
Table of contents
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58248/HS70
Overview
Diet inequalities are differences between groups in how difficult it is to eat healthily in the long-term. Inequalities in diets contribute to higher prevalence of obesity in those with lower incomes, which widens overall inequalities in health.[1] If current trends continue, analysis by Cancer Research UK projects that seven in 10 (71%) people will be overweight or obese by 2040 (from 64% in 2022-2023).[2][3] The prevalence of obesity is already a leading cause of illness and mortality in the UK. Better diets can improve population-wide health and reduce wider health inequalities.[4][5][6]
Research shows the food environment presents barriers to accessing healthy food. The food environment can be broadly understood as how someone’s surroundings and conditions shape their food choices (PN 686). These food environments are embedded in the wider UK food system, which is a complex and dynamic network of decision-makers (such as retailers), natural processes (such as soil health) and human activities (such as food cultures), spanning all processes and activities involved in food production, processing, packaging, storage, distribution, consumption, and food loss and waste. Food systems can generate economic and nutrition benefits and they interact with the natural environment in multiple ways (PN 702).
Challenges and opportunities
Affordability plays a major role in determining the food purchased. The ability to afford a healthy diet is not only affected by food prices, but also income and the costs of other essentials, such as energy costs. The time available to purchase, prepare and cook food and the skills required to do so are also barriers to eating healthy diets. The most deprived fifth of the UK population would need to spend 50% of their disposable income on food to meet the cost of the Government recommended healthy diet, and there is increasing reliance on cheap foods with low nutritional values.[7]
Contributors to the scan stated links between poor health and consuming high levels of high fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) foods and “ultra-processed foods” (UPFs). UPFs are a heterogenous group of foods grouped on the basis of how they are made, not on their nutritional composition.[8] The subjective definition includes both ‘junk foods’ and nutritionally complete foods, which makes the evidence base for their effects on health challenging to interpret.[9][10][11][12][13]
UPFs are currently poorly defined (PB 59),[14][15] with the most used classification system being ‘Nova’. UPFs are usually ready-to-eat foods made in large-scale food processing facilities and usually include ingredients not found in home kitchens. The group of foods includes many junk foods, defined HFSS foods.[16] This subgroup of UPFs, which includes sugar-sweetened beverages and processed meats, have been consistently shown to be associated with adverse health outcomes. Some other UPFs, including breads, cereals, and plant-based products, do not show this association.[17][18] Uncertainties remain in determining if there are mechanistic causes between UPF consumption and ill health, and if negative health effects are driven by certain products classed UPFs, or all UPFs.[11]
There are well-documented challenges involved in conducting epidemiological research using the subjective UPF classification, which does not consider the nutrition profile of a food, and many researchers have questioned the use of UPF terminology in both research and public discourse.[14][15] Despite these challenges, research into UPFs and links to health, including if and how processing contributes to health beyond nutritional content, is rapidly evolving.
Contributors suggested there was a need to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of using population based and public health measures to improve diets.[19][20] Possible measures suggested included:
- restricting consumption of unhealthy foods by children[21]
- warning labels on HFSS foods[22][23][24]
- restrictions on adding high levels of sugar, salt and fat per serving of foods (this can involve use of nutrient and ingredient profiling models to determine which foods and beverages should be subject to regulation[25][26][27])
- restricting the advertising of unhealthy foods to children including online and in public places.[28][29][30] The government stated on 1 October 2025 that further restrictions (‘the advertising restrictions’) will come into force on the advertising of certain products categorised as less healthy food and drink[31]
- taxes on unhealthy foods,[32][33][34][35] to address the costs created by their consumption
Some contributors to the scan suggested that unhealthy foods produced with environmental impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption and loss of natural habitats and species, should also be taxed to address environmental costs (PN 702).[36][37][38][39] It was also suggested that widespread prescription of weight loss drugs would reduce food intake.[40][41]
Others stated that as well as limiting unhealthy food intake, increasing access to and consumption of healthy foods is needed to address inequalities in diets.[42][43] Fresh fruit and vegetables are a key component of a healthy diet.[44][45] Researchers and organisations, such as the Food Foundation, suggest UK households in low-income areas struggle to afford fresh fruit and vegetables and call for measures to address affordability.[46][47][48] Households in the North-East buy on average 300g less fruits and vegetables per week compared to those in the South-East.
