Read the 24 January 2012 issue

A Yale University study found that children are disproportionately targeted by food company websites using branded computer games, known as advergames.

Researchers also found that playing these games increases children’s consumption of junk food.

Only one website in their analysis used advergames to promote primarily healthy foods.

They conclude: “These findings support the need for restrictions on companies’ use of advergames to market nutritionally poor foods to children.”

Read the article in Journal of Children and the Media, Online 20 Jan 2012

Read more about junk food advergame research, Yale Univ News, 9 Jan 2012

Read the 9 January 2012 issue

The review suggested interventions to reduce consumption, such as drinking water.

Read more: Psychology Today, 2 Jan 2012

It includes:

• Australian and New Zealand ministers’ response to the food labelling review
• reaction from FOE and other health, consumer and industry groups.

Read the 21 December 2011 issue

“an interpretative front-of-pack labelling system be developed that is reflective of a comprehensive Nutrition Policy and agreed public health priorities”.

An interpretive system attempts to make it easier for people to distinguish healthier from less healthy food choices.

FOE wants an interpretive system and has supported a traffic light system (using green, amber and red symbols) as the best available interpretive model.

Background

The ministers came to their decision at the meeting of the Forum on Food Regulation on 9 December 2011. The Forum (previously called the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council), comprised Australian federal, state and territory ministers, and Kate Wilkinson, New Zealand’s Minister of Food Safety.

The Forum met to make decisions on recommendations made by the review panel for the Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy. One of the panel’s recommendations, following submissions from many public health and consumer groups, was the introduction of a multiple traffic light system.

Traffic lights not adopted by the Forum

Health and consumer groups were disappointed that the Forum didn’t adopt the recommendation for traffic light labels. However, the Forum’s decision to develop an interpretive system backs the main thrust of consumer and health submissions to the Review.

Officially the recommendation to introduce a traffic light system is “on hold” pending the outcome of a development process for an interpretive system.

Daily Intake Guide rejected by the Forum

Food industry submissions to the Review supported the Daily Intake Guide system (DIG). This was developed by the Australian Food and Grocery Council and supported by New Zealand’s Food and Grocery Council. The Forum effectively rejected this approach by noting that the DIG is not an interpretive system. It relies on people thinking about the percentage of recommended daily intake of various food components when making food choices.

The next step – developing a new system

The Forum called for further work to develop a front-of-pack system that builds on and seeks to overcome limitations of existing systems. They cite Sanitarium’s proposed Healthy Eating System which is a development of traffic light labels, and the New Zealand Nutrition Foundation’s eMark, as having “the potential to overcome the technical objections raised by industry”.

The next step is a government-led collaborative process “that brings polarised views together to build on existing common ground”. The timetable is to develop a new system by December 2012. Some stakeholders, both from public health and industry, think this timetable is too tight.

What if a collaborative approach fails?

The Forum concludes its statement on front-of-pack labelling as follows:

“If major points of difference are or can be resolved, consistent voluntary implementation by industry will be encouraged, supported by consumer education initiatives by government. Alternatively, depending on the level of consensus, either a pilot of the model interpretive system (if one is agreed) or a market-based comparative trial conducted by government, may be the next step.”

This is encouraging. The Forum appears to be saying it will not be happy for the status quo to continue, and unless industry moves to introduce an agreed interpretive system, governments will consider taking steps to bring pressure on them to do so.

Read the Forum’s Communique after the meeting.

Read the Forum’s report (PDF 542 KB)

Read FOE’s views on traffic light food labelling

Read the 25 November 2011 issue

Read more: NZ Herald, 17 Nov 2011

Fast food chains “lite” on accessible nutrition information

Nutrition information for meals at New Zealand fast food chains is available but not easily accessible according to a study by researchers at The University of Auckland.

Read more from Auckland University, 17 Nov 2011

Read the journal abstract in Appetite, Online 12 Oct 2011

A report released earlier this year recommended introducing a voluntary multiple traffic lights front-of-pack food labelling system, but said it should be mandatory if health claims are made.

Officials from the New Zealand Government, and Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory governments, are developing responses to the report’s recommendations. Their responses will be considered by the Australian New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council at its meeting in December 2011.

Read more: NZ Herald, 17 Nov 2011

Read FOE’s position on traffic light food labelling

Political parties differ on obesity prevention – FOE survey

FOE recently questioned political parties about issues considered likely to contribute significantly to reducing obesity, and diseases such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

One question was about traffic light nutrition labelling.

Read FOE’s report, Responses of New Zealand political parties to questions about obesity prevention

FOE (Fight the Obesity Epidemic)

10 November 2011

Parties differ on obesity prevention

Political parties seeking election in 2011 have some very different approaches to preventing obesity, according to a report just released by Fight the Obesity Epidemic (FOE).

FOE obtained responses from seven parties considered as having some likelihood of gaining at least one seat. Parties were asked about five issues considered likely to contribute significantly to reducing obesity, and diseases such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

“One party stands out as having a clear picture of what is needed,” says FOE spokesperson Dr Robyn Toomath. “The Green Party show they fully understand the need to change the environment driving the obesity epidemic.”

Green policies commended by FOE include prohibiting junk food advertising on TV before 8.30pm, support for traffic light labelling on food packaging to help consumers distinguish healthier choices, and a tax on soft drinks.

“Labour, the Māori Party and New Zealand First also have a number of useful policies,” Dr Toomath says.

“Along with the Greens, these parties all support reinstatement of the provision in school administration guidelines that only healthy food is to be available for sale on school premises.” This provision was removed by the National-led government in February 2009.

Dr Toomath says she found the range of views on GST is of interest, particularly given that Labour is proposing to remove GST from fruit and vegetables.

The Māori Party advocates removal of GST from all food. National, ACT, United Future and the Green Party oppose removal of GST from fruit and vegetables. The Greens argue that this is not the most effective way to make healthy food more affordable.

Read the report: Responses of New Zealand political parties to questions about obesity prevention