200 likes | 322 Views
Food promotion and childhood obesity: Impact on Policy. Jason Halford & Emma Boyland Liverpool Obesity Research Network. ACCIDENTAL IMPACT TV food advertising to children. Halford et al., 2004. FA exposure increased intake in all children
E N D
Food promotion and childhood obesity: Impact on Policy • Jason Halford & • Emma Boyland • Liverpool Obesity Research Network
FA exposure increased intake in all children • Weight status effects can be very obvious especially in older children
Exposure to either the advert or the celebrity endorser exaggerated brand choice Significant main effect of crisp brand (p<0.001) and an interaction between crisp brand and advert condition (p<0.001).
Key findings: Boyland et al., (Pediatrics in press) *** p < 0.001 • High TV viewers had a higher mean BMI SDS than the low TV viewers. • The food preferences of high TV viewers were more affected by food ad exposure than low TV viewers. • Increased media use increases susceptibility? Non branded (LFPM) Branded (AFPM)
Current picture – extent and nature of food advertising on UK TV in 2008 • 14 most popular commercial channels chosen: • ITV • Channel Four • Five • Nickelodeon • Cartoon Network • Jetix • CiTV • 4 Music (formerly The Hits) • Smash Hits • MTV • Sky One • Sky Sports 1 • E4 • Boomerang
Freedom of Information: Right to know request 1-27184548 ‘The information you requested is being withheld as it falls under the exemption in section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act. This part of the Act deals with the exemption of information that would prejudice the commercial interests of a person or company’ Julia Fraser 13th August 2007
Key findings – types of foods advertised Non-core dominates across entire sample
Examples of inter-channel variation Cartoon Network ITV FAMILY CHILD Sky Sports One Nickelodeon Variation within category rather than between child and family channels
International Comparison: Kelly et al., 2010 How does this map on to the regulation and prevalence of childhood obesity?