How could growing concerns over ‘Ultra-Processed Food’ impact UK grocers?

Once, we feared fats, then we feared carbs. Now the latest horror is ‘UPFs’, or ultra-processed foods. But what exactly are they? And how will growing concerns over them affect UK grocers?

What are UPFs?

There is not always a clear-cut answer as to whether a food is ultra-processed or not, but a group of experts usefully devised a ‘NOVA’ food classification system, which categories food into the following groups:

1. Unprocessed or minimally processed foods – e.g. meat, fruit, flour, pasta.
2. Processed culinary ingredients – e.g. oil, butter, sugar, salt.
3. Processed foods – mixture of group 1 & 2 e.g. tinned beans, fresh bread, salted nuts.
4. Ultra-processed foods – this group has a less clear-cut definition, but one that BMJ has synthesised as “characterised as industrial formulations primarily composed of chemically modified substances extracted from foods, along with additives to enhance taste, texture, appearance, and durability, with minimal to no inclusion of whole foods.”

When it comes to UPF, the easiest way to think about it is as ready-to-eat products with a host of ingredients you couldn’t find in your kitchen at home. Such as frozen pizzas, or even protein bars.

Both the NOVA classification authors and Dr Chris Van Tulleken, leading doctor, TV presenter, and author of number one bestseller book ‘Ultra Processed People’, argue that “processes and ingredients used to manufacture UPF are designed to create highly profitable, convenient, hyperpalatable products liable to displace all other NOVA food groups.” It’s thought that without colouring and flavouring, most of the UPF we find stacked high on our supermarket shelves would likely be inedible.

I’m sure it will be no surprise to the busy modern-day citizen that the rise of grab-and-go convenience means a significantly higher proportion of our diet is now made up of UPF globally. The UK & US are leading with UPFs exceeding 50% of daily calorie intake.

But why are UPFs bad?

An extensive meta-analysis conducted by the BMJ concluded that “Greater exposure to ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes.” Their findings were so compelling that they urged governments to introduce public health measures to target and reduce dietary exposure to UPF to improve human health.

Although at the moment there are mixed reviews on how seriously UPF should be taken, what can’t be denied is their addictive nature. For anyone who’s ever had a Malteser, a chocolate finger or a pringle – one is never enough. Similarly for ready meals, they never leave you feeling fully satisfied.

UPFs are typically designed to be easily eaten, with a high calorie density and additives that tend to confuse our “I am full” trigger – meaning we’re likely to buy and eat more. Their main ingredients – oil, sugar, salt, flour and starches – make UPFs high in fat and low in vitamins & minerals, while also being devoid of the protective plant compounds found in many whole foods.

Funnily enough, this applies to many foods once considered healthy. Vegan meat alternatives, once a trendy basket item, are now a no-no for many people. These highly engineered products mimic the texture, flavour, and appearance of meat. For example, reducing sugars and colorants create a colour shift from red to brown during cooking. Additives like methylcellulose and carrageenan enhance the meat-like bite and slice-ability, while flavour enhancers, emulsifiers, and stabilisers adjust taste and texture. Due to their varied effects on the body, these chemicals should be consumed sparingly yet are frequently found in a range of stereotypical ‘health foods’ like low calorie cereal bars and protein bars. Even carrot puffs are promoted to parents as a healthy option, when they hold little to no actual nutritional value and are teaching children that a snack comes from a packet.

Over time, consumers have become more aware and conscious of their health – you only have to look at the success of companies like Zoe, a health and nutrition company that uses scientific research and personalized data to help people improve their diet and overall health, co-founded by Professor Tim Spector. Who would have thought 10 or 20 years ago that normal, healthy people would be willing to send stool samples in the post or wear blood sugar monitors to work out how they can optimise their health?

The trend towards ‘longevity’ and the growing awareness of the risks of UPF has begun to trigger a range of changes in consumer behaviour:

Increased demand for whole and natural foods.

To avoid the additives, preservatives, and artificial ingredients commonly found in UPFs, consumers will increasingly opt for whole, minimally processed foods such as fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean proteins. However, healthier, less processed foods are often more expensive than UPFs. When faced with financial pressure, consumers tend to prioritise convenient, filling, and calorie-dense foods, often found in UPFs, over more expensive and less calorie-dense healthier options.

This can lead to a diet dominated by processed foods that are cheaper but less nutritious and is a major contributor to the obesity epidemic. Throughout the cost-of-living crisis we have seen supermarkets make pledges, such as Sainsbury’s “Nourish the Nation” programme. By addressing affordability and awareness and extending their pledges to a UPF context, the grocery industry can help ensure that healthier, non-UPF options remain democratised and within reach for all consumers, always.

More food label scrutiny.

