The UPF debate: A reminder that it’s not personal

You’ve seen the headlines:

The protein bar you’re eating is going to kill you.

Ultraprocessed foods are the new smoking.

Feed your kids chicken nuggets and they may not see their next birthday.

Grab a fizzy pop and your limbs WILL fall off

(OK, I hope not those exact headlines…)

The guilt. The judgment. The shame. (And I’m a nutritional therapist – take a moment to empathise with my shame levels when I grab a sausage roll while running for a train.)

Beneath the headlines, the information can feel personal. We should all be spending twice as long in the supermarket reading the food labels and cooking from scratch, right?

And when you scroll the social media comments, it’s clear to see how personal it feels for a lot of people. They are defensive. Angry. Hurt, even.

A perfect example of how emotionally charged this issue is came with Joe Wicks’ recent stunt: the 96-ingredient ‘KILLER’ protein bar. Joe – with the help of Chris van Tulleken of Ultra-Processed People fame – created this to highlight glaring issues with UK food labelling and how many supposedly healthy products are actually ultraprocessed.

(If you have a spare 47 minutes, the accompanying TV show Licensed to Kill is certainly worth a watch.)

Some people loved it. Others absolutely hated it and felt it was shaming. Even nutritionists called it out for being fearmongering and alarmist.

(But one thing we can all agree on – the deliberately provocative stunt succeeded in getting people talking.)

For many families, convenience foods are how they cope and survive. When someone with visibility and financial security points at your coping strategy and labels it ‘KILLER’, it’s going to hit a nerve. You’re going to feel like you’re being judged for doing your best.

But here’s the thing that’s really important to remember: the UPF debate isn’t about us as individuals. It’s about our food system.

There’s a reason that 60% of the UK diet comes from UPFs: they’re convenient, affordable and widely available. In a country where many households are juggling long hours, childcare, rising living costs and limited time, of course people reach for whatever makes life manageable.

And we know that UPFs are aggressively marketed at us, in their bright colourful packaging, jumping out from the aisle ends as we valiantly try to reach the fruit and veg.

And we know they’ve been designed to sneakily modify and stimulate our appetite… to make us want to eat more of them.

So, we know this isn’t a self-discipline problem.

But, to make a divisive topic even more messy, the experts themselves aren’t terribly aligned when it comes to what the UPF data and evidence actually shows.

A new Lancet series published just days ago (Nov 2025) pulled together decades of research showing links between high UPF intake and increased risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, cancer and depression. The researchers called for better labelling, reformulation and policy change.

But some scientists argue that because most of the evidence is observational, we must be careful not to assume causality. They caution against oversimplifying UPFs as inherently harmful without further high-quality research.

So if the scientific community is debating it, no wonder the rest of us feel confused.

So where does that leave us?

Food is not just food. It’s culture and comfort and identity. What we feed ourselves and our families is deeply emotional. When someone implies that what we are doing is harmful or irresponsible, it lands like a judgement on who we are.

And when society tells you to eat better, but the cheapest and most accessible options are UPFs, it can feel like a moral failure. But it isn’t.

It’s a big, structural, societal problem.

This conversation is not about blaming people who are just trying to get dinner on the table. It’s about asking why real food has become comparatively expensive, time-consuming and difficult to access.

Thankfully, there are lots of organisations here in the UK working to make it easier for everyone to make healthier choices.

Groups like the British Association For Nutrition And Lifestyle Medicine (BANT), the Soil Association, the Food Foundation, Action on Sugar and the Obesity Health Alliance, are pushing for clearer food labelling, better food marketing practices, and policies that support access to minimally processed foods.

Local councils are also becoming more active in shaping healthier food environments. Many are reviewing planning rules around fast food outlets near schools and supporting community projects that increase access to fresh, affordable food.

Here in Bristol in the UK, the council uses the Bristol Eating Better Award to support and reward businesses and school caterers that offer healthier food options. There is also the Bristol Good Food 2030 framework, bringing people together to drive change across Bristol’s food system.

You can support change by:

• Following and supporting organisations mentioned above, or finding and joining your local community initiatives

  
  

• Signing petitions or supporting campaigns

  
  

• Sharing evidence-based information with friends and family

  
  

How has the UPF conversation made you feel? Judged, confused, defensive, motivated, indifferent? I would genuinely love to know.

The information and advice I provided here is of a general nature and should never replace individual health or medical advice provided by your doctor or other healthcare professional involved in your care.