The recent revelation that a PR campaign may have fuelled the ferocious backlash to the 2019 Eat-Lancet sustainable diets report came as no big shock. At Hubbub, the environmental charity where I work, we’ve faced similar resistance to our work on sustainable diets.
This opposition ranges from homophobic slurs aimed at male consumers of plant-based milk to fearmongering about seed oils. It reveals not only growing health concerns but a disturbing undercurrent of prejudice against more sustainable food choices and those who embrace them – often laced with gendered anxieties.
The UPF debate
Similarly, the debate around ultra-processed foods (UPFs) has thrust plant-based options into the spotlight. Suddenly, questions are swirling about the dangers of meat and dairy alternatives, and influencers are calling emulsifiers in plant-based milks the latest health hazard.
Yet, it’s striking that we don’t compare like for like, and processed meat products rarely face the same level of scrutiny. I picked up a packet of one of Britain’s best-loved pork sausages and found a lengthy ingredients list stuffed with E numbers, colourings and preservatives – but I haven’t read much about the dangers of a few bangers on the BBQ recently.
It begs the question: is some of the UPF panic a thinly-veiled backlash against more sustainable ways of eating?
The Food Standards Agency says three in four consumers are worried about ultra-processed food. But for most of us, it’s tough to avoid. From our morning cereal to our evening snacks, UPFs are often part of the equation. While their links to health conditions like heart disease and diabetes are genuinely concerning, the intense focus on plant-based alternatives exposes a double standard.
One reason may be the vagueness of the term ‘UPF’ and how it’s defined. The Nova classification lumps together most wholegrain bread and marshmallows – a spectrum too broad to be definitive in its own right. What’s more, a longer ingredient list doesn’t always mean a worse health outcome: fortified milk and cereals have been a huge boon to public health.
Nuance in nutrition
We need a more nuanced discussion. Nutrition is vital, but we mustn’t allow a disproportionate negative focus on plant-based alternatives to distract us from tackling the outsized environmental impact of meat and dairy.
Hubbub’s experience demonstrates we need positive messaging and real choices to make sustainable eating palatable. From persuading Manchester football fans to try plant-based meals with ‘tactical substitutions’, to our ‘Find Your Oooh Without The Moo’ campaign encouraging dairy-free switches, we’ve seen what lands. It’s about highlighting the multiple wins of plant-rich diets: health, cost, and climate.
We must resist the false dichotomy. Ultra-processed food is a real concern, and so is misinformation driven by vested interests. But the answer isn’t to vilify innovation, especially when it offers a path to healthier, lower-impact diets.
The best way for the UK to reach the 35% reduction in meat consumption by 2050 recommended by the Climate Change Committee is to champion a better food future: one where delicious, sustainable choices are made easy for everyone. That means keeping perspective.
The conversation about UPF needs nuance, not kneejerk reactions. Let’s push for clearer definitions, better standards, and reform where it’s needed, without derailing progress on climate, health and making good food accessible to everyone.
Alex Robinson, Hubbub CEO
No comments yet