Strollerderby

Some "Baby Food" Less Healthy Than a Cheeseburger

Posted by Shannon LC Cate

The Children's Food Campaign has released a new report analyzing the nutritional value of some of Britain's most popular baby and toddler foods, finding them worse for health than the average cheeseburger or chocolate cookie, claims the Guardian.

Of the foods surveyed, only half were found to be low in sugar, sodium and saturated fat--some even contained the dreaded transfat.  But the worst culprit for unhealthy baby food was the Heinz company, of whose surveyed products, only one quarter were deemed to have sufficiently low amounts of sugar, sodium and fat.

Two Heinz products were singled out for headliner status.  Farley's Husks, were higher in sugar than chocolate digestives, while mini cheese biscuits were found to have more fat than a McDonald's quarter pounder with cheese.  Both are foods aimed at beginning eaters and toddlers.

Okay, so these foods are unhealthy.  Do they claim to be healthy?  Do parents merely assume anything for a baby or toddler is healthy?  I feel that while it would be nice to see the food industry regulated better in certain areas, determining what is a good diet for myself and my young children is my responsibility.  In the line of this duty, I take nothing for granted.  I read labels, determine what's in the processed food I give my children, then mete out such foods sparingly, focusing instead on whole foods in a nice variety.

Contrary to some opinion, this actually doesn't take a great deal of extra time or energy on my part.  Washing and/or peeling and/or slicing a piece of fruit really isn't that much harder than opening a box of crackers and shaking a pile of them into a bowl.  And even when the fruit is organic, it's usually cheaper.  And it doesn't take a master's degree in nutrition to know it's healthier than the crackers.

So sure, shame on Heinz for marketing unhealthy food to parents.  Shame on them for basically trying to get us to train our kids to expect food to taste sugary, salty, and fatty, so they'll have lifelong junk food customers.  But ultimately?  Shame on us for not taking the four extra seconds to read the back of a box before we throw it in the grocery cart.  Really, it ain't that tough.

image: junkfoodnews.net


+ DIGG + STUMBLE

Comments

 

g8grl said:

when you say "Shame on us for not taking the four extra seconds to read the back of a box before we throw it in the grocery cart." what you're really saying is "shame on you" since you've already said that you don't do this.  At least own up to what you're doing.

May 7, 2009 1:26 PM
 

Trey said:

g8grl, I believe her quote was "shame on us..." She already included herself.

May 7, 2009 1:29 PM
 

leahsmom said:

Were these foods assessed for nutritional needs of infants and toddlers? Those guys need a lot more fat and calories than adults do - giving infants and toddlers the low-fat, low-calorie stuff adults are urged to eat exclusively can result in malnourishment and starvation.

May 7, 2009 1:50 PM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

I wondered a little about that, leahsmom, but it seemed like they were taking babies' needs into account.  And really, no one needs transfats.  But you can check out the article at the link.

May 7, 2009 2:10 PM
 

Sheri said:

Ummm, this is a British newspaper....

I don't recall feeding my kids food from England, Scotland etc.  And yeah, I did read labels and the like.  

Although I vaguely remember giving my boys an occasional 1/2 jar of Dutch Apple Delight.

May 7, 2009 2:15 PM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

g8girl, my point is, if there's too much of something bad in a food, we parents are more than capable of figuring that out and feeding our kids accordingly.  It really shouldn't take an investigative reporter to tell us relying heavily on processed food isn't a great idea.

May 7, 2009 2:23 PM
 

CV said:

And babies definitely do not need added sugar and salt, and the article linked (and the various other places where I've seen this information in the past few days) seems to indicate that those foods contained them.

May 7, 2009 2:25 PM
 

g8grl said:

Trey,

Not to make too big a deal about it but if you read what she said and read what I said you would realize that what she meant was shame on you (i.e. anyone who doesn't do this). Since she said in her post that she "read labels, determine(d) what's in the processed food I give my children, then mete(s) out such foods sparingly, focusing instead on whole foods in a nice variety." it's obvious that she wasn't talking about herself when she said "shame on us for not taking the four extra seconds to read the back of a box before we throw it in the grocery cart".  It was a bit judgemental.  With respect to her comment, I agree.  We as parents are fully capable of feeding our children well.  The times when I don't read the box are the times when I know the food isn't the healtiest but I've decided to give it to them anyway...and I don't feel any shame at all.

May 7, 2009 3:39 PM
 

Shannon said:

I think it is the parents' responsibilities to watch what their kids eat and limit the processed foods, as it is our responsibility to do the same for ourselves. But...

Why can't we take the food industry to task? I for one get tired of the constant battle. They target our kids from birth. The advertising is insidious. We have an obese population. We are seeing diseases like diabetes become the norm.

So yeah, ultimately the responsibility rests on us, blah blah blah, but I for one am ready for some change and welcome every sling and arrow thrown at an industry that has no interest in us except in how many calories it can get us to eat and how much money it can get us to spend.

