Young people want to eat well. But when supermarket shelves are packed with foods overloaded with sugar and salt, and marketing practices target young people incessantly, choosing healthy options isn’t just difficult, it’s stacked against us.
So, the Recipe for Change campaign brought together a group of young people for a taste test with a twist. We wanted to know: could they tell the difference between high- and low-salt or sugar snacks? And what would they choose if given better options?
From crisps to popcorn, cake to biscuits, and even a few savoury nuts, our taste test lineup featured popular snacks with a range of sugar and salt. The results? Surprising, even to the participants.
In most cases, there were healthier versions that barely differed in taste from the highest sugar or salt options. Some were even preferred. As one young tester exclaimed about the lemon cakes: “They literally taste the same to me, I’m not going to lie.”
Another added about the sweet and salty popcorn: “These two tasted the same – I thought it was a trick question.” Yet one had almost double the salt and more sugar.
And when we revealed just how much sugar was in the high-sugar biscuits, the reactions said it all. “That’s just too much sugar, 15g – that’s crazy.”
The young people told us they feel bombarded by unhealthy food options every time they shop, and that big food companies need to do better. When nearly identical products have drastically different sugar and salt contents, it begs the question: why aren’t all companies choosing the healthier path?
Our recent report, Incentivising Reformulation, uncovered just that. We found massive variations in salt and sugar levels across similar products - clear proof that food companies can make healthier recipes. But most aren’t bothering, because there’s no incentive for them to change.
That’s where the idea of a Government levy comes in – food companies need to be held accountable for the food they sell us. A levy on food products high in sugar and salt would incentivise companies to reduce these ingredients to avoid paying – something we’ve seen they can clearly do while still keeping customers happy with the taste.
Any companies who choose not to change their recipes would instead pay the levy and we want this revenue to go towards funding children’s health programmes and access to good food.
The young participants in our taste test were behind a levy, they see that companies need a push to do the right thing. Right now, profits are taking priority over people’s health.
What needs to change? This experiment gave us a clear message:
- Young people want to eat better - but it shouldn’t be so hard
- They often prefer snacks with less salt and sugar
- Food companies can do better, and they should
If some companies can make lower-sugar, lower-salt snacks that taste just as good, all of them can. But they won’t until there’s a financial reason to act. That’s why Recipe for Change is calling for a levy to help tip the balance.
The taste test proved it: the healthier option can still be the tastier one. Now we just need the food industry to catch up. For more information visit: www.recipeforchange.org.uk.