Are “Less Processed” Foods Always Healthier - or Just More Expensive?

With growing awareness around ultra-processed foods (UPFs), more people are scrutinising ingredient lists and trying to make food choices that feel healthier and more aligned with long-term wellbeing.

In many ways, this is a positive shift.

Food brands have responded by reformulating products, removing certain additives, and launching ranges proudly marketed as “minimal ingredient”, “simpler”, or “cleaner”.

But recently, when I decided to try a few of these products myself, something stopped me in my tracks.

The price.

That pause made me look closer - and I’m really glad I did.

When “minimal ingredients” come with a premium price

Take bran flakes as an example.

• M&S 3-ingredient bran flakes: £0.83 per 100g

• Kellogg’s bran flakes: £0.44 per 100g

  
  

Almost double the price.

At face value, the shorter ingredient list looks appealing. But when you dig deeper, the nutritional picture becomes more nuanced.

The role of fortification - and why it matters

Kellogg’s bran flakes are fortified with several nutrients, including:

• Iron

• Niacin

• Riboflavin

• Thiamin

• Vitamin B6

• Folic acid

• Vitamin B12

• Vitamin D

These additions aren’t arbitrary.

UK dietary data consistently shows that many people fall short on key nutrients - particularly iron, folate, vitamin D, vitamin B12 and fibre. This is especially relevant for women of reproductive age, older adults, vegetarians, and people with restricted or inconsistent diets.

Fortified foods quietly play a role in supporting population-level nutrient adequacy.

So while removing fortification may simplify an ingredient list, it doesn’t automatically improve nutritional value - and for some people, it may do the opposite.

Tomato sauce: same story, different shelf

The same pattern appears elsewhere.

M&S recently launched an 8-ingredient tomato sauce, priced at £0.90 per 100g.

By comparison, Heinz tomato ketchup:

• contains a similar number of ingredients

• is nutritionally very similar

• costs around £0.55 per 100g

  
  

There’s no meaningful nutritional advantage - but the messaging suggests otherwise.

This is where the conversation risks shifting away from nutrition science and towards marketing-led health narratives.

The hidden pressure this creates

What concerns me most isn’t reformulation itself.

It’s the pressure these messages place on people.

Will everyone stop to compare labels, prices and nutrients? Or will many feel pushed to spend more - or quietly carry guilt for choosing the cheaper, perfectly adequate option?

When “healthier eating” is framed as something that:

• costs more

• looks more virtuous

• requires constant upgrading

  
  

we risk turning nutrition into a luxury rather than a practical, inclusive goal.

In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, that matters.

A more helpful way to think about ultra-processed foods

Instead of asking “Is this ultra-processed?”, more useful questions might be:

• Does this food help me meet my nutrient needs?

• Is it affordable and sustainable for me long-term?

• How does it fit into my overall dietary pattern?

• Does it reduce stress around food - or increase it?

• 
  

Nutrition doesn’t happen in isolation. It happens in real lives, with real budgets, time pressures and access limitations.

The bottom line

Greater awareness around ultra-processed foods has encouraged some genuinely positive change.

But shorter ingredient lists are not a guarantee of better nutrition - and they’re not always worth paying more for.

Sometimes the familiar, fortified, affordable option is doing more for public health than the premium alternative.

And health should never come with a side serving of shame.

References

1. Monteiro CA et al. (2019). Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them. Public Health Nutrition, 22(5), 936–941.

2. British Nutrition Foundation. (2023). Ultra-processed foods and health.

3. Public Health England. (2020). National Diet and Nutrition Survey: Results from Years 9–11.

4. Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN). (2016). Vitamin D and Health.

5. World Health Organization. (2023). Healthy diets and nutrient adequacy.

6. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. (2023). Food fortification and public health nutrition.