For those consumers who are still willing to purchase some processed food, it’s likely they will become more vigilant about reading ingredient labels, looking for products with fewer ingredients and avoiding those with long lists of unfamiliar or artificial additives. However, this may start the debate of what is processed vs. ultra-processed and what is even healthy at all with conflicting government guidelines. Open Food Facts still has a way to go in capturing all products in its UPF-classifying database, which may see some consumers finding it easier just to avoid any processed food altogether.

A home-cooking revival.

A resultant impact of this is a resurgence in home cooking from scratch, where consumers have greater control over the ingredients they use. It is likely that the current time pressures that exist already aren’t going anywhere, so the demand for simple mid-week recipes will see a boom, for convenience without the UPF. Sainsbury’s has recently partnered with Gousto to expand its meal kit offerings as part of a strategic move to tap into the growing demand for convenient, high-quality meal solutions. This is likely to have been influenced by the growing scrutiny on UPFs and the partnership ties healthy eating trends, transparency and ingredient quality and market differentiation together.

Growth in ‘real food’ movements.

As we have seen with other trendy diets over the last 50 years or so, ‘real food’ diets will become what was once the vegan diet. Diets that emphasise whole, unprocessed foods, such as the Mediterranean or paleo diet, may see increased popularity. We are likely to see this reflected in the social media landscape with influencers and health advocates jumping on the bandwagon and promoting “real food”. Instagram accounts already exist that share their non-UPF finds available across the UK supermarkets.

Shifts in brand loyalty.

Consumers have already started and will continue to demand transparency from brands and conglomerates in relation to where their food has come from and what it contains. Brands shown supporting the move away from a UPF diet and making that easier for consumers will benefit from increased loyalty and support. We have seen M&S make moves towards this through attempts to update their ‘Eat Well’ range to get it to mean “not-UPF”, however working with mass-producing suppliers and having unclear guidance from government on what they’re aiming for makes this a real challenge. Whilst brands work out how to adapt, there may be a growing trend toward supporting local, artisanal, and small-scale producers who emphasise traditional methods and natural ingredients over industrial processing.

Demands for innovation in the convenience/snacking category.

For anyone that has tried a non-UPF diet, they will know that this becomes most challenging when on-the-go and looking for a quick & convenient snack. This is because ultra-processed foods are designed for convenience, cost-effectiveness, and long shelf life, making them ubiquitous in the market. Healthier (and typically fresh) alternatives often face challenges like shorter shelf life, higher costs, and limited availability, particularly in convenience-focused retail spaces (e.g. vending machines). Additionally, consumer preferences shaped by taste, marketing, and price further drive the dominance of UPFs in the snack industry. Moves away from UPF will create a demand for healthy, minimally processed convenience foods, and considering the current lack of availability, there will be rapid innovation required in this space too.

Pressure on industry and government.

In response to consumer pressures, food manufacturers may reformulate existing products to reduce or eliminate UPFs, focusing on simpler ingredient lists and healthier profiles. The industry might also introduce new products to cater to the growing demand for less processed, more natural foods. They may even have their hand forced by government should taxes on UPFs be introduced, an extension to that seen introduced for high fat, salts and sugars (HFSS) in 2022. We may also see other government initiatives implemented. For example, advertising regulation, subsidies for fresh produce, and even new labelling, following Germany’s ‘Nutri-Score Label’ that uses a color-coded scale from A (green) to E (red) to indicate the overall nutritional quality of a product – a step-on from the traffic light system we see in the UK.

So, what does this mean for supermarkets?

We recommend retailers explore the following ideas to align themselves with evolving consumer preferences:

1. Expand whole and natural food product offerings – Increase accessibility through pricing and availability of fresh produce. Innovate and curate new product ranges made with simple, whole ingredients.
2. Promote transparency – Ensure product labels are clear and easy to understand, highlighting ingredients, sourcing, and processing methods. Implement in-store signage to educate customers on how to identify minimally processed foods.
3. Champion education and drive awareness – Adapt marketing strategies to offer nutritional guidance through a range of channels such as brochures, in-store dietitians, or online and social media content about the benefits of choosing whole foods over UPF. This could be particularly fruitful when targeted at younger generations where diet choices are being habituated. Supermarkets could collaborate with schools by providing nutrition education, supplying affordable healthy ingredients for school meals, and creating incentive programs that promote non-UPF food choices to encourage healthier eating habits both in and out of school.
4. Support local and artisanal producers – Build relationships with local farmers, artisans, and small-scale producers to offer a broader range and greater accessibility of unique, minimally processed products. This creates greater interest for consumers and supports local food economies. Increasing shelf space and creating dedicated sections or signage for these products will make it easier for customers to find and choose these options.

So, how serious do you think the impacts of ultra-processed foods are on our nation? And what actions would you like to see supermarkets take to reduce our overall consumption of them?