Rethinking UPFs Beyond The Labels

Experts suggest what people believe about food matters, and that demonising all ultra-processed foods (UPFs) might not work

- 

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) have become public enemy number one in nutrition debates. From dementia to obesity and an epidemic of 'food addiction', these factory-made products, including crisps, ready meals, fizzy drinks and packaged snacks, are blamed for a wide range of modern health problems.

Some experts argue that they're "specifically formulated and aggressively marketed to maximise consumption and corporate profits", hijacking our brain's reward systems to make us eat beyond our needs.

Policymakers have proposed bold interventions: warning labels, marketing restrictions, taxes, even outright bans near schools. But how much of this urgency is based on solid evidence?

Experts from University of Leeds stepped back and asked: what makes people like a food? And what drives them to overeat—not just enjoy it, but keep eating after hunger has passed? The team studied more than 3,000 UK adults and their responses to over 400 everyday foods. What they found challenges the simplistic UPF narrative and offers a more nuanced way forward.

Two ideas often get blurred in nutrition discourse: liking a food and hedonic overeating (eating for pleasure rather than hunger).

Liking is about taste. Hedonic overeating is about continuing to eat because the food feels good. They're related, but not identical. Many people like porridge but rarely binge on it. Chocolate, biscuits and ice cream, on the other hand, top both lists.