Unveiling the Interplay: Childhood Obesity, Impact of Marketing to Kids, and the Pursuit of Effective Regulatory Measures.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era of pervasive marketing, targeting children has become a subject of growing concern due to its potential impact on their well-being and consumer behaviour. The purpose of this study was both to assess and evaluate why Bill S-228, a legislation aimed at protecting children from the current state of marketing to kids (M2K), failed to become law despite initially passing through the Senate and then through the House. First, a narrative literature review was conducted to describe the current practices for restricting M2K of food products based on global data. Second, using two prominent policy change theories, Advocacy Coalition Theory, and the Multiple Stream Theory, the policy change process of Bill S-228 was evaluated to explore what prevented Bill S-228 from passing a third reading in the Senate. Finally, the third study builds on findings from the first two studies by interviewing stakeholders who were involved in the M2K and Bill S-228 policy process. This analysis revealed that there is variation in the evidence regarding the different M2K policies used globally and in Canada. The analysis also identified several political challenges to advancing Bill S-228 on the policy agenda, including industry influence, nature of the bill (being a private member’s bill), stakeholder involvement, timing, terminology debates, role of evidence, framing of the issue and political influence. Finally, this paper concludes with recommendations based on findings, discussions, and conclusions. These recommendations include having more unity between Health Canada and different parties, addressing resources and capacity limitations, considering obesity as a societal issue, defining clear criteria and definitions, and addressing potential loopholes used by industries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".