4.3 Article

Salt and sugars content of breakfast cereals in the UK from 1992 to 2015

Journal

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
Volume 20, Issue 8, Pages 1500-1512

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980016003463

Keywords

Salt; Sugars; Breakfast cereals; Reformulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To study the salt and sugars content of breakfast cereals sold in the UK between 1992 and 2015. Design: Cross-sectional surveys on salt and sugars content collected from the nutrition information panel of breakfast cereals in 1992, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2015. Setting: All major UK retailers operating at that moment in time (approximately ten). Subjects: The salt and sugars content was collected from product packaging and the nutrition information panels. Results: Cereals consistently surveyed across all five years (n 22) showed a significant reduction in salt content of 47% (P< 0.001). Sugars content of breakfast cereals (n 15), however, did not show a significant change; 25.65 g/100 g in 1992 and 22.45 g/100 g in 2015 (P= 0.170). There was a large variation in salt and sugars content between different categories and within the same type of category. Conclusions: The study shows the progressive reduction in salt content of breakfast cereals in the UK since 2004 as a result of the successful salt reduction programme, particularly the setting of incremental salt targets. Further reductions in salt content need to be made as cereals remain a major contributor to salt intake. Sugars content, however, has been consistently high due to the lack of a sugar reduction strategy. The research demonstrates that the sugars content of breakfast cereals in the UK is of concern, particularly in children's breakfast cereals, with a typical serving (30 g) containing a third of a 4-6-year-old's maximum daily recommendation (19 g/d) for free sugars intake in the UK. More can and should be done to reformulate, with an urgent need to set incremental sugar reduction targets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available