Warning baby food pouches 'more sugary than Coke' risk giving infants a sweet tooth for life

Baby food pouches are more sugary than Coke and risk giving infants a sweet tooth for life, experts warn.

Shock research has found some contain more sugar in a single pouch than a one-year-old should have in a day. The British Dental Association (BDA) and commissioned laboratory testing of 18 pouches made by six leading brands Ella's Kitchen, Heinz, Piccolo, Little Freddie, and and found over a quarter of the fruit-based pouches contained more sugar by volume than Coca Cola. A number of the savoury pouches often used as meal replacements were also low in iron.

Eddie Crouch, chair of the BDA, said: “Parents of infants are still being marketed products sugarier than Coke. It shouldn’t take dentists naming and shaming the worst offenders to bring about needed change. Voluntary action has failed. We need Government to step up and force industry to do the right thing.”

READ MORE:

READ MORE:

Manufacturers responded to the BBC acknowledging the pouches should only be a complementary part of a child's varied weaning diet.

The probe found parents of infants as young as four months were marketed pouches that contain the equivalent of up to 184% of the sugar levels of the soft drink. A 330ml can of Coca-Cola in the UK contains 35 grams of sugar. This equates to 10.6 grams of sugar per 100ml.

Research shows too much can lead to tooth decay, weight gain and obesity, which increases the risk of developing chronic diseases later in life. It can also impair brain development. The says an infant should have as little sugar as possible and a one-year-old should have no more than 10g of free sugars a day.

Free sugars occur when fruit is pureed, which releases sugar from inside fruit cell walls and can be absorbed much more quickly. Experts agree eating fresh fruit is much better. A recent BDA report indicated that 37 of 60 fruit pouches found on supermarket shelves contained more free sugar than this 10g guideline.

Separate research by Leeds University assessed 632 baby food products marketed towards babies and toddlers under three years old. It found that more than half of snack products contain added sugars while 41% of main meals were too sweet and had high sugar levels. It concluded 89% of fruit products should carry a ‘high sugar’ warning label according to international recommendations

Researcher Dr Diane Threapleton, of Leeds University, said: Dr Threapleton said: “Babies and toddlers are in a period of rapid and important growth and good nutrition is needed to support their development. It is therefore critical that commercial products are nutritious options, not laden with sugar.

“Commercial baby foods are often highly pureed. When the main ingredients are fruit, this poses a particular problem because the sugar that would be contained within the food matrix, and therefore slowly digested, becomes readily available in the mouth. This means that pureed baby foods taste very sweet, strengthening preferences for sugary foods throughout life, and teeth are being exposed to high levels of sugar.”

The BDA and Panorama investigation commissioned a laboratory approved by the UK Accreditation Service to independently test the nutritional value of a fruit, yoghurt and savoury pouch from each of the six leading brands. Fruit pouches marketed as having "no added sugar" contain about four teaspoons of so-called "free sugars" which are created when fruit is blended.

Advertising claims for the pouches included phrases like “only naturally occurring sugars", “no added sugars", "nutritionist approved”, “organic”, “high in fibre” and “containing 1 of your 5 a day”. Manufacturers insisted to the that parents would be aware such products would be so high in natural sugars.

Dr Alison Tedstone, who spent nine years as chief nutritionist to the UK government, : "You think as a parent it is a healthy product, and it just isn't. I would hope that ministers, when they think about the baby food industry, recognise that we need to protect our babies. [Businesses] are not going to change unless they are forced to."

UK guidance recommends to start introducing solid foods to babies around 6 months of age, alongside breast milk or formula. The BDA said that at the time this research was undertaken market leader Ella’s Kitchen and Piccolo were pushing products to 4-month olds contrary to Government guidelines, stating that “every baby is different”. Piccolo has since dropped its four months marketing.

There are more than 250 of these products on the multi-million pound baby pouch market - they have become a staple for many households with babies and children up to the age of two or three. They are convenient and have long shelf lives. Savoury pouches in particular are used by some families as replacements for main meals. Some were found to contain less than 5% of the key nutrient, iron, that an infant needs each day.

Baby food pouches are topped off with a spout but both the NHS and the World Health Organization say it should not be used to suck directly from the pouch. It means babies can eat too fast and it can cause dental decay. The Leeds University study found pouches with spouts make up over a third of the baby foods market (38%) and around half did not include a recommendation not to let children drink via the spout.

