Consumers are increasingly aware of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) yet struggle to distinguish them from merely convenient or packaged products – a confusion that spans demographics and poses a collective challenge for food and beverage brands.
At the same time, the government and regulators are ramping up action on UPFs creating a shifting legislative backdrop that brands can’t ignore. On the consumer front, Attest’s research shows concern about ultra-processed food is driving behaviours such as checking ingredient lists, home cooking, buying organic or “clean” foods, and experimenting with label-scanning apps.
For F&B brands, these trends highlight both risks (brand misclassification, reputational damage) and opportunities (reformulation, transparent communication, new product innovation), writes Sam Killip, VP of Customer Success at Attest.
The awareness-understanding divide
UPF consumption in the UK is estimated to range from 51% of energy intake in adults to 68% in children, according to The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN). Despite this high level of intake, consumers are unclear on what constitutes ultra-processed foods.
Our research shows that while 86% of UK shoppers have heard the term “UPF,” just 35% think they know what it means, and even less can define it accurately. Many consumers believe all food that’s high in saturated fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) is UPF, or even food that is simply pre-made and packaged.
When presented with a precise UPF definition – foods featuring industrial formulations and additives uncommonly found in home cooking – shoppers still struggle to identify them correctly.
Frozen chicken nuggets (67%) and diet carbonated soft drinks (47%) were most frequently recognised as UPFs, but only 30% labelled canned baked beans and grated cheese as ultra-processed, though these often use modified starches or preservatives. Packaged wholegrain bread (21%) and low-fat yoghurt (18%) were similarly under-identified, despite typically containing additives that make them UPFs.
And while 41% flagged vegan meat substitutes as UPFs, only 20% did so for plant-based milks, which often contain stabilisers and emulsifiers. Conversely, 16% of consumers think dried pasta – typically made from durum wheat and water – is a UPF.
This disconnect has real commercial implications: misperceptions can lead to unfair stigma for genuinely less-processed products, or misplaced brand loyalty to offerings dressed up as “clean.” Brands whose products straddle the line – natural formulations versus ultra-processed blends – must proactively demystify ingredients and processing methods.
Addressing negative perceptions of UPFs
Earlier this year, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) – the principal public body for funding research and innovation – launched a project inviting public opinions on UPFs, with the aim of incorporating consumer perspectives into future research and policy-making. Our research already shows that consumers have a high level of concern around ultra-processed foods.
Nearly two-thirds of UK consumers report being worried, with 22% “very concerned.” Obesity and weight gain are the top perceived risks (70%), followed by heart disease, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes (each over 50%), and even cancer (45.5%). Emerging research also links UPF intake to cognitive decline and mental health issues, recognised by around a quarter of shoppers.
These beliefs represent a serious image problem for UPFs, but many F&B brands are putting their heads in the sand. Not only are companies failing to take action to make their products healthier, they’re actively trying to evade the legislation aimed at cleaning up the industry.
Before the new 9 pm watershed on HFSS advertising rolls out, major food marketers have been testing the limits. In 2024 alone, industry giants increased their HFSS ad spend by £420 million – a 26% jump – knowing full well that come October 2025, daytime television ads for HFSS products will be banned, and paid-for online promotions will be outlawed altogether.
However, with brand-only advertising remaining permissible, alongside outdoor billboards, influencer sponsorships, podcasts and in-app ads, there are still plenty of opportunities for brands to promote UPFs. The question is, does it make commercial sense in the light of growing public awareness of their health risks?
Adapting to consumer behaviour shifts
Rather than press on with products that are potentially damaging to health, now is the time for F&B brands to start adapting their strategies to changing consumer behaviour. Despite the confusion around ultra-processed foods, shoppers are already taking steps to avoid them – changes that represent both challenges and opportunities for food manufacturers.
The primary trend is an increased focus on home cooking, with 60% of consumers saying they cook from scratch in order to know what’s in their food – rising to 70% among those over 50. Shoppers are also getting savvier when it comes to checking labels; 42.5% say they check them to avoid buying UPFs, rising to three quarters of older shoppers. Some are even using digital tools, like the food-scanner app Yuka (8%), to check for harmful additives, posing opportunities for collaborations and partnerships.
Meanwhile, fears about UPFs are driving the “clean” eating trend, especially among young consumers. Just over 32% of shoppers try to buy whole foods, rising to 44% of 18-30 year-olds. Likewise, 38% of this age group purchase organic/natural products specifically to sidestep UPFs.
Overall, these shifts highlight the need to focus on education and transparency. Companies that build ingredient-storytelling frameworks (such as on-pack QR codes) and use plain-language explanations to demystify UPF criteria stand to gain consumer trust.
Moreover, there’s exciting scope for innovation. Introducing non-UPF product lines that highlight simple ingredient lists can open up new income streams, while brands look to reformulate existing products, reducing E-numbers in order to improve “processing scores.” Ultimately, it’s a rare moment for brands to find out what their consumers want and deliver changes that help shape the future of healthy eating.
Comments are closed.