Removing sweets and crisps from supermarket checkouts could dramatically cut the amount of unhealthy snacks bought to eat on the go, say researchers.
Under pressure to act because of rising childhood obesity, some supermarkets have moved snacks away from the till, where people queuing — often with children — are tempted to put them in the shopping basket as they wait their turn.
Research shows the positioning of products at the checkout or on the end of aisles increases their sales. The findings suggest that many families who stop adding sweets and crisps at the counter appear not to buy them at all.
Photo: Bloomberg
The government-funded study, published in the journal Plos Medicine, found that 76 percent fewer annual purchases of sugary confectionery and crisps were bought and eaten on the go from supermarkets that do not stock them at checkouts than at those that do.
The study used commercially held data from 7,500 shoppers who recorded food bought and eaten on the go during 2016-17 from supermarkets with and without checkout food policies. On the go purchases are often impulsive and can be the result of children pestering their parents.
The researchers, from Cambridge, Stirling and Newcastle universities, also looked at how purchases of less healthy, common checkout foods that were brought home — rather than eaten on the go — changed after the implementation of checkout policies. They used data from more than 30,000 UK households from 12 months before to 12 months after implementation.
They found that removing the unhealthy snacks from the checkout was associated with an immediate 17 percent reduction in purchases. After a year, shoppers were still purchasing 15 percent fewer of the items compared with when no policy was in place.
“Our findings suggest that by removing sweets and crisps from the checkout, supermarkets can have a positive influence on the types of purchases their shoppers make,” said Katrine Ejlerskov, the study’s first author.
“This would be a relatively simple intervention with the potential to encourage healthier eating. Many of these purchases may have been impulse buys, so if the shopper doesn’t pick up a chocolate bar at the till, it may be one less chocolate bar that they consume.”
Jean Adams, a senior lecturer in dietary public health research at the University of Cambridge, agrees.
“It may seem obvious that removing unhealthy food options from the checkout would reduce the amount that people buy, but it is evidence such as this that helps build the case for government interventions to improve unhealthy behaviors.”
The government promised to consult on removing snacks from supermarket checkouts as part of its latest obesity plan. Bryony Sinclair, a senior policy manager at the World Cancer Research Fund, welcomed the study.
“Displaying sugary food and drinks at checkouts, tempting shoppers to make unhealthy last-minute decisions, is unacceptable,” she said.
“These evidence-informed policies can then be implemented by governments to create environments that support healthier choices, as eating too much sugar can lead to weight gain, and being overweight or obese increases the risk of 12 different types of cancer.”
Taiwan’s English education system is being pulled apart by three opposing forces. Bilingual Nation 2030 pulls students toward English and global communication. Artificial Intelligence (AI) readiness pulls them toward digital judgment, verification and AI-mediated work. But Taiwan’s old exam culture pulls them back toward memorization, grammar drills, timed reading and correct answers. If the education system keeps using old exams to define success, it risks producing graduates who are neither genuinely bilingual nor genuinely AI-ready, but trained for tasks machines can already perform. The first force is Bilingual Nation 2030. Launched in 2018, the policy aimed to “help Taiwan’s workforce connect
It seems every few days one bumps into one of those “real man” comments in which Taiwan is urged to “face reality” or similar, and “make a deal,” with the speaker implying that soon it will be too late. “Deal” advocates always present themselves as having a superior grip on reality, and the manly ability to make the “hard choice.” Their testosterone-laden language often echoes that of Taiwan sellout advocates. Note that such commentary always specifies a process (“make a deal, work with, make progress”), never the end state of what occupation by a violent authoritarian colonialist state will entail. In
There are shadowy cabals plotting to sell out Taiwan to be annexed by China, by invasion if necessary. Fortunately, they are buffoons. In 2019, former Bamboo Union gangster and founder of the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP), Chang An-le (張安樂, colorfully known as “White Wolf”), led a protest at the Legislative Yuan against comments made by then-premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) that in the event of an attack by China, he would never surrender, but would protect the nation by fighting to the end, even if he only had a broom. Chang had party members bring a wooden casket that they
June 1 to June 7 "If all Taiwanese were as afraid of dying as you, then what would happen?” Physician Shih Chiang-nan (施江南) reportedly said this to his wife Chen Chiao-tung (陳焦桐) after she urged him to stop intervening on behalf of Taiwanese soldiers stranded overseas after serving in the Japanese Army during World War II. Shih had clashed with high-ranking officials over the issue, engaged in several heated arguments with Taiwan governor-general Chen Yi (陳儀) and allegedly shouted at general Ko Yuan-fen (柯遠芬), chief of staff of the Taiwan Garrison Command, over