Open consultation

Applying the new NPM to advertising and promotions restrictions

Published 25 March 2026

Introduction

This government has a bold ambition to raise the healthiest generation of children ever. As we set out in our 10 Year Health Plan for England, this includes taking decisive action to reduce levels of childhood obesity.

Why obesity is a problem

Obesity robs children of the best possible start in life, sets them up for a lifetime of health problems and costs society over £100 billion each year (Nesta and Frontier Economics, 2025). Obesity costs the NHS around £9.3 billion each year and is the second biggest preventable cause of cancer (Brown and others, 2018). Improving diet and preventing obesity can reduce dietary ill health, such as diabetes and heart disease.

The number of 4 and 5 year olds living with obesity is at its highest level since records began. The leading cause of hospital admissions in 5 to 9 year olds is for tooth extractions. The latest data shows 1 in 5 children aged 5 have experienced tooth decay in England, with higher rates of up to 1 in 3 in more deprived areas. At the start of primary school, 23.5% of children in England are living with overweight or obesity, and this rises to 36.2% by the time they leave (see National Child Measurement Programme, England 2024 to 2025 school year).

The life-long problems caused by obesity also expose health disparities that we want to address. Obesity prevalence for children in the most deprived areas of the UK is more than double that in the least deprived areas. Children who live with overweight and obesity are 5 times more likely to live with overweight and obesity in adulthood, in comparison with children who are not.

Obesity has an economic cost. It costs businesses up to £23.8 billion per year from inactivity and ill health. People living with obesity take 4 more sick days per year than people who are a healthy weight, due to obesity-related illness. Obesity-related productivity costs are 22% higher in the most deprived groups than in the least deprived groups (Nesta and Frontier Economics, 2025). Reducing obesity prevalence would help to encourage economic growth while narrowing health and economic inequalities.

Government action on obesity

To achieve our ambition of raising the healthiest generation of children ever, we are implementing a far-reaching prevention programme announced in the 10 Year Health Plan. We have consulted on banning the sale of energy drinks to children aged 15 years and under and extended the Soft Drinks Industry Levy to further reduce sugar content. Alongside this, we are aiming to be the first country in the world to introduce mandatory healthy food sales reporting for large food businesses and to set new targets to increase the healthiness of sales in all communities.

We make many decisions about the food and drink we consume, and every day we are presented with encouragement and opportunity to consume the least healthy food and drinks. This can be through the:

• adverts our children see on TV and online
• range of food and drinks sold in our local shops or delivered straight to our doors
• food and drink that is promoted in-store and online

All of this is intended to influence the choices we make about the food and drink we buy our children, and the choices children make themselves.

That is why we committed to implementing advertising restrictions on TV and online. The advertising restrictions, which came into force UK-wide on 5 January 2026, include a restriction on:

• advertising ‘less healthy’ food or drink products on TV before 9pm
• paid-for advertising of these products online at any time

We also brought into force restrictions on the volume price promotions retailers can offer, including a restriction on ‘3 for the price of 2’ offers on ‘less healthy’ food and drink in England from 1 October 2025. This follows the restrictions on promotions by location that were implemented in England in 2022. These location restrictions apply to:

• store entrances
• aisle ends
• checkouts
• equivalent locations online

The advertising and promotions restrictions are designed to reduce children’s exposure to ‘less healthy’ food or drink products. Evidence shows that advertising and promoting these products encourages less healthy choices and so contributes to childhood obesity (Cairns and others, 2009; Halford and others, 2004 and 2007; Public Health England, Sugar reduction: from evidence into action).

The restrictions also incentivise businesses to reformulate their products. This is the process of altering the composition or recipe of existing products to improve their nutritional profile and help create a healthier food and drink environment for children.

Emerging evidence is showing that the restrictions on promotions by location are already making an impact with 2 million fewer in-scope ‘less healthy’ products being sold each day (Kininmonth and others, 2025 and 2025b; Jenneson and others, 2025).

Updating the NPM

We announced in the 10 Year Health Plan that we would update the standards behind the advertising and promotions restrictions, which are out of date. This will bring these policies back in line with the latest dietary advice and enable more impactful regulation.

The advertising and promotions restrictions are currently underpinned by the UK nutrient profiling model (NPM) 2004 to 2005.

