Andrea Hipsher felt saddled with guilt when she found out the packaged infant food she was feeding her toddler may have contributed to his nutritional deficiencies, despite the products claiming to be “natural” and full of health benefits.
Hipsher fed her baby boy the food pouches every lunch and dinner because it provided a quick and easy solution to her feelings of being “stressed and overwhelmed” with the demands of parenting.
But when her son was 13 months old, she took him to a nutritionist as she was concerned he was not growing as quickly as his peers. The nutritionist told her evidence suggests that over-reliance on commercial food products can stunt growth, she said.
Unknowingly, Hipsher had fallen for the “health halo effect”, a term that describes how food companies seduce parents with carefully worded marketing making meaningless nutritional claims.
“Learning that the pouches weren’t sufficient made me feel extra guilty that for several months of my son’s life he probably wasn’t getting the nutrients that he needed. I didn’t know what I was doing was so wrong and he was missing out,” the Melbourne mother, now aged 35, said.
Australian and New Zealand infant and toddler food guidelines recommend children eat a wide variety of nutritious food every day from across the food groups.
In December, a report tabled by the government’s Food Regulation Standing Committee found minimal regulation around nutritional quality of commercial foods for infants and young children – despite public perceptions those foods are tightly regulated.
The report found commercial foods designed for infants and young children are “often high” in sugar and highlighted concerns over ingredients and information on packaging.
“Labelling does not support carers to make informed choices for infants and young children due to product naming not always accurately reflecting ingredients,” it noted.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has urged governments to quickly tackle misleading labelling and advertising of infant and toddler food.
A 2023 WHO report investigating the issue said pre-packaged products often featured attractive labels and emotional marketing designed to erode confidence in preparing home-cooked meals.
Some packaging claims may even reduce confidence in the nutritional value and safety of breast milk, the WHO found.
Associate Prof Helen Dixon, a health behaviour researcher at Cancer Council Victoria, said infant food products can often sugar-coat the truth and emphasise often meaningless claims – such as “no added sugars” – to convey the idea the product is healthy.
“Australian families have a right to expect that ready-made foods sold for babies and toddlers do provide good nutrition and are marketed responsibly,” she said.
A common claim on products is “contains vegetables”. But typically, Dixon said, the pouches primarily contain potato or apple puree, which lack vital nutrients and give children a preference for sweeter foods.
She said improper food labelling can widen inequalities, as less health literate and time-poor solo carers are more likely to pick unhealthier foods.
An analysis of 330 packaged food products available in Australia for infants and toddlers under 36 months old, conducted by the Cancer Council Victoria and Food for Health Alliance, published in June, found none complied with WHO labelling requirements.
after newsletter promotion
Fewer than one in three (28%) of the products assessed met nutritional guidelines relating to sugar, sodium, fat and energy levels. All of the foods analysed contained sugars prohibited by WHO, as did half of snacks such as crackers and biscuits.
The study also found that all products contained a health claim contrary to WHO guidelines, such as “encourages self feeding”, “free from artificial colours and flavouring” and “developed by child nutritionists”.
One product highlighted by the researchers consisted of 69% sugar, more than Smarties, which contains 67.5g of sugar per 100g.
Dee Madigan, owner of advertising agency Campaign Edge, said “there is a little bit of trickery involved” in some packaging claims “and the companies know it”. She said marketing companies prey on time-poor parents.
“Marketers make us unconfident in our own abilities … we feel like our kids will be getting more of a balanced diet by buying something from the experts,” she said.
For almost four in ten (39%) babies, ready-made foods make up at least half of their diet, and 73% of parents believe the foods are healthy, according to a poll by the Royal Children’s hospital in Melbourne.
Paediatric dietitian Nicole Bando, the convener of the Dietitians Australia paediatric and maternal health interest group, said the evidence suggests consuming packaged foods in place of whole foods increases risk of nutritional deficiencies. Hipsher had sought out Bando to advise about her young son.
The foods eaten by children between six months and two years lay the foundation for long term health, Bando said.
Bando said many infant foods labelled as safe to eat from four months of age contravenes Australian advice, which recommends children consume solid food from around six months.
Marketing claims suggesting products will aid a child’s development “are unsubstantiated and conflict with the science,” she said.
The Australian Medical Association wants the government’s marketing guidelines on breastmilk substitutes to mirror the WHO’s international code, which it says will stop products, such as high-sugar toddler milk, being marketed as “beneficial”.
The executive manager at Food for Health Alliance, Jane Martin, said: “Parents need to be able to trust what’s on the shelves and know they’re not being sucked in by marketers who make the products look healthier than they really are.”
Food ministers will meet to discuss potential tighter regulations on 25 July.
The assistant health minister, Ged Kearney, who will chair the meeting, said that food marketed to parents of infants or toddlers should meet the “absolute highest standards” and any health claims should be “accurate and appropriate.”
link