Ultra-processed foods ‘strong concerns’ alert as study shows health fears

The public feels kept in the dark regarding ultra‐processed foods (UPFs) and desires further research into their health consequences, a new report reveals. The study, commissioned by the Government-funded UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), discovered people were worried about how UPFs might be impacting pregnancy, child development, mental health, obesity and disease such as cancer.

Research has demonstrated that UPFs are associated with poor health, though there remains debate surrounding the extent of the impact and whether the processing mechanism itself or the reality that numerous UPFs contain elevated levels of fat, sugar and salt bears responsibility. Examples of UPFs include ice cream, processed meats, crisps, mass-produced bread, some breakfast cereals, biscuits, many ready meals and fizzy drinks.

They also tend to incorporate additives and ingredients absent from scratch cooking, such as preservatives, emulsifiers and artificial colours and flavours.

In the new study, some 132 members of the public were questioned extensively about their views on UPFs and where research ought to direct its focus.

In the UK, 56% of calories on average come from UPFs, rising to 68% in teenagers. These figures are higher than in comparable European countries such as France (14%) and Italy (13%).

The report stated: “Many participants supported immediate action on UPFs in relation to their most serious concerns, especially child health and non-communicable diseases, rather than waiting for complete evidence, fearing inaction will harm future generations.

“They expressed strong concern that the food system creates an illusion of choice while leaving decisions to market forces, deeply distrusting industry messaging while placing greatest trust in publicly funded researchers.

“Participants called for power to shift from food companies to government and the public, informed by scientific evidence.”

Some participants labelled UPF advertising by food companies as “crafty”, “insidious”, and “lulling people into a false sense of security”.

The research revealed that people were seeking answers to questions including “are some UPFs better or worse for you, than others?”, “what are the ‘good’ and what are the ‘bad’ UPFs?”, and “can UPFs be eaten as part of a healthy, balanced diet?”.

Professor Anne Ferguson-Smith, executive chairwoman of the UKRI Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, said: “UPFs intersect health, behaviour, economics, psychology and the environment and our role is to bring together researchers from across these fields to provide impartial evidence that people can trust.

“These findings highlight the importance of a whole‐system approach and UKRI will continue to convene the research community to address one of the most complex food issues facing the UK today.”