Visual communication design: a neglected factor in nutrition promotion via packaged food labels.

Packaging design is a communication device and a critical component in branding strategy, and has relevance for food policy. Presently, packaging-related nutrition policy initiatives focus on the role of regulated claims, nutrition information panels and front-of-pack nutrition labels to help guide consumer food choices and address high prevalences of discretionary and ultra-processed food consumption in many countries. However, these nutrition labelling systems are not optimized as public health policy tools as many consumers do not use them to inform their food choices. Visual communication design theory posits that a designer orders the elements and principles of design into hierarchies that prioritize certain elements over others, and that some of these elements are more dominant and given more emphasis than others. The overall design of the package thereby directs consumer attention to some aspects of pack design (e.g., characters, contents of the package) and away from others (e.g., nutrition details). Dual processing frameworks propose that food decisions are made with the interplay between automatic and rational thinking processes. Packaging designs affect whether consumers rely predominantly on automatic or rational thinking to select a food. This narrative review outlines the role of food packaging design and how it impacts the clear communication of nutrition aspects of food products and how the use of nutrition information by consumers to make decisions may depend upon design structures in packaging. This article attests that nutrition scientists and policy makers should incorporate visual communication design into research on the food packaging as a public health promotion tool. A stronger focus on the communication of regulated front-of-pack nutrition information can be made with a re-evaluation of the hierarchy of elements in the front-of-pack design enabling consumers to make healthier decisions.

Australian Stakeholder Perspectives on Healthier Retail Food Environments for Toddlers-The Era of "Band Aids and Small Inroads".

Background: A healthy diet in young children is crucial for optimal growth and development. However, many toddlers (1-3 y) consume suboptimal diets, and as a result, are at a high risk of experiencing negative health outcomes. Moreover, minimal progress has been made to improve the healthiness of retail food environments for toddlers to date despite the potential and advocacy for the issue. Objectives: To gain insight into stakeholder perceptions and opinions on the healthiness of Australian retail food environments for toddlers, as well as perspectives on the options and barriers to improve their healthiness. Methods: Qualitative, online study utilizing semi-structured individual interviews with 27 key stakeholders from food industry, academia, nongovernment organizations, public health, and government in Australia. Results: Most stakeholders agreed that retail food environments for toddlers were not health promoting. Stakeholders identified that a multifaceted approach including nutrition education and strong government mandated regulation were essential to improve the healthiness of retail food environments for toddlers. Interviews also highlighted the main perceived barriers to progress, and reasons for policy inaction in this area are the food industry and government support. Many stakeholders were concerned that child health is being undermined due to the government favoring business needs over public health. Conclusions: Stakeholders in this study overwhelmingly agreed that there is more that can and should be done to create health promoting retail food environments for toddlers in Australia. Stakeholders identified a range of strategies that can be used to improve the healthiness of toddler food environments, but advocacy efforts are being undermined due to government inaction. Stakeholders believed that strong governance is required to create equitable, sustainable healthy retail food environments for young children. Improving the healthiness of retail food environments for young children will not only reduce diet related disease across the lifespan but will help to address financial and societal costs of a poor diet.

The Nutritional Profile and On-Pack Marketing of Toddler-Specific Food Products Launched in Australia between 1996 and 2020.

With the food system evolving, it is not clear how the nutrition and on-pack claims of toddler foods have been impacted. Data on the trends in Australia are lacking, so we sought to determine the changes in the nutrition and on-pack claims of toddler-specific packaged foods over time. A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the Mintel Global New Products Database. The number of toddler-specific foods increased from 1996 to 2020. Over time, a lower proportion of meals and snacks were classified as "ultra-processed", but a higher proportion of snacks were classified as "discretionary". Meals launched after 2014 had higher median values for energy, saturated fat, and sugar than those in earlier years. Toddler snacks launched after 2014 had lower median values for sodium, and higher median values for fat, saturated fat, and sugar than those in earlier years. The mean number of total claims per package increased over time for snacks, with an increase in unregulated claims for both meals and snacks. Public health action is needed to ensure that the retail food environment for young children is health-promoting, including stringent and clear regulations for on-pack claims, and compositional guidelines and guidance on how to reduce the number of ultra-processed foods for toddlers.

Nutrition and packaging characteristics of toddler foods and milks in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse nutritional and packaging characteristics of toddler-specific foods and milks in the Australian retail food environment to identify how such products fit within the Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADG) and the NOVA classification. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retail audit of toddler foods and milks. On-pack product attributes were recorded. Products were categorised as (1) food or milk; (2) snack food or meal and (3) snacks sub-categorised depending on main ingredients. Products were classified as a discretionary or core food as per the ADG and level of processing according to NOVA classification. SETTING: Supermarkets and pharmacies in Australia. RESULTS: A total of 154 foods and thirty-two milks were identified. Eighty percentage of foods were snacks, and 60 % of foods were classified as core foods, while 85 % were ultraprocessed (UP). Per 100 g, discretionary foods provided significantly more energy, protein, total and saturated fat, carbohydrate, total sugar and Na (P < 0·001) than core foods. Total sugars were significantly higher (P < 0·001) and Na significantly lower (P < 0·001) in minimally processed foods than in UP foods. All toddler milks (n 32) were found to have higher energy, carbohydrate and total sugar levels than full-fat cow's milk per 100 ml. Claims and messages were present on 99 % of foods and all milks. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of toddler foods available in Australia are UP snack foods and do not align with the ADG. Toddler milks, despite being UP, do align with the ADG. A strengthened regulatory approach may address this issue.

Mothers' and father's perceptions of the risks and benefits of screen time and physical activity during early childhood: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to explore mothers' and fathers' perceptions of the risks and benefits of screen time and active play during early childhood. METHODS: In-depth semi structured telephone interviews were conducted with mothers and fathers (n = 28) of children aged 3-5 years who had earlier taken part in a larger quantitative study in Australia and identified willingness to be re-contacted were recruited. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using NviVo. Coding was performed to produce themes. Quotes were extracted from the transcripts to illustrate common responses. COREQ guidelines for qualitative papers were followed. RESULTS: Parents reported active play was beneficial for many health and developmental outcomes such as imagination, enjoyment and socialisation, while reporting risks such as safety and stranger danger. There were mixed perceptions of screen time, with benefits such as learning, education and relaxation, and risks including habit formation, inappropriate content, negative cognitive and social outcome, and detriments to health being reported. A few differences between mothers' and fathers' perceptions were evident. CONCLUSION: This study identified that some parental perceptions of benefits and risks of screen time and active play were consistent with published evidence, while others were contradicted by current evidence. Future studies should consider evidence-based education to ensure parents are aware of evidence-based outcomes of children's behaviours. Interventions may wish to capitalise on parents perceived benefits to enhance engagement.