Several food organizations have signed a letter to the CEO of Nestlé UK and Ireland, pointing out that the way its new breakfast cereal inspired by the candy bar KitKat is marketed is “irresponsible.” The organizations state that the nutritious claims are inaccurate and question how the food giant can promote a high sugary product for children as it is contrary to the company’s mission statement. 

“Nestlé claims to be interested in nutrition but continues to develop and bring to market breakfast cereals that are one-quarter sugar, and market them at families,” Barbara Crowther, co-ordinator at the Children’s Food Campaign, tells NutritionInsight.

Nestlé UK’s mission statement reads: “We are the Good food, Good life company. We believe in the power of food to enhance lives. Good food nourishes and delights the senses. It helps children grow healthy, pets thrive, parents age gracefully and everyone lives life to the fullest. Good food brings us together. Good food also respects our planet and protects resources for future generations.”

The letter reads, “If it were really following its mission statement, Nestlé would never have developed that product in the first place. There is no way that it could be seen as ‘enhancing quality of life for everyone, today and for generations to come.’”

NutritionInsight speaks with a spokesperson from Nestlé, who says, “Our breakfast cereal portfolio offers a range of products to meet a wide variety of consumer expectations and nutritional needs. We want to offer a breakfast option for everyone. We are proud that 84% of Nestlé’s Breakfast Cereals sold in the UK qualify as non-HFSS, and we also want to provide breakfast cereals for those looking for an occasional and more indulgent breakfast choice.”

Arguing that the KitKat cereal is Nutri-Score C, the spokesperson adds, “wher we have products like this one, we want them to be competitive on taste and nutrition and to be marketed responsibly.”

A day’s worth of sugar in one bowl
According to the product’s nutritional label, 100 g of cereal equals 24.7 g of sugar. 

“A 30 g serving provides almost 30% of recommended sugar intake for a 7-year-old and 40% for a 6-year-old – and in reality, many children eat twice or three times that amount, consuming their entire daily sugar allowance in one bowlful,” stresses Crowther.

The letter further reads that followed by a consumer backlash, “Nestlé removed its spurious nutritional claim from parts of its website.”

“It is cynical in the extreme to try and claim, as it did, that this is ‘nutritious.’ It has updated the claim on its website, but this is simply not how our food system should be governed. It should not take consumer outrage to get the biggest food manufacturer in the world to take responsibility for its products.”

On the product page by Nestlé, it says that “as well as being oh-so chocolatey and tasty, these crunchy cereals are also made with whole grain and are a source of vitamins and minerals. What’s more, they are made using sustainably sourced cocoa.”

The nutritional label
Per 100 g, 10.9 are fats, 4.7 g are saturated fats and 0.37 g are salt. According to nclick="updateothersitehits('Articlepage','External','OtherSitelink','Nestlé accused of irresponsible marketing with “fake” nutrition claims on KitKat cereals','Nestlé accused of irresponsible marketing with “fake” nutrition claims on KitKat cereals','334632','https://www.nutrition.org.uk/putting-it-into-practice/food-labelling/looking-at-labels/', 'article','Nestlé accused of irresponsible marketing with “fake” nutrition claims on KitKat cereals');return no_reload();">the British Nutrition Foundation’s guidelines, these are considered medium rather than low levels. However, the sugar content is considered high as it exceeds 22.5 g per 100 g.

“To continue developing foods contributing to a health crisis is irresponsible and strategically foolish. Nestlé risks investing millions in product lines that a future government will be forced, in the face of overwhelming evidence, to take action against,” the letter reads.

The Nestlé spokesperson says, “In breakfast cereals, we’ve been taking positive action through innovation and product renovation. We work with leading experts and nutritionists worldwide to help us create breakfast cereals that deliver the taste and nutrition consumers expect.” 

The company further states that since 2003, it has increased whole grain by 50% while reducing sugar by 20% and salt by 25%. “Today, 90% of our breakfast cereal recipes have whole grain as their number one ingredient – and this rises to 99% for our ready-to-eat breakfast cereals for children,” Nestlé tells us.

“It’s inconceivable that a company that proudly states on its UK website that ‘our purpose is to make breakfast better’ is a company that also makes and promotes a product that is one-quarter sugar. Unfortunately, this product is not an exception for Nestlé,” Mhairi Brown, Action on Sugar’s policy, public affairs and international projects lead at Queen Mary University of London, tells NutritionInsight.

“Earlier this year, in collaboration with ShareAction, we investigated the nutritional profile of products made by global food manufacturers sold worldwide. We found that around two-thirds of products sold by Nestlé are less healthy. This builds on research we did in the UK, which similarly found that around half of flagship products sold by Nestlé in the UK were less healthy.”

Drawing attention
The letter is signed by Sustain, Obesity Health Alliance, The Food Foundation, the British Dental Association, the British Heart Foundation, Bite Back 2030, Alexandra Rose Charity, Mission Ventures and Action on Sugar and Salt. 

“We sent the letter to draw attention to the audacity of such a product being marketed as ‘nutritious.’ At a minimum, we hope the letter was read by someone senior in the company and this type of dishonest marketing will not happen again,” says Brown.

“But the truth is, regulation is needed to ensure this type of marketing from Nestlé or any other company is not allowed. Consumers deserve the best; they do not deserve misleading marketing,” she continues.

To guide responsible consumption, Nestlé says it provides information and services to help people make informed food choices as part of a balanced diet.

Ranging from simple nutrition labeling to stringent responsible marketing practices such as voluntarily restricting marketing to children under 16 years old, as well as nutrition education programs and services that promote healthy lifestyles.

“Regarding the letter from UK organizations, Nestlé has also been consistent that we are open to the idea of effective regulation in the UK that drives proper innovation in our sector and has the desired health outcomes that we all wish to see,” asserts the spokesperson.

Actions on obesity
Earlier this year, the World Obesity Federation predicted that 51% of the world’s population will be overweight or obese by 2035 if the current path is not disrupted.

“If Nestlé insists on bringing unhealthy produce to market and making fake nutritional claims, then it cannot be trusted to be part of the solution to the health crisis we face,” Crowther underscores.

“In the UK, government research has already shown that voluntary measures by industry to remove sugar have failed to deliver the scale of change needed, especially compared to the very successful soft drinks industry levy. The case for government intervention is clear,” Crowther adds.

Even though change is coming, the UK government was recently accused of “bowing to the food industry” as it delayed the banning of junk food by three additional years, giving companies until 2025 to make a change rather than implementing the ban on the first of January 2023, as previously stated that it would.

Brown stresses that poor diets are among the most significant risk factors for ill health and death globally and that the food industry “absolutely has an impact on this.”

“Given the power of multinational companies in the current system and the extent to which their products are part of the fabric of our daily lives, completely banning them doesn’t seem realistic. However, policies that aim to rebalance our food system to help us see and buy more of what is good for us are entirely feasible.” 

She exemplifies better front-of-pack labeling for food and drinks, restrictions on the use of spurious health claims on unhealthy products, restrictions on the advertising and marketing of less healthy products, ensuring that healthier products are placed in prominent areas of supermarkets and making more nutritional products more affordable and available.

“All of these measures have been in the pipeline in the UK and many other countries for years. We need governments to push them through. By doing so, they can help improve our diet and protect us from devastating health conditions, keeping us healthier, resilient and productive for longer,” Brown concludes.