In a telephone briefing on Monday, the authors of the study discussed why their research is so important. They cited statistics compiled over the past year, which show that one-third of U.S. children and teens eat fast food every day, accounting for 16 to 17 percent of their daily caloric intake. “Eating at fast food restaurants is ingrained in our culture. That’s why the nutritional quality of these meals is so important,” Marlene Schwartz, co-author of the study said on Monday. Jennifer Harris, lead author of the study added that they uncovered how the barrage of fast food advertising has made kids think that this kind of food is “normal and expected.” Harris said: “Kids think that they should be able to eat McDonald’s all the time and this has a direct effect on obesity.”

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says two-thirds of American adults and 15 percent of children are overweight or obese. The childhood obesity rate is above 30 percent in some states.

The researchers found that the average preschooler saw 2.8 TV ads per day for fast food, children saw 3.5, and teens saw 4.7. The ads are not limited to TV alone—children and teens are also viewing ads on-line, on the radio, and with in-store promotions and signs.

Indeed, the $4.2 billion dollars spent in 2009 on advertising by the fast food industry is working. The researchers said that 40 percent of parents report that their children ask to go to McDonald’s at least once a week and 15 percent of preschoolers ask to go every day. Another finding concludes that 84 percent of parents take their child to a fast food restaurant at least once a week while 66 percent reported going to McDonald’s in the past week.

According to Schwartz, part of the problem is that the current generation of parents is the first group to have grown up with fast food advertisements. The researchers said that the parents’ exposure to marketing makes them think it “normal” to take their children to eat at fast food restaurants as well.

The study also found that the industry specifically targets teens and minority youth more often and with less healthy items. African American youth saw at least 50 percent more fast food ads on TV in 2009 than their white peers. The researchers said that African Americans were also exposed to more websites and banner ads. “KFC and McDonald’s specifically market to African Americans through what they watch,” lead author Harris said. “We also found that Hispanic children, and especially preschoolers, are seeing a lot of ads on Spanish TV, particularly for McDonald’s.”

Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center said this is particularly alarming since these are the populations most at-risk for obesity and diabetes. “The disproportionate marketing to these groups is concerning,” Brownell said.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of obesity for African Americans is 51 percent higher than for white Americans, and the prevalence of obesity amongst the nation’s Hispanic American population is 21 percent higher than their white peers.

Children are clearly eating more fast food than they should be and the authors hope their research will help to devise strategies to curb this trend. “You can try education, but that doesn’t seem to be working, so that’s not the answer,” Brownell said. “Restricting or curtailing practices is something we need to do.” Brownell referred to the ordinance passed last week in San Francisco that only allows restaurant meals to include a toy when the meals meets certain nutritional standards and criteria. He hopes that other states and local jurisdictions will take similar actions.

When asked what parents could do, lead author Harris said, “The only way to control what kids are seeing is to turn off the TV. No matter what’s on, you’re going to see a lot of fast food ads.”

The tricky part of the debate revolves around the First Amendment. While the authors of the study would like to see advertisements to children and other vulnerable groups curtailed, corporations have the right to advertise. And while the fast food restaurants have pledged to offer healthier menu options, this doesn’t seem to be affecting what people are eating. The study found that just 12 of 3,039 possible kids’ meal combinations met nutrition criteria for preschoolers and 15 met nutrition criteria for older children. “You have to work hard to get a healthy side and drink with kids meals,” co-author Schwartz said. “You have to know it exists and you have to ask for it.”

These findings come on the heels of other shocking news released last week that the incidence of diabetes has reached an all-time high in Los Angeles County. The Department of Public Health report shows an increase from six-and-a-half to nine percent among adults between 1997 and 2007, for a total of 650,000 people with the disease. In addition, obesity rates rose from 14 to 22 percent, or to more than one in every five adults.

Schwartz, who along with her colleagues spent more than a year compiling this information told reporters, “All of this is really just the tip of the iceberg.”

