Despite their trusted image, commercial babyfoods are a public health concern. Our research has found a raft of issues around the nutrition and marketing of foods aimed at children under three. Products are often far too sweet, poorly labelled and misleadingly marketed, leaving parents to navigate a marketplace fraught with ambiguity.
That is why last week’s launch of new commercial babyfood and drink guidelines matters. For the first time in decades, government has recognised that reforming young children’s diets is overdue. Manufacturers now have 18 months to cut sugar and salt levels and introduce clearer labelling.
The move sits within the government’s 10-year plan to support children’s health, and comes against a backdrop of obesity rates that have doubled since the 1990s, with over one in five children entering school already overweight or obese.
The guidelines are a welcome step, signalling recognition that stronger standards are needed. But they stop short of decisive action. Narrower in scope than many experts had recommended, voluntary in nature, and lacking a plan for monitoring or enforcement, they risk allowing superficial changes while the real problems remain.
The challenge of babyfood reform
Three challenges stand out. First, the guidelines are voluntary. Experience from evaluating HFSS legislation shows that only when clear rules are in place does the market shift at scale.
Second, sweetness and texture. While the guidance acknowledges the problem of purées and snacks that set children on a lifelong preference for sugar, it sets no mandatory limits. Our recent report ‘Commercial Babyfoods in Crisis’ found the problem runs deeper still: more than half of snacks contained added sugars, nine in 10 fruit-based products were excessively sweet, and a quarter of all products would trigger a ‘high sugar’ warning label under World Health Organization guidelines.
The third challenge is marketing. While some claims are restricted, healthwashing and greenwashing remain widespread, with two in three parents in our survey reporting they feel misled by labels.
This is why the response from retailers and brands now is critical. We need to see manufacturers move beyond the minimum requirements – by implementing government advice to reduce reliance on fruit sugars, focus on savoury, vegetable-led products, and stop the pervasive use of misleading claims.
Parents are calling for this change. Seven in 10 told us they want stronger warning labels on high-sugar foods. Half use commercial babyfood most of the time and reasonably expect the products they buy to be nutritious, affordable and safe. Retailers and manufacturers cannot continue to treat babyfood as a niche convenience category. Our data on usage shows it is a frontline category shaping child health.
The government has provided a framework. Now leadership must come from industry. Those who act ambitiously will build trust with parents, shape a healthier market, and secure a stronger foothold in a sector long overdue for reform.
Ali Morpeth, visiting research fellow and Diane Threapleton, senior research fellow at the University of Leeds
No comments yet