89% of children's food products provide poor nutritional quality,but 62 % still make health claims

[Guest guest]

Colleagues, the following is FYI and does not necessarily reflect my own

opinion. I have no further knowledge of the topic. If you do not wish to

receive these posts, set your email filter to filter out any messages

coming from @nutritionucanlivewith.com and the program will remove

anything coming from me.

---------------------------------------------------------

Public release date: 14-Jul-2008

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-07/w-8oc071408.php

Contact: Annette Whibley

wizard.media@...

Wiley-Blackwell

89 percent of children's food products provide poor nutritional quality

But 62 percent of them still make health claims on the packaging

Nine out of ten regular food items aimed specifically at children have a

poor nutritional content – because of high levels of sugar, fat or

sodium - according to a detailed study of 367 products published in the

July issue of the UK-based journal Obesity Reviews.

Just under 70 per cent of the products studied - which specifically

excluded confectionery, soft drinks and bakery items - derived a high

proportion of calories from sugar. Approximately one in five (23 per

cent) had high fat levels and 17 per cent had high sodium levels.

Despite this, 62 per cent of the foods with poor nutritional quality

(PNQ) made positive claims about their nutritional value on the front of

the packet.

" Children's foods can now be found in virtually every section of the

supermarket and are available for every eating experience " says

Professor Charlene Elliott from the University of Calgary, Canada, and a

Trustee of the Canadian Council of Food and Nutrition.

" Parents may have questions about which packaged foods are good for

their children. Yet certain nutritional claims may add to the confusion,

as they can mislead people into thinking the whole product is nutritious. "

Only 11 per cent of the products Professor Elliott and her colleagues

evaluated provided good nutritional value in line with the criteria laid

down by the US-based Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a

non-profit agency that received the Food and Drug Administration's

highest honour in 2007.

The CSPI nutritional standards state that healthy food should not derive

more than 35 per cent of its calories from fat (excluding nuts and seed

and nut butters) and should have no more than 35 per cent added sugar by

weight. They also provide guidance on sodium levels, ranging from 230mg

per portion for snacks through to 770mg per portion for pre-prepared meals.

CSPI's standards are adapted from those developed by the National

Alliance for Nutrition and Activity, a coalition of some 300 health and

nutrition organisations in the USA. The organisation states that its

standards represent a compromise approach. They allow for the marketing

of products that may not be nutritionally ideal, but that provide some

positive nutritional benefits that could help children meet the US

Government's Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

The 367 products included in the study were bought from a national

supermarket chain stocking 50,000 food and non-food items in December

2005. Each had to meet very specific criteria.

" We included food products and packaging that were presented in such a

way that children were the clear target audience " explains Professor

Elliott, whose research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health

Research. " They included products that promoted fun and play, had a

cartoon image on the front of the box or were linked to children's

films, TV programmes and merchandise. "

Each product was subjected to a 36-point analysis that included the

nutritional content and how the packaging was designed to appeal to

children and their parents.

Key findings included:

* 63 per cent of all the products surveyed made some sort of

nutritional claim, including 62 per of the products that could be

classed as poorly nutritious, due to high levels of sugar or fat or

sodium. A low percentage (eight per cent) carried some kind of nutrition

mark or seal. Other claims included that products were low fat, a source

of calcium, contained no artificial flavours or colours or provided a

number of essential nutrients.

* Products with high sugar levels accounted for 70 per cent of the

goods with PNQ. Despite this, 68 per cent included some sort of

nutritional claim on the package, such as a source of whole grains,

source of iron or low in fat. Cereals and fruit snacks were particularly

likely to make nutritional claims and have high levels of sugar.

* Just under 23 per cent of the products had PNQ because of their

high fat content. Yet 37 per cent had some sort of nutritional claim on

the package. For example peanut butter mixed with chocolate claimed to

be a " source of six essential nutrients " and a pizza product claimed to

be a " source of calcium " .

* High sodium levels meant that 17 per cent of the products

analysed were classified as being of PNQ. Despite this, almost 34 per

cent made some sort of nutritional claim on the package. Crackers and

pizza products were among the worst offenders.

* A fifth of the products featured a cartoon image engaged in some

sort of healthy physical activity on the front and a quarter showed

these on the back or side of the box. Activities included skateboarding,

basketball and biking.

" Assessing the levels of sugar in the selected food products was a

methodological challenge, because milk sugars and fruit sugars occur

naturally in foods " says Professor Elliott. " The Nutrition Facts label

only displays total sugars and the quantity of added sugars is not

always provided by the manufacturer.

" This means that the percentage of foods categorised as poorly

nutritious due to high levels of sugar is higher than it would have been

if information on naturally occurring sugars had been available. "

The problem of accurately separating figures for quantities of natural

and added sugars in manufactured products has also been encountered by

other researchers and acknowledged as an issue by CSPI, so it is not

unique to this study.

" Despite this, the findings still give us cause for concern " says

Professor Elliott. " While caregivers are likely to purchase products

that they hope their children will like, it clearly can result in a less

nutritious diet than they may realise. Having a healthy diet is

especially important given the current rates of childhood obesity. "

Excess body weight affects up to 35 per cent of children across Canada,

the United States and Europe and is linked to a range of health problems

including type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease and some

forms of cancer. Overweight children can also suffer from psychological

and social consequences because of their weight.

Professor Elliott believes that policy attention needs to be directed

towards the nutritional claims made by products aimed at children and

the images they use to sell the products.

" If a parent sees a product that makes specific nutritional claims, they

may assume that the whole product is nutritious and our study has shown

that that is definitely not true in the vast majority of cases "

concludes Professor Elliott. " Using cartoon characters engaged in sport

can also create the illusion of a healthy product. "

###

Notes to editors

* Assessing 'fun foods': nutritional content and analysis of

supermarket foods targeted at children. Elliott C. Obesity Reviews.

9.43, pp 368-377 (July 2008).

* Obesity Reviews is a bi-monthly publication that includes papers

from all disciplines related to obesity. The official review journal of

the International Association for the Study of Obesity, it is published

by Wiley-Blackwell and has a 2007 impact factor of 7.821.

www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117981306/home

--

ne Holden, MS, RD

" Ask the Parkinson Dietitian " http://www.parkinson.org/

" Eat well, stay well with Parkinson's disease "

" Parkinson's disease: Guidelines for Medical Nutrition Therapy "

http://www.nutritionucanlivewith.com/