May 7, 2009 4:50 PM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

I can't say I disagree about the food industry, Shannon.  But it is hardly a revelation here that these foods are not the healthiest.  At least I didn't think it was a revelation.

May 7, 2009 4:56 PM
 

Knitty said:

Oh good, the Mommy Wars about food continue on.  "Shame on us" indeed.  Parenting, after all, is all about the shame.

May 7, 2009 7:21 PM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

If it's a war, I sure didn't start it.  I am in fact, suggesting, that we are not so stupid as to not be able to read a food label.  That we are responsible people who aren't so stupid as to believe that a teething biscuit--a cookie--is health food for a baby.  If you didn't know that?  Sure okay, feel defensive.  I assumed you did.

May 7, 2009 7:29 PM
 

M said:

You know, I'm a reasonably well informed and educated parent, but I frequently find myself feeling like I don't know much about nutrition for little kids.  Example- if my toddler drinks a couple of cups of whole milk a day, is it okay if the rest of what I give him is (incidentally, not necessarily purposefully) low fat, like baked chicken,vegetables, and fruit?  Seems like a pretty fundamental question, and yet I have no idea...  I know enough to do pretty well, but lack confidence that it's "optimal", if there is such a thing.

I don't know that the food industry has any responsibility here, but I sure wish I could find a good source of information that would allow me to feel better about my own responsibility.

May 7, 2009 10:06 PM
 

Knitty said:

Give me a freaking break, Shannon.  You wrote:

"But ultimately?  Shame on us for not taking the four extra seconds to read the back of a box before we throw it in the grocery cart.  Really, it ain't that tough."

How does that NOT assume that your readers can't be bothered to read the labels and should be ashamed, ashamed, ashamed by our lousy parenting?  Maybe you need to re-read your posts and listen for tone.  

May 7, 2009 11:06 PM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

Okay knitty.  Let's say it's a war.  You win!

May 7, 2009 11:29 PM
 

Knitty said:

Mmmm-hmmm, I'm the bad guy for reacting what you wrote instead of what you meant and you're the wounded innocent who totally meant the opposite of what you wrote.  And FYI: the problem with these mommy wars is that none of us "win" -- it's that when parenting is turned into a shamefest of guilt and finger-pointing and "can't you be bothered to read for four seconds", we all lose.  

May 8, 2009 12:30 AM
 

Allie said:

Well, here in the UK I did read labels. I didn't assume that babyfoods would be nutritionally sound.  Sometimes, however, I did feed my kids rubbish.  I have been that mother pouring 'smarties' (like M and Ms) into the palm of a wailing toddler.  Because I was at the end of my tether and looking for a quick fix.  They weren't poison and the child still enjoys his vegetables, so it wasn't the end of the world.  I don't suppose anyone wants to claim that they always make the right parenting decisions.

The point is that we need to be able to make informed decisions.  Misleading marketing gets in the way of that so it should be challenged. Correct labelling and product location won't stop anyone doing things like pouring coke in a baby bottle (yes, I see this fairly often) but it will make it easier for people trying to make healthy choices for their child.

May 8, 2009 5:46 AM
 

GeneralS said:

I think we should join forces with each other against the children. Clearly, they are the real enemy in this war. They have divided us, with their chubby faces and chicken nugget feet. For shame, indeed! We should rise up as one against their tyranny! They may take our lives, but they will never take our FREEDOM!!

May 8, 2009 7:29 AM
 

Manjari said:

Shannon, I always appreciate your posts. I think you're a great writer and I usually find myself nodding in agreement with your opinions. I agree that parents are ultimately responsible for what they feed their children, and my habits are similar to yours when it comes to feeding my kids. Still, I have to agree with some of the comments here about your tone. The first thing I thought when I read this post was that you were writing "Shame on us..." while thinking "Shame on you." You already noted that you DO take the time to read labels.

GeneralS, you made my day with that comment. I'm ready for the uprising!

May 8, 2009 9:36 AM
 

Shannon LC Cate said:

Where do I sign up, general?

May 8, 2009 10:33 AM
 

GeneralS said:

The enemy has used some of its most diabolical tactics, once again, with breakfast in bed and the broken, but enthusiastic greeting of "Happy Mommy Day!" complete with a sticky kiss and a homemade card. Will their trickery never end??!

May 11, 2009 9:30 AM
 

kevin said:

too bad they dont tell us how bad the chemicals in food are bad for us

May 20, 2009 12:22 AM

About Shannon LC Cate

Shannon LC Cate, PhD is a lesbian housewife and work-from-home mother of two girls via domestic, open, transracial adoption. They are both under five and already too brilliant and beautiful for their own good. Shannon lives, writes and assembles tricycles in Chicago, Illinois.

in

GROUP BLOGS

  • Strollerderby

    The smartest, funniest, most exhaustive parenting blog in the blogosphere.
  • Droolicious

    Modern design for modern parents.
  • FameCrawler

    Your daily baby celebrity fix.
back to blog homepage