Healthier food grows more expensive at twice rate of unhealthy options
Healthier food grew more expensive at twice the rate of less healthy options in the UK over the last two years, a study has found.
Food that is lower in fat, salt and sugar is now more than twice as expensive per calorie than less healthy products, according to the Food Foundation's annual Broken Plate report.
The most deprived fifth of the population would need to spend 45% of their disposable income on food to afford the government-recommended healthy diet, rising to 70% for these households that also have children, researchers found.
The overall figure has fallen from the peak of the cost-of-living crisis in 2021-2022 – when the most deprived fifth needed to spend 50% to achieve a healthy diet – but remains higher than the previous year's figure of 43%.
The study found more than a third (37%) of supermarket promotions on food and non-alcoholic drinks are for unhealthy items, and a quarter (26%) of places to buy food in England are fast-food outlets, rising to nearly one in three in the most deprived fifth of areas.
Meanwhile, more than a third (36%) of food and soft drink advertising spending is on confectionery, snacks, deserts and soft drinks, compared to just 2% for fruit and vegetables.
While children across all income groups are eating significantly more unhealthy food than is recommended for good health, children in the most deprived fifth of the population were found to be nearly twice as likely to be living with obesity as those in the least deprived fifth by their first year of school.
Deprived groups were much more likely to be affected by type 2 diabetes, with those in the most deprived fifth of the population almost three times more likely to experience a lower-limb amputation than the least deprived fifth in 2022.
Similarly, children in their last year of primary school in the most deprived areas were more than twice as likely to have experienced tooth decay in their adult teeth (23%) compared to those in the least deprived areas (10%).
Anna Taylor, executive director of the Food Foundation, said, 'The Broken Plate report sadly shows that our food system is failing to provide large swathes of the population with the basic nutrition needed for them to stay healthy and thrive.
'There is a tragic imbalance in the UK between the food that is marketed, available and affordable, and foods that are healthy and sustainable. Often it is the most vulnerable children in our society who suffer the worst consequences of this.
'Not only can lack of nutrition lead to serious health conditions, it can also lead to children being unable to concentrate in school and have lasting negative impact on mental health, entrenching inequalities from a young age.
'The Government has recently announced that it has started working on a National Food Strategy. We hope that this will be seized as an opportunity to tackle these inequalities through cross departmental working, with acknowledgment that key changes to the food system can help to achieve Labour's missions, from economic growth, to breaking down barriers to opportunity to relieving pressure on the NHS.'
Henry Dimbleby, the former government food tsar and author of the last National Food Strategy, said: 'This report couldn't come at a more critical moment. As the government rolls out its new food strategy, addressing the incentives that drive the sale and aggressive marketing of unhealthy foods must be a top priority.
'The human and economic toll is too great to ignore any longer.'
Professor Susan Jebb, chairwoman of the Food Standards Agency, said: 'I'm very pleased to welcome the publication of the Food Foundation's new Broken Plate report.
'We need to find ways to deliver safe, healthy, sustainable food as the default across the food system. If we can reshape the food environment, I feel confident we can improve people's experience so that everyone – whatever their circumstances – can get the physical and mental nourishment that comes from good food.'
Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs Daniel Zeichner said: 'The Food Foundation's Broken Plate report highlights important issues with the UK's food system, with unhealthy diets driving obesity levels.
'That is why we will introduce a cross-Government food strategy to ensure our food system can continue to feed the nation, realise its potential for economic growth, protect the planet, and nourish individuals.
