MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092492496 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.324

The kids are not alright: Lessons from the advocacy pursuit of restrictions on food marketing

2020· article· en· W3092492496 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lesley James, Manuel Arango, S Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateGovernment (linguistics)Public healthOpposition (politics)Public relationsPublic policyHealth policyPoliticsBusinessMarketingPolitical scienceEconomic growthMedicineEconomicsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Issue Poor nutrition is a leading contributor to ill health worldwide. WHO recommends restrictions on the marketing of unhealthy food to children to reduce intakes of energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods. In Canada, the government made this a mandate commitment. This provides an opportunity for other countries pursuing public health nutrition policy to better understand and overcome commercial interests when trying to advance public health. Background Heart & Stroke Foundation (H&S) advocated for over a decade (2008-2019) to secure government policies to restrict food marketing to youth in Canada. The inclusion of such policy in the government's 2015 mandate was promising and the associated bill was one of the strongest in the world - well received by public health advocates worldwide, positioning Canada as global leader. However, the commercial interests of various stakeholders including food and marketing industries created concerns among policy makers. Public health advocates underestimated the influence, power and opposition of industry. Results In order to counter industry opposition, the public health community worked in coalitions and employed a range of innovative tactics to mitigate policy concerns. This included public engagement on social media, evidence generation, celebrity endorsement, as well as calling out industry practices and political blockers. Despite the innovative and collaborative approach of public health, the policy failed to be adopted. Lessons Food industry will use a range of concerns including economic, environmental, and health issues to generate skepticism among policy makers. Public health advocates working in nutrition need to be proactive and prepared with insightful counter arguments and evidence to dispel myths and re-frame the issue. Key messages Public health progress on nutrition policy is at an early stage and we need to learn lessons from successes and failures. There is a strong amount of food industry opposition to public health nutrition policy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0310.028
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0160.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207