Households in the most deprived areas are often situated in “food deserts”. These are areas with a greater density of fast-food outlets and convenience stores that sell HFSS foods, but may also lack access to outlets selling affordable healthy foods.[49] Options for promoting high quality diets for all suggested by contributors included subsidising healthy foods,[50][51][52][53] food labelling for health and environment,[54][55][56][57][58] and nutrition studies in the national curriculum for primary and secondary schools to inform healthy diet choices.[59][60][61][62][63][64][65]
Micronutrient deficiencies occur when dietary intakes of vitamins and minerals are not adequate for optimal human health. Contributors to the scan also highlighted the opportunity to develop nutritious food with higher bioavailability of micronutrients and vitamins through ‘agronomic’ biofortification. This is increasing the minerals in the edible parts of food crops through use of mineral fertilisers, but effectiveness depends on factors such as crop type, genotype, climate, soils, and soil mineral interactions.[66]
Shifts towards more plant-based diets can be beneficial for health but can also lead to shortfalls in micronutrients typically present in animal products, and the opportunity to fortify plant-based foods with B-vitamins, vitamin D, calcium, iodine, iron, selenium, zinc, and long-chain omega-3 fatty acids was suggested.[67][68][69][70][71][72]
Key uncertainties/unknowns
- The lack of consensus on a framework for classifying what food products are “ultra processed” that could inform legislation.[73][74][75][76][77][78][79][15][80] Some researchers argue for the need to deconstruct the UPF classification for a nuanced understanding of health impacts.[7]
- The socially and politically acceptable means of promoting healthy and environmentally sustainable diets given cost of living pressures.[81][82] At present, affordability may exclude some socio-economic groups.[83][84][85]
- A shift from animal-based food to plant-based food may improve nutritional health and reduce environmental impacts. The nutritional composition of foods needs to be considered in the context of wider diets when changes are made. [86][87][88][89][90][91][92]
Key questions for parliament
- The government-led Food Data Transparency Partnership (FDTP) is seeking to implement mandatory reporting on environmental sustainability and nutrition metrics to inform consumers and incentivise industry.[93] Is there adequate regulation and monitoring to ensure standardised collection procedures are followed? How should the costs and benefits of data collection be balanced? (PN 702).
- The 2022 government food strategy proposed changes to food labelling to increase transparency. Contributors to the scan suggested regulating labelling to be easy for consumers to understand health and environment impacts. However, is there sufficient evidence to show that labels will be effective in influencing consumer choices (PN 702) to deliver desired policy outcomes?[94][95][96][97]
- Is sufficient understanding of a mechanistic link between UPFs and adverse health outcomes beyond the known effects of HFSS junk foods needed before this classification can inform policy? (PB 59).[98][99][100]
Related documents
- House of Lords Food, Diet and Obesity Committee Inquiry
- House of Lords Library, Impact of ultra-processed food on children’s health, In Focus
- House of Commons Library, Obesity statistics
- Diet-related Health Inequalities, POSTnote 686
- Health impacts of ultra-processed foods, POSTbrief 59
- Measuring sustainable environment-food system interactions, POSTnote 702
References
[1] European Commission (2024). Health Inequalities: dietary and physical activity-related determinants. Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Knowledge Gateway
[2] Cancer Research UK (2022). New analysis estimates over 21 million UK adults will be obese by 2040. Cancer News.
[3] Office for Health Improvement and Disparities. (2024). Official Statistics Obesity Profile: short statistical commentary May 2024. GOV UK
[4] WHO Europe. (2024). The inequality epidemic: low-income teens face higher risks of obesity, inactivity and poor diet.