'We cannot do this alone, which is why we are working with those across the food sector, utilising their expertise, to transform the industry for good.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
The NHS truths the Left don't want you to hear
Until very recently, Health Secretary Wes Streeting tried to market himself as a radical health reformer, who is not afraid to poke sacred cows. While his reform-minded rhetoric always remained at a highly-abstract and general level, Streeting deserved some credit for it, because he did not have to do this. He had the courage to say things which he knew would rub some people up the wrong way, not least the Corbynite wing of his own party. Sadly, that brief period of NHS candour is now officially over. Streeting, the self-styled reformer, is no more. He and his colleagues have fully retreated into their comfort zone. During the recent local election campaign, Labour distributed a leaflet that showed a mock medical bill, and a doctor holding up a credit card reader. The message was clear: vote for us, because this is what the other lot want to do to you. On Twitter/X, Labour are now frequently posting dire warnings about the alleged evils of insurance-based healthcare systems. This is exactly that old-school NHS cultism which Streeting used to disavow until five minutes ago. It may work for him. The NHS may be falling apart, but the cult around is still going strong. In the eyes of its keenest defenders, the NHS can do no wrong. They have quietly dropped the old cliché about the NHS being 'the envy of the word', and replaced it with a slightly more subtle version, which goes something like this: Once upon a time, the NHS used to be the best healthcare system in the world. But then, from 2010 on, it was systematically defunded. It was deliberately run into the ground, so that it can be privatised more easily. A privatised system would mean luxury healthcare for the rich, and Wild West medicine for the poor. None of these claims are true. Let's have a look at each of them in turn. The NHS was never the best healthcare system in the world. The idea that it ever was can be traced back to a ranking compiled by the Commonwealth Fund, an American healthcare think tank, which relies on a very unusual methodology, in which medical outcomes only account for a fifth of the total score. This matters, because on medical outcomes, the NHS has always been one of the worst-performing healthcare systems in the developed world – as even the Commonwealth Fund study shows. There is no turning point after which the NHS's performance suddenly deteriorated. It was just never good in the first place. At the end of the 2010s, age-adjusted real NHS spending per capita was only marginally higher than it had been in the beginning of the decade. Put differently, the NHS budget only just about kept pace with population growth, population ageing, and inflation. This clearly constituted a slowdown in spending increases compared to the previous decade. But it does not constitute a 'defunding'. In any case: that period of relative spending restraint is already over again. The NHS budget was given a massive boost during the pandemic, which has only been partially reversed. Public healthcare spending in the UK stands at just under 9% of GDP: one of the highest levels in the world. Conspiracy theories about secret plans to privatise the NHS have been around for decades. I wrote a report on this three years ago, for which I went through the news archives, and I found warnings about the NHS's imminent demise from every year since 1980. But somehow, it never happens. The NHS remains an unusually state-centred system. Most healthcare systems, including tax-funded ones, use a mix of public, private for-profit and private non-profit providers. There are no plans – secret or otherwise – to privatise the NHS. More's the pity. Because there is nothing wrong with private healthcare systems. There are good examples of private, insurance-based healthcare systems, most notably in the Netherlands and Switzerland, which are nothing like the dreaded system of the US. These systems cover everybody: poor people are exempt from health insurance premiums and co-payments. Under these systems, rich and poor alike get faster access to medical treatment, and better medical outcomes, than they would on the NHS. The only thing these people don't get is a naff feel-good mythology around their health systems. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
News24
8 hours ago
- News24
It's the ‘Donald disease' that's making us sick
Our so-called HIV 'key populations' — men who have sex with men, transgender women, sex workers and people who inject drugs, and, in Africa also young women — have been hard-hit ever since the Trump administration stopped most of its HIV funding in February. Key populations have a much higher chance of getting HIV than general populations, which is why Pepfar, over the past decade, allocated most of its funds to programmes working with such groups. With the 12 specialised key population clinics in South Africa funded by the US government and now shuttered, getting treatment at government clinics has been difficult, if not impossible, for some. 'Hello, sis. How are you? I hope you're fine. I mean, I'm not.' A lot has been going on out there, he told Bhekisisa in the voicemail, one of the many we recently received. 