Proposals to ban cut-price deals on junk food in supermarket would slash obesity levels in Scotland by more than 25% over five years, according to a new analysis. 

Legislation to restrict price promotions such as three-for-two offers on food and drink products high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) was shelved by the Scottish Government in 2020 as a result of the impact of the pandemic on retailers. 

However, a revised consultation on the measures was launched in February this year. 

READ MORE: 

In a first-of-its-kind study, research and innovation think tank Nesta has created a toolkit in collaboration with leading academics - including experts from the universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh - to evaluate the cost and effectiveness of dozens of different health policies.

The analysis found that banning price promotions on unhealthy food in shops and supermarkets would deliver a 25.6% reduction in obesity rates in Scotland over five years.

Stopping retailers from displaying unhealthy foods at checkouts, aisle ends and store entrances – a rule already in force in England – could reduce obesity rates by 16% over five years, according to the analysis.

Other proposed restrictions - such as banning meal deals and price promotions on unhealthy foods in restaurants and takeaways, and restrictions on online advertising - were identified as having a lower impact overall. 

However, a separate cost-benefit analysis carried out at a UK level by health and economics researchers at HealthLumen estimated that implementing all the policies would cost the public purse £2.14 million over five years and cost businesses £2.4 billion, but deliver annual gains of £39.3bn after five years in the form of savings for the NHS and social care, increased productivity, and more healthy years of life. 

Previous research from Nesta and Frontier Economics put the annual cost of obesity to Scotland at £5.3bn including costs to the NHS, cost in lost productivity and value lost by people in Scotland through reduced quality of life and shortened lives.

Shoppers say they want retailers to do more to promote healthy eating (Image: PA) In Scotland, 29% of adults live with obesity, a further 38% live with excess weight and a third of children are at risk of obesity.

Frances Bain, Nesta Scotland’s Health Lead, said: "Rates of obesity are far too high in Scotland and have been steadily getting worse over the last 30 years – there is a clear need to take action to stem the tide of unhealthy food in our diets.

“No single measure will do enough so it is imperative that the Scottish Government fully implements the regulations it set out in February’s consultation.

"As our research shows, these modest restrictions on how some unhealthy foods are sold would all make a huge difference to the number of people in Scotland living with obesity as well as saving billions for the public purse.”

Experts from Nesta also recommend that the UK Government expands access to weight-loss drugs, and introduces mandatory healthy food targets to incentivise the UK's largest 11 grocery chains to offer healthier food options.

The policy is backed by consumer group Which?.

Sue Davies, its head of food policy, said: “Which? research has repeatedly found that people want retailers to do more to support them in making healthier choices.

"Six in 10 (60%) consumers said they would support the government introducing health targets for supermarkets.

"Nesta's analysis shows that mandatory food targets would incentivise retailers to use the range of tactics available to them to make small but significant changes, which would make it easier to eat a balanced diet and ultimately help people lead healthier lives.”

Restrictions on restaurants and takeaways were expected to have a smaller effect (Image: PA)Dr Kate Tudor, principal researcher at Nesta said, “We set out to close a gap in the policy landscape.

"Until now it was too hard for policymakers to compare the likely effectiveness and costs of different ways to reduce obesity.

"We also show that it’s not just about individual policies – but rather the package.

"There are combinations of policies that work together more effectively than others.

"In our current economic climate, we know how important it is that investment is focused on the approaches that have the biggest impact for the lowest cost.”