[5] Lonnie, M, et al. (2024). Tackling dietary inequalities in the UK food system: An exploration of stakeholders’ experiences to deliver national recommendations for policy and health care practitioners (a framework for action). OSF preprints
[6] Yau, A, et al. (2019). Time trends in adherence to UK dietary recommendations and associated sociodemographic inequalities, 1986-2012: a repeated cross-sectional analysis. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 73, pg 997–1005
[7] The Food Foundation. (2023). The Broken Plate 2023: The State of the Nation’s Food System
[8] Monteiro, C. (2009). Nutrition and health. The issue is not food, nor nutrients, so much as processing. Public Health Nutrition, Volume 12 , Issue 5 , pg 729 – 731
[9] Mendoza, K, et al. (2024). Ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular disease: analysis of three large US prospective cohorts and a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. The Lancet Regional Health Americas, Volume 37100859
[10] House of Lords Library. (2023). Impact of ultra-processed food on children’s health. In focus
[11] Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition. (2023). SACN statement on processed foods and health. GOV UK
[12] Martinez-Perez, C. et al. (2021). Use of Different Food Classification Systems to Assess the Association between Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Cardiometabolic Health in an Elderly Population with Metabolic Syndrome (PREDIMED-Plus Cohort). Nutrients, 13(7), 2471
[13] Hess, J., et al. (2023). Dietary Guidelines Meet NOVA: Developing a Menu for A Healthy Dietary Pattern Using Ultra-Processed Foods. The Journal of Nutrition, Volume 153, Issue 8, pg 2472-2481
[14] Sadler, C., et al. (2022). “Even We Are Confused”: A Thematic Analysis of Professionals’ Perceptions of Processed Foods and Challenges for Communication. Front. Nutr., Volume 9
[15] Braesco, V., et al. (2022). Ultra-processed foods: how functional is the NOVA system? European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 76, pg 1245–1253
[16] Monteiro, C. et al. (2018). The UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing. Public Health Nutrition, Volume 21, Special Issue 1: Ultra Processed Foods, pg. 5 – 17
[17] Cordova, R., et al. (2023). Consumption of ultra-processed foods and risk of multimorbidity of cancer and cardiometabolic diseases: a multinational cohort study. The Lancet Regional Health Europe, Volume 35, 100771
[18] Dicken, S. et al. (2024). Food consumption by degree of food processing and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a prospective cohort analysis of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). The Lancet Regional Health Europe, 101043
[19] Lane, M., et al. (2024). Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses. BMJ 2024; 384:e077310
[20] National Institute for Health and Care Research. (2024). 24/78 Ultra-processed foods
[21] Chang, K., et al. (2021). Association Between Childhood Consumption of Ultraprocessed Food and Adiposity Trajectories in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children Birth Cohort. JAMA Pediatr.;175(9):e211573
[22] Taillie, L., et al. (2021). Changes in food purchases after the Chilean policies on food labelling, marketing, and sales in schools: a before and after study. The Lancet Planetary Health Volume 5, Issue 8, pg e526-e533
[23] Haridy, R. (2023). Researchers call for health warning labels on ultra-processed foods. New Atlas.
[24] Srour, M., et al. (2023). Effect of a new graphically modified Nutri-Score on the objective understanding of foods’ nutrient profile and ultraprocessing: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health, 6
[25] Popkin, B., et al. (2024). A policy approach to identifying food and beverage products that are ultra-processed and high in added salt, sugar and saturated fat in the United States: a cross-sectional analysis of packaged foods. The Lancet Regional Health Americas, Volume 32100713
[26] Canella, D., et al. (2023). Food additives and PAHO’s nutrient profile model as contributors’ elements to the identification of ultra-processed food products. Scientific Reports volume 13, Article number: 13698
[27] Global Food Research Program. (2023). Ultra-processed foods A global threat to public health
[28] American Psychological Association. (2010). The impact of food advertising on childhood obesity
[29] Global Food Research Program. (2024). Restrictions on marketing food to children
[30] Carpientier, F., et al. (2023) Comprehensive mandatory policies are needed to fully protect all children from unhealthy food marketing. PLoS Med 20(9): e1004291.
[31] DHSC and DCMS. (2024). Open consultation: Introducing further advertising restrictions on TV and online for less healthy food and drink: consultation on internet protocol television (IPTV)
[32] Global Food Research Program. (2024). Taxes on unhealthy foods and beverages
[33] Jensen, J., et al. (2013). The Danish tax on saturated fat – Short run effects on consumption, substitution patterns and consumer prices of fats. Food Policy, Volume 42, pg 18-31
[34] Wright, A., et al. (2017). Policy lessons from health taxes: a systematic review of empirical studies. BMC Public Health volume 17, Article number: 583
[35] Batis, C. (2016). First-Year Evaluation of Mexico’s Tax on Nonessential Energy-Dense Foods: An Observational Study. PLoS Med 13(7): e1002057.
[36] Anastasoiu, K., et al. (2022). A conceptual framework for understanding the environmental impacts of ultra-processed foods and implications for sustainable food systems. Journal of Cleaner Production Volume 368, 133155
[37] Fardet, A, et al. (2020). Ultra-Processed Foods and Food System Sustainability: What Are the Links? Sustainability, 12(15), 6280
[38] Leite, F. et al. (2022). Ultra-processed foods should be central to global food systems dialogue and action on biodiversity. BMJ Global Health; 7:e008269.
[39] Pasterino, S., et al. (2023). The future of meat and dairy consumption in the UK: exploring different policy scenarios to meet net zero targets and improve population health. Global Sustainability, Volume 6, e10.
