Few Americans dispute that obesity is rampant in this country and that the ramifications are damaging not only to the health of individuals but also to the overall health of the nation.

Prompted by former President Bill Clinton and the American Heart Association, food manufacturers recently agreed to limit the fat and calorie content of non-nutritional school snacks. Now, 10 of the nation's largest food and beverage makers have agreed to a voluntary code that will limit the advertising of junk food to children.

This, too, is a welcome step, although there are some justifiable warnings being sounded by consumer groups.

Children are particularly susceptible to the allure of advertisers, who are highly skilled in honing their messages for their target audience. Kids see advertising promoting this product or that and pester their parents until Mom or Dad relents.

Under the agreement, at least half the advertising directed at children under 12 would tout foods that are healthier or carry a message that encourages a child to lead a healthier life; the companies would not advertise in elementary school; they would promote nutritious food and healthy lifestyle messages in interactive games and also reduce the number of those friendly, fuzzy characters used to push junk food to kids.

Obviously a step in the right direction, the initiative is nonetheless criticized by consumer advocates because it contains what they see as loopholes. The executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest cited the example of sugar-coated cereal, which could be promoted as healthful because, as defined by the food industry and the Food and Drug Administration, healthy doesn't take account of sugar.

For its part, the Federal Trade Commission says it will monitor the program.

The food and beverage industry has been under pressure to change the way it markets food to children. The Institute of Medicine has said marketing practices aimed at kids don't jibe with healthful diets, and it called on Congress to act if the industry didn't get on with self-policing. The FTC and the Department of Health and Human Services also called for changes in marketing practices.

Faced with the prospect of congressional mandates -- a course seen as more likely by some consumer advocates with the shift in power after the election -- the food industry is no doubt hoping to police itself before it is forced by legislation to make changes.

The Council of Better Business Bureaus, which will monitor the change, sees the advertising limits as a "major step forward." Both Washington lawmakers and parents around the country will be watching to make sure that's true.