What does this research mean for the field?

Social media significantly influences adolescents' dietary choices and nutrition purchases, yet despite their awareness of misinformation, they rarely verify the credentials of the non-expert sources they rely on. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

June 9, 2026

A study exploring the relationship between social media use and nutrition-related practices among secondary school students in London

Key Points

This study aims to explore the relationship between social media use and nutrition-related practices among adolescents.
Mixed-methods study design with n=24 adolescents (aged 16-18+) from three secondary schools in London.
Data collection included questionnaires and four focus groups.
Quantitative data analyzed using SPSS; qualitative data thematically analyzed.
61% of participants used social media as their primary source for nutrition information.
71% encountered nutrition misinformation, but only 13% consistently fact-checked creators' qualifications.
79% altered their diet based on social media content, and 71% purchased nutrition-related products influenced by brands.

Abstract

Social media (SM) has become a primary source of nutrition information for adolescents in the UK (1) . However, widespread nutrition misinformation on these platforms poses a significant public health concern for adolescents, influencing dietary habits, body image, and health outcomes (2,3) . The complex relationship between adolescents and SM nutrition content is underexplored. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between SM use and nutrition-related practices among secondary school students in London. A mixed-methods study design was used with a sample of London adolescents (n=24, aged 16-18+) recruited from three secondary schools/colleges across London. Questionnaires and four focus groups were used for data collection. Quantitative data from the questionnaire was analysed using SPSS, while qualitative data was thematically analysed. Of the 24 participants (54% female), a majority (61%) used SM as their primary source for nutrition information, with TikTok (68%) and fitness influencers (57%) being the most popular platform and account type, respectively. Although 71% had encountered nutrition misinformation, few consistently verified the nutrition qualifications of creators (13%), and most didn’t routinely fact-check (54%). The majority of participants altered their diet (79%) and purchased nutrition-related products (71%) in response to SM content. A total of 71% reported being influenced by brands and influencers in their nutrition choices. Females spent significantly more time on SM (p<.001), were more likely to fact-check (p<.001) and reported more negative feelings related to body image pressures (p=.014). Meanwhile, 90% of males reported positive feelings and utilised intuition as a form of fact-checking. The study found that SM had a pervasive influence on participants’ nutrition-related practices, and they often sought advice from non-expert sources. The participants’ awareness of nutrition misinformation did not consistently lead them to fact-check content or credentials. These findings suggest that the current nutrition education in schools should incorporate digital and emotional literacy into the nutrition curriculum, equipping adolescents with the skills to navigate online nutrition misinformation and body image pressures.

Bookmark

View Full Paper