Restaurants and takeaways with the unhealthiest menus are more likely to be found in deprived areas, while tourists hotspots such as Westminster have the healthiest food outlets, research suggests.
The study from the University of Cambridge examined menus from almost 55,000 food outlets on Just Eat, an online food ordering and delivery platform. Each menu was given a score between 0 and 12, with 12 being the healthiest.
To extrapolate the data, the researchers used artificial intelligence to predict the healthiness of almost 180,000 menus across the UK.
Researchers found an association between areas with high levels of deprivation, and food outlets with lower levels of healthiness.
The study found that the local authorities with the highest menu healthiness scores were Westminster, the City of London, and Kensington and Chelsea. By contrast, the areas with the food outlets with the unhealthiest menus were North East Linconshire, Luton, and Kingston upon Hull.
Researchers also found that food outlets clustered in more deprived areas, with 8.39 food outlets per 1,000 to 3,000 people in local authorities with the highest levels of deprivation, compared with just 3.85 in the least deprived areas. As a result, people living in the most deprived areas were facing a “double burden” where they had more food outlets but also that they were less healthy.
The research comes after a study by Adfree cities showed that four in five outdoor billboard advertisements were found in the most deprived areas of England and Wales.
Yuru Huang, a Gates Cambridge scholar at the Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, said that there was a “clear pattern” linking the healthiness of menus at out-of-home food outlets – where food or drink is prepared in a way that means it is ready for immediate consumption, on or off the premises – in an area and its level of deprivation.
Huang added: “This can create a ‘double burden’ for people living in deprived neighbourhoods, where there are more outlets and these tend to be less healthy, compared to less deprived neighbourhoods.
“On top of this, there are studies that show, for example, that people with the lowest income were more likely to be obese when living in areas with a high proportion of fast food outlets. This could even create a ‘triple burden’ for people living in these areas.”
The researchers acknowledged that the menu healthiness score did not take into account menu differences such as portion size, cooking methods, and levels of food processing.
Jean Adams, professor of dietary public health at the University of Cambridge, said the study found there were more out-of-home food outlets in more deprived areas, and these tended to be less healthy.
“That is the ‘double burden’ we refer to,” said Adams. “Within these neighbourhoods, individuals at lower socioeconomic positions are also at a greater risk of obesity when they are exposed to more outlets, adding a ‘triple burden’.
“People in lower socioeconomic groups often live in these more deprived areas, where they are exposed to numerous unhealthy food outlets, and they are more susceptible to the negative impacts of this exposure. These inequalities in the local food environment may have contributed to the health inequalities we see in the UK.”