[40] Agri-food Analytics Lab. (2024). GLP1 Survey: Impact of GLP-1 Drugs on Consumer Eating Habits and Food Industry Trends. Dalhousie University
[41] Bettadapura, S. et al. (2024). Changes in food preferences and ingestive behaviors after glucagon-like peptide-1 analog treatment: techniques and opportunities. Int J Obes
[42] Office for Health Improvement and Disparities. (2023). National Diet and Nutrition Survey. GOV UK
[43] BMA (2018). Improving the nation’s diet: action for a healthier future
[44] NHS (2022). 5 A Day portion sizes
[45] Public Health England. (2018). A Quick Guide to the Government’s Healthy Eating Recommendations
[46] University of Sheffield. (2018). 1.2 million living in UK food deserts, study shows
[47] The Food Foundation. (2022). The Broken Plate 2022 report
[48] The Food Foundation and City University of London. (2023). From purse to plate: implications of the cost of living crisis on health
[49] UKRI (2024). Funding opportunity: Health inequalities in the food system
[50] Pancrazi, R. et al. (2022) How distorted food prices discourage a healthy diet. Science Advances, Vol 8, Issue 13
[51] University of Warwick (2022). Subsidy would improve fruit and veg intake by as much as 15%, say economists.
[52] Huangfu, P., et al. (2024) Impact of price reductions, subsidies, or financial incentives on healthy food purchases and consumption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Planetary Health, Volume 8, Issue 3e197-e212.
[53] Winston Churchill Memorial Trust and the Food Foundation. (2021). Eating better for less
[54] Brown, K., et al. (2020). The future of environmental sustainability labelling on food products. The Lancet Planetary Health, Volume 4, Issue 4e137-e138
[55] Arrazat, L. et al. (2023). Traffic-light front-of-pack environmental labelling across food categories triggers more environmentally friendly food choices: a randomised controlled trial in virtual reality supermarket. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, volume 20, Article number: 7
[56] Giner, C., et al. (2023). Developing food labels for improved health outcomes: Insights into simplified nutrition labelling policies. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 203, OECD Publishing, Paris
[57] Cook, B. et al. (2023) Consumer Interaction with Sustainability Labelling on Food Products: A Narrative Literature Review. Nutrients, 15(17), 3837
[58] Clark, M., et al. (2023). Food ecolabels: trusting what you put on your plate. Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. University of Oxford.
[59] Smith, K., et al. (2022). How Primary School Curriculums in 11 Countries around the World Deliver Food Education and Address Food Literacy: A Policy Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19(4)
[60] British Nutrition Foundation. (2022). Education Nurturing Healthy Habits
[61] Buszard, S., et al. (2023). Education and information: How important are educational interventions as a tool for improving dietary health? The food Foundation
[62] Food a fact of life. (2022). Curriculum, qualifications and frameworks
[63] FAO. School-based food and nutrition education
[64] Rosales, A., et al. (2023). Collaborative Strategies to Improve Nutrition Security and Education: Lessons Learned During a Pandemic. Journal of School Health, Volume 93, Issue 2, pg 148-152
[65] WHO. (2021). Implementing school food and nutrition policies: a review of contextual factors
[66] Teklu, D. et al. (2023). Effectiveness of Agronomic Biofortification Strategy in Fighting against Hidden Hunger. Agronomy, 13(8)
[67] Grasso, A, et al. (2023). The Potential of Food Fortification as an Enabler of More Environmentally Sustainable, Nutritionally Adequate Diets. Nutrients, 15(11)
[68] McClements, I., et al. (2023). Designing healthier plant-based foods: Fortification, digestion, and bioavailability. Food Research International, Volume 169, 112853
[69] Pingali, P., et al. (2023). Making meat and milk from plants: A review of plant-based food for human and planetary health. World Development, Volume 170, 106316
[70] Drewnowski, A. et al. (2021). Proposed Nutrient Standards for Plant-Based Beverages Intended as Milk Alternatives. Front. Nutr., Volume 8
[71] Smith, N., et al. (2024). Alternative protein-based foods must contribute to micronutrient adequacy. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 1–11.
[72] Bogueva, D. et al. (2023). Safety and Nutritional Risks Associated with Plant-Based Meat Alternatives. Sustainability, 15(19), 14336
[73] Government Office for Science. (2024). Research and analysis: Ultra-Processed Food
[74] Sneed, N., et al. (2023). Reliability and validity of assigning ultraprocessed food categories to 24-h dietary recall data. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 117, Issue 1, pg 182-190
[75] Fraanje, W. et al. (2019). What is ultra-processed food? And why do people disagree about its utility as a concept? (Foodsource: building blocks). Food Climate Research Network, University of Oxford.
