{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033420707732634336, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00655307994757536, 'mean_word_length': 4.988235294117647, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exploring the landscape of nutrition related marketing in Canada: is it guiding consumers to more healthful dietary patterns?

A majority of Canadians report that they use food labels to obtain nutrition information and make food purchasing decisions. However, apart from the nutrition facts table, this information appears at the manufacturer's discretion. It is unclear whether the current landscape of Nutrition Related Marketing (NRM) on foods functions to promote healthy eating. Our objectives were to examine which foods are taking up NRM, what is being communicated to consumers, and what the implications of this practice are for population health. Front‐of‐package (FOP) NRM was recorded from all packaged foods (n=20520) in 3 large grocery stores in Toronto, representing the top three food retailers in Canada. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the proportion of foods with NRM by food category and type of claim. 39% of all products had FOP NRM. It was especially prominent among beverages, cereals, snacks, and yogurt. Claims for the absence of undesirable nutrients (e.g. trans fat) were 1.5 times as common as claims for the presence of desirable nutrients (e.g. vitamin C). Claims for nutrients with a high prevalence of suboptimal intakes in the population (e.g. sodium, vitamin D, magnesium, and fibre) were found infrequently, even among foods able to bear these claims. FOP NRM is widespread in Canada, yet this practice provides limited nutritional guidance. This project is supported by CIHR.