'You know, I'm a gay guy. I have sex with other men, without wearing condoms now, because when I try to fetch them from my local clinic, I'm told I get judged and told I want too many. You know what's happening in our industry.' We will call him Nkosi. Because he has sex with men and because his industry is sex work and because no one in the small community where he lives knows that he is gay or what he does for work. He even has a 'girlfriend' so people will think he's straight. Sex work has always been a dangerous profession. But ever since the Trump administration stopped most of its HIV funding in February, it's become even more risky. The World Health Organisation says gay and bisexual men like Nkosi's chance of contracting HIV through sex is 26 higher than that of the general population. Male sex workers are even more likely to get infected with the virus. That is what makes sex workers, as well as gay and bisexual men, what researchers call a ' key population ' in the HIV world. Other key populations are gay and bisexual men, transgender people, people who inject drugs, and, in Africa, also young women between the ages of 15 and 24. Because so many new HIV infections happen in these groups, the US government's Aids fund, Pepfar, has, for the past decades, invested most of its funds in programmes working with these groups. But the 12 specialised clinics for key populations, supported by the US government's Aids fund, Pepfar, have now been shut down. Gone, too, are their health workers specially trained in how to work without discrimination. Gone is their tailor-made HIV treatment and testing services; their specialised mental health support; and the condoms and lubricants they handed out for protection against HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Gone are the two-monthly anti-HIV jabs and that some of these clinics handed out as part of studies — and the daily anti-HIV pills, which they distributed without any judgement. Although government clinics also stock the daily anti-HIV pill, which, if used correctly, can reduce someone's chance of getting HIV through sex to close to 0, people like Nkosi, research shows, are often treated badly by health workers at state clinics, making them wary to return. Preventive medicines like the daily pill are called pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, because they stop infection by preventing a germ such as HIV from penetrating someone's cells. 'So sometimes I don't have PrEP,' says Nkosi. 'A partner can tell me he is on PrEP, but I don't trust that. Because where is he getting PrEP? Where am I going to get it? The black market? 'I don't know if it is even the real thing. Is it a counterfeit? Lube? That's another thing — you use everything, anything, as long as it's got jelly in it. The last time I did that I had an itchy penis for a week.' Nkosi calls the domino effect of the Trump administration's decision to pull funding 'the Donald disease because it is being caused by this guy, one man.' 'It's like crossing the freeway every day the way we're living now. One day, I know I'm gonna die.' What's with key populations? When Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi called a press conference in May to present his '18 facts' about the crisis, eight of those points were about what government is doing to make sure the patients from those specialised clinics — over 63 300 patients — were taken care of and that their files have been transferred to the nearest government facility. But why is there so much focus on these communities? UNAids says more than half of all new infections in 2022, around the world, came from key populations — and infections don't stay within those groups. 'Even the most self-interested people should be heavily invested in treatment and prevention of these populations,' says Francois Venter, who heads up the health research organisation, Ezintsha, at Wits University. 'There's no clean, magical division between key populations and general populations. It's a Venn diagram of married men sleeping with sex workers, of drug-using populations interacting with your ostensibly innocent kids, gay men with your straight presenting son, all needing HIV prevention and treatment programmes.' Although we have medicines like PrEP to prevent people from getting infected with HIV and antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) for HIV-infected people, which, if taken correctly, reduce their chance of transmitting the virus to others to 0, having the medications available, is just a small part of the solution. What's more difficult is to get medication to people and to convince people to use it, and to use it correctly. Studies, for example, show that getting people to use the anti-HIV pill, also called oral PrEP, each day, has been a struggle — and those who do use it, often don't use it each day, the less often it's used, the less well it works. Moreover, United Nations targets that South Africa needs to reach by the end of 2025, show that we struggle with convincing people who know they're infected with HIV, to take treatment — and stay on it. Researchers estimate that of South Africa's 8-million people with HIV, 1.1-million people who have been diagnosed with HIV, are not on treatment. Some of the 1.1-million choose not to start treatment, but an even larger proportion, who do go on treatment, cycle in and out of it. READ | 'It erases the very existence of people like me': Activists tackle doctors' anti-trans stance Pepfar programmes funded thousands of 