>>why a food advertising ban would not reduce obesity - Jeremy Preston, director, the Food Advertising unit
The past weeks have seen the issue of food advertising to children again pushed to the fore by the media and politicians. As Debra Shipley MP tabled her 10 Minute Rule Bill to “ban the advertising of high fat, high sugar and high salt content food and drinks during pre-school television programmes and related scheduling”, certain sectors of the press took the opportunity to try to demonise the food and advertising industries and hold them accountable for the increasing levels of childhood weight and obesity problems.
Advertising is a complex business that affects consumers in different ways, in different circumstances and at different ages, but there is no factual evidence to support the theory that a ban on advertising food to children will eliminate or reduce obesity.
Parents supply about 90% of the family’s food requirements and therefore control the diet. Additionally, the UK has one of the EU’s strictest codes of practice on the content of food advertising to children. Advertisers must not communicate excessive consumption or frequency, snacks cannot be portrayed as main meal substitutes and showing snacking pre-bedtime is forbidden.
Overweight and obesity are caused by an imbalance between food consumption and energy expenditure. Government statistics point to a decline in calorific intake among children over the past 10 to 15 years and, in addition, it is also accepted there has been an even greater reduction in exercise. Children who walk or cycle to school are significantly fewer and less than half take the government-recommended two hours PE each week.
Changing lifestyles are at the core of the overweight/obesity problems.
Equally, the view that children make their parents’ lives unbearable by asking for advertised items is not supported by recent research among 1,500 independent parents. They acknowledged the presence of “pester power” but recognised this was part of a child’s development. Pester power has been around long before TV advertising began and more than 80% of parents said they refused to give in to immediate demands.
Likewise, concern from Debra Shipley and others over the influence of advertising on children is contradicted by a recent review of scientific research carried out by Brian Young, a lecturer at Exeter University's School of Psychology.
Young found that family behaviour studies revealed that the impact of advertising on children’s food choices and attitudes was not considered to be significant. What was significant was the influence of siblings and peers.
However, the time and space devoted to apportioning blame and argument must stop and we all (government, food and advertising industries, professional and NGOs) need to move ahead with a strategic plan which recognises the complexity of the issue. Food advertisers welcome the latest Food Standards Agency discussion paper which seeks to broaden the debate and we look forward to developing ideas in the coming weeks.
We must not forget the issue of “calories out” because that is the other half of the problem, and government needs to devote the same level of interest and policy development as they are currently giving to “calories in”. This may seem more difficult but has to be addressed with imagination and determination.
Overweight/obesity among children and adults can only be tackled effectively if the strategic plan envisaged covers education, exercise, parenting and diet, with education at the centre. Everyone involved must ensure that any plan is practical, sustainable and delivers quantified goals - quick fixes that play well in media headlines will fail.
The past weeks have seen the issue of food advertising to children again pushed to the fore by the media and politicians. As Debra Shipley MP tabled her 10 Minute Rule Bill to “ban the advertising of high fat, high sugar and high salt content food and drinks during pre-school television programmes and related scheduling”, certain sectors of the press took the opportunity to try to demonise the food and advertising industries and hold them accountable for the increasing levels of childhood weight and obesity problems.
Advertising is a complex business that affects consumers in different ways, in different circumstances and at different ages, but there is no factual evidence to support the theory that a ban on advertising food to children will eliminate or reduce obesity.
Parents supply about 90% of the family’s food requirements and therefore control the diet. Additionally, the UK has one of the EU’s strictest codes of practice on the content of food advertising to children. Advertisers must not communicate excessive consumption or frequency, snacks cannot be portrayed as main meal substitutes and showing snacking pre-bedtime is forbidden.
Overweight and obesity are caused by an imbalance between food consumption and energy expenditure. Government statistics point to a decline in calorific intake among children over the past 10 to 15 years and, in addition, it is also accepted there has been an even greater reduction in exercise. Children who walk or cycle to school are significantly fewer and less than half take the government-recommended two hours PE each week.
Changing lifestyles are at the core of the overweight/obesity problems.
Equally, the view that children make their parents’ lives unbearable by asking for advertised items is not supported by recent research among 1,500 independent parents. They acknowledged the presence of “pester power” but recognised this was part of a child’s development. Pester power has been around long before TV advertising began and more than 80% of parents said they refused to give in to immediate demands.
Likewise, concern from Debra Shipley and others over the influence of advertising on children is contradicted by a recent review of scientific research carried out by Brian Young, a lecturer at Exeter University's School of Psychology.
Young found that family behaviour studies revealed that the impact of advertising on children’s food choices and attitudes was not considered to be significant. What was significant was the influence of siblings and peers.
However, the time and space devoted to apportioning blame and argument must stop and we all (government, food and advertising industries, professional and NGOs) need to move ahead with a strategic plan which recognises the complexity of the issue. Food advertisers welcome the latest Food Standards Agency discussion paper which seeks to broaden the debate and we look forward to developing ideas in the coming weeks.
We must not forget the issue of “calories out” because that is the other half of the problem, and government needs to devote the same level of interest and policy development as they are currently giving to “calories in”. This may seem more difficult but has to be addressed with imagination and determination.
Overweight/obesity among children and adults can only be tackled effectively if the strategic plan envisaged covers education, exercise, parenting and diet, with education at the centre. Everyone involved must ensure that any plan is practical, sustainable and delivers quantified goals - quick fixes that play well in media headlines will fail.
No comments yet