Adolescents in the UK get nearly two-thirds of their daily calories from ultra-processed foods, or UPFs, with consumption highest among those from deprived backgrounds, researchers say. The findings emerged from an analysis of food diaries kept from 2008 to 2019 by nearly 3,000 participants aged 11 to 18 as part of the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey. While the authors found a slight decrease in UPF consumption, from 68% to 63%, over the course of the study, the findings suggest that adolescents in the UK are still eating more of the foods than other age groups. Dr Yanaina Chavez-Ugalde, the first author of the study at the University of Cambridge, said the results highlighted the need to address the dominance of ultra-processed foods in adolescents’ diets. “Adolescence is a unique stage in life where individuals gain a bit more independence and have more freedom of choice over what they eat. It’s also when health behaviours tend to solidify,” she said. “I think there’s a place for ultra-processed foods in our diets … but not as much as we’re consuming.” Chavez-Ugalde said wholegrain cereals and breads could be an important source of fibre even when ultra-processed, but suggested that a reasonable intake was nearer to 20% than two-thirds. Comprehensive policy measures, including better food education, marketing regulations, and improved access to nutritious food, were needed to encourage adolescents to make healthier choices, she added. UPFs are industrially manufactured foods containing preservatives, sweeteners, artificial flavourings, emulsifiers, and other additives. Typically high in sugars, saturated fats, and sodium, they are associated with a poor quality diet and have been linked to numerous health risks including obesity, type 2 diabetes and cancer. In the latest study, the authors assessed more than 5,000 food items recorded in the food diaries using the formal NOVA criteria to define UPFs, which include most supermarket breads, breakfast cereals, crisps, and ready meals. The study, a collaboration with the University of Bristol, found that while on average 66% of adolescents’ calories came from UPFs, there were differences across society. Those from more deprived backgrounds consumed more UPFs (68.4%) than those from less deprived backgrounds (63.8%). Consumption was higher in people from white v non-white backgrounds (67.3% compared with 59%), and in the north of England compared with the south, at 67.4% v 64.1%. Across the age ranges, 18-year-olds ate a slightly lower proportion of UPFs, at 63.4%, than 11-year-olds at 65.6%. “If you ask a lot of people, they know how to eat healthily,” said Chavez-Ugalde. “UPFs replace or displace minimally processed food because they’re more convenient and cheaper.” Details are published in the European Journal of Nutrition. Carmen Piernas-Sanchez, a nutrition scientist at the University of Oxford, who was not involved in the study said: “The percentage of total daily energy intake from ultra-processed foods is very high, despite the declines observed over recent survey years. Similar figures have been reported in other countries, such as the US.” “Future studies of this type should report the top food sources contributing the most to UPF consumption, which may further help inform policies aiming to improve dietary quality in the UK population,” she added. Concerns over UPFs and their potential effect on health have led some countries to introduce new labelling for the foods. But Gunter Kuhnle, professor of nutrition and food science at the University of Reading, cautioned against such a move. “Putting another threshold on things to avoid is probably not the best idea. I think it’s much better to switch to a more positive side. It would also make a lot of sense, because there’s a lot of disagreement about what to avoid. Should we eat more healthily? Yes. But a recommendation ‘do not eat X’ needs strong evidence.”