[76] Access to Nutrition Initiative. (2024). Classification of Processed Foods: Opportunities and Gaps Discussion Paper
[77] Food Drink Europe. (2023). Scientific critique of ‘ultra-processed foods’ classifications
[78] Astrup, A., et al. (2022). Does the concept of “ultra-processed foods” help inform dietary guidelines, beyond conventional classification systems? Debate consensus. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 116, Issue 6, pg 1489-1491
[79] Dicken, S., et al. (2024). Ultra-processed Food and Obesity: What Is the Evidence? Current Nutrition Reports, Volume 13, pg 23–38
[80] Astrup, A., et al. (2022). Does the concept of “ultra-processed foods” help inform dietary guidelines, beyond conventional classification systems? NO. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition Volume 116, Issue 6, pg 1482-1488
[81] Biesbroek, S., et al. (2023). Toward healthy and sustainable diets for the 21st century: Importance of sociocultural and economic considerations. PNAS, 120 (26) e2219272120
[82] BDA. (2020). Sustainable diets
[83] Galazoula, M., et al. (2022). Affordability of healthy and environmentally friendly diets in the UK. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , Volume 81 , Issue OCE5: Summer Conference 2022, 12–15 July 2022, Food and Nutrition: pathways to a sustainable future, E16
[84] Leydon, C., et al. (2023). Aligning Environmental Sustainability, Health Outcomes, and Affordability in Diet Quality: A Systematic Review. Advances in Nutrition, Volume 14, Issue 6, pg 1270-1296
[85] Ambikapathi, R., et al. (2022). Global food systems transitions have enabled affordable diets but had less favourable outcomes for nutrition, environmental health, inclusion and equity. Nature Food volume 3, pg 764–779
[86] Craig, W., et al. (2023). Plant-Based Dairy Alternatives Contribute to a Healthy and Sustainable Diet. Nutrients, 15(15), 3393
[87] Rauber, F., et al. (2023). Implications of food ultra-processing on cardiovascular risk considering plant origin foods: an analysis of the UK Biobank cohort. The Lancet Regional Health Europe, Volume 43, 100948
[88] Messina, M., et al. (2022). Perspective: Soy-based Meat and Dairy Alternatives, Despite Classification as Ultra-processed Foods, Deliver High-quality Nutrition on Par with Unprocessed or Minimally Processed Animal-based Counterparts. Advances in Nutrition, Volume 13, Issue 3, pg 726-738
[89] EIT Food Consumer Observatory (2024). Consumer perceptions unwrapped: ultra-processed foods (UPF).
[90] Rizzolo-Brime, L., et al. (2023). Nutritional Assessment of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: A Comparison of Nutritional Information of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives in Spanish Supermarkets. Nutrients, 15(6), 1325
[91] Ohlau, M., et al. (2022). Plant-Based Diets Are Not Enough? Understanding the Consumption of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives Along Ultra-processed Foods in Different Dietary Patterns in Germany. Frontiers in Nutrition, Volume 9
[92] Espinosa, S., et al. (2024). Mapping the evidence of novel plant-based foods: a systematic review of nutritional, health, and environmental impacts in high-income countries. Nutrition Reviews, nuae031
[93] Food Data Transparency Partnership. GOV UK
[94] Ikonen, I., et al. (2020). Consumer effects of front-of-package nutrition labeling: an interdisciplinary meta-analysis. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 48, 360–383
[95] Osman, M., et al. (2021). Consumer responses to food labelling: A rapid evidence review. Food Standards Agency.
[96] Majer, J., et al. (2022). The effects of visual sustainability labels on consumer perception and behavior: A systematic review of the empirical literature. Sustainable Production and Consumption Volume 33, pg 1-14
[97] Purmedhi, M., et al. The Effectiveness of Warning Labels for Consumers: A Meta-Analytic Investigation into Their Underlying Process and Contingencies. American Marketing Association, Volume 36, Issue 1
[98] Lane, M., et al. (2024). Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses. BMJ; 384:e077310
[99] British Nutrition Foundation. (2024). Position statement on UPF
[100] Zhao, Y., et al. (2024). Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Mortality: Three Cohort Studies in the United States and United Kingdom. American Journal of Preventive Medicine Volume 66, Issue 2, pg 315-323
