Saturday, November 18, 2006

let's imagine

Let’s imagine different commercials:
No more junk food, candies, video game, toys, TV show, medication...

let's imagine that commercials speak about fruits, vegetables, dairy, sport, exercises, water, board game played all together, visit to museum, hiking and discovering nature, cooking, growing vegetables and flowers, making all kind of things with our hands, writing, reading, drawing, singing, playing music, talking with friend, enjoying farmer market...

Just imagine the content of each of those commercials, like picturing the one for board game: the family together laughing and talking, the one for the farmer market with the children choosing the vegetables and the fruits with the parents...
Continue to imagine...

Then imagine that all those commercials are aired thousand of time a week, that your children are seeing them.
What would be the result?
What kind of thoughts they will have?
What kind of desire, needs?

Sunday, November 12, 2006

TV’s Grip on Your Toddler’s Health (part 2)

I really look at this article as a really good one!
The author wonder what toddlers learn from the example of parents spending their time of leisure in front of TV or computer?

Here is an extract and the link where you can read it all:

TV’s Grip on Your Toddler’s Health
By Dr. Richard Visser

"If a child eats while watching TV, she isn’t paying attention to either the food or her stomach, and it can be easy for her to eat until she’s beyond her “full” point. The foods most craved as a snack are the same high-fat, high-sugar, low-fiber products that are being marketed to your child every five minutes during kids’ programming. A 2006 study by the Harvard School of Public Health reported that for every hour a child spent watching TV, they added 167 calories to their diet per day—primarily from foods frequently advertised on TV."

According to his source toddlers must have 60 minutes of physical activity daily (and) should not be sedentary for more than 60 minutes at a time (except when sleeping) in order to prevent obesity.
Well, I do not know what you think but 60 minutes does not seem enough to me...
Then, Richard Visser lists ways to keep the children moving: "Limit the time your kids spend in front of the TV. Keep TVs and computers out of bedrooms...

He cites ways to Prevent Unconscious Eating advocating No TV or games while eating and insist "your kids model your own behavior, so if they see you snacking in front of the TV or computer, they’ll want to do it, too.”

the advertising impact on increaded weight gain

Well I do not agree with the 2 hours a day of TV for children over two, I think it is already two much as I think that 20 minutes/day and not everyday is plenty enough for children between 2 and 5... but other than that, I think this article (found in Los Angeles Family, oct 2006) is good and interesting:

Mass Media & Child Obesity (part one)

The Advertising Impact on Increased Weight Gain
by Dr. Richard Visser

The advertising industry makes junk food seem irresistible, and it may well be, as recent research shows that children could become physically addicted to junk food. In a recent study, Dr. Robert Lustig from the University of California, San Francisco suggests that childhood obesity arises from foods that are high in fat and fructose and low in fiber. When children eat these “insulinogenic” foods, the insulin not only increases the effects of the pleasure-chemical dopamine (making the child want to eat more of the same food) but also reduces the effects of the hormone leptin, making the child want to eat more and be less active.

Everywhere you find children, you find advertisements for these very foods, promising adventure, popularity, fun—and so much more—if they’d only buy and eat some of the product. The Institute of Medicine, which reported in 2004 on childhood obesity following a request by the U.S. Congress, has concluded that “Food and beverage advertising on television influences children ages 2–11 years to prefer and purchase high-calorie and low-nutrient foods and beverages.”

Such early establishment of brand loyalty is irresistible to advertisers, who have also discovered that children under the age of eight cannot distinguish the difference between a commercial and the TV program or movie it appears with. Kids think that commercials are presenting information, and they digest it with the same seriousness as Dora’s advice to “Share toys!”— particularly if it’s Dora who’s saying “Buy and eat this candy!” With your child’s favorite cartoon character urging her every five minutes to eat Fake-Flake cereal, it’s no wonder that she has a temper tantrum when you won’t buy it at the grocery store.

This brings us back to the question of nagging and the other routines kids go through to get the food they want into the grocery cart. The advertising industry has actually researched nagging through psychological studies designed to identify parents who give in to whining (parents who are divorced or have multiple children, for example) and detailed which purchases and outings are a result of whining, a tool for advertisers who want to ensure such purchases and outings happen more often.