This article is part of a regular column by holistic nutrition expert Kristin Wartman, in which she examines food, nutrition, and the way the industrial food industry affects our food system and our health.

On Friday, leaders from the House of Representatives and the Senate introduced legislation to establish a federal ban on bisphenol A (BPA) in all food and beverage containers. The bills, which are identical, are sponsored by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

BPA—a chemical found in the linings of cans and in polycarbonate plastic, including some sports bottles, food-storage containers and baby bottles—has potential links to a wide range of health effects. The diseases and health effects to which BPA has been linked include an increased risk of diseases or disorders of the brain, reproductive and immune systems.

“The scientific evidence is mounting that BPA poses serious health risks, especially to children, and manufacturers and retailers have already started to pull items from their store shelves,” said Markey, reported Agence France-Presse. “It is time for Congress to act quickly to ban this toxin from all food and beverage containers so that parents can feed their children without worrying that the food contains poisonous chemicals.”

The federal legislation follows the March 3 unanimous decision by the Suffolk County, New York Legislature to ban BPA in all beverage containers for children under the age of three. Today, Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy will hold a public hearing on this landmark legislation. Levy has until April 2 to either sign or veto the bill to sign the bill to make Suffolk County the first jurisdiction in the nation to effectively ban BPA.

“This legislation will set a new precedent and sends a strong message to FDA and to industry that consumers, like those in Suffolk County, want change now,” said Dr. Urvashi Rangan, Senior Scientist and Policy Analyst, Consumers Union.

Consumers Union has repeatedly called on FDA to ban BPA materials in infant and children’s products and food and beverage contact containers. Recent studies have linked BPA exposure to problems with liver function testing, an increased risk of diabetes and heart disease and interruptions in chemotherapy treatment. A study by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has shown that 93% of Americans excrete some BPA in their urine. New studies also show that BPA seems to stay in the body longer than previously believed.

In August 2008, the federal agency said BPA was safe for humans. But the agency only considered studies that had been financed by the plastics industry. At last month’s Science Board Hearing, FDA tacitly acknowledged the serious health concerns regarding BPA, but the agency continues to maintain the position that no public health safeguards should be implemented at this time.

Steven Stern, the Suffolk County legislator who sponsored the ban in that county, told the Associated Press that the FDA review prompted him to act. “We can’t wait. We don’t know how long it’s going to take.”

Several states, such as Oregon, Washington and California, and cities, such as Chicago, are also considering BPA bans as the FDA continues to research BPA while allowing the product to remain on the market. In 2008, the Canadian government banned its use in baby bottles. Major U.S. retailers, including Toys ‘R’ Us Inc. and Wal-Mart, already have removed products containing BPA from their shelves because of the growing controversy.

Shortly after the Suffolk County Legislature made its decision, six of the largest manufacturers of baby bottles—Avent, Disney First Years, Gerber, Dr. Brown, Playtex and Evenflow—decided they will no longer sell bottles made with BPA. The decision by manufacturers came after Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, joined by attorneys general of Delaware and New Jersey, wrote to the baby bottle companies urging them to stop using BPA because studies have linked the chemical to health problems in infants, including damage to reproductive, neurological and immune systems.

Almost immediately after this decision, gas and chemical giant Sunoco, acknowledging the safety concerns about BPA, announced they would restrict the sales of the controversial chemical in baby bottles and food containers for children under three. “We will no longer sell BPA to [Sunoco’s] customers who cannot make this promise,” Thomas Golembeski, head of public relations, wrote in a letter to two investors, according to the Associated Press.

While scientists continue to assess the health risks of BPA to consumers, the FDA is taking on a bigger risk by taking no action to protect the health and safety of consumers. Given the currently existing body of scientific knowledge about the health risks of BPA to consumers—and the growing consumer and industry movement again this chemical—the FDA should act immediately to protect high risk populations, such as children and babies, while it gathers more data.

Image: thesoftlanding