substantial fruit or vegetable content raises ethical questions.
Product Names vs. Ingredients The investigation also uncovered misleading product names. Over half of the savory meals studied had names that did not accurately represent the primary ingredients, often highlighting meats or nutrient-rich ingredients like spinach or legumes that were only present in minimal quantities.
A similar issue persists in Australia, where research assessed 330 products, discovering widespread claims and misleading names. On average, Australian products featured eight claims, with a third having misleading names. The current bi-national regulations by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) concerning packaging claims appear insufficient.
Many packaged infant and toddler foods in Australia and New Zealand fail to promote healthy eating habits. In Australia, only about 25% of these products meet World Health Organization nutritional recommendations. Unpublished research suggests only a third of New Zealand products meet these standards. Such findings highlight the need to reevaluate how these products are marketed.
There is now an opportunity for change. Earlier this year, food ministers from Australia and New Zealand tasked FSANZ with reviewing product marketing regulations to prevent misleading claims and empower consumers to make informed decisions. This initiative is a promising step forward, and FSANZ must now establish appropriate rules. Essential measures include prohibiting health and nutrition claims on infant and toddler foods, using fruit and vegetable imagery only if these constitute a substantial product portion, and ensuring product names accurately represent their ingredients.
(Only the headline of this report may have been reworked by Editorji; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
