Yoon Y Choi1, Alexis Ludwig1, Jennifer L Harris1. 1. UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, University of Connecticut, One Constitution Plaza Suite 600, Hartford, CT06103, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Extensive marketing of 'toddler milks' (sugar-sweetened milk-based drinks for toddlers) promotes unsubstantiated product benefits and raises concerns about consumption by young children. The present study documents trends in US toddler milk sales and assesses relationships with brand and category marketing. DESIGN: We report annual US toddler milk and infant formula sales and marketing from 2006 to 2015. Sales response models estimate associations between marketing (television advertising spending, product price, number of retail displays) and volume sales of toddler milks by brand and category. SETTING: US Nielsen retail scanner sales and advertising spending data from 2006 to 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Researchers analysed all Universal Product Codes (n 117·4 million) sold by seven infant formula and eight toddler milk brands from 2006 to 2015. RESULTS: Advertising spending on toddler milks increased fourfold during this 10-year period and volume sales increased 2·6 times. In contrast, advertising spending and volume sales of infant formulas declined. Toddler milk volume sales were positively associated with television advertising and retail displays, and negatively associated with price, at both the brand and category levels. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive marketing of toddler milks has likely contributed to rapid sales increases in the USA. However, these sugar-sweetened drinks are not recommended for toddler consumption. Health-care providers, professional organizations and public health campaigns should provide clear guidance and educate parents to reduce toddler milk consumption and address misperceptions about their benefits. These findings also support the need to regulate marketing of toddler milks in countries that prohibit infant formula marketing to consumers.
OBJECTIVE: Extensive marketing of 'toddler milks' (sugar-sweetened milk-based drinks for toddlers) promotes unsubstantiated product benefits and raises concerns about consumption by young children. The present study documents trends in US toddler milk sales and assesses relationships with brand and category marketing. DESIGN: We report annual US toddler milk and infant formula sales and marketing from 2006 to 2015. Sales response models estimate associations between marketing (television advertising spending, product price, number of retail displays) and volume sales of toddler milks by brand and category. SETTING: US Nielsen retail scanner sales and advertising spending data from 2006 to 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Researchers analysed all Universal Product Codes (n 117·4 million) sold by seven infant formula and eight toddler milk brands from 2006 to 2015. RESULTS: Advertising spending on toddler milks increased fourfold during this 10-year period and volume sales increased 2·6 times. In contrast, advertising spending and volume sales of infant formulas declined. Toddler milk volume sales were positively associated with television advertising and retail displays, and negatively associated with price, at both the brand and category levels. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive marketing of toddler milks has likely contributed to rapid sales increases in the USA. However, these sugar-sweetened drinks are not recommended for toddler consumption. Health-care providers, professional organizations and public health campaigns should provide clear guidance and educate parents to reduce toddler milk consumption and address misperceptions about their benefits. These findings also support the need to regulate marketing of toddler milks in countries that prohibit infant formula marketing to consumers.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advertising; Breast-milk substitutes; Retail marketing; Sales analysis; Toddler milks; Young children
Authors: Ana Paula C Richter; Emily W Duffy; Lindsey Smith Taillie; Jennifer L Harris; Jennifer L Pomeranz; Marissa G Hall Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Phillip Baker; Katheryn Russ; Manho Kang; Thiago M Santos; Paulo A R Neves; Julie Smith; Gillian Kingston; Melissa Mialon; Mark Lawrence; Benjamin Wood; Rob Moodie; David Clark; Katherine Sievert; Monique Boatwright; David McCoy Journal: Global Health Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 4.185
Authors: Emily W Duffy; Lindsey S Taillie; Ana Paula C Richter; Isabella C A Higgins; Jennifer L Harris; Marissa G Hall Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-10 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Phillip Baker; Thiago Santos; Paulo Augusto Neves; Priscila Machado; Julie Smith; Ellen Piwoz; Aluisio J D Barros; Cesar G Victora; David McCoy Journal: Matern Child Nutr Date: 2020-11-03 Impact factor: 3.092