Recommended Age of Introduction on Commercial Baby Food Labels: Alignment with Allergy Prevention Guidelines

Abstract

Background: Current recommendations for infant weaning suggest the early introduction of solid and diverse foods. Although homemade meals are advisable, there is a demand for commercially available complementary foods (CACFs), and the information present on their labeling influences caregivers’ choices. The aim of this study was to evaluate recommended-age-of-introduction labeling of CACFs in the Portuguese market, in light of current guidelines for complementary feeding. Methods: Between November and December 2025, labels of all CACFs found in infant feeding sections of 13 Portuguese grocery retailers were analyzed. Milk formulas, powders, products for children over 15 months, and those for children with food allergies or intolerances were excluded. Results: Of the 539 products analyzed, 458 showed a recommended age for introduction, ranging from 4 to 12 months, with significant variability being observed between food categories. Significant variability was also observed in the recommended age for introduction depending on whether major allergens were present. Conclusions: The results of our study identified an age-segmented approach to complementary feeding recommendations in CACF labeling, not reflecting current infant feeding guidelines that support complementary feeding. Our results reinforce the need for more support from scientific evidence and health guidelines in food availability and marketing.

1. Introduction

The timing of complementary feeding represents a critical window for infant development, nutrition, and the establishment of oral tolerance [1,2]. Evidence suggests that the early introduction of solid and diverse foods, including major allergens, may decrease the risk of food allergy development [3,4,5]. This has resulted in a change to previous guidelines on food allergen avoidance [6]. Accordingly, current recommendations suggest the period between 4 and 6 months as the age to start complementary feeding, with evidence also supporting early and regular introduction of specific complementary foods, as peanuts and cooked egg, for the prevention of food-specific allergies [7,8,9].

While the introduction of home-cooked foods is generally encouraged [10,11], commercially available complementary foods (CACFs) remain highly demanded due to such factors as convenience, ease of transport, and perceived food safety [12]. Although data on infant feeding practices remain limited, research involving infants and young children across multiple European countries has shown that most consume CACFs within their first two years of life [13]. Additionally, it is also known that the information present on the labeling of CACFs influences caregivers’ perceptions and choices [14].

The aim of this study was to evaluate recommended-age-of-introduction labeling of CACFs in the Portuguese market, in light of current guidelines for complementary feeding.

2. Materials and Methods

From November to December 2025, a cross-sectional study of CACFs’ labels within sections intended for infant feeding, encompassing both physical and digital retail platforms, was conducted across thirteen major Portuguese grocery retailers/companies and infant food manufacturers. The CACFs were categorized into five distinct classes: snacks, meals, fruit pots and pouches, porridges, and yoghurt/veggie-based yoghurt pouches. Milk formulas were excluded, along with powders, products intended for children older than 15 months, and products for children with food intolerances or allergies. Data analysis was performed using SPSS Statistical Software^® version 30 for Mac (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), considering a significance level of 0.05. Descriptive analyses (proportions) were used to summarize product characteristics and recommended ages of introduction. Differences between groups were assessed using the Mann–Whitney U test or Kruskal–Wallis test, as appropriate.

3. Results

A total of 530 CACFs marketed for infants were included in the analysis, representing 32 brands. Among these products, 37.2% (n = 197) were fruit pots and pouches, 22.3% (n = 118) were porridges, 16.8% (n = 89) were categorized as finger-food snacks, 14.3% (n = 76) as prepared meals, and 9.4% (n = 50) as yoghurt/vegetable-based yoghurt pouches.

86.4% of products (n = 458) showed a recommended age for introduction, ranging from 4 to 12 months. Overall, 35.8% of products (n = 164) were labeled for introduction after 6 months of age, while 64.2% of products (n = 294) were labeled for introduction at or before 6 months.

3.1. Recommended Age by Food Category

Significant variability was observed between food categories (

Table 1. Recommended age by category.

Food Category	Products with Age Recommendation (n)	Median (Months)	Range (Months)	Products > 6 Months (%)
Fruit pots and pouches	170	6	4–12	25.9
Porridges	108	6	4–12	11.1
Finger food and snacks	79	8	6–12	86.1
Prepared meals	57	6	4–12	42.1
Yoghurt/vegetable-based yoghurt pouches	44	6	6–12	36.4

). Products in the porridge category and in the fruit pots and pouches category were predominantly labeled for introduction at or before 6 months, while products in the snacks category showed the oldest recommended age of introduction, with a median age of 8 months (range 6–12), and 86.1% of products being labeled for introduction after 6 months.

3.2. CACFs by Recommended Age

Accordingly, when CACFs were analyzed by the recommended age for their introduction, it was found that 6 months was the age most frequently stated on products (39.1%; n = 207), followed by 8 months (15.7%; n = 83) and 4 months (14.3%; n = 76).

When analyzed by ingredient composition, differences in recommended age of introduction were observed across products. Fruits such as apple, banana, and pear were consistently marketed for ≤6 months. In contrast, products containing yoghurt, strawberry or wheat were associated with a recommendation for introduction >6 months (median 8 months).

Inconsistencies in recommended age were also observed among products with identical ingredient composition. For instance, a fruit pouch containing apple, banana, strawberry, and vitamin C was marketed by four different brands with four distinct recommended ages of introduction, ranging from 4 to 8 months, despite identical ingredient profiles and similar product formats.

3.3. Allergen Labeling Across Age Categories

Of the products analyzed, 43.7% (n = 200) contained allergens requiring European mandatory labeling [15], and 23.1% (n = 106) had precautionary allergen labeling.

