The UK government has published plans to change the country’s nutrient profiling model, which classifies the health credentials of food and drinks sold in the country.

The nutrient profiling model (NPM), launched more than 20 years ago, underpins which food and drinks are classed as high in saturated fat, sugar or salt, or HFSS.

Ofcom, the UK’s broadcast regulator, uses the NPM to enforce rules that curb the advertising of HFSS products.

Changes to the country’s dietary recommendations since the NPM was launched mean it is outdated, the UK government said today (27 January).

The revisions to the NPM include a change in a model based on total sugars to ‘free’ sugars, which are defined as all added sugars in any form, including honey, all sugars naturally present in fruit and veg, as well as all sugars in drinks. Overall, the changes could see thousands more products categorised as HFSS.

In documents published online today, the UK’s Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) said the changes are based on proposals put forward in 2018 by the then Public Health England agency. Those plans were shelved after pushback from industry.

According to the UK government's plans, free sugars should make up no more than 5% of a person's energy intake. DHSC figures show most children are consuming double that and less than one in ten meets the recommendation.

The DHSC is to consult on how the changes will apply to the new rules on advertising and supermarket promotions that came into effect in the UK at the start of the year.

UK industry body The Food and Drink Federation (FDF) expressed its unease about the potential impact of the changes. Overall, the changes could see thousands more products categorised as HFSS.

“Food and drink manufacturers have made multi-million-pound investments to meet the nutrient profile model that underpins the new promotion and advertising restrictions, the latest of which only came into force in this month. This includes developing new options that make it easier for consumers to swap to healthier choices,” Karen Betts, the FDF’s chief executive, said.

“We have serious concerns that changing to the new model will mean many healthier options could no longer be promoted or advertised to consumers, which runs the risk of them being delisted by retailers. We urge government to meet industry as soon as possible to discuss our concerns and how we can work together to help shift consumers towards healthier diets.”

Campaign groups and academics, however, have welcomed the update to the NPM.

Sonia Pombo, head of research and impact at Action on Salt & Sugar, said: “We welcome the government’s long-awaited update to the nutrient profile model, which represents a clear improvement on the outdated 2004 model and better reflects current evidence on free sugars. No model is perfect, but this update is a necessary step forward and provides a stronger, more evidence-based foundation for food policy – and one that should come as no surprise to industry, having first been consulted on in 2018.”

Dr Kath Roberts, a senior lecturer in public health nutrition, at the University of York, added: “The updated nutrient profiling model reflects where the science is now, not where it was fifteen years ago. It provides a far more accurate way of identifying foods that undermine health, particularly for children and, if it is applied to policy in the future, will ensure that advertising and promotions are based on evidence rather than outdated thresholds. Delaying its implementation would mean knowingly maintaining a food environment that drives poor diet and widening health inequalities.”