Ready-to-eat (RTE) cereals, which are processed and packaged to be eaten directly from the box, are one of the most predominant breakfast choices among children in the United States. Although RTE cereals in many cases are marketed as a healthy option, a University of Kentucky researcher at the Martin-Gatton College of Agriculture, Food and Environment is investigating the changing nutritional profiles of children's cereals and their potential impact on childhood nutrition and overall public health.
The study "Nutritional Content of Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereals Marketed to Children," was published in JAMA Network and supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Led by Shuoli Zhao, assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics and one of The Bill Gatton Foundation Early-Career Professors, the study examined packaging, and trends in the nutritional composition, of new children's RTE cereals introduced in the U.S. market from 2010 to 2023.
In general, a significant increase in fat, sodium and sugar, as well as a large decrease in protein and dietary fiber per serving, was found. Furthermore, the study found high levels of added sugar with a single serving exceeded 45% of the American Heart Association's daily recommended limit for children. To Zhao, this shift in nutritional quality potentially contributes to an increased risk of childhood obesity and decreased long-term cardiovascular health.
"Breakfast is a critical meal for children, impacting their level of physical energy and ability to mentally concentrate, thus learn, for the majority of the day," Zhao said. "If a common breakfast choice like RTE cereal is trending towards lower nutritional quality, as our study suggests, it potentially makes it harder for parents to ensure their children are getting a healthy start to the day."
The "health halo" effect
The health halo effect happens when people perceive a product as healthier than it might actually be. It's often due to a single positive labeling or marketing that makes claims about the product, but with little or no evidence.
Some examples of these messages include "New Formula", "Even Better", "Tastier" or "New and Improved." Thus, a cereal box's repackaging or relabeling can influence a consumer's behavior - making the decision to choose healthier options increasingly difficult for families.
These messages, while indicating improvements related to product novelty and taste, may not align with genuine health optimization, such as lowering sugar or increasing fiber, according to Zhao.
"While there's a demand for healthier foods, how this is marketed and perceived through labeling is key," Zhao said. "Children's cereals often highlight the addition of more vitamins. For some consumers, this creates a 'health halo' effect that appeals to time-strapped parents, even if the product's core nutritional content - like sugar or sodium - is not optimal."
"Our findings contribute to a broader discussion about the overall food environment that children are exposed to right now," Zhao said. "Working families may often have limited bandwidth and time when grocery shopping, which leads to unintended suboptimal decisions in food choices. Under such conditions, what cereals are available on supermarket shelves and who provides them is also important. The responsibility probably lies on both sides."
Going forward, Zhao hopes that his research prompts further discussion with the food industry about which groups in society have the responsibility for creating and choosing healthier cereal options for children. "Hopefully, this research can encourage a conversation where the food industry stakeholders can join in contributing and creating healthier food options for children," Zhao said.
Learn more about the Department of Agricultural Economics at https://agecon.ca.uky.edu and The Bill Gatton Foundation gift at https://alumni.ca.uky.edu/bill-gatton-foundation.
This material is based upon work that is supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture under award number 2024-67023-42730 and by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2024-67023-42550. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Department of Agriculture.
