Junk food adverts plan 'weak'
Your support helps us to tell the story
This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.
The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.
Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.
Food manufacturers and advertisers have revealed their proposals for reducing the impact of junk food commercials on children.
They fall far short of the 9pm watershed favoured by health and consumer groups. Instead, the industry wants a ban on ads for all branded foods during programmes aimed at under-10s on terrestrial television. In addition, they want to limit all food and drink adverts to 30 seconds per hour all day on dedicated children's channels.
The industry dismissed the Food Standards Agency's criteria for defining which products are junk foods as "not scientifically robust".
It wants the European Food Standards Agency to develop an alternative approach to nutrient profiling. The food and advertising industries sent their proposals to Ofcom.
The regulator had set out three different options in a consultation document. It also asked respondents to create their own, fourth, option which is what the food and advertising industries have done.
The National Heart Forum - a coalition of nearly 50 health and consumer groups - dismissed the industry's proposals as "predictably weak". But Melanie Leech, director general of the Food and Drink Federation, which represents manufacturers, said: "We think this is a very significant package."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments