Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Avoiding UPFs at breakfast

395 replies

Ayechinnyreckon · 05/01/2025 20:17

After breakfast we eat virtually no UPFs but the kids breakfast is a huge issue.

They wake early and are hungry. They're 9&6 so can be trusted to go downstairs, get themselves some cereal and occupy themselves in the morning until we get up.

They eat cereal and pastries mainly until we get up and make a more substantial breakfast if they want it) 90mins - 2 hours later.

AIBU to want quick and easy breakfast that the DC can get themselves? So I don't have to get up at 5.30!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Putthekettleon73 · 06/01/2025 18:39

Gwenhwyfar · 06/01/2025 17:59

"Hovis does a wholegrain preservative free bread at Sainsbury's, and they also do an own brand organic whole wheat bread"

Are they really not classified as UPFs?

No. Still upf. Longer shelf life slices bread has preservatives etc. my friend passed on her old bread machine to us after I read the van tullekin book as she makes her own sourdough now (I tried and failed, it was flat as a pancake!) and I gave my husband the job of doing a loaf overnight each night. It's really nice and I'm pleased we are avoiding the upf stuff.

Had a holiday in France this yr for the first time with the kids and it's easy to eat a diet with less processed crap there. They really enjoy and value food & mealtimes don't they.

gardenflowergirl · 06/01/2025 18:31

What about leaving fruit, cheese and high protein yogurt easily accessible for them.

Gwenhwyfar · 06/01/2025 17:59

"Hovis does a wholegrain preservative free bread at Sainsbury's, and they also do an own brand organic whole wheat bread"

Are they really not classified as UPFs?

LuckySantangelo35 · 06/01/2025 17:24

@Ayechinnyreckon

what about Greek yoghurt and fruit maybe with some granola, nuts and seeds, that kind of thing? Ain’t nobody got time to actually cook a meal at breakfast time!

Biroclicker · 06/01/2025 17:10

GallopingGuineaPigs · 05/01/2025 20:42

There's no law that breakfast has to be breakfast foods. I personally hate cereal, eggs, and milk! So I usually eat leftover dinner for breakfast. Or bread/cheese/tomatoes.

We can't have cheese unfortunately. I also already use leftovers for main meals so can't really spend time or money making more meals for breakfast. I freeze potato rosti type things and heat them up sometimes but generally breakfasts are a complete pain. I fast now purely to avoid having to bother with it but the DC need something.

UnstableEquilibrium · 06/01/2025 17:08

samarrange · 06/01/2025 14:32

For me, I like to avoid chemical additives (emulsifiers / gums / E numbers / preservatives etc)

Well, a lot of those are in UPFs, but a lot of them are also in ordinary "non-U" processed foods. E-numbers identify additives that the EU has recognised as safe. Salt has an E-number. Parmesan cheese is naturally 1.2% E621 (monosodium glutamate). The most common emulsifier is corn starch.

Another thing to remember is that the principal target of the UPF people is American food. And there I think they might have more of a point. You can buy some truly horrible stuff in a US supermarket, and many of their additives are banned in Europe. But whenever I see a package in the UK that says "No artifical colours", I try to remember the last time I bought anything that does have artificial colours. Apart from maybe the very cheapest sweets (candy) I can't thing of any major processed, or even "ultra-processed", food brand that contains artificial colours. 🤷‍♂️

I'm not too phobic about UPF but I won't touch anything that has "no artificial colours" on the label.

I translate that into "this is total junk with no nutritional value whatsoever, so we've desperately looked for something we can say that makes you think it's not actually poisonous". It's like terrible "Energy" drinks advertising themselves as being low fat.

katter · 06/01/2025 16:57

But yes, buying is definitely easier. I just begrudge chucking out bread, and we are either feast or famine on the stuff.
You can easily freeze bread though.

katter · 06/01/2025 16:51

MyLadyGreensleeves · 06/01/2025 10:27

Could you serve a cheeseboard and leave it in the fridge with a selection of fruits, different home made bread and crackers.
You could even leave it, covered with foil, beside the bed.
Maybe a small glass of port?

Or just buy two good breads, a couple cheeses and some fruit. Surely the adults eat that too.
Don't need a toaster for that either.
I really wonder if some people really know what an easy and healthy breakfast is I mean bacon and eggs...🙄
I eat a lot of crap myself but at least I know it's crap.

MoodySky · 06/01/2025 16:09

I bet you wish you'd never asked OP!

Blueuggboots · 06/01/2025 15:41

Get a toaster. A 9 year old can safely use a toaster....

