British adults want to cut ultra-processed foods from their diets but most cannot accurately define what those foods are, according to a new survey released by ma-clinique.fr.
The findings highlight a growing awareness of health risks tied to industrial food products, even as confusion persists about their identification. This gap between intention and knowledge comes amid mounting scientific evidence linking ultra-processed foods to cancer, diabetes, and liver disease, and as legal and public health actions gain traction in the United States and Europe.
In the UK, a ten-year study of over 200,000 adults by Imperial College London found that every 10% increase in ultra-processed food consumption was associated with a 2% rise in overall cancer risk and a 19% increase in ovarian cancer incidence. In France, the NutriNet-Santé cohort showed a 10 to 12% increase in overall cancer risk per 10% rise in ultra-processed food intake, climbing to 22% for breast cancer. A parliamentary meta-analysis cited in the Doctissimo report found even steeper increases: 13% higher global cancer risk, 30% for colon cancer, and 50% for pancreatic cancer per 10% increment.
These foods — defined by the NOVA classification as Group 4 items — include mass-produced breads, sugary cereals, ready meals, processed meats, snacks, and sweetened beverages. In the UK, more than half of daily energy intake comes from such products. In France, ultra-processed foods account for 31.1% of adult caloric intake, and two-thirds of packaged products sold in supermarkets fall into this category, according to research cited by Sciences et Avenir.
The scientific consensus has begun to translate into action. In California, San Francisco District Attorney David Chiu announced on December 2, 2025, a lawsuit against ten major food corporations — including Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Nestlé, Kellogg’s, and Mars — alleging they aggressively market ultra-processed foods despite known health risks. The suit cites a tripling of pediatric fatty liver disease cases over twenty years and a rise in diabetes-related medical costs from $27 billion to $40 billion between 2017 and 2021. Chiu noted that 70% of items in U.S. Supermarkets are ultra-processed, calling the crisis a direct result of imbalanced food supply, not inevitability.
Researchers say reversing even a portion of this trend could yield significant benefits. Inserm-led studies estimate that replacing 10% of ultra-processed foods with minimally processed or whole foods could reduce cancer incidence by approximately 9%. William Li, a physician and researcher cited in Gala, emphasized that anti-inflammatory foods — such as cruciferous vegetables, legumes, extra-virgin olive oil, and omega-3-rich seafood — may counteract some of the damage by reducing inflammation, inhibiting tumor blood supply, and protecting DNA.
Yet the ma-clinique.fr survey reveals a critical barrier: public understanding lags behind concern. Many Britons express a desire to avoid ultra-processed foods but lack the knowledge to identify them reliably, undermining individual efforts to improve diet. This disconnect suggests that without clearer labeling, public education, or regulatory reform, consumer intent may not translate into meaningful behavioral change.
The convergence of scientific evidence, legal action, and public concern marks a turning point in how ultra-processed foods are viewed — not merely as dietary choices but as systemic health threats requiring coordinated response. While individual dietary shifts offer promise, the data imply that lasting change will depend on altering the food environment itself, from formulation and marketing to accessibility and clarity.
What counts as ultra-processed food?
Ultra-processed foods are industrial formulations typically containing five or more ingredients, including additives like preservatives, sweeteners, and emulsifiers. Examples include packaged snacks, sugary cereals, reconstituted meats, and soft drinks. They are classified as Group 4 in the NOVA system, which ranks foods by the extent and purpose of processing.
Can eating fewer ultra-processed foods really lower cancer risk?
Yes, observational studies and modeling suggest a strong association. Research from Imperial College London and NutriNet-Santé links each 10% increase in ultra-processed food consumption to a 10–12% rise in overall cancer risk, with higher increases for specific cancers. Inserm estimates that replacing 10% of such foods with whole or minimally processed options could reduce cancer incidence by about 9%, though causation has not been proven.
Why is there a lawsuit against food companies in California?
San Francisco prosecutors allege that ten major food corporations knowingly promoted ultra-processed products despite evidence linking them to serious health conditions, including fatty liver disease and diabetes. The lawsuit argues that these practices contributed to a public health crisis driven by an imbalanced food supply, citing a tripling of childhood fatty liver disease cases over two decades and rising diabetes-related costs.
What foods might help counteract the effects of ultra-processed diets?
Foods with anti-inflammatory properties — such as broccoli, kale, lentils, extra-virgin olive oil, and omega-3-rich seafood like mussels and cod — may help reduce cancer risk by limiting inflammation, inhibiting tumor angiogenesis, and supporting DNA repair, according to Dr. William Li. These are not cures but part of a dietary pattern associated with lower disease risk in population studies.