The great and the good of the British food industry descended on the Guildhall last week for the 25th annual City Food & Drink Lecture.
Given the UK’s stubbornly entrenched cost-of-living crisis and its ever-alarming obesity epidemic – the event is perhaps more important now than it ever has been.
Consummately led by Food Standards Agency chair, Susan Jebb, the lecture examined the key issues that the industry has faced over the last few decades, such as the rise and rise of obesity and the ever-increasing reliance on ultra-processed foods (UPF); and asked very pertinently – how can we ensure that the next 25 years are healthier than the last?
During a subsequent panel discussion including Co-op’s member nominated Director Christine Tacon, Sofina boss Ash Amirahmadi, and former CEO of the FDF Ian Wright, attention was drawn to the correlation between deprivation, lack of education and unhealthy lifestyles.
The consensus was clear – radical change is most likely needed if Britain is serious about getting healthier...but will the food industry take heed?
The UPF question
The debate around UPFs has been rumbling for some time but appears to have reached a fever pitch of late, with data cited by Jebb indicating that as many as 79% of UK consumers are concerned about them.
Yet, according to a study carried out by Cambridge University, UPFs represent around 51% of household grocery purchases, far outstripping most of our European neighbours.
The key question then: If Britons are so damn worried about UPFs, why do they keep consuming them at a rate of knots?
Climate is a significant factor, with our colder neighbours more closely matching our rate of consumption – but perhaps the sheer convenience of UPFs is the determining factor.
For some time, the UK has had the highest rate of obesity throughout Europe, and it would be incredibly naïve not to see a correlation between the two.
But what can the food industry do about it? And should it rest on their shoulders alone?
Wright believes we first need to settle on a concrete definition of what UPFs are: “We can’t ascribe responsibility for obesity to ultra processed food until we have an agreed and workable definition for the term.
“Right now it’s a catch-all for everything from proven science which industry should respect to loony tunes for campaigners which make no sense and on which the industry absolutely does not rely for its future.”
It is also incontestably a matter of education – as a nation we see the highest rates of obesity closely correspond with the highest rates of poverty.
Tragically, the two are inextricably linked, as is a widening life expectancy gap between the richest and the poorest in our society, with obesity-related diseases now costing the NHS an estimated £6.5 billion a year.
But as dietitian and founder of Chickpea Marketing Corrine Toyn points out, UPFs are not the root of all evil: “UPFs have played a significant role in the UK’s obesity epidemic, though they are not the sole cause. These products are typically high in calories, sugar, salt and saturated fat, while being engineered for convenience and overconsumption. Their affordability and ubiquity have reshaped diets, with the biggest hit to lower-income communities.
“However, obesity is also driven by socioeconomic inequality, sedentary lifestyles and advertising. Reducing reliance on UPFs will require reformulation targets, clearer labelling, restrictions on marketing, fiscal incentives for fresh produce, and investment in local, minimally processed food supply chains.”
Kennedy Jr.’s inverted food pyramid
Is the UK food industry in a state of inertia about the issue – and does something drastic need to be done to counter our increasingly unhealthy eating habits?
The ever-eccentric (to put it kindly) US secretary of health Robert F Kennedy Jr. earlier this month unveiled his ‘upside-down’ food pyramid, which reverses much of the conventional dietary wisdom of the last 50 years and acts as an inverted model of the US’ 1992 version, which closely mirrors the NHS’ own ‘Eatwell Guide’ pie chart.
Traditionally, people are advised to prioritise fruit and veg as well as starchy foods and grains, combining them with smaller portions of protein, dairy and fats.
Kennedy Jr.’s model, however, urges the American public to instead prioritise protein, dairy and fats alongside fruit and veg for the bulk of their diets – relegating starchy foods and grains firmly to the base of the pyramid.
In his address unveiling the new model – Kennedy Jr. framed it as a clear rejection of UPFs, which he blamed, along with a sedentary lifestyle, on the US’s own obesity epidemic and announced an end to “the war on saturated fats”.
Should the UK be aiming for its own radical rethink of generations or received knowledge about how we should order our diets – or is the situation far too nuanced for any kind of immediate grand gesture?
Toyn believes that above all else “structural change” is needed, as opposed to simple “voluntary pledges”, and this could be achieved via “tighter regulation, public procurement reform, especially in care settings such as schools and hospitals, and reshaping subsidies to favour nourishing foods over industrial ingredients”.
She continued: “Robert Kennedy’s call to ‘eat real food’ is rhetorically powerful but overly simplistic without systemic support. For UK consumers facing cost-of-living pressures, healthier choices must also be affordable, accessible and convenient, or behavioural appeals alone will have limited impact.”
For Wright, however, the UK food and drink and sector needs to keep “doing its job”, and provide the steady, reliable service it has done for many decades.
“It’s here to provide high quality safe and nutritious food at accessible prices. Public policy - particularly on food safety - must follow the science,” he added.
“Secretary Kennedy has sparked a major debate in the United States. Just as with his views on vaccines, it’s clear that most clinicians regard many of his ideas as deeply controversial and unproven. That’s not a direction the UK public want the industry they love to follow.”
In truth – it’s never going to be a one-size fits all solution that solves the UK’s obesity crisis. And while Robert F Kennedy Jr.’s inverted pyramid makes some interesting and salient points – perhaps the most crucial factor holding British culinary health back is education.
Unsurprisingly, a lack of education around what is and isn’t healthy food is closely linked to higher levels of economic deprivation.
The data is clear: the poorer an area is, the more obese its population is. And while deprived populations naturally struggle with the disposable income needed to spend on higher quality, healthier foods – they are also more time and equipment poor, and may rely on simple, high-processed meals for speed and convenience.
Can the UK turn the tide?
If the Government and the industry is truly serious about tackling what is now and endemic issue – healthy, organic foods need to be subsidised on a mass scale and food education needs to be ramped up significantly across the board.
Easier said than done of course – but if concrete steps towards these measure are taken, improvement will surely be seen.
And that’s without tackling the worsening headache around how high energy bills are restricting poorer households from cooking frequent, healthy meals from scratch daily.
After decades of inertia – the problem needs a truly top-down, multi-faceted action plan if it is ever to be solved.
And as things stand, it isn’t clear if the Government or the food industry have the will or even the capacity to enact real, lasting change.