Ayechinnyreckon · 06/01/2025 15:08

SnowballSandwich · 06/01/2025 13:07

I would happily make my own but always assumed it was a faff

Just to add balance to the 'so easy' pp (not being unkind to you pp, I'm jealous of your ability and your loaf looks delicious) I sadly find it a massive faff. Just reading the instructions posted shuts something off in my brain (the same thing happens in wordy maths equations, golf and football)
I adore cooking and baking and have loads of spare time but I absolutely don't have the long term brain that finds it easy to think that in 20 odd days of measuring, feeding and discarding I'll bake my first loaf of bread.
I can bake a regular loaf myself but I'll merrily pay the bakery £5 a loaf to mess about with sourdough!

Oh no - I could give you starter and you'd be baking a loaf tomorrow 😂

I don't weigh or measure when feeding my starter- cup (ISH)of flour, cup (ISH)of warm water, stir.

2 hours later make dough, prove, shape, prove, bake!

But yes, buying is definitely easier. I just begrudge chucking out bread, and we are either feast or famine on the stuff.

Currently waiting on my yogurt to finish cooking.

OP posts:
samarrange · 06/01/2025 14:32

Whatshallwedohere · 06/01/2025 14:03

All very interesting points thank you!

I think we perhaps need different or better terminology as UPF can be misinterpreted. For me, I like to avoid chemical additives (emulsifiers / gums / E numbers / preservatives etc)

For me, I like to avoid chemical additives (emulsifiers / gums / E numbers / preservatives etc)

Well, a lot of those are in UPFs, but a lot of them are also in ordinary "non-U" processed foods. E-numbers identify additives that the EU has recognised as safe. Salt has an E-number. Parmesan cheese is naturally 1.2% E621 (monosodium glutamate). The most common emulsifier is corn starch.

Another thing to remember is that the principal target of the UPF people is American food. And there I think they might have more of a point. You can buy some truly horrible stuff in a US supermarket, and many of their additives are banned in Europe. But whenever I see a package in the UK that says "No artifical colours", I try to remember the last time I bought anything that does have artificial colours. Apart from maybe the very cheapest sweets (candy) I can't thing of any major processed, or even "ultra-processed", food brand that contains artificial colours. 🤷‍♂️

YourLimeScroller · 06/01/2025 14:19

Sorry to be negative but toasters are not great either - we had one catch fire early last year, not a cheap one but didn’t “pop up” - huge amount of damage to kitchen. Would not have another and would be reluctant to have children using one unless also capable of aiming a kitchen fire extinguisher and using a fire blanket. Stick to overnight oats or cereals.

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 14:16

samarrange · 06/01/2025 14:12

No, I wasn't referring to that. You could replace foie gras with oysters or caviar. Or yacht ownership: people who own yachts live far longer than people who don't own yachts, but it's not the purchase of a yacht that does it.

My understanding from epidemiology friends (I am a publishing scientist, but only have one article in an actual epidemiology journal) is that the French Paradox is mostly down to differences in culture among doctors when certifying the cause of death. Even within countries you can get that. The percentage of people "dying of heart disease" (according to the ICD-10 classification of diseases) is 10 times higher in some parts of the US compared to others.

Again, this brings me back to my main point. Science is hard, epidemiology is harder, nutritional epidemiology is even harder. I recently read a history of the post-WW2 research into the link between smoking and lung cancer, and while some of the deniers were being paid by the tobacco companies ("Type A personality" is an invention of those times), plenty of others weren't. It took the development of new statistical techniques to convince them. There really is no scientific consensus about UPFs and where they might fit in to overall health.

The point is that the direction of travel is that UPFs are not good for us.

Your own work isn't relevant. Many people in my family have PhDs in science/bio topics . You are giving an opinion.

UnstableEquilibrium · 06/01/2025 14:15

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:32

Alpen is 21% sugar.

A 45gm portion (which is tiny) is almost 2 teaspoons of sugar.

Dieticians class anything over 5% sugar as high.

Yes that's definitely its Achilles heel. I get the no added sugar version: but that's still high in "sugars" of course because of all the raisins.

samarrange · 06/01/2025 14:12

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:44

Also, @samarrange the 'fois gras' example you mention is called the 'French Paradox'. This is because in France where there is a higher intake of saturated fat, used their cooking (cream and butter) there is less heart disease than expected.

There are multiple reasons for this but one theory is that sugar and refined carbs are thought to be more dangerous re. CVD than animal fat because they cause inflammation, which narrows the arteries.

No, I wasn't referring to that. You could replace foie gras with oysters or caviar. Or yacht ownership: people who own yachts live far longer than people who don't own yachts, but it's not the purchase of a yacht that does it.

My understanding from epidemiology friends (I am a publishing scientist, but only have one article in an actual epidemiology journal) is that the French Paradox is mostly down to differences in culture among doctors when certifying the cause of death. Even within countries you can get that. The percentage of people "dying of heart disease" (according to the ICD-10 classification of diseases) is 10 times higher in some parts of the US compared to others.