Don’t despair. There are many things you can do to outmaneuver the advertising industry and keep your kids out of their grasp.

Turn the TV off during mealtimes. Keep the TV in the family room so you can monitor what your child is watching and for how long. Also, limit TV viewing to two hours a day for children over two and no TV at all for kids under two. Set a timer to ensure your kids are sticking with their two-hour limit. (Internet or video game time is included in those two hours, by the way.)

Does your child know when a commercial starts and her program ends? Watch TV with your child, and identify commercials. Point out when each advertisement begins and ends by using a timer.

Does your child recognize the purpose of commercials? Ask questions like, “What is the commercial selling? Do you want to buy it? Who makes money from this? How are they attracting your attention? Do you think the people in the ad are cool? Happy? Healthy? Why?” Help your child understand that the point of advertising is convincing kids to buy something.

Don’t forget about other types of advertising. Ads are everywhere—see how many different types you can identify together. Go to some online games—the new frontier for advertisers, who relish the long blocks of time players spend engrossed in games—and talk about what they’re selling while you’re playing. Find product placement in website games, movies, and TV, and see how many name-brand products or logos appear. Talk about why those products are there.

Take advantage of the great resources available from organizations like Commercial-Free Childhood ( and the ADA ( Make sure your children take advertisements with a grain of salt instead of that overly generous helping of sugar.

Dr. Richard Visser is the director of the Visser Wellness and Research Center in Aruba, as well as CEO of SimplyH, LLC and Simply Toddler, LLC in Los Angeles. He works worldwide to raise awareness of proper nutrition for healthy and fit toddlers and children.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Baby Einstein video’s syndrome

It seems obvious that Baby Einstein videos are really well promoted. But I wonder who really expose their babies to those?
Sure, somebody gave me one tape when my babies were born and I (not them) screened it, I was horrified. For me it felt like the mini version of music videos, so even before developping the MTV's syndrome, babies will be able to develop the Baby Einstein video's syndrome...

Following is an article from MSNBC: URL: http://www.msnbc. 15499211/

Can you build a brainier baby? Experts doubt that newfangled toys, videos promote smarts
By Victoria Clayton

MSNBC contributor Updated: 4:13 a.m. PT Nov 6, 2006

Since July and August are traditionally the most popular birth months, there are many people out there who are just now discovering a little bundle of joy is headed their way. If you're one of them, after you exhaust the pregnancy books and Web sites, you'll inevitably stumble across the books, videos, DVDs, CDs, toys and exercise devices that promise they can turn your newborn into a mini Mensa member. Undoubtedly, many tots will be getting these gifts from Santa this year.

Some products claim they teach babies to read in several languages, play the violin and do advanced math or computer programming before they're even out of diapers. Others make more vague (and, thus, slightly more reasonable) claims such as “creates engaging learning opportunities” or “specially designed for your baby’s social, emotional, cognitive and physical development.

”The market for infant “developmental” videos and DVDs alone was more than $100 million in the United States in 2004. Nobody knows just how many books, CDs, television shows, toys or activity classes are sold based on the premise that smart kids are made by exposing babies to the proper brain and body stimulation from the minute they open their eyes.

The premise behind this “smarter baby” craze isn’t a bad one, says Claire Lerner, director of parenting resources for Zero to Three, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing the healthy development of babies and young children.

“The attention to brain development lately has really elevated people’s awareness and understanding of how important the early years are socially, emotionally and intellectually,” says Lerner. “That’s a good thing. But, unfortunately, there’s also been a downside. Now it’s causing many parents a tremendous amount of anxiety and pressure.

” Bad parents?

Savvy marketers, says Lerner, have convinced parents that if they don’t use certain products and programs, they’re being negligent. It’s not only not true, but some of the products could actually be counterproductive, experts say.

“As far as infant videos, DVDs and computer programs, for example, a lot of developmental or educational claims are made implicitly or explicitly in terms of testimonials but most of the claims are outlandish and completely false,” says Dimitri A. Christakis, director of the Child Health Institute at the University of Washington in Seattle.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no screen time, in fact, in the first two years of life.

Studies have found that even programming such as "Sesame Street" that may be beneficial to older children could be ill advised for babies, says Christakis. “Heavy television and computer usage for children under 2 has been associated with attention problems, as well as cognitive and linguistic delays — no matter what the packaging claims,” he says.

