Ultra-processed indulgence: New survey reveals candy differs from other UPFs

Researchers urge policymakers not to treat chocolates and candy the same way as other ultra-processed foods (UPFs) because their impact on health and weight substantially differs from other UPF consumption. Research reveals that these contribute fewer calories and added sugars to US diets, and the amounts consumed are significantly lower than other indulgent foods.

The Georgetown University McDonough School of Business, US, and the country’s National Confectioners Association developed a white paper on US ultra-processed indulgent food consumption. The report leverages data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and a proprietary Natural Marketing Institute consumer segmentation. 

The paper’s author, Hank Cardello, executive director of leadership solutions for health and prosperity program at Business for Impact at Georgetown University, US, tells Nutrition Insight that he hopes that “policymakers and public health advocates understand that all UPFs are not created equal and that regulatory initiatives consider this factor.”

Cardello notes that the study confirmed “how chocolate/non-chocolate candy behaves differently than other indulgent products and should not be lumped in with them for policymaking purposes. It also revealed that the ‘healthiest of the healthiest’ consumers purchase chocolate/candy at higher rates than the general population.” 

Moreover, the report indicates that around half of chocolate and candy purchasers want smaller portions, with the industry and some companies “pursuing strategies focused on helping consumers enjoy their products as ‘treats.’ We note that other product sectors should adopt this pragmatic approach.” 

UPFs and obesity

Based on NHANES data, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates that obesity prevalence in US adults reached 40.3% in 2021--2023. The organization notes that these rates have been relatively stable from 2013 to 2014, but severe obesity increased from 7.7% to 9.7% in the same period. 

The report notes that this “obesity crisis” has attracted attention from regulators and policy experts, with an increased focus on dietary sugar reduction, retail checkout bans and food package labeling to communicate nutrition information quickly and easily. 

Beverages contribute the most to caloric consumption and added sugar to US diets.“We have been examining indulgent products since 2016 and have focused on added sugars to tie into WHO and Dietary Guidelines positions to reduce their concentration in the food supply,” details Cardello. 

The white paper focuses on the contributions to added sugar intake and caloric consumption for several indulgent UPFs — beverages, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, ready-to-eat cereals, ice cream or frozen dairy, candy and sugars, honey and syrups. 

Beverages and sweet baked goods contribute the most to caloric consumption at 7% and 6.6%, while candy only adds an average of 1.8% or around 40 kcal to US diets daily. Regarding added sugar intake, candy contributes 6.4% to the diet, while beverages account for 40.4% and sweet baked goods for 13.7% of added sugar intake. 

As the report focused on packaged foods, Cardello suggests it would be “worth examining fast food products like pizza, French fries, etc., as they contribute higher levels of calories and saturated fats.”

Comparing consumer behavior

Consumers buy an average of four pounds of chocolate candy and 3.2 pounds of non-chocolate candy per year, compared to 27.4 pounds of sweet baked goods, such as cakes, pies, cookies, donuts and pastries. 

The report reveals that “a broad spectrum of consumers — from the healthiest to those with obesity — purchase chocolate and non-chocolate candy at similar frequencies.” 

In his report, Cardello dives into the purchasing behavior of five consumer groups, from the most health pro-active (Well-Beings) to the least health-active consumers (Eat, Drink & Be Merrys). 

Most consumers buy candy at a similar frequency, around four pounds of chocolate and 3.2 pounds of other candies yearly.Moreover, the Eat, Drink & Be Merrys segment “purchases less candy than the other cohorts, while the ‘healthiest of the healthiest’ consumer cohort purchases candy at the highest index,” states the paper. 

When comparing UPF purchase behavior and body mass index (BMI), the report indicates that chocolate candy had the lowest BMI among indulgent product consumers, while BMI was the highest among low- or no-calorie and regular soda purchasers. 

Therefore, the report concludes: “Consumers do not over-consume chocolate and candy, so targeting these foods will not impact obesity. An approach focusing on product categories that consumers with the highest BMIs eat and drink the most will be more effective.”

In addition, it discloses that people with the highest BMIs “read nutrition labels the least” — 23% of Eat, Drink & Be Merrys say nutrition facts labels, ingredient lists and health claims influence their purchases, compared to 71% in the Well-Beings group. 

Moreover, the report asserts that evidence on interpretive warning labels “suggests that this approach has not proven effective in arresting or reversing obesity rates.” Therefore, it recommends the US FDA consider other labels that may be more effective, such as providing more positive messaging or highlighting items that are classified as “good, better or best” in terms of nutrition. 

Portion control

The report calls attention to the reduction of portion sizes and added sugars. It builds on earlier research findings that a significant majority of US consumers (85%) consider portion sizes in their purchasing decisions, similar to ingredient considerations, such as the amount of added sugar, sodium, calories and saturated fats. 

Cardello suggests that companies adopt more programs that pledge to reduce portion size or deliver smaller treats.The main changes candy users make to help manage their weight are choosing snacks lower in sugar, salt or fat, eating fewer processed foods, eating small portioned entrees or meals, choosing smaller snacks and candy bars or with fewer calories and choosing more portion-controlled snacks. 

In his report, Cardello suggests that companies and restaurant chains adopt more programs that pledge to reduce portion size or deliver smaller treats. 

“Smaller portions can be delivered without much difficulty,” says the executive director. “Plus, at least half of consumers demand more of these, so it presents a business opportunity.”

Cardello also recommends companies reformulate their offerings or introduce new products with higher levels of protein and fiber. “This will become more important as the GLP-1 drugs proliferate — protein helps with the loss of muscle mass, and fiber provides satiety.”

“It is crucial for policymakers and public health officials to recognize the unique nutritional and cultural aspects of UPFs and make educated decisions on how to guide consumer purchasing behavior best,” he concludes. “A one-size-fits-all approach to ultra-processed and indulgent food products is ineffective.” 

By Jolanda van Hal