The NPM is a technical tool, developed by experts with feedback from industry. It determines what food and drinks are ‘less healthy’ by balancing the beneficial nutrients against the less beneficial nutrients in these products and producing a score.

The 2004 to 2005 model is over 20 years old. UK dietary recommendations have been revised since it was developed, particularly for:

• free sugars (sugars added to foods, plus those naturally present in syrups, honey and unsweetened fruit and vegetable juices, purees and pastes)
• dietary fibre (carbohydrates that are not digested or absorbed in the small intestine, including components of plant cell walls, such as cellulose)

These recommendations were set out in the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) 2015 report Carbohydrates and health, which was accepted by the governments of all UK nations.

Following SACN’s report, the government commissioned a review of the NPM 2004 to 2005. Public Health England carried out the review with an expert and reference group that included industry, regulators and health charities. The updated NPM was consulted on and finalised in 2018. For more information, see UK nutrient profiling model 2018 review.

We have now published the Nutrient profiling model 2018 to give businesses more time to understand how it will affect their product ranges.

We refer to the NPM 2018 in this consultation document as the ‘new NPM’.

Determining the products in scope of the restrictions

There is a 2-step process to determine which products are ‘less healthy’ and in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions.

Step 1: determine the product category

The product must fall into one of the food and drink categories in the regulations.

Both the advertising and promotions regulations apply to a defined set of food and drink categories that are linked to poor health in children. While the 2 sets of regulations are deliberately mostly aligned, there are slight differences between the categories in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions, as the advertising restrictions also relate to the out of home sector. These are categories that are of concern to childhood obesity because they are the biggest contributors to children’s sugar and calorie intakes, and are heavily promoted.

You can find more information on the 13 product categories in:

• Restricting advertising of ‘less healthy’ food or drink on TV and online: products in scope
• Restricting promotions of products high in fat, sugar or salt by location and by volume price

Exclusions to the 13 product categories include (but are not limited to):

• savoury bread products
• cooking sauces
• fruit juices without added sugar
• table sauces and dressings
• dips and sweet spreads

These categories largely align with the categories in Sugar reduction: from evidence into action and Calorie reduction: the scope and ambition for action, and also align with drinks that are subject to the Soft Drinks Industry Levy.

Step 2: calculate the NPM score

The product is only in scope of the restrictions if it is also assessed by the NPM 2004 to 2005 and receives a score of 4 or above for food or 1 or above for drinks. This determines it to be ‘less healthy’. The technical guidance in Nutrient profiling model 2004 to 2005 provides instructions on how to calculate the NPM score for different products.

Scope of the consultation

We now have better data, stronger science and a clearer understanding of which nutrients matter most to children’s health. It’s right that we apply the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions to reflect this and maximise their impact to help reduce levels of childhood obesity.

This consultation fulfils our statutory duty to consult on changes to existing food law. We want to gather your views on:

• how the new NPM would apply to:
  • the Advertising (Less Healthy Food Definitions and Exemptions) Regulations 2024
  • the Food (Promotion and Placement) (England) Regulations 2021
• the implementation timelines

We are not consulting on the new NPM itself. We already consulted on this in 2018 and have published the:

• consultation response and final version of the new NPM
• updated technical guidance

We have also committed to consulting on the shape and scope of healthier food targets and reporting, which were announced in the 10 Year Health Plan. Determining suitable and practical metrics for these policies will be vital to their success, including considering the NPM as a potential metric to measure the healthiness of products that large food businesses sell. This consultation will run separately, so anyone who is interested in providing feedback on these policies can do when it is published.

We would like to understand the impact of our proposals on applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions on:

• children
• businesses
• groups with protected characteristics

You can find more information about protected characteristics at Discrimination: your rights.

Who should respond

This consultation affects policies that are implemented both across the UK (the advertising restrictions) and in England only (the promotions restrictions). So, this consultation is relevant to all people who live in the UK.

We are interested to gather a broad range of views and would particularly welcome responses from:

• public health partners, academic experts and health charities
• clinicians and healthcare professionals, including nutritionists and dieticians
• people and organisations working with children, including teachers, headteachers and teachers’ unions
• businesses in the retail, manufacturing and advertising sectors, and any other businesses and industry bodies impacted by the proposals
• food standards and advertising enforcement authorities and regulators
• local councils (reflecting the views of trading standards and environmental health officers)
• members of the public, including young people, parents and carers

See the privacy notice for more information about how we will use and store your data.