There’s no reason to think toys, classes or exercise programs are harmful, but Lerner warns there’s little evidence either that they’re extremely helpful or worth an enormous amount of time, stress or money. In response, a spokesperson for Baby Einstein, which makes toys and videos, pointed to a statement on the company's Web site that says: "Baby Einstein products are not designed to make babies smarter. Rather, Baby Einstein products are specifically designed to engage babies and provide parents with tools to help expose their little ones to the world around them in playful and enriching ways, stimulating a baby's natural curiosity."

And in a written statement sent to, the company disputed the notion that TV is harmful for young children: "The Baby Einstein Company believes that when used appropriately, television can be a useful learning tool that parents and little ones can enjoy together."

But Lerner contends that what's simplest and cheapest is often best for a baby’s development. “Babies don’t need expensive toys or intricate programs," she says. "They certainly don’t need videos or computers. What they really need is interaction in a loving relationship with people they’re close to.” Exposing a baby to a lot of different stimulus in the first year of life is, indeed, healthy, says Janet Doman, co-author of "How Smart is Your Baby? Develop and Nurture Your Newborn’s Full Potential."

Doman explains that far too many generations of past treated the first year of life like a benign illness. “A ‘good infant’ traditionally was one who slept a lot, kept quite and wasn’t disruptive or inconvenient,” she says.

Now we know more about the brain. We know it’s changing and growing more rapidly during the first year than at any other time. We want babies to move, make noise and interact with their environments.

There’s no guarantee you’ll have an Einstein on your hands, but here are some simple and cheap strategies to help give your baby the best start:Let your baby move and explore. The car carrier, high chair, bouncy seat, swing and stroller should not be in heavy and constant rotation. It’s best for development if babies are able to move freely and eventually explore. When possible, sit with your baby on the floor in a safe area rather than put her in a device. “What we’ve found is that what’s best for the baby developmentally, unfortunately, has little to do with parent convenience,” says Doman, who is also director of The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential in Philadelphia, a nonprofit organization that works with brain-injured and well children.

Talk right from the start. You’ll drive non-parents crazy talking to your 3-month-old in the supermarket but, hey, at least you’re not talking politics. “If you’re taking a walk, talk about houses and what color they are, talk about the different animals or point out rocks and leaves,” says Lerner. Conversation lets babies know early on that you want to communicate with them, plus it builds a future vocabulary and helps children learn the way the world works.

Minimize screen time. “Computers are not as passive as television but infant computer games still have no proven developmental benefits,” says Christakis. “They’re just another electronic toy.” Research published in the journal American Behavioral Scientist found that watching a screen is far less developmentally beneficial than watching real life. So let your babe see and feel a real apple or tree whenever possible.

Victoria Clayton is a freelance writer based in California and co-author of "Fearless Pregnancy: Wisdom and Reassurance from a Doctor, a Midwife and a Mom," published by Fair Winds Press.© 2006 MSNBC Interactive© 2006 MSNBC Interactive

Saturday, November 04, 2006

later attention problems for young TV watchers

This is a great article that every parents should read. Extracts:

May 24, 2004 LA Times
Losing focusYoung TV watchers may be at risk for later attention problems.

By Melissa Healy, Times Staff Writer

...But it was not until the publication last month of a study that followed about 2,600 kids from birth to age 7 that researchers were able to draw a firmer line between TV and rampant complaints - from teachers, parents and physicians - of attention problems among American kids.

The study showed that every average hour per day of television programming viewed by a child between the ages of 1 and 3 increased by 10% the probability that the child's parent would report attention problems at age 7. "Limiting young children's exposure to television as a medium during formative years of brain development may reduce children's subsequent risk of developing [attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder]," concluded the study's author, Dimitri A. Christakis of the University of Washington.

Experts on learning disabilities - even those who are deeply suspicious of TV - warned that many other factors, chief among them genetic inheritance, are at work in the twin syndromes known as attention deficit disorder (ADD), and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Somewhere between 4% and 12% of American kids are believed to suffer from ADD or ADHD, and their behavior typically is marked by difficulty sustaining concentration, trouble organizing themselves and staying on task, and problems with impulse control.

