A new study raises concerns over the nutrient content and high sugar levels in commercially available spouted baby food pouches, prompting calls for regulatory review amid warnings they resemble sugary drinks more than suitable weaning foods.
Researchers have raised fresh questions about the growing use of spouted baby food pouches, saying many of the products sold in UK supermarkets look and behave more like sweet drinks than the foods infants need when they begin weaning. A study published in Archives of Disease in Childhood found that these pouches were often lower in nutrient density and higher in sugar than breast milk or formula, while also lacking the thicker textures that help babies learn to eat solids. According to the University of Glasgow, the findings have prompted calls for a review of how the products are classified and labelled.
The analysis examined 298 commercial baby foods sold in six large hypermarkets in Glasgow in late 2024. Of those products, 178 were spouted pouches, making them the dominant format in the sample. The researchers said all of the pouches were marketed for children under 12 months, and about two-thirds were aimed at babies six months and younger, despite official advice that complementary foods should begin around that age and become progressively more textured as infants develop feeding skills.
Texture appeared to be a major concern. Nearly half of the spouted pouches were classed as liquids, compared with only a small share of other packaged baby foods, and just 10% were described as soft foods. The study also found that only 14 of the pouches met all of the criteria the researchers set for a suitable complementary food, while 48 met none. By contrast, around a third of the other wet baby foods met all of the criteria.
Sugar content was another issue. The researchers reported that 61% of spouted pouches contained more sugar than breast milk, compared with 8% of other baby foods in the sample. The study authors argued that high sugar intake in early childhood can have lasting effects on dental health and weight, and said regulators should consider whether current labelling is misleading. They also noted limitations, including the lack of data on what babies actually consume and the fact that iron content was rarely disclosed by manufacturers.
Disclaimer: This content is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical judgment, advice, diagnosis, or treatment.