Proposals for applying the new NPM

We are making 2 main proposals in this consultation:

• applying the new NPM to the existing advertising and promotions restrictions
• timescales for implementing this change

Applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions

We are proposing to apply the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions to protect children from the harms of ‘less healthy’ food and drink marketing and reduce inequalities in children’s health.

How the new NPM is different

The main difference with the new NPM is that it implements the SACN recommendation that free sugars make up no more than 5% of energy intake. Evidence shows that free sugars have a stronger association with poor health outcomes in children. Data shows that:

• children consume more than double the recommended levels of free sugars
• only 8% of 4 to 10 year olds meet the UK dietary recommendation for free sugars intake
• only 5% of 11 to 18 year olds meet the UK dietary recommendation for free sugars intake

This change means that some products that would be defined as ‘healthier’ by NPM 2004 to 2005 would be defined as ‘less healthy’ using the new NPM.

The new NPM is also slightly stricter on points for saturated fat and energy, meaning more savoury snacks will be classified as ‘less healthy’.

However, the new NPM awards more positive points to fibre. Fibre is strongly linked to a lower risk of heart disease, type 2 diabetes and bowel cancer in adults.

Data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey 2019 to 2023 shows that:

• only 14% of 4 to 10 year olds meet the UK dietary recommendation for fibre intake
• only 4% of 11 to 18 year olds meet the UK dietary recommendation for fibre intake

There is much room for improvement. Given the low population-level fibre intakes, this gives businesses a reformulation opportunity to include more fibre in their products.

Applying the new NPM to the existing restrictions

Applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions would bring more products in line with the latest dietary recommendations. It would also bring products that are higher in free sugars into scope, such as some:

• desserts
• yoghurts
• breakfast cereals
• cereal bars

These are often products that are marketed as being healthier to children and that parents may mistakenly think are healthier choices, despite their free sugar content.

We intend to apply the new NPM to the product categories in their current form in the legislation. However, we welcome views on how effective the new NPM would be at capturing more of the products that contribute the most to childhood obesity.

Targeting the advertising and promotion of more of the products that contribute to childhood obesity is essential if we are to reduce childhood obesity. Without taking this action, the significant costs to society and economy from obesity will continue to increase.

Understanding the impact on industry

We recognise the impact that these changes will have on the food and drink industry. This is set out in our impact assessment, which is published alongside this consultation. We will continue to listen to their concerns.

Many businesses have invested in reformulating their products to comply with the current NPM. We welcome the leadership and actions taken by those who continue to champion the development of healthier product ranges. We want to incentivise businesses to continue innovating and reformulating further to meet these new standards.

To help with this, we have engaged stakeholders since the 10 Year Health Plan announcement. We have listened to their views to understand what further support they need to meet the operational requirements of the new NPM.

The government remains committed to implementing proportionate regulation that supports economic growth and minimises the administrative burden on businesses. For example, businesses have told us that they want to be able to invest in their products with the confidence of having reasonable knowledge about the direction of government policy. We are asking about the timings of any future updates to the NPM and to consider industry investment cycles and the implementation of other regulations to provide greater certainty.

We will continue to listen to industry and our other stakeholders as we implement these changes.

Timescale for applying the new NPM

We intend to introduce an implementation period to allow businesses to adapt to any changes. We propose that 12 months is an appropriate amount of time for all relevant businesses and enforcement authorities to adapt to the new NPM being applied to the advertising and promotions restrictions.

Enforcement

Local councils enforce the promotions restrictions, either through Trading Standards or environmental health teams, as determined by local arrangements. Prosecutions are undertaken by HM Courts and Tribunals Service. The advertising restrictions are enforced by the Advertising Standards Authority as the frontline regulator, which is commissioned by Ofcom as the statutory communications regulator. The following guidance is available to support enforcement authorities in enforcing the advertising and promotions restrictions:

• ‘Restricting advertising of ‘less healthy’ food or drink on TV and online: products in scope’
• ‘Restricting promotions of products high in fat, sugar or salt by location and by volume price’

We are not proposing any changes to how the restrictions are enforced. We expect enforcement bodies to assess the evidence from retailers or advertisers on how they have calculated an NPM score, rather than making a calculation themselves. While we do not expect that applying the new NPM will have a significant impact on enforcement bodies, we are still seeking views on what kind of support would be useful to enable enforcement authorities to adapt to the new NPM being applied.

