Marketing & Childhood Obesity

The epidemic of childhood obesity rates in the U.S. has been forefront in the news for years. McDonald's usually takes the brunt of the blame. But I found these insights reported by Nancy Clark, MS RD CSSD
for Active.com to be more relevant:

Research with children who watched TV with four ads for food ate 45 percent more Goldfish Crackers (100 calories more) when exposed to the ads for food as compared to when they watched four ads for games. The kids who liked the taste of Goldfish ate even more calories.

Foods marketed with a character (such as Scooby-Doo) sell better. Fifty-two percent of pre-schoolers said the character-food tasted better (as opposed to 38 percent who said it tasted the same, and 10 percent who said food without the character tasted better).

My two children do not struggle with weight issues, for which I am greatly relieved. I did. I know how difficult and long-lasting it can be. But despite my children's lack of weight issues, Nancy Clark's insights rang true. I've watched my children suddenly become "hungry" during food commercials on TV. My daughter insists that the Spongebob Squarepants-shaped macaroni & cheese tastes better than regular. So do the fun-shaped Spaghettio's, and character-marketed brands of Fruit Roll-ups.

I'm jumping to a huge conclusion here, but I'd say watching too much television is a bigger cause of childhood obesity than McDonald's. At least McDonald's is offering healthier side options and has a playplace where children can burn off a little energy. Think about this last statement I include from Nancy Clark's report:

The food industry's bottom line is profits. When Pepsi started marketing more of its healthy products, sales of the unhealthy products dropped. The stockholders complained—and that puts the food industry in a bind.