'foot soldiers', such as community health workers, adherence counsellors, data collectors and youth workers, who went into communities with mobile clinics to find people who stopped their treatment, or to make ARVs easier to get by making it possible for people to collect their medicine from community halls, shops or private pharmacies close to where they live. That's why having lost at least half of those workers — we're likely to lose the other half at the end of the US financial year in September — is such a tragedy. And why, if we do nothing to replace them, modelling studies show, there's a high chance that we see up to almost 300 000 extra HIV infections over the next four years and a 38% increase in Aids deaths. The difficulty with state clinics and key populations Government clinics are mostly not geared towards key populations, because they serve everyone. And because many health workers' own prejudices so often interfere with the way in which they treat patients such as sex workers, gay and bisexual men, or teens who ask for condoms or PrEP, such groups frequently feel uncomfortable to use state health services. Stigma and discrimination in public clinics — doled out by security guards, cleaners, health workers and patients in waiting rooms — keep people away from HIV treatment and prevention. Researchers who surveyed over 9 000 people in key populations found that less than half, and in some cases not even a quarter, said they were treated well; about one in five said they were blocked from getting services. Motsoaledi says he's trying to fix that by now training 1 012 clinicians and 2 377 non-clinician workers at government facilities in non-discriminatory healthcare. But despite similar trainings having been conducted for years already, discrimination remains rife. Because funding cuts mean already understaffed government health clinics now have even fewer staff, many people with HIV, or those wanting PrEP, have to travel further for treatment, or wait in long queues. As politicians, activists and researchers duke it out from labs and clinics and press conferences, many of those most at risk, like Nkosi, have been left to fend for themselves. Here are some of their stories — we collected the stories via voice notes with the help of health workers who worked for Pepfar programmes that have now been defunded. Female sex worker: 'My child is going to be infected' 'Yoh, life is very hard. Since all this happened, life has been very, very hard.' 'I have tried to go to the public clinic for my medication. But as sex workers, we are not being helped. We are scared to go to the government clinic to treat sexually transmitted infections because we are seen as dirty people who go and sleep around. We even struggle to get condoms. We are now forced to do business without protection because it is only our source of income and it's the way that we put food on the table. My worry now is that I am pregnant and my child is going to be infected because I'm not taking my ARVs, and I have defaulted for two months now.' READ | Elon Musk's estranged trans daughter, Vivian, makes bold modelling debut Transgender woman: 'The future is dark' 'I'm a transgender woman. My pronouns are she.' 'When the clinic closed, I was about to run out of medication so I went to the government clinic in my area. I introduced myself to the receptionist and the lady asked me what kind of treatment I was taking. I told her ARVs and that I'm virally suppressed [when people use their treatment correctly the virus can't replicate, leaving so little virus in their bodies that they can't infect others], so I can't transmit HIV to others. 'The lady told me that they can't help me, and I need to bring the transfer letter. I told her that the clinic is closed so I don't have the transfer letter. I asked to speak to the manager and the manager also refused to help me. The manager! How can she let someone who is HIV-positive go home without medication? 'I had to call one of my friends and she gave me one container. If you're not taking your medication consistently, you're going to get sick, you're gonna die. And the future? The future is dark.' Migrant farm worker: 'Lose my job? Or risk my health?' 'When we were told that the clinic was closed, I was actually in another town trying to get a seasonal job on the farms. But when I went to the nearest clinic, I was told that I needed to get a transfer letter. So, I ended up sharing medication with friends. But then their medication also ran out. 'Then I got a job on the farm. Before the mobile clinics came to the farms and we had our clinical sessions there. The nurse was there, the social worker was there. Now we went to the clinic and spent the whole day there because we had to follow the queues. And because our jobs were not permanent jobs, you know, you just get a job if you apply by the gate. So, if you are not there by the gate on that day, then the boss will automatically think that you are no longer interested in the job, so they employ someone else. 'I went to the government clinic and asked to get at least three months' supply. But the clinic said no because it was my first initiation, so I had to come back. So, I went back to the farm to see if I could still have my job. I found that I was no longer employed because they had to take up someone else. 'What am I going to do? If I go to the clinic, I stand a chance of losing my job. If I stay at my job I am at risk of getting sick.'