Consultation-stage impact assessment

We have published a consultation-stage impact assessment in this consultation, which sets out our provisional assessment of the impact of the proposals on:

• consumers
• retailers
• food and drink manufacturers
• enforcement authorities
• advertising bodies
• the health and care sector

Our approach largely follows established methodologies used in final impact assessments for the existing restrictions:

• Further advertising restrictions for products high in fat, salt and sugar (‘Impact assessment: introducing a 9pm to 5:30am watershed on TV and online restriction for paid advertising of foods and drinks that are HFSS products’)
• Restricting promotions of food and drink that is high in fat, sugar and salt (‘Final impact assessment: restricting location promotions of HFSS products’)
• Restricting volume price promotions of HFSS products

Applying the new NPM would strengthen the existing advertising and promotions restrictions by bringing more products that are high in free sugars into scope. We expect the benefits of this to be a reduction in people buying ‘less healthy’ food and drink products, which leads to excess calorie consumption and weight gain over time. In the long term, this will help lower obesity prevalence and obesity-related morbidity and mortality.

The impact assessment estimates the health and economic benefits of 3 options:

• doing nothing
• applying the new NPM to the promotions and advertising restrictions
• applying the new NPM alongside amendments to the product categories in scope

Over 25 years, we estimate calorie reductions in the population from applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions could result in total health and economic benefits of around £36.93 billion. This is in addition to the benefits achieved by the existing regulations.

The £36.93 billion is made up of:

• £1.26 billion NHS savings
• £1.13 billion social care savings
• £26.91 billion health benefits to the population
• £7.62 billion in economic output

If the calorie reductions from applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions are achieved, it could reduce cases of childhood obesity by over 110,000 and adult obesity by almost 520,000.

Where possible, we have estimated transition costs in the impact assessment including costs for:

• familiarisation
• knowledge sharing
• product assessment
• IT system changes
• store planning

We have also estimated ongoing costs including ongoing product assessment and loss in profit due to reduced sales of ‘less healthy’ food and drink products.

The questions in this consultation will help us gather further evidence and insight. We would like to use the responses to this consultation to improve our estimated costs and benefits. We would also like to improve our assessment of the impact of introducing the new NPM on advertising spend and impacts.

We will update the impact assessment after the consultation. Any information you provide may be used in our final impact assessment, which we will publish.

Impact on groups with protected characteristics

We would like to understand the impact of our proposals on people with protected characteristics. It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of a protected characteristic, which are:

• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation

Additional information you can submit

We welcome any further information you would like to provide to inform our final impact assessment on applying the new NPM to the promotions and advertising restrictions on ‘less healthy’ food and drink.

For example, this can include information on health or social impacts. It may also include information on the impact on, or cost to, your business or organisation.

How to respond

Completing the online survey

Please respond by completing the online survey.

Do not provide personal information when responding to free-text survey questions. We will remove any personal information before the responses are analysed, and it will not be considered in the consultation outcome.

The consultation is open for 12 weeks and will close at 11.59pm on 17 June 2026. If you respond after this date, we will not consider your response.

If you have any questions about the consultation, you can email us at food.legislation@dhsc.gov.uk. Do not send your consultation answers or any personal information to this email address.

Disclosure of responses

As a public body, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) may be required by law to publish or disclose information you provide in response to this consultation. This is in line with the:

• Freedom of Information Act 2000
• Data Protection Act 2018
• General Data Protection Regulation

Confidential information is disclosed at the respondent’s risk. If you provide personal, confidential, commercial or intellectual property information in your response, you consent to its disclosure and publication where necessary.

Consultation questions

About you

In what capacity are you responding to this survey?

• An individual sharing my personal views and experiences
• An individual sharing my professional views
• On behalf of a business or organisation

Questions for individuals sharing their personal or professional views

This survey is only open to individuals who live in the UK. Where do you live in the UK?

