The announcement of the prohibition in Spain of the unhealthy food advertising on children’s schedule or in environments frequented by children has generated a great stir. Many people see it as a restriction on the freedom of parents to decide what they want to feed their children. However, nutrition experts have received it with great joy, but also with caution to the waiting for the results.
This polarity in the perception of the population is common in any political decision. But we are not here to talk about politics, but about science. And the truth is that scientists generally agree that these are necessary measures.
There are many studies carried out in different countries in which the conclusions, with small variations, are the same: that children are a public very susceptible to publicity and that, therefore, they must be protected to avoid possible feeding problems. But let’s see it more in depth.
From advertising to obesity
According data of the World Health Organization, childhood obesity has increased by giant steps in recent decades.
In 1975, a 4% of children and adolescents from 5 to 19 years I had being overweight or obese. However, in 2016 the percentage had already risen up to 18%. Additionally, data below that age is alarmingly increasing, with a total of 39 million children under 5 years of age being overweight or obese in 2020 worldwide.
For all this, the body has a Commission for end childhood obesity aimed at studying what are the factors behind this terrible problem. Their conclusions are collected in a guide which, among other recommendations, is that of remove advertising for unhealthy foods and beverages of those places and times in which it can be consumed by children and adolescents.
But scientists at the WHO are not the only ones who have come to this conclusion. Hundreds of researchers around the world agree. And it is that, in reality, children are a target audience of unhealthy food advertising for various reasons, but above all for two. First of all, because they have a great influence on household purchases. Who says no to a little boy’s face asking for the chocolate cereal that he just saw advertised on television? And secondly, because they have great potential as adult consumers in the future. Once captured, they can spend years consuming that product.
In addition, it is easier to convince them through certain maneuvers, such as the use of pets and cartoons. In fact, in a study published in 2015, the effect of these types of claims was analyzed and it was found that they are really useful in both senses. In other words, they help attract children to eat unhealthy foods. You just have to see the bunny that advertises a famous brand of instant cocoa, the friendly lynx of a brand of smoothies or the little monkey that accompanies the advertising of some very popular chocolate cereals among children. But they can also attract children to healthy foods. In this study, it is concluded that pets and cartoons could be used to encourage children’s audiences to consume fruit and vegetables. Unfortunately, it is something that is hardly done.
It is generally reduced to unhealthy foods, hence some countries, such as Mexico, already have opted for banning these characters in the packaging of unhealthy products.
Convincing them with these tactics while they are still children is helpful in attracting a future adult audience. And it is that doing it directly in this is not so simple. In fact, in 2016 a systematic review of several studies in which it was concluded that “acute exposure to food advertising increases intake in children, but not in adults.”
In love with brands
In 2019, a team of Australian scientists conducted a study in which 282 children aged between 8 and 12 years about her television viewing routines and her attachment to food and beverage brands.
They had to answer how many minutes a day they watched television and whether they used to do it with recorded or live programs, with or without advertising. They were then asked about their favorite food and beverage brands. In general, regardless of what television they watched, everyone went for unhealthy foods. In fact, the most named brand was Cadbury, a famous chocolate brand, followed by Mcdonalds. As for the drinks, the most named was Fanta.
But the influence of advertising was noticed when they were asked if they would like to wear a T-shirt advertising their favorite food or beverage brand. 23% He acknowledged that he would rather wear a shirt with his favorite food brand, compared to a shirt with nothing on it. And the percentage was even higher for the favorite drink, with 41%. Here we did see a relationship with the consumption of advertising. Those who watched more minutes of television had this tendency, especially towards drinks. They even said that they would feel good taking her in front of their peers and friends.
And that, in the end, leads them to have a greater trend for consumption of those foods that they consider so popular.
Not everything is television advertising for children
The new measure announced yesterday for him Ministry of Consumption it does not include just television. It also refers to certain applications, social networks and written press. In general, any advertising channel that may be in frequent contact with children.
This is a good measure, as there are also numerous studies that show that advertising about unhealthy foods he is not alone on television.
For example, in 2017 it was carried out in New Zealand a study in which all the ways in which children are in contact with this type of marketing were analyzed. 168 children participated, who were fitted with a portable camera that took images every 7 seconds. With it, it was found that, in one way or another, children on average were exposed to 27.3 non-staple food ads per day. On the contrary, they were only exposed 12.3 times to those that are considered basic. Among the former, the most common were sugary drinks, fast food, sweets and salty snacks.
All this supposes a constant bombardment that leads them to want to consume what they see so regularly. And it is especially troublesome with social networks, as can be seen in the conclusions of another study, published in 2019. 101 children and adolescents, with ages between 7 and 16 years. All of them were surveyed about their favorite social networks and then recorded for five minutes using the two they liked the most in their usual electronic device.
In this way, it was seen that 72% of children in that short period of time they were exposed to advertisements. There were all kinds of them, but the vast majority of them were unhealthy, with 44% promoting a fast food brand.
What about the parents?
Generally, it is not the children who buy those foods that they see advertised. For this reason, there are those who criticize this type of measures, arguing that it will be useless to veto these ads in children’s schedule; because, after all, the decision is up to the parents.
And, yes, it is true. But it is not that simple. As explained by the food technologist Miguel Angel Lurueña in his book Don’t get mixed up with food, the technique used by this type of advertising is known as nag factor, or annoyance factor. Basically, it consists of using the aforementioned animated characters, along with raffles, gifts and all kinds of claims they make that children insist on their parents over and over again until you achieve your goals. Yes, with patience and firmness they could ignore them. And it is something that should also be worked with adults, of course. But we all know how far a child’s insistence can go. If we cut off that advertising, which also takes advantage of a particularly fragile audience, we will eliminate the root problem and save ourselves that complicated struggle.
Will all this help?
Some countries, like United Kingdom, Chile, Mexico and Slovenia They have already implemented measures similar to the one Spain intends to implement now. Generally, they have not been in place for many years. Sloveniafor example did in 2017 and chili in 2016.
Researchers from both countries have since carried out studies aimed at verifying the effectiveness of measures. In this way they have been able to see that the exposure of children to the advertising of unhealthy foods has been reduced, but that it has not been completely eliminated. On the one hand, because companies take advantage of legal loopholes to hold on to them and continue to deliver their ads to the widest possible audience. And, secondly, because not all children shy away from television outside of the children’s schedule. Again we come to the fact that these measures help, but the family intervention is still necessary.
Also, some of these studies have not found a significant improvement in kids diet since the measures were implemented. This may be due to various causes, such as the one mentioned above, that, although to a lesser extent, they are still exposed to advertising. But you also have to keep in mind that it has not been a long time and that these types of results look better at medium-long term. In fact, these studies generally conclude that they should be repeated later.
However, each country takes its measurements differently and no comparisons can be made. It will be necessary to wait to see the effectiveness of the one that will be developed in Spain.
What is clear is that science, in every sense, points out that it is a more than necessary measure. The childhood obesity and some non-communicable diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, are a serious problem that is taking over every day more of the children of the developed countries. And it is more than proven that the advertising of unhealthy foods has had a lot to do with it. It is not about forbidding children to snack on chocolate cookies at any given time. In fact, this has not been forbidden by anyone, despite what some people seem to have understood. It is about avoiding that, for children, the most attractive thing is to ask their parents for a snack of those cookies. There he is crux of the issue and, therefore, these measures are worth celebrating, not criticizing.