The public feels kept in the dark regarding ultra‐processed foods (UPFs) and desires further research into their health consequences, a new report reveals. The study, commissioned by the Government-funded UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), discovered people were worried about how UPFs might be impacting pregnancy, child development, mental health, obesity and disease such as cancer.

A recent report has highlighted public concerns about ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and the need for more research into their health effects. This study, backed by the Government-funded UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), found that many people are anxious about how UPFs might influence various health aspects, including pregnancy, child development, mental health, obesity, and diseases like cancer.

While research has linked UPFs to negative health outcomes, there is ongoing debate about the extent of their impact. The core question is whether the processing methods themselves are harmful or if the problem lies in the high levels of fat, sugar, and salt found in many UPFs. These foods include items like ice cream, processed meats, crisps, mass-produced bread, certain breakfast cereals, biscuits, many ready meals, and fizzy drinks.

Ultra-processed foods often contain additives and ingredients not found in home-cooked meals, such as preservatives, emulsifiers, and artificial colors and flavors.

The study surveyed 132 individuals to gather their perspectives on UPFs and to identify areas where future research should focus.

Read more: New weight loss jabs ‘too good to be true’ warning from pharmacies

“They expressed strong concern that the food system creates an illusion of choice while leaving decisions to market forces, deeply distrusting industry messaging while placing greatest trust in publicly funded researchers.

“Participants called for power to shift from food companies to government and the public, informed by scientific evidence.”

Some participants labelled UPF advertising by food companies as “crafty”, “insidious”, and “lulling people into a false sense of security”.

The research revealed that people were seeking answers to questions including “are some UPFs better or worse for you, than others?”, “what are the ‘good’ and what are the ‘bad’ UPFs?”, and “can UPFs be eaten as part of a healthy, balanced diet?”.

Professor Anne Ferguson-Smith, executive chairwoman of the UKRI Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, said: “UPFs intersect health, behaviour, economics, psychology and the environment and our role is to bring together researchers from across these fields to provide impartial evidence that people can trust.

“These findings highlight the importance of a whole‐system approach and UKRI will continue to convene the research community to address one of the most complex food issues facing the UK today.”