• England
• Scotland
• Wales
• Northern Ireland
• I live outside the UK (selecting this option will end the survey)

What is your age? (Optional)

• 15 and under
• 16 to 24
• 25 to 34
• 35 to 44
• 45 to 54
• 55 to 64
• 65 to 74
• 75 to 84
• 85 and over
• Prefer not to say

What is your sex? (Optional)

• Female
• Male
• Prefer not to say

What is your ethnic group? (Optional)

• White - includes British, Northern Irish, Irish, Gypsy, Irish Traveller, Roma or any other White background
• Mixed or Multiple ethnic groups - includes White and Black Caribbean, White and Black African, White and Asian or any other Mixed or Multiple background
• Asian or Asian British - includes Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese or any other Asian background
• Black, Black British, Caribbean or African - includes Black British, Caribbean, African or any other Black background
• Other ethnic group - includes Arab or any other ethnic group
• Prefer not to say

Questions for individuals sharing their professional views

What sector do you work in? (Optional)

• Public sector
• Private sector
• Not for profit
• Other (please specify)

What is the main area of focus of your work? (Optional)

• Academia
• Children and youth services
• Health and social care
• Hospitality
• Local government
• National government
• Nutrition policy and services
• Other (please specify)

Questions for people responding on behalf of a business or organisation

What is the name of your business or organisation?

Where does your business or organisation operate or provide services? Select all that apply.

• England
• Wales
• Scotland
• Northern Ireland
• The whole of the UK
• Outside the UK

What type of business or organisation are you responding on behalf of?

• Academic institution
• Charity
• Food and/or drink manufacturer
• Non-government organisation
• Out of home sector
• Retailer
• Trade association
• Other (please specify)

Applying the new NPM to the existing restrictions

Questions for all respondents

The advertising and promotions restrictions are designed to reduce children’s exposure to ‘less healthy’ food or drink products. The restrictions are currently underpinned by the UK NPM 2004 to 2005. We are proposing to apply the NPM 2018 (the new NPM) to the advertising and promotions restrictions to bring them in line with the latest dietary recommendations. This would bring into scope more food and drink products that are high in free sugars.

Do you agree or disagree that applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions will improve population health?

• Agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Disagree
• Don’t know

Please provide any specific information or evidence to support your answer. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

We welcome views on how effective the new NPM would be at capturing more of the products that contribute the most to childhood obesity.

Do you agree or disagree that applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions will capture the products that contribute to childhood obesity?

• Agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Disagree
• Don’t know

Please provide any specific information or evidence to support your answer. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

As part of the process for determining which products are in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions, a product must fall into one of the categories of food and drinks products within the schedules of the regulations and be assessed as ‘less healthy’ by the NPM.

The NPM 2018 technical guidance provides businesses with the information they need to calculate whether a product is ‘less healthy’.

If the technical guidance requires any further clarity to help you to determine if a product is classified as ‘less healthy’, please set this out. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Understanding the impact on industry

Questions for individuals sharing their professional views and people responding on behalf of a business or organisation

What are the main challenges or operational issues that businesses might experience when implementing the new NPM? We welcome examples of actions businesses are taking to overcome these challenges. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

The government is committed to implementing proportionate regulation and minimising administrative burdens of new regulation on businesses.

If the NPM is reviewed and updated again in the future to reflect new dietary recommendations, what would be a proportionate timeframe for applying any future updates which supports alignment with the investment cycles of industry? (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Timescale for applying the new NPM

Questions for all respondents

Subject to the consultation outcome, we would introduce an implementation period to allow businesses to adapt to any changes.

Do you agree or disagree that 12 months is a sufficient implementation period for businesses in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions and enforcement authorities to adapt to the new NPM being applied? (Optional)

• Agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Disagree
• Don’t know

If you said ‘disagree’, how long should the implementation period be? Enter the number of months. If you have any specific information or evidence to support your answer, please include it in your response. (Maximum 300 words)

How can government support businesses during an implementation period? (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Enforcement

Questions for all respondents

Guidance is available to support enforcement authorities in enforcing the advertising and promotions restrictions.