In the last decade, the pace of ADD and ADHD diagnoses has risen dramatically. In the same period, fast-paced programming for children - from "The Wiggles" and "Rugrats" to modern-day "Sesame Street" - has begun to penetrate even households with babies. Several media organizations, including the Walt Disney Co. and Sesame Workshop, have launched major efforts to build and capture the baby-to-toddler audience for video and TV programming.

That concurrent blossoming of early TV exposure and a rise in attention problems has led many experts on early child development to surmise that heavy viewing - especially at an early age - may negatively affect the wiring of some kids' brains, leading to attention problems later. The study published last month didn't distinguish between TV shows aimed at young children and more general programming, but it did find that the incidence of attention problems rises as the level of television exposure increases and in cases where the onset of TV viewing is very early.

"Look, there's smoke here. We need to pay attention to what's happening out there in terms of kids' viewing," says Seattle pediatrician Donald Shifrin, who heads the pediatric academy's public information committee and helped draft its "no screen time for babies" recommendation.

Earlier this month, a trio of Washington lawmakers underscored their rising concern about the effects of television on children - and about the dearth of independent research to guide parents and physicians - by introducing legislation that would set aside $100 million a year for new studies.

"Children today are exposed to more media than ever before," says Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who along with Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), drafted the bill. "Parents need to know what effects such exposure has on their children, particularly very young children," she adds.

This week, the Kaiser Family Foundation will be briefing Congress on what is known - and what is not - about children and time spent in front of computer, television and video screens.

The next several years could bring new findings, as the federal government lays plans to launch the most comprehensive survey of American children ever undertaken, following a vast cross section of kids and gauging their lifestyles and their health status from birth to adulthood. Around the country, researchers are meeting to devise questions that could use that survey to clarify the relationship between a child's "screen time" and indicators such as health, school readiness and social adjustment.

"This is a very exciting time," says Ellen Wartella, one of the nation's leading researchers on children and television and soon to be executive vice chancellor and provost of UC Riverside. "We're asking questions not just about media's effects but about children's development and the role of media in that development. That's a subtle but important difference.

Guilt and ambivalence

Television may bring households with children a dose of entertainment, the odd educational moment and a stretch of blessed peace to get dinner on the table. But with the publication of the new attention study, the cost for these benefits seemed to rise another notch, heaping new worries atop the guilt and ambivalence of parents with plugged-in kids.

First came the research linking televised violence and children's aggression. Then came the warnings that TV's constant barrage of advertising was turning our children into consumer automatons. In the last two years, we've been told that TV is making our children obese." ...
"But for all of our worry, have we turned off the TV?

Apparently not, according to a survey of more than 1,000 American families with young kids released by the Kaiser Family Foundation last October. Children younger than 6 are spending on average two hours a day in front of a screen, mostly watching TV or videos. Two out of three such children live in households where the television is on at least half of the day, whether anyone is watching or not, and 36% live in homes where the TV is on most or all of the time.

The Kaiser survey found that more than one in four American kids younger than 3 (and 43% of those between 4 and 6 years old) have a TV in their bedroom - meaning they are far more likely to watch TV unsupervised.

And the TV habit is starting early for many American babies, Kaiser found. In spite of the pediatric academy's recommendation, 43% of children younger than 2 watch TV every day, and about one in three American babies start watching TV before their first birthday.

"We know now that media is a huge part of the lives of kids at the earliest stages. Beyond that, we know very little," says Vicky Rideout, director of the Kaiser foundation's Program for the Study of Entertainment Media and Health.

But the existing research linking TV to attention problems points to trouble.

At a lab at the University of Massachusetts, psychologist Daniel Anderson has spent years watching 1-, 2- and 3-year-olds and their mothers play and interact from behind a one-way mirror. When a baby is classically engaged in exploration of a toy, his heart rate will fall, his little tongue may poke out and his eyes will be fixed upon the object of his scrutiny. He will hunch, his torso motionless, over the toy as his small fingers poke and prod. It may take several callings of his name to draw his attention from his investigations.

Babies whose play regularly looks like this are more likely to reach their developmental milestones on or ahead of schedule, and later will likely score higher on IQ tests.

