Law and the marketplace

New Laws

Law and the market place

Three changes to American consumer law

Three changes to American consumer law

Regulating advertising on television for sugary snacks and beverages

At present, because of First Amendment concerns, marketers are free to advertise sugary, non-nutritive foods during programming that is primarily intended for children. However, there has already been substantial regulation of advertising to all consumers and not just for the nation's most vulnerable population: cigarette advertisements are no longer permitted on television, for example, whether they are intended for adolescents (like the infamous Joe Camel ads) or adults. "The FTC said a study due out next year will help it determine whether media companies took its recommendations about expanding self-regulations to cover all forms of ads and promotions and the extent to which they had limited their use of character licensing to healthier foods and beverages"(Eggerton 2010).

Substantial evidence already exists that children find it difficult to differentiate between advertising and entertainment programming, and that their food choices are influenced when they see foods promoted by cartoon characters. One recent study of children ages 4 to 6 which presented sample foods that were identical "down to the clear packaging, except that one of the packages had a sticker of Shrek, Dora the Explorer, or Scooby Doo on it. Between 50% and 55% of the children said that the food with the sticker on it tasted better than the same food in the plain package" (Klein 2010). Self-regulation seems dubious given that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has already had to take action because marketers make inaccurate, sweeping health claims about their foods. In the United Kingdom, "a ban on adverts for junk food during television programs aimed at children under 16" was enacted in 2008 (Ban, 2008, BBC). The U.S., given that it faces a child obesity epidemic even more catastrophic than that of the UK, should enact a similar ban.

Law 2: Diet supplements should be regulated, just like conventional foods

The FDA "regulates dietary supplements under a different set of regulations than those covering 'conventional' foods and drug products (prescription and over-the-counter). Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), the dietary supplement manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that a dietary supplement is safe before it is marketed" (Dietary supplements, 2010, FDA). However, there are no laws that require the manufacturer to demonstrate that the food substance is actually effective in doing what it claims to do on the label.

According to Consumer Reports, more than 50% of the American adult population has tried supplements even though manufacturers can "sell their products without first having to demonstrate that they are safe and effective. The Food and Drug Administration has not made full use of even the meager authority granted it by the industry-friendly 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA)… Because of inadequate quality control and inspection, supplements contaminated with heavy metals, pesticides, or prescription drugs have been sold to unsuspecting consumers. And FDA rules covering manufacturing quality don't apply to the companies that supply herbs, vitamins, and other raw ingredients" (More dietary supplement, 2010 redOrbit).

Law 3: Picture-based warnings on cigarettes