The UK is getting sicker younger, while future policy threatens to undermine progress

UK healthy life expectancy (HLE) has fallen.

New findings from The Health Foundation shows that over the last decade, HLE in the UK has dropped by around two years, to just under 61 years old for both men and women.

Healthy life expectancy is defined as “the average number of years a person born during a given period would expect to live in good health based on current mortality rates and the prevalence of self-reported good health”.

Healthy life expectancy across GB

Of 21 high-income countries, the UK is just one of five (including the Netherlands, Canada, Germany and the United States) that saw HLE fall.

England, Scotland and Wales all saw sharp drops in HLE, while the fall in Northern Ireland was more modest. Moreover, while females have a slightly longer HLE on average, across all the devolved nations, the drop was sharper for this sex.

Most local areas in Great Britain saw a decline over the decade. London was the only outlier, with 15 of its 32 boroughs seeing improvements in HLE for both males and females over the decade.

The majority of areas (90%) also saw HLE fall below the state pension age of 66 years. In more than one in ten local areas across GB, HLE is below 55 years.

The areas where good health is experienced for the shortest length of time is among the most deprived areas. The gap between the most and least deprived deciles in England is approximately 20 years.

These findings underscore growing evidence around declining health in the UK, especially among the working-age population and poorest communities.

The Health Foundation estimates that the number of working-age people experiencing major illness will shift from 3 million in 2019 to 3.7 million in 2040 – with 80% of this increase concentrated in the most deprived areas.

The organisation flags not just the substantial human cost that its findings signal, but a growing economic and fiscal impact. With people living shorter healthy lives, workforce participation and therefore productivity will fall. In turn this will up reliance on social security and limit people’s ability to save for later in life.

These findings come as other research shows record numbers of people are out of the workforce due to poor health. In particular, there has been a rise in the number of 16–24-year-olds not in education, employment or training due to work-limiting conditions.

What has caused the fall?

Although the pandemic had an impact on these figures, it does not explain them, with HLE starting to fall in some areas way before Covid hit. Instead, The Health Foundation points to rising self-reporting of ill-health as a key driver.

This includes a sharp upward turn in mental health problems. According to the charity, there has been a significant rise among 16-34-year-olds in particular.

The changing consumer and opportunities for NPD

Emerging research has connected gut health to mental well-being, while other studies have indicated links between vitamin D deficiencies and cognitive health, highlighting further opportunities in this space for the sector to respond and innovate.

As weight loss drugs emerge and alter consumption patterns, it will be especially important for users to ensure they are still eating all the right nutrients.

Bridget Benelam, nutrition communications manager at the British Nutrition Foundation elaborated: “Whilst GLP-1 weight loss medications can help with weight loss for those who can access them, it’s vital that nutrient-rich choices are made to avoid low intakes of key nutrients. Evidence shows that weight loss will benefit health but if nutritional needs are not met then this could lead to longer term health issues."

Speaking with Lumina Intelligence’s insight lead, Linda Haden, on what this means for the food sector, she pointed to an opportunity within functional indulgence which is outlined in the insight firm’s Modern UK Consumer report.

“The clear opportunity for F&B NPD sits in functional, pleasure-led products that quietly support wellbeing without feeling clinical or restrictive,” she said.

“Health has become an expectation rather than a differentiator, but flavour remains non-negotiable, with 80% of consumers refusing to sacrifice taste. This sets the stage for growth in ‘everyday functional’ foods: fibre-forward meals, protein-enriched snacks, and products supporting digestion, energy, mood or sleep, embedded into familiar formats such as ready meals, food-to-go, bakery, drinks and snacks.

“Gut health, vitamin D, omega‑3s and fibre are particularly primed for scale, especially where benefits are communicated in simple, outcome-led language (energy-friendly, gut-supporting) rather than dense nutritional jargon.”

For manufacturers, Haden says the biggest opportunity lies in dual-track innovation.

“Younger consumers are driving demand for mood, cognitive and performance-led NPD (e.g. adaptogens, functional mushrooms, clean caffeine alternatives), while older cohorts are fuelling growth in healthspan-focused ranges that prioritise longevity, fibre, digestion and balanced nutrition,” she added.

“Success will depend on translating these benefits into low-UPF, convenient and sensorially premium products that feel indulgent rather than medicinal. Formats that simplify choice, reduce cognitive load and flex across price tiers, such as tiered meal solutions, ‘nutrient-dense’ smaller portions, or functional upgrades within mainstream SKUs, will be best placed to win in a cost-conscious but experience-driven market.”