But with "Jeopardy" on in the background, the same baby's heart rate may race, his eyes will likely dart around the room, and the attitudes of intent scrutiny are replaced with a restless, shifting motion. Compared with an hour playing in silence next to his mother, a toddler moves from one toy or activity to the next at roughly double the speed when the television is in the room, Anderson has found. And when he does appeal to mom for help, it will take more bleating to get her attention and he'll get a shorter interaction, Anderson says.

"The TV is perpetually distracting" to children, Anderson says. "These are very young children, and so the parts of their brains that have to do with attention are not nearly as effective as older children or adults at filtering out background stimulation.

"When the TV is background noise, their ability to sustain attention doesn't have an adequate chance to develop," Anderson says. That, he adds, may lead to problems of attention or other mental functioning as the child develops.

In Japan in 2001, another researcher looked inside older children's brains and drew a similar conclusion. Ryuta Kawashima of Tohoku University used brain-imaging techniques to compare the brain activity of children playing Nintendo games with that of children doing a mental mathematics exercise for a half-hour. The images showed that playing Nintendo games stimulated primarily the parts of players' brains that are involved in vision and movement. But subjects performing an exercise of mental arithmetic showed brain activity throughout the left and right hemispheres of the frontal lobe. In adults, these are the brain areas most involved in carrying out complex intellectual tasks, in learning and memory, and in judgment and impulse control.

*Gratification in an instant

When researchers chew over the meager findings on TV, kids and attention, they bump up quickly against two great unknowns: Does the age of the viewer matter, and will the content of the programming make a difference?

Like many researchers, Dr. Mark Mahone, a neuropsychologist and specialist in attention disorders, describes a child's first two to three years as a "window" during which the brain, embryonic at birth, is turned on, wired up, shaped and ultimately edited by the experiences of her surroundings and her bonds to people. A baby learns from play with people and objects that a parent may withhold a smile, waiting for something more, and that blocks may not stay stacked under some conditions.

But on television, changes come without any effort by the baby - often in rapidly evolving images that last two to three seconds. Exposed to hours and hours of TV during this critical time, the developing brain may come to expect, and even prefer, the immediate reinforcement of TV images and the novelty of quick changes over the plodding effort involved in hands-on experience, says Mahone, of Johns Hopkins University's Kennedy Krieger Institute.

This might make the brightest child lazy or inattentive, Mahone says. And heavy TV viewing in middle-childhood or even in the teen years, he adds, may also set up habits of mind that favor quick changes and instant gratification.

But a child's genetic inheritance is likely the decisive factor in determining whether "attention problems" rise to a diagnosis of ADD or ADHD, Mahone says. In cases where a child has a family history of attention problems, frequent and early TV viewing may nudge that child toward a diagnosable condition. Without that genetic propensity, a child might endure a heavy diet without negative effects, Mahone says.

"I think what we're talking about is perhaps exacerbating some preexisting predisposition.

"Through all the debate, the marketing of TV-for-babies continues. In 1997, the "Baby Einstein" line of videos, audio CDs and other media products were launched. Designed and marketed as brain boosters for babies and toddlers, the line was quickly snapped up by the Walt Disney Co., and a recent survey found that more than one in four households with a baby had at least one of its products. Baby Einstein's website touts parents' testimonials, including the assertion by a parent of a prematurely born infant that watching the Baby Einstein videos "helped increase JJ's attention span." The child is said to have begun watching when 2 months old.

Meanwhile, Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit organization that launched "Sesame Street" 35 years ago, is beginning to explore video products that it says could "help lay the foundation for language development and literacy in children from infancy through age 3."

Jennifer Kotler, the Workshop's assistant director of research, says these young children are watching "Sesame Street" already, and the organization is wrestling with ways to make it age-appropriate for those pint-sized viewers.

" It's a hard balance," Kotler acknowledges, to juggle the "no screen time" recommendation with the fact of younger viewers. And while Kotler lauds the recent attention study as "a good start for a dialogue," she says its failure to address the content of what young viewers watched limits its usefulness.

Kotler and many other researchers, including the University of Massachusetts' Anderson, believe that a limited amount of TV made for children - which keeps narratives simple and moves at a pace a small child can follow - can help build attention skills, empathy and school readiness. But others contend that the medium of television itself - a succession of bright, changing images, taken in passively - leads to problems for kids. It is a central debate that, so far, remains unresolved. "The medium is not the message," says Kotler. ADD specialist Mahone says the idea that television itself may harm some kids' brains "is theoretically sound." But he acknowledges, "there's not much data to back it up.