Among major-allergen-containing products, wheat/gluten (63.5%; n = 127) and milk (53.0%; n = 106) were the most common allergens; in contrast, allergens such as egg, peanut, and tree nuts were rarely present. The categories “Yoghurt/vegetable-based yoghurt pouches” and “Porridges” showed the highest proportions of major-allergen-containing products (88.6% and 83.3%, respectively).

Although the median recommended age of introduction did not differ between products with or without allergenic ingredients (6 months in both cases), allergen-containing products showed a significantly higher mean recommended age of introduction and a higher proportion of delayed age of introduction (>6 months) (41.0% vs. 31.8%, p < 0.001), driven by a greater proportion of products labeled for introduction at later ages (8–12 months). In contrast, products carrying precautionary allergen statements showed a clear shift toward later introduction, with a median recommend age of 8 months (p < 0.001).

4. Discussion

The results of our study identified an age-segmented approach to complementary feeding recommendations in CACF labeling, with allergen-containing products being represented among those labeled for later introduction, despite there being no difference in the median recommended age. These results do not reflect current infant feeding guidelines which recommend that complementary foods, including allergenic foods, should be introduced between 4 and 6 months, with no evidence supporting a rigid or age-based schedule of foods [9,16]. In particular, dietary diversity during infancy has been associated with a reduced risk of food allergy and allergic disease [5].

Additionally, strong evidence from randomized controlled trials has demonstrated that early introduction of major allergens, particularly peanut and cooked egg, can reduce the risk of food allergy in both high-risk and general infant populations [3,4,17,18]. Consequently, international guidelines now recommend not only avoiding delay in the introduction of allergenic foods, but also actively incorporating these foods into the infant diet once complementary feeding has begun [19,20].

In this context, labeling practices that associate specific foods or ingredients, particularly major allergens, with later ages of introduction may influence caregiver feeding decisions in ways that could be associated with reduced dietary diversity in early life, something which is relevant for allergy prevention strategies.

Although most products in our sample were labeled for introduction at or before 6 months of age, the substantial variability observed across products and categories may have practical implications for complementary feeding behaviors. Age-of-introduction labeling is frequently used by caregivers as a source of feeding guidance [12,21], and inconsistent or segmented recommendations may contribute to uncertainty or delayed dietary progression. Accordingly, despite focusing particularly on nutritional content, the recent literature on CACFs has also highlighted how misleading marketing and age-related labeling can influence caregiver perceptions and feeding decisions [22]. In particular, the tendency for allergen-containing products to be labeled for later introduction may reduce opportunities for early exposure to allergenic foods. While the present study cannot assess caregiver behavior or clinical outcomes, these labeling patterns may be misaligned with current allergy prevention recommendations that support timely and diverse food introduction.

The segmented labeling patterns observed in this study are partially aligned with the latest Portuguese national recommendations for complementary feeding [23], dating from 2019, which propose a structured scheme for food introduction based on age and food type. Importantly, although these guidelines advise against delaying the introduction of potentially allergenic foods, they also remain silent regarding the imperative of actively introducing these foods as part of allergy prevention strategies. When combined with the long-standing paradigm of delayed allergen introduction and a cautious risk management approach by manufacturers, this context may partially account for the later recommended ages observed for major allergenic foods and products carrying precautionary allergen statements in our study.

Product texture and developmental appropriateness must always be considered in complementary feeding [24], and this may justify the recommendation for later introduction of certain products, particularly finger foods and snacks. However, texture considerations alone may not fully account for the differences observed in age recommendations, as our analysis included puréed fruit products (fruit pots and pouches category) labeled for introduction after 12 months of age.

Previous studies have focused on the assessment of nutritional [25,26,27,28] or allergenic content [29,30] of CACFs; however, there is a paucity of works that specifically address recommendations for the age of introduction within the context of current allergy prevention guidelines. Even so, our results are in line with previous results reported in the United Kingdom [31], where a lack of consistency between the recommended age for introduction present in CACF labels and public health guidelines has been highlighted. Although the legal, commercial and epidemiological contexts differ between Portugal and the United Kingdom, the results taken together highlight the need for greater effort in to scientifically validate this labeling.

Misalignment between labeling practices and current scientific evidence may have implications not only for individual clinical care but also for public health. Few studies exist on the prevalence of food allergies in Portugal. However, recent national studies have warned of an increase in food allergies in childhood [32] and also that food is the leading cause of anaphylaxis in the pediatric population [33], with cow’s milk, tree nuts, shellfish, egg, fresh fruits, fish, and peanut being the main elicitors. These data reinforce the importance of concerted strategies regarding food allergy prevention that encompass not only clinical guidance but also the broader food environment encountered by caregivers.

Our study has limitations, as we relied on label information and could not assess caregiver behavior or actual food consumption. Additionally, we analyzed only a small number of products that can be introduced into children’s diets, although we did a comprehensive analysis of most that are specifically marketed to them in Portugal. Moreover, although the retailers included comprise the major national supermarket chains and leading infant food manufacturers operating in Portugal, thereby capturing the majority of commercially available complementary foods accessible to caregivers, the exclusion of smaller local retailers may limit the generalizability of the findings. Despite these limitations, our study allows us to characterize the environment encountered by caregivers. It is also, to our knowledge, the first work that specifically addresses the age range of products and analyzes it in light of current guidelines for introducing solid foods.

Our results reinforce the need for more support from scientific evidence and health guidelines with regard to food availability and marketing, to ensure that labeling practices are aligned with current evidence on timely and diverse food introduction. Ongoing public-health communication strategies are also essential to effectively support caregivers, and encourage them to safely proceed with complementary feeding, as well as nationally adapted, scientific, and practical guidance that promotes food allergy prevention.