Still, businesses will need to be careful in how they communicate messages, as Benelam outlined: “The Health Foundation report highlights increasingly poor mental health as a key concern for the UK population. However, when it comes to communicating about the impact foods and drinks may have on mental wellbeing, health claims on products are relatively restricted. For example, nutrients such as iron and zinc can be said to ‘contribute to normal cognitive function’ but there are no authorised claims about mental health or wellbeing and the science in this area is still emerging.”

Unintended consequences

Following its findings, The Health Foundation says a new approach is required that looks beyond the NHS to focus on the drivers of poor health. It adds that governments have failed to take necessary action so far and urges politicians to move public health up the agenda with policies that place it on an equal footing to delivering economic growth.

New regulations around health have come in this year, with further reforms on the horizon. Recent changes include the crackdown on junk food advertising across TV and online, which government says is expecting to remove 7.2 billion calories from children’s diets each year and deliver £2 billion in health benefits.

High-sugar foods are also set to be scrapped from school menus in plans announced earlier this month (April 2026). These proposals will see food and drinks high in fat, salt and sugar limited, with more fruit, vegetables and wholegrains put on plates instead.

An update to the Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM) is also in the works, with discussions on-going. Additionally, rules around mandatory healthy food sales are in the pipeline.

While I’m all for policies that help push a healthier world forward, that’s a pretty big list of change. It all feels rather ambitious.

In fact, in a recent conversation with a respected industry voice, they told me that at this rate we may not see mandatory reporting happen at all. The reason? Too much regulation all at once.

Specifically, they cited the changes to the NPM as being one area which is set to push food manufacturers over the edge. While they said mandatory reporting is a decent idea, they fear too much change – and perhaps the wrong kind of change – could see good intentions backfire, with industry lobbying against further changes (like mandatory reporting) possible due to sheer overwhelm.

The FDF’s Karen Betts has previously aired concerns over the new NPM, arguing that the proposals will move the goalpost after years of investing and hard work put in to meet HFSS restrictions which are underpinned by the current NPM model.

As the sector is squeezed tighter and tighter, it could be that the regulations are just too difficult to adhere to. This may see non-HFSS and other healthier alternatives axed by businesses in favour of the traditional aisle – consequences be damned.

If that becomes a mass trend among the sector, it means those operating in the non-HFSS space become a niche once more. Advertising and other restrictions on such food could therefore not be quite as impactful as they could have been if health regulation had been handled differently.

There are also concerns that changes to the NPM could demonise certain products which are in fact healthy.

“The UK has the strictest sugar target in the whole world at 5% daily calories from free sugars which is half the amount advised in other countries. The target is unachievable for most Brits – the National Diet and Nutrition Survey shows that just 6% of 4–18-year-olds and 17% of 19–64-year-olds are meeting the recommendation. Changing the NPM to align with the 5% sugar target will put many otherwise nutritious, useful foods into the HFSS category and penalise food manufacturers who have spent millions on reformulation in good faith over the past decade,” explained Dr Carrie Ruxton, dietitian and founder of Nutrition Communications.

“Low sugar and sugar-free options are already available to consumers but are not popular. In the case of children’s yoghurts, products with no added sugars have failed to impact on the market and have ended up delisted by retailers. Brands which relentlessly reduced sugar to meet the earlier Public Health England sugar targets will find themselves branded HFSS after the revised NPM is implemented. An unintended consequence of the changes could be that yoghurts are shunned for being HFSS but confectionery and chocolate sales will continue to rise since parents view these as ‘treats’ and expect them to contain sugar.”

Taking responsibility

But Dr Ruxton adds that the responsibility cannot lie on government and industry’s shoulders alone. While (helpful and accurate) information and policy are needed, she argues that consumers have been resting on their laurels for too long.

“The final responsibility for our health lies in our own hands. While our living environment is impacted by policies, regulation and commercial activities, the ultimate decision to eat something or not to eat it; to move our bodies or sit on the sofa; to smoke and drink or to avoid these products is our own,” she contended.

“We’ve relied too long on the NHS to pick up the pieces and leave it too late to implement changes in our own lives,” she continued.

“Additional policies which would help, in my view, are to remove alcohol sales from supermarkets and go back to off-licences with strict age verification, limit the shelf space given to HFSS foods in small supermarkets and convenience stores – many of which predominantly sell confectionery, cakes, salty snacks and sugar-sweetened soft drinks, and keep children and teenagers in school at lunchtime so they can benefit from nutritious school meals.”