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Growing number of MPs changing their mind on assisted dying
Opposition to a bill which would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales is growing among MPs, the BBC has found. The Assisted Dying Bill was supported by 330 MPs last year, passing its first major vote in the House of Commons with a majority of 55 MPs from a wide range of political parties. But at least a dozen MPs who backed it or abstained in November have now said they are likely to vote against it. The bill would allow terminally ill adults with less than six months to live to receive medical assistance to die Supporters remain confident it will eventually become law but it faces further parliamentary tests. How assisted dying laws across the UK could change GPs split over assisted dying plans, BBC research suggests MPs back proposals to legalise assisted dying Assisted dying bill: How did my MP vote? The bill is a private members' bill, sponsored by backbench Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. MPs have been given a free vote on it, meaning they can decide based on their conscience rather than having to follow a party line. They have spent the past few months examining it in detail, with more than 500 amendments tabled. Some of these changes will be voted on by MPs next Friday - and a final Commons vote will take place in the summer, before it heads to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. Markus Campbell-Savours, the Labour MP for Penrith and Solway, is one of those who has said he's now likely to vote against the bill after previously supporting it. He said he still considers himself "a supporter of assisted dying" but believes the current bill crosses "red lines for protecting the vulnerable". "I want to see safeguards that will ensure that assisted dying is not overextended to include those in situations where there are alternative ways to improve the quality of their lives," said Campbell-Savours. "I would also be very concerned if legislation produced a situation where people who considered themselves a burden on their families and friends felt pressured to end their life." Fellow Labour MP Josh Fenton-Glynn also plans to vote no, having previously abstained. "If you'd asked me at any point in my life what I thought of assisted dying, I'd have always said in favour," he told the BBC. He has suggested a number of amendments to the bill, and claims he is "still open to supporting" the plans, but doubts it will change after Leadbeater blocked previous similar attempts. "We see quite a few of the amendments which are specifically aimed at stopping coercion being opposed by the supporters of the bill," he said, adding: "I don't think chances to make the bill safer have been taken." The two MPs have added their names to a growing list of their colleagues who have suggested they will switch sides including: Tory former minister George Freeman, Tory MPs Mike Wood and Andrew Snowden, Lib Dem Brian Matthew, Labour's Jonathan Hinder, Reform UK chief whip Lee Anderson and ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe. Labour MP Debbie Abrahams and Tory MP Charlie Dewhirst, who abstained previously, will vote against. Labour's Karl Turner, who voted in favour at second reading, is now abstaining. Tory MP David Davis has not announced how he plans to cast his next vote, but has publicly backed a number of amendments that would make sweeping changes to the bill. Some MPs have also changed their stance, by supporting the bill. Minister Chris Bryant is understood to be backing it, having abstained in November. Labour MP Jack Abbott, who voted against last November, is also now likely to vote in favour. Others who were hesitantly supportive are now more firmly in favour. Liz Saville Roberts, the leader of Plaid Cymru at Westminster, said she was initially concerned but supported the principle of assisted dying. "I think the safeguards have got stronger," she said. "They have been improved through the bill committee and through the evidence that we heard." One of the changes made as the bill was scrutinised was allowing Senedd members a vote on whether it will apply in Wales. Despite opposition, supporters expect the bill to clear the Commons and go on to the House of Lords. Campaigners backing the bill do not expect many MPs to reverse their views - but with such tight margins, efforts to shore up support are in full swing. One major threat, for supporters of the bill, is MPs deciding to return home to their constituencies instead of voting. Due to a quirk of the parliamentary system, private members' bills are normally debated on Fridays - a day when MPs are normally in their constituencies. There is also growing concern that the government cannot afford to keep giving it parliamentary time. One Labour source told the BBC: "Given the huge amount of difficult issues the government face, from winter fuel payments and Personal Independence Payment to defence and special educational needs and disabilities spending, a tight vote on assisted dying becomes a real problem. "Lots of MPs think No 10 would be unwise to expend political capital continuing with this very divisive issue rather than choosing to fix the stuff we got elected to sort." Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
