Imperial academics convened global leaders across science, policy and civil society to examine the latest evidence on Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) and to identify practical policy responses to their growing role in diets and disease.
On 24 March, Imperial Business School convened more than 100 in-person participants alongside a global online audience of more than 600 viewers across 49 countries, bringing together leading scientists, policymakers, politicians, and civil society representatives to examine the latest evidence on ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and identify practical policy responses.
Welcoming attendees, Professor Peter Haynes, Provost and Deputy President, emphasised Imperial's dedication to addressing global challenges through research-led policy insights.
Professor Franco Sassi, Director of the Centre for Health Economics and Policy Innovation (CHEPI) and co-convenor of the conference, offered opening remarks on the current status of UPFs, government action and the food system.
Professor Sassi noted that the UPF landscape has significantly evolved since Imperial Business School hosted its previous conference in November 2024, with increasing public, political and scientific attention in the UK and internationally. Governments worldwide have been intensifying efforts to address the expanding role of UPFs in diets, and high-quality research is increasingly central to shaping policies.
Sheila Dillon, a noted food journalist and host of The Food Programme on BBC Radio 4, chaired proceedings. In her opening remarks, she highlighted how food policy has received a lack of attention from successive governments and how conferences such as this are critical in moving the issue higher up the agenda.
The State of Evidence behind Ultra-Processed Food
The first part of the conference examined the state of scientific understanding. It began with a keynote address from Professor Carlos Augusto Monteiro, Professor of Nutrition and Public Health at the School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, Brazil.
Professor Monteiro highlighted that the problem with UPFs lies not only in their nutritional profile, but in the very processes, ingredients and additive combinations used to manufacture them, which drive overconsumption and damage health through multiple pathways. He addressed some of the criticisms of UPF research directly, pointing out how these often draw on outdated research, inappropriate comparisons, and inconsistent associations.
Dr Matilde Touvier (INSERM, French National Institute for Health and Medical Research) built on Professor Monteiro's keynote by presenting her work, suggesting that the health impacts of UPFs can be attributed to several complementary mechanisms: poor nutritional profile for many UPFs, alterations of the food matrix, exposure to food additives (e.g., emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners), neo-formed contaminants generated during processing, and chemicals migrating from packaging.
Dr Ashley Gearhardt illustrated the parallels between tobacco and ultra-processed foods, focusing on shared industrial design features and engineered characteristics. She spoke about the mechanisms of addiction, including how modern processing optimises intensity, speed of delivery, sensory appeal, and repeat consumption.
Dr Sam Dicken followed, discussing his work comparing the health effects of UPF diets and minimally processed food (MPF) diets. He highlighted how, under the current UK national dietary guidelines, one could consume a diet that was classified as healthy, despite eating a large proportion of UPFs. This is despite the overwhelming evidence of the negative health effects of consuming UPFs.
UPF Policy Landscape
The second part of the conference focused on the direction of UPF policy research. Professor Adam Briggs introduced the three new NIHR-funded research projects on ultra-processed foods, representing a major investment in building the evidence base needed to develop and justify effective policy interventions in the UK.
Professor Sassi, Dr Eszter Vamos and Dr Dan Derbyshire (researchers leading on all three of these new projects) discussed how these projects form part of a coordinated national research strategy and outlined how findings will be translated into actionable policy recommendations.
Following this, Dr Kremlin Wickramasinghe (WHO Europe) outlined the organisation's current direction on UPF policy guidance, including work to establish internationally harmonised definitions and evaluate policy tools such as front-of-pack labelling, marketing restrictions, and taxation.
Dr Fabio Gomes of the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) presented evidence from Latin America, where countries including Brazil, Chile, and Mexico have implemented some of the most comprehensive food labelling and advertising regulations in the world. Chile's warning label system has demonstrated measurable impacts on consumer purchasing behaviour and industry reformulation.
Practical Steps to Action
The third part of the day moved from evidence to action, examining the specific policy levers available to governments seeking to reduce UPF consumption and improve diet quality.
Dr Austin Frerick examined the concentration of power across the food system, highlighting how dominant corporations shape supply chains, influence policy through lobbying, and structure market incentives in ways that entrench unhealthy food environments and resist regulatory reform. Anti-trust policies and institutional procurement are among the policy approaches that may help break cartels and monopolies in the food system.
Returning to the question of policy tools, Dr Mathilde Touvier examined front-of-pack labelling as a means of empowering consumers to identify and limit UPF exposure, while simultaneously creating strong incentives for manufacturers to improve product composition.
Dr Magdalena Muc highlighted how current UK restrictions on unhealthy food marketing are undermined by gaps around brand advertising, influencer content, and nutrient profiling, arguing that more comprehensive and updated policy approaches are needed to effectively limit young people's exposure to UPF marketing.
Finally, Dr Vicky Sibson spoke on how UPF marketing and formulation specifically target infants, toddlers, and young children, and made the case for regulatory action on infant and toddler food products.
The Way Forward
Following a full day of scientific and policy evidence, Dr Dolly van Tulleken hosted a panel to investigate the gap between evidence and political action.
Ben Coleman MP emphasised that people from less privileged backgrounds want access to healthy food options and that affordability and equity should remain a key focus in discussions around UPF policy. Baroness Walmsley stated that although the government has introduced a range of policies recommended within the House of Lords Report on Food, Diet and Obesity, the government need to go further and faster with its interventions.
Closing the conference, Henry Dimbleby concluded by highlighting the progress that has already been made, noting that 94% of people in the UK know that UPFs are bad for their health. He emphasised that the power lies in giving support for positive policies such as teaching cooking in schools and encouraging as many people as possible to breastfeed their infants.
The forum highlighted a growing international consensus: the evidence linking UPFs to poor health outcomes is strengthening, and the policy debate is shifting from whether to act to how. The event reinforces Imperial's role as a leading centre for interdisciplinary research linking nutrition, economics, and public policy.
