Kids notice sugar warnings but still reach for flavored milk

Kids notice sugar warnings but still reach for flavored milk

Can a simple label on a bottle change what your family drinks? A study is investigating whether conspicuous warning labels about sugary drinks influence the choices of children and their parents.

Study:Parent and child choice of sugary drinks under four labeling conditions. Photo credit: Bodenbild/Shutterstock.com

A recent study inNutrients Investigated whether warnings about sugar content on the front of beverage packages encourage parents and children to make healthier beverage choices.

introduction

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the total energy intake of sugar should be 10% or less of the daily energy intake of daily energy. Excessive sugar intake increases the likelihood of weight gain, tooth decay, type 2 diabetes, and other cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.

Over half of Australian children consume too much sugar, and almost 40% of this intake comes from sugary drinks.

Parents often consider 100% fruit juice and flavored milk healthy drinks. Yet they have as much sugar as soft drinks. Clever marketing of their natural contents such as vitamin C and real fruits, as well as the lack of preservatives, falsely positions them as healthier choices.

To help consumers make informed decisions, truthful nutritional information should be clearly displayed on beverage packages in an easy-to-understand form. For example, packs may have front labels showing energy and sugar content.

The Health Star Rating (HSR) is a label used in Australia and New Zealand. This government initiative from 2014 is based on voluntary labeling. However, there is limited research on their effectiveness.

As with tobacco, warning labels on sugary drinks can influence children's preferences and purchasing decisions. These can show the number of teaspoons of sugar in a drink, the energy or sugar content, or include graphic warnings such as images of tooth decay. All of these provide simple and acceptable warnings. There is evidence that adults and adolescents respond more to these warnings than to traffic light warnings or dietary guidelines. However, little is known about their effects on younger children.

Parents often choose drinks in response to their children's suggestions. Because childhood is a necessary time for learning lifelong dietary habits, the current study aims to understand how different prepack labels influence beverage choices among young children and their parents.

About the study

The study included 1,229 Australian children aged 4 to 11 and their parents. Parents and children were asked separately to choose a drink from an online vending machine. They were then asked to choose from the same drinks again, but with randomly assigned labels.

Drinks included 100% fruit juice, fruit drink, plain milk, bottled water, a soft drink with sugar or an artificial sweetener, and flavored milk. With the exception of water, all drinks were offered in two versions. Water, plain milk and artificial sweeteners were not labeled because they do not contain sugar. A panel of experts assessed the healthiness of the drinks.

The four labels used were the text label “Warning: Drinks high in sugar contribute to tooth decay,” an image suggesting tooth decay with the text “Warning and high in sugar,” the number of teaspoons of sugar equivalent to the drink with the text “Warning,” or the HSR. The latter was present in all drinks and showed different stars depending on the sugar content.

All labels were octagonal for added visual impact and resembled a stop sign.

Study results

Retrieve

A large proportion of participants did not recall seeing labels. Only half of the children and two-thirds of the parents remembered the labels. Of these, 73% of children remembered them accurately compared to 44% of parents.

In this group, parents were more likely to recall HSR (67%) but not the text warning or teaspoon sugar labels (<30%). Most children (80%) correctly recalled the HSR label, and approximately 70% recalled the text warning.

perception

Parents assigned comparable meanings to all labels regardless of design. Both parents and children reported the least negative influence on the HSR label. The text warning and teaspoon of sugar labels worried the age group 4-7 years more than other labels. In other areas, their impact was comparable to that of HSR.

The dental waste label had the most significant effect on slightly older children, ages 8 to 11. Compared to the HSR, it was perceived as easy to understand, truthful and worrying.

Choice of drinks

Among children, the sugar label teaspoons had the greatest influence on drink choices, followed by the text-based warning and the tooth decay image.

However, the magnitude of these changes was small; Most children didn't switch to a healthier drink, even after seeing the warning label.

Seeing the labels did not significantly change parents' or children's beverage choices. Statistically significant health improvements were observed in some groups of children, but the practical impact was limited.

Parents tended to choose water, artificially sweetened drinks and soft drinks. While water and artificially sweetened drinks are generally considered healthier, soft drinks are not. Those who changed their choices chose healthier options regardless of label type.

Before labeling and with the HSR label, the top three choices among children were flavored milk, 100% fruit juice, and soft drinks. Other labels have created small shifts.

When the text warning label was shown, fruit drinks became the second most popular choice among children, overtaking 100% fruit juice. With the label “tooth decay,” water became the second most popular drink. Sugar Label's teaspoons contributed to Water's increasing popularity, making it the third most chosen beverage.

Over 70% of parents and children did not change their drink choices after seeing the label.

Diploma

The study shows that labels alone create small changes in consumer choices. Flavored milk remains children's first choice, regardless of warning labels.

HSR had a minimal impact in children, perhaps because it is present in all bottles, making it difficult to distinguish healthy from unhealthy drinks. In addition, it fails to evoke emotional or cognitive responses, limiting its ability to influence behavior. In contrast, HSR labeling improved parental decisions despite their perceptions of its ineffectiveness.

A large proportion of participants did not remember the labels. Better captions are needed, combined with stricter interventions across platforms and improved regulation.

The study used a simulated online vending machine scenario. Therefore, real-world results may vary. However, the full impact of prepack labeling may only emerge with long-term follow-up in future studies.

Such evidence can influence public health policy to ensure that beverages carry easy-to-understand nutrition labels. This could help encourage children to choose healthier drinks if they desire.

Download your PDF copy now!

Sources: