No more nasties: The government stamps its feet on baby food

The Department of Health and Social Care recently unveiled a new set of voluntary guidelines aiming to enhance the nutritional quality of commercial baby foods. These set new expectations for manufacturers, retailers, trade associations and non-governmental healthcare organisations to reduce the sugar and salt content of baby food and address misleading labelling within the next 18 months.

This initiative is the latest intervention as part of the government’s ‘Plan for Change’ and its broader 10-year plan for health. Building upon previous HFSS measures, such as the ban on junk food advertisements restrictions on fast-food outlets near schools, it indicates a growing appetite to intervene to improve the nation’s dietary health. Childhood obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s and obesity currently costs the NHS £11.4 billion per year; this is expected to increase as obese children reach adulthood. In order to shape healthy eating habits as much as possible, policymakers are turning their focus to the formative stages of children’s diets. The rationale is straightforward: if a child’s very first diet is contributing to lifelong health problems, then meaningful change must begin from the highchair.

The evidence underpinning these guidelines is clear. Researchers from the University of Leeds have found that baby foods from market leaders lack nutritional value and market their products in a misleading way. All too often, these products are sugary, watery, and breed consumer confusion with misleading slogans like ‘contains no nasties’. The guidance also advises manufacturers not to market products aimed at children under twelve months of age as ‘snacks’, with NHS guidance for parents contending that children this young do not need to eat snacks.

For manufacturers and retailers alike, the challenge will be to reformulate at pace. With the use of sweeteners prohibited for all foods aimed at children aged three and under, and a market that values both taste and convenience, they will need to find new ways to meet nutritional needs whilst maintaining trust with parental consumers.

Though billed as voluntary, these guidelines represent a clear direction of travel for the government. Public health campaigners have already indicated that these recommendations represent a further step rather than the finish line, and the government has left the door open to mandatory regulation should uptake be slow or inconsistent. For businesses, the choice is binary: act now and shape the policy conversation, or risk playing catch-up if it was to become law.

The government’s strong stance on baby food is a clear signal of intent to improve the nutritional content of the nation’s diet. It forms part of a wider push by the government to encourage healthy eating habits, improve transparency between businesses and consumers and reduce the long-term economic burden on the NHS. Whilst this will result in short-term costs to businesses, there remains a real strategic opportunity to engage in the policy conversation. Businesses that position themselves early as genuine leaders in providing nutritional baby food can win the trust of both policymakers and increasingly health-conscious parents.