What kind of support would be useful to enable enforcement authorities to effectively adapt to the new NPM being applied to the advertising and promotions restrictions? (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Consultation-stage impact assessment

Questions for people responding on behalf of a business or organisation

Do you agree or disagree that the transition cost calculations within the impact assessment reflect a fair assessment of the costs that would be faced by your organisation or business?

• Agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Disagree
• Don’t know
• Not applicable

Please provide any further evidence that could be used to improve our estimates. If you are referring to a specific calculation, please state which one. (Maximum 300 words)

Do you agree or disagree that the ongoing cost calculations within the impact assessment reflect a fair assessment of the costs that would be faced by your organisation or business?

• Agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Disagree
• Don’t know
• Not applicable

Please provide any further evidence that could be used to improve our estimates. If you are referring to a specific calculation, please state which one. (Maximum 300 words)

Questions for individuals sharing their professional views and people responding on behalf of a business or organisation

We are assessing how many advertisements there currently are for products that would be reclassified as ‘less healthy’ if the new NPM was applied to the advertising restrictions.

If you have any evidence or data that would help inform our assessment, you will be asked to include it. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

We are assessing children’s exposure to these advertisements for products that would be reclassified as ‘less healthy’.

If you have any evidence or data that would help inform our assessment, you will be asked to include it. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Impact on groups with protected characteristics

Questions for all respondents

We would like to understand the impact of our proposals on people with protected characteristics. It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of protected characteristics, which are:

• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation

Do you think that this proposal is likely to impact on people who share a protected characteristic in a way that is different from those who do not share it?

• Yes
• No
• Don’t know

If you said ‘yes’, which protected characteristics do you think this applies to? Select all that apply. (Optional)

If you selected any characteristics, how might the proposal impact people differently because of these characteristics? Provide any specific information or evidence to support your answer, including whether the impact is likely to be positive or negative. (Maximum 300 words)

Additional information you would like to submit

Questions for all respondents

We welcome any further information on impact you may have. You will be asked to include any further information you would like to provide to inform our final impact assessment. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

You will be given the opportunity to upload up to 3 relevant files. All file types are accepted. Please make clear which questions the information relates to within the file. Do not submit any commercially sensitive information.

If applicable, you can raise any further matters about this consultation. Please do not include any personal information. (Optional, maximum 300 words)

Privacy notice

The DHSC privacy notice sets out how we process and manage your personal information and explains your rights under the Data Protection Act 2018 and the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). The privacy notice is kept under regular review, and new versions will be available on the DHSC privacy notice page.

References

Brown KF, Rumgay H, Dunlop C and others. The fraction of cancer attributable to modifiable risk factors in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the United Kingdom in 2015. British Journal of Cancer 2018: volume 118, issue 8, pages 1,130 to 1,141.

Cairns G, Angus K and Hastings G. The extent, nature and effects of food promotion to children: a review of the evidence to December 2008. World Health Organization, 2009.

Halford JC, Boyland EJ, Hughes GM, Stacey L, McKean S and Dovey TM. Beyond-brand effect of television food advertisements on food choice in children: the effects of weight status. Public Health Nutrition 2008: volume 11, issue 9, pages 897 to 904.

Halford JC, Gillespie J, Brown V, Pontin EE and Dovey TM. Effect of television advertisements for foods on food consumption in children. Appetite 2004: volume 42, issue 2, pages 221 to 225 (registration and purchase required for full article).

Jenneson V, Kininmonth A, Wilkins E, Chukwu I, Eselebor O, Pontin F, Naisbitt R, Johnstone A, Fildes A and Morris M. Did high in fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) product placement legislation in England lead to reduced HFSS purchases? An interrupted time series analysis. OSF preprints, 2025.

Kininmonth AR, Jenneson VL, Pontin F, Halford JCG, Johnstone AM, Morris MA and Fildes A. Customer awareness and perceptions of the high in fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) placement legislation and impacts on self-reported food purchasing. Food Policy 2025a: volume 135, article 102941.

Kininmonth A, Stone RA, Jenneson V, Ennis E, Naisbitt R, Johnstone A, Morris M and Fildes A. “It was a force for good but…”: a mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of the high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) legislation in England. OSF preprints, 2025b.

Nesta and Frontier Economics. The economic and productivity costs of obesity and excess weight in the UK. Nesta, 2025.