A significant portion of the British diet is comprised of foods that significantly raise the risk of fatal heart disease, with new research indicating the danger is not just about what’s in them, but what has been done to them. For every extra daily serving of ultra-processed food (UPF) consumed, the risk of suffering a life-threatening cardiac event rises by approximately 5%, according to a major US study.
UK Among Highest Consumers Globally
This warning carries particular weight in the UK, where such foods are estimated to constitute over half of the average diet—a higher proportion than in most other European nations. Indeed, the UK is considered the world’s second-largest consumer of UPFs by daily energy intake. For some, particularly the young, the less affluent, or those living in disadvantaged areas, these industrially manufactured products can make up as much as 80% of dietary intake.
The new analysis, presented to the American College of Cardiology, examined decades of data from more than 6,800 U.S. adults aged 45 to 84. It found that those who consumed the highest amount of UPFs—an average of 9.3 servings per day—faced a 67% increased risk of dying from a heart attack, stroke, or related heart disease, compared to those who ate the least, at 1.1 daily servings. A single serving can be deceptively small: just three Chips Ahoy! cookies or 15 Lay’s potato chips.
Processing Itself May Be the Problem
Critically, the study indicates that the risk persists independently of the nutritional content of the foods. “Regardless of the amount of calories you consumed per day, regardless of the overall quality of your diet … the risk associated with higher ultraprocessed food intake was still about the same,” explained the study’s lead author, Dr. Amier Haidar, a cardiology fellow at the University of Texas Health Science Center.
This suggests that the industrial processing methods themselves may be a harmful factor. UPFs are typically defined using the NOVA classification system as products containing ingredients rarely used in home cooking, such as preservatives, artificial sweeteners, emulsifiers, colours, and flavour enhancers. Examples range from crisps, sweets, and ice cream to mass-produced breads, breakfast cereals, many ready meals, processed meats like sausages and bacon, and even some products marketed as healthy, such as protein bars and some vegan meat alternatives.
Dr. Haidar noted that while sugar, salt, fat and carbohydrates are often higher in these foods, the link to heart disease remained even after adjusting for these factors. This points to potential harms from additives, alterations to the food’s natural structure, or other aspects of intensive manufacturing.
Racial Disparity Points to Underlying Inequalities
The research, which drew on data from the long-running Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), revealed a stark racial disparity. While each additional serving was associated with a 5.1% increased risk across the study cohort, the risk rose to 6.1% for Black American participants. For non-Black individuals, the increase was 3.2%.
Researchers suggest that socio-economic and environmental factors are likely contributing to this disparity. “Some minority and low-income communities have a harder time accessing fresh food,” the study authors noted, highlighting how UPFs are often heavily marketed, convenient, and affordable, making them a default choice in so-called ‘food deserts’. The MESA study was originally designed to understand why some racial groups face higher heart disease risk, and has previously linked health inequalities to factors like local air pollution.
Broader Health Impacts and Potential for Reversal
The cardiovascular findings add to a substantial body of evidence linking high UPF consumption to an increased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cancer, depression, and premature death. Proposed mechanisms for the damage include dysregulation of blood lipids, harmful changes to gut bacteria, promotion of obesity, systemic inflammation, and impaired insulin sensitivity.
There is, however, some hopeful evidence that the damage can be undone. Researchers at Harvard Medicine have indicated that some negative impacts on the heart, gut, and brain may be reversible over years by switching to a nutritious, balanced diet rich in fruits, vegetables, lean proteins, and fibre.
Further evidence of the unique effect of processing comes from a recent UCL study, which found participants lost twice as much weight on a diet of minimally processed foods compared to a UPF diet, even when the calorie and nutrient content of both diets were matched and participants could eat freely.
UK Policy Lags Behind the Science
Despite the growing evidence, current UK dietary guidelines, such as the Eatwell Guide, do not explicitly address food processing. They focus instead on High Fat, Sugar, Salt (HFSS) foods and overall nutritional value. While there is significant overlap between HFSS products and UPFs, meaning some harmful items are captured, the direct role of industrial processing is not yet a formal policy concern.
The government’s independent Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) has acknowledged the NOVA classification is applicable to the UK population but has raised concerns about its practical application in national dietary surveys. There are calls for stronger evidence to support the inclusion of processing levels in future UK regulations and health advice, as the nation grapples with its heavy reliance on these products.
