Suchergebnisse

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A key driver of unhealthy diets in children is the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages. Attempts to regulate children's exposure to unhealthy food marketing through government-led policies are challenged by commercial interests. Parents shoulder the responsibility of counteracting the effects of omnipresent unhealthy food marketing that children are exposed to within the food environment. In this narrative review we aimed to synthesise the evidence over the last 10 years on parents' perceptions of children's exposure to unhealthy food marketing and parents support for policies to restrict this marketing. RECENT FINDINGS: The evidence indicates that unhealthy food marketing leads parents to feel undermined in their ability to provide healthy foods to their children. Despite this concern, parents tend to underestimate the levels of exposure to, and impacts of, unhealthy food marketing to their children, especially in the digital ecosystem. SUMMARY: The voices and support of parents represent a significant opportunity to accelerate policy action on food marketing. Increasing awareness among parents and caregivers to the high levels and harmful impacts of children's exposure to unhealthy food marketing, focusing on their right not to be undermined by such action, may drive support for policy change. Further research is needed to understand parents' attitudes and perceptions related to their children's exposure to contemporary unhealthy food marketing, specifically in digital environments, and the perspectives of fathers and parents from low and middle-income countries.

BackgroundThe insidious and pervasive nature of marketing of unhealthy food and beverages has been identified as one of several strategies the unhealthy food and beverage industry uses to exert their influence on population food choices and diet. Regulating the food and beverage industry's marketing practices is one mechanism to mitigate this commercial determinant of health. This paper seeks to understand the main barriers and enablers that governments face when attempting to design an appropriate regulatory system.Methods14 semi-structured expert interviews were undertaken with participants across different jurisdictions (Ireland, United Kingdom, Chile, Canada, Norway, Portugal and Brazil) who were involved in introducing marketing restrictions; and a purposive documentary analysis was carried out. A thematic analysis of this data was conducted informed by the Health Policy Triangle.ResultsMultiple common technical and political issues were experienced by governments regarding the form and substance of the policy design regardless of the jurisdictional context. Such issues included: whether to introduce a mandatory approach; what age group to protect; what nutrient classification system to use; how to define "marketing to children"; and what mediums, settings and techniques to cover. The actors opposing regulation challenged the form and substance of each design element. However, having a strong political mandate to introduce regulation; multiple actors working together, including multiple government ministries, academics and civil society actors; and a strong evidence base supporting the policy design helped policymakers navigate the technical and political challenges faced when designing the regulatory approach.ConclusionDespite the different political contexts and actors involved in different jurisdictions internationally, there are many commonalities in the challenges and enabling factors faced by governments. Understanding the technical and political challenges experienced by governments and how these governments overcame those challenges is critical to improve capacity around designing more effective regulations to improve population's diets, and therefore NCDs.

BACKGROUND: The INFORMAS [International Network for Food and Obesity/Non-communicable Diseases (NCDs) Research, Monitoring and Action Support] Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was developed to evaluate the degree of implementation of widely recommended food environment policies by national governments against international best practice, and has been applied in New Zealand in 2014, 2017 and 2020. This paper outlines the 2020 Food-EPI process and compares policy implementation and recommendations with the 2014 and 2017 Food-EPI. METHODS: In March–April 2020, a national panel of over 50 public health experts participated in Food-EPI. Experts rated the extent of implementation of 47 "good practice" policy and infrastructure support indicators compared to international best practice, using an extensive evidence document verified by government officials. Experts then proposed and prioritized concrete actions needed to address the critical implementation gaps identified. Progress on policy implementation and recommendations made over the three Food-EPIs was compared. RESULTS: In 2020, 60% of the indicators were rated as having "low" or "very little, if any" implementation compared to international benchmarks: less progress than 2017 (47%) and similar to 2014 (61%). Of the nine priority actions proposed in 2014, there was only noticeable action on one (Health Star Ratings). The majority of actions were therefore proposed again in 2017 and 2020. In 2020 the proposed actions were broader, reflecting the need for multisectoral action to improve the food environment, and the need for a mandatory approach in all policy areas. CONCLUSIONS: There has been little to no progress in the past three terms of government (9 years) on the implementation of policies and infrastructure support for healthy food environments, with implementation overall regressing between 2017 and 2020. The proposed actions in 2020 have reflected a growing movement to locate nutrition within the wider context of planetary health and with ...

New Zealand has the second highest overweight and obese child population in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). This paper evaluates whether New Zealand's self-regulatory controls on the advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children and young people adequately protects children from the exposure to, and power of, such marketing in order to limit its impact on children's food and beverage preferences. First, an analysis of the relevant New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) Codes was conducted, including the ASA Complaints Board and Appeals Board decisions from 2017–2019 to determine the application of the Codes in practice. Second, a public health law framework was applied to the self-regulatory system. Of the 16 complaints assessed, 12 were not upheld, and only one was upheld under the Children and Young People's Advertising Code (CYPA Code). Three complaints were upheld under the Advertising Standards Code (ASC) but not the CYPA Code. An analysis of the Codes and their interpretation by the Complaints Board found that many facets of the public health law framework were not met. The self-regulatory system does not adequately protect children from the exposure to, and power of, unhealthy food and beverage marketing, and government-led, comprehensive, and enforceable marketing restrictions are required.