The university's survey of 1,000 parents found that families rely on commercial baby and toddler foods, with 47% using these “always” or “most of the time”. Dr Threapleton said: “We know that many parents and carers rely on these commercial baby foods, and in the UK they are so widely available as to be almost unavoidable.”

She added: “Voluntary guidelines are often ineffective, and so regulation is needed to make sure that change happens. With around 1.7 million children between six and 36 months in the UK, ‘baby food’ is a massive market. Widespread availability of inappropriate products with poor nutritional quality will negatively impact child growth and development.”

Sue Davies, head of food policy at consumer group Which?, said: "It's unacceptable that so many foods and snacks aimed at babies have such poor nutritional quality and high sugar levels. To make matters worse, these items are often misleadingly marketed as being healthy - making it difficult for parents to make informed choices about the best products to buy for their children.

"The government urgently needs to update the out-of-date laws for commercial baby foods to ensure there are tighter controls on their composition - including limits on their sugar and salt content - make labelling clear and upfront and clamp down on any misleading marketing claims that suggest products are healthier than they really are."

Barbara Crowther, Children’s Food Campaign Manager at Sustain, which supported the parent Leeds University polling, said: “All babies and children have a right to grow up healthy, but overwhelmingly the commercial baby and toddler food industry is misleading parents about the nutritional benefits of their products. Millions of parents regularly use these brands and want to trust them, so they’re shocked and angry to learn the truth - that they’re not nearly as healthy as they claim to be, and they’re not even being regulated properly.”

All of the brands investigated by Panorama said their products were intended as a complementary part of a child's varied weaning diet.

Market leader Ella's Kitchen insisted “nothing is more important to us than the safety of little ones” A spokesperson said: “It is misleading to compare our pouches to fizzy drinks, which are nutritionally empty. Our pouches contain only naturally occurring sugars from whole fruit and veg, alongside fibre, vitamins, and minerals – benefits that fizzy drinks simply don’t offer. There are no added sugars or artificial ingredients in any of our products, which are specifically designed to support healthy growth and development in young children.

“What’s more, these comparisons are often based on per-100g figures – not on the actual amounts consumed. A fizzy drink is typically consumed in one go and delivers far more sugar overall, without any of the nutritional value. We are confident that parents understand that fruit can be high in natural sugars, while containing vital nutrients.”

The company insisted it had already made the decision to change its marketing from four months plus, to six months plus, before being contacted by the BBC.

A Kraft Heinz spokesperson said: “We’re proud of the role we play in families’ lives and remain committed to the health and well-being of infants and young children. We provide quality products based on nutrition science that meet the nutrient requirements specific to this life stage and adhere to stringent UK / EU regulation. Our convenient, resealable pouches, made from natural ingredients with no added sugars, should be used as a complementary part of a varied weaning diet (6+ months) and are designed to be squeezed into a bowl or straight onto a spoon – as communicated on pack."

A spokesman for Aldi said: “Our fruit and vegetable first taste pouches can be used to introduce children to new flavours and full nutritional information is shown on the packaging. Any sugar in them is naturally occurring and would be the same in a fruit puree made at home. In line with other brands and retailers, we will be moving all of our products to ‘6 months+’ going forward.”

Lidl said it offers one of the smallest baby food ranges in the market and aligns with wider industry norms. A spokeswoman said: “All our pouches meet UK and EU safety and nutritional regulations, and we always look to align where there is guidance available. Our products are all organic and are therefore free from artificial additives, contain no added sugar or salt, and are clearly labelled to support informed choices.”

A spokesman for the British Specialist Nutrition Association said: “Baby pouches can play an important role in offering parents convenient options to allow their little ones to experience new textures and flavours as they grow and develop, in a safe way. Whether homemade, or shop bought, the most important thing is in providing babies with a healthy, nutritious and balanced diet.”

A spokesman for the Department for Health and Social Care said: “Good nutrition is a vital component of our aim to ensure all babies and infants have the best start in life. Existing laws already set nutrition needs for baby foods, and we support enforcement against any product that does not meet these expectations. More widely, we are committed to tackling the childhood obesity crisis and improving children’s health through our Plan for Change, and the upcoming junk food advertising ban demonstrates the scale of our ambitions in this area.”