The government’s scientific health advisers have concluded there is “insufficient evidence” to launch a new review into the risks posed by ultra-processed foods, The Grocer can reveal.
The influential Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) discussed the merits of carrying out a new full risk assessment on the impact of UPFs at a special “horizon scanning” meeting last month.
However, while the committee recognised the improved quality and volume of research on the dangers of UPFs since it published a position statement two years ago and a further report last year, the committee decided it should not launch a new probe.
Instead, the scientists recommended that while a watching brief is kept on the risk of UPFs, the government should continue to focus on encouraging consumers to reduce their consumption of food high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS).
SACN’s decision mirrors that of its July 2023 position statement. Then, the committee found that despite acknowledging “concerning” reports linking UPFs with serious health risks It was unclear to what extent outcomes were explained by established relationships with HFSS foods.
It also found serious difficulties in being able to define which foods could be classified as UPF.
A subsequent “rapid review” in April last year found that the limitations in the evidence remained. The government has subsequently ramped up its focus on HFSS restrictions, with the extension of the in-store promotions measures last October and January’s introduction of the junk food ad ban.
However, controversy over UPFs has continued both in the UK and globally.
Last week a report in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found thousands of people could avoid dying of heart disease by reducing UPFs.
The study suggested between 23% and 37% of heart disease cases, and between 23% and 38% of heart disease deaths, could be attributable to UPF consumption.
SACN’s decision not to recommend that the government conducts a new review has been communicated to the food industry and expert groups.
“Both recent SACN and FSA meetings have reflected on the consistent associations reported between UPF intake and adverse health outcomes but continue to find limitations in the evidence base,” said British Nutrition Foundation science director Sara Stanner.
“The SACN Secretariat recently presented a review paper on new evidence relating to ultra-processed foods published since 2024 at the June Horizon Scanning meeting and recognised the improved quality of the evidence, both in terms of the number of randomised controlled trials and the sub-analysis of ultra-processed food categories in observational studies.
“However, the Horizon Scanning meeting discussion suggested that SACN’s existing recommendations (ie that, on balance, most people are likely to benefit from reducing their consumption of processed foods high in energy, saturated fat, salt and free sugars, and low in fibre) remain appropriate.
“It was also concluded that there is currently insufficient new evidence to justify a further full risk assessment or review at this stage.”
Stanner added: “However, it remains important to continue closely monitoring developments in the evidence base.
”The evidence on ultra-processed foods and health continues to evolve, and we’re seeing a growing body of high-quality research that may shed light on why some associations may exist, including factors such as energy density, eating rate and food texture.
“As the field continues to develop, it remains important to recognise and support reformulation initiatives that improve the nutritional quality of foods available to consumers, while ensuring that emerging evidence on food processing and health is kept under review.”
No comments yet