UK’s Secret Move Could Change How a Generation Eats
A New Approach to Combating Childhood Obesity
A UK-wide ban on advertising certain foods and drinks high in fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS) has come into effect. This new policy restricts the promotion of these items on television and online, aiming to reduce childhood obesity. The regulations prohibit advertisements for “less healthy” products on TV before the 9pm watershed and ban them entirely online. The government claims this will help cut children’s exposure to marketing that can influence their preferences and eating habits from a young age.
Ministers describe the restrictions as a preventive measure targeting the environments where children spend time. According to estimates, the measures could remove up to 7.2 billion calories from children’s diets annually, prevent around 20,000 cases of childhood obesity, and deliver long-term health benefits valued at approximately £2 billion. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) will enforce compliance, with potential actions against advertisers who break the rules.
Addressing a Persistent Public Health Challenge
Childhood obesity remains a significant issue, with figures showing that 22.1% of children in England are overweight or obese at the start of primary school, rising to 35.8% by the time they leave. Beyond weight, tooth decay is a major concern, being the leading cause of hospital admissions for young children. Recent data suggests that around one in five children have tooth decay by the age of five.
The financial burden on the NHS is also substantial, with obesity costing over £11 billion annually. Obesity is linked to higher risks of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and some cancers, with health organizations warning that early-onset obesity can have severe consequences.
Against this backdrop, the government and public health groups argue that reducing children’s exposure to HFSS marketing is a reasonable step. While advertising isn’t the sole cause of obesity, it contributes to a broader “food environment” where unhealthy products are normalized and made more appealing, especially to children.
What the Restrictions Cover
The new regulations introduce two main constraints:
Television: HFSS adverts are banned before 9pm.
Online: HFSS paid advertising is prohibited at all times.
The ban applies to 13 categories of products considered significant contributors to childhood obesity. These include soft drinks, chocolates, pizzas, and ice creams, as well as less obvious items like breakfast cereals, sweetened bread, and certain sandwiches. The scoring model differentiates within categories, allowing brands to advertise healthier options if they meet the threshold.
Why Some “Healthy” Products Are Classified as “Junk”
One of the most controversial aspects of the policy is how it classifies some products that consumers consider “better for you.” Examples include instant porridge, yoghurt drinks, lentil-based crisps, and kombucha. The scoring system evaluates products based on nutrients like energy, saturated fat, sugar, and salt, while subtracting points for beneficial nutrients like fibre and protein. Products that still score above a defined threshold are labeled “less healthy” for advertising purposes.
Experts note that the policy does not prohibit the sale of these foods or dictate what parents can feed their children. Instead, it limits how aggressively these products can be marketed to children.
Enforcement, Loopholes, and Uneven Impact
The ASA will oversee enforcement, and non-compliant companies may face action. The Food and Drink Federation (FDF) states its members have been voluntarily adhering to the restrictions since October, framing the policy as consistent with efforts to promote healthier choices. The industry body also highlights long-term product changes, such as reduced salt and sugar levels.
However, the practical impact depends on how advertising strategies evolve. Companies may still advertise their brand identity without showing HFSS products, potentially favoring larger firms with broader campaigns. Smaller companies, often reliant on product-led advertising, may face greater constraints. There is also a risk of displacement, with advertising budgets shifting to other formats like billboards.
Part of a Broader Strategy, Not a Standalone Solution
Supporters call the restrictions “long overdue,” but many stress they are not sufficient on their own. Experts argue that advertising controls should be part of a comprehensive strategy addressing inequalities, improving local food environments, and making nutritious options more affordable and accessible.
The government positions the ban as part of a wider prevention agenda, alongside measures to improve diets and reduce exposure to harmful products. Other initiatives include the Soft Drinks Industry Levy, which encourages reformulation, and policies restricting promotions on unhealthy food in retail contexts.
The Central Test: Exposure, Behavior, and Outcomes
The case for the HFSS advertising restrictions rests on the idea that children’s diets are shaped by both household choices and the commercial environment. Reducing exposure to persuasive marketing for HFSS products should help shift preferences and reduce demand over time.
Whether these aims are achieved will depend on enforcement, industry adaptation, and the extent to which brands can maintain influence through logo-led campaigns or by redirecting spending. Most experts agree that advertising restrictions address only one dimension of the problem. Lasting reductions in childhood obesity will require sustained action combining tighter marketing controls with improvements in affordability and access.
Leave a Reply