Why this research?
Every year, the industry spends billions on bottle feeding advertisements, which often focus on emotions. Nutrition and health claims for bottle feeding are controversial because they can reinforce the perceived benefits of bottle feeding over breastfeeding, even though breastfeeding is the best food for babies.
Research question
To what extent are nutritional and health claims for bottle feeding scientifically substantiated?
How was this investigated?
This cross-sectional study searched a select sample of 15 countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, UK, US and South Africa) for nutritional and health claims and associated references to scientific sources on packaging and official websites of bottle feeding companies. Bottle feeding was defined as any food product suitable for infants aged 12 months or younger and which serves as a substitute for breastfeeding. A claim was defined as a text that states, suggests or implies that a food product or a component thereof has or may have an effect on the human body. The data collection took place in the period April 2020-July 2022.
Main results
A total of 757 infant food products and 1884 nutrition and health claims were found. The median number of claims per product was 2 (interquartile range: 1-4). In 608 products with ≥ 1 claim, the most common claims were: ‘helps or supports the development of the brain and/or eyes and/or the nervous system’ (323 (53%) products, 13 ingredients), ‘strengthens or supports a healthy immune system’ (239 (39%) products, 12 ingredients) and ‘helps or supports growth and development’ (224 (37%) products, 20 ingredients). Claims most often related to long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (278 (46%) products), pre-, pro- or synbiotics (225 (37%) products), hydrolyzed proteins (120 (20%) products) and vitamins (116 (20%) %) Products). Half of the claims did not refer to a specific ingredient. In 161 (26%) of the 608 products with ≥ 1 claim, the nutrition or health claim was scientifically substantiated, with 266 unique sources cited. Most often reference was made to clinical trials (50%) and reviews (20%). In 46 (90%) of the 51 claims that were supported by findings from a registered randomized trial, there was a high risk of bias in the study results.
2023-12-11 05:00:00
#Nutrition #health #claims #bottle #feeding #insufficiently #substantiated