" Jane Healy, author of "Endangered Minds" (Touchstone Books, 1990) has been deeply critical of those producing children's programming, contending they have hooked a generation of kids on a technological crutch that makes them lazy, inattentive and unimaginative. Healy has assailed "Sesame Street" as contributing to a visual culture of jolting, jerky and eye-popping kids' television that contributes to attention problems.

"Its substitution of surface glitz for substance has started a generation of children in the seductive school of organized silliness, where their first lesson is that learning is something adults can be expected to make happen as quickly and pleasantly as possible," wrote Healy (no relation to this writer) in her widely read book.

Kotler counters that rigorous and ongoing research ensures that 3- to 5-year-old viewers understand and absorb the content of "Sesame Street" - and that those children learn lessons in empathy and caring and have higher rates of school readiness at kindergarten.

But it would take money and research devices not yet in hand to gauge the effects of "Sesame Street's" stories and pacing on younger children, who are not yet able to speak well, adds Kotler. Meanwhile, she notes, the pace and format of "Sesame Street" have been downshifted and more simply organized in the last two years to reflect research on children's attention spans.

In its promotions of Baby Einstein products, Disney notes that the videos, unlike programmed television, can be stopped and discussed by adults watching along with their intended viewers, and that the videos' "gentle motion," and "deliberate pacing" are suited to very young children. Neither the pediatric academy's recommendation nor the recent study take account of those distinctions, the promotions state.

*A call for limits

Even as researchers scramble to fill in the blanks on kids and TV, the Shifrin says parents should heed what he calls the "early storm clouds" suggesting a link between TV and attention problems. Just as when parents assess the risks of letting their child ride a bike without a helmet or serve them a tuna sandwich (the subject of recent warnings about mercury), they should probably err on the side of conservatism and adopt viewing limits, Shifrin says.

For children with a genetic predisposition - a family member with recognized attention problems - these findings offer an even stronger warning for parents, Shifrin adds. "What's the tipping point for youngsters? What tips them into that behavior? We don't know," he acknowledges. But when attention problems seem to run in the family and the TV is turned on early and often, "you've now taken your genetic inheritance and you've pushed it a bit.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

making perfect little consumer...

I remember one of my friend telling me how happy she was to have cut down TV viewing because her children were not so demanding any more...
Before, when watching TV everyday for eventually few hours, they had so many needs and never seem to be satisfied, after, with very little TV viewing, their minds were to busy playing to have time to think about consuming :-)
Here is an interesting abstract:

Effects of Reducing Television Viewing on Children's Requests for Toys: A Randomized Controlled Trial
an abstract from the Journal of Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics 22:179-184, 2001.
THOMAS N. ROBINSON, M.D., M.P.H. Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, and Center for Research in Disease Prevention, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine
MELISSA NICHOLS SAPHIR, Ph.D. Center for Research in Disease Prevention, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine
HELENA C. KRAEMER, Ph.D. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine
ANN VARADY, M.S. K. FARISH HAYDEL Center for Research in Disease Prevention, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California
Abstract. Previous attempts to reduce the effects of television advertising on children's purchase requests have had little success. Therefore, we tested the effects of a classroom intervention to reduce television, videotape, and video game use on children's toy purchase requests, in a school-based randomized controlled trial. Third- and fourth-grade children (mean age, 8.9 years) in two sociodemographically and scholastically matched public elementary schools were eligible to participate. Children in one randomly selected elementary school received an 18-lesson, 6-month classroom curriculum to reduce television, videotape, and video game use. In both schools, in September (before intervention) and April (after intervention) of a single school year, children and parents reported children's prior week's purchase requests for toys seen on television. After intervention, children in the intervention school were significantly less likely to report toy purchase requests than children in the control school, with adjusting for baseline purchase requests, gender, and age (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.69). Among intervention school children, reductions in self-reported purchase requests were also associated with reductions in television viewing. There was no significant difference between schools in parent reports of children's requests for toy purchases. These findings suggest that reducing television viewing is a promising approach to reducing the influences of advertising on children's behavior. J Dev Behav Pediatr 22:179-184, 2001. Index terms: television, media, advertising, consumerism, children, toys.