Again, this brings me back to my main point. Science is hard, epidemiology is harder, nutritional epidemiology is even harder. I recently read a history of the post-WW2 research into the link between smoking and lung cancer, and while some of the deniers were being paid by the tobacco companies ("Type A personality" is an invention of those times), plenty of others weren't. It took the development of new statistical techniques to convince them. There really is no scientific consensus about UPFs and where they might fit in to overall health.

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 14:10

BigDahliaFan · 06/01/2025 12:47

You do have to remember that Prof Tim Spector is also selling a product....

No one has to buy anything he sells if you mean Zoe.

He was doing this research decades ago and it's being suggested in some cancer treatments.

Don't forget about all the aggressive marketing on the other side for UPFs.

Whatshallwedohere · 06/01/2025 14:03

samarrange · 06/01/2025 12:02

The most important points are:

  • There is no good single definition of UPFs. It all started with one scientific study from Brazil that was written in highly political language (one of the characteristics of a UPF is that it is made by a multinational company, so that would make Warburton's white sliced bread somehow less bad than Unilever's white sliced bread).
  • The claim of the UPF people is that there is something specific about the processing aspect that makes foods more palatable, beyond fat and sugar. But there are no known mechanisms for this. A lot of people's acceptance of the UPF story is that it piggybacks on our existing narratives about fat and sugar/carbs.
  • There are very few serious studies comparing UPFs with non-UPFs. They do discuss one small serious American study, but even there it's hard to sort out all the confounding — for example, if you give one group "unprocessed" quinoa salad versus "UPF" packaged macaroni cheese and see that people consume more calories of the latter, are you comparing the UPF-ness of the two, or the fact that macaroni cheese tastes better than quinoa salad even if it is made from scratch with £40/kilo farmer's market cheese and wholemeal pasta?

Nutritional epidemiology is hard, because you can't in practice get people to stick to their assigned diet. In that American study they got people to volunteer to essentially spend four weeks locked away from society (so they couldn't sneak out and get a Mars bar), which is incredibly expensive to do. It also means that you are only studying people who have an interest in nutrition and can take four weeks off work.

Basically there is very little that we can say about diet with any great degree of certainty. The science simply isn't there, and people like Chris van Tulleken are doing a disservice by pretending that it is. We know that people who eat a lot of fat, sugar, and UPFs have worse health outcomes, but we also know that people who eat a lot of foie gras live longer than those who don't, and in both cases the cause is likely to have a large amount of socioeconomic status in it (people who can afford foie gras can also often afford BUPA checkups).

All very interesting points thank you!

I think we perhaps need different or better terminology as UPF can be misinterpreted. For me, I like to avoid chemical additives (emulsifiers / gums / E numbers / preservatives etc)

SnowballSandwich · 06/01/2025 13:07

I would happily make my own but always assumed it was a faff

Just to add balance to the 'so easy' pp (not being unkind to you pp, I'm jealous of your ability and your loaf looks delicious) I sadly find it a massive faff. Just reading the instructions posted shuts something off in my brain (the same thing happens in wordy maths equations, golf and football)
I adore cooking and baking and have loads of spare time but I absolutely don't have the long term brain that finds it easy to think that in 20 odd days of measuring, feeding and discarding I'll bake my first loaf of bread.
I can bake a regular loaf myself but I'll merrily pay the bakery £5 a loaf to mess about with sourdough!

eqpi4t2hbsnktd · 06/01/2025 12:48

I'm not sure I would be ok with my kids being up for 2 hours without adult supervision.

BigDahliaFan · 06/01/2025 12:47

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:36

@samarrange I truly don't know where you are getting your info from for your posts. You aren't linking to any real science.

UPFs damage the gut microbiome. There IS research and science on this. How you don't know of it is quite strange considering you're intent on saying there is none!

I'm sure though that you must have heard of or maybe read some of the science coming out of King's College London and the work of Prof Tim Spector and Sarah Berry. All on UPF and gut microbiome. The Twins study? Nothing to do with wealth or being able to choose their own food and stick to it.

There is also evidence that a healthy gut microbiome can make a 50% difference in a positive response to immunotherapy used in cancer (papers available online as evidence.)

Most of the stuff you're posting isn't right and it's a shame you don't realise this.

Edited

You do have to remember that Prof Tim Spector is also selling a product....

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:44

Also, @samarrange the 'fois gras' example you mention is called the 'French Paradox'. This is because in France where there is a higher intake of saturated fat, used their cooking (cream and butter) there is less heart disease than expected.

There are multiple reasons for this but one theory is that sugar and refined carbs are thought to be more dangerous re. CVD than animal fat because they cause inflammation, which narrows the arteries.

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:36

@samarrange I truly don't know where you are getting your info from for your posts. You aren't linking to any real science.

UPFs damage the gut microbiome. There IS research and science on this. How you don't know of it is quite strange considering you're intent on saying there is none!

I'm sure though that you must have heard of or maybe read some of the science coming out of King's College London and the work of Prof Tim Spector and Sarah Berry. All on UPF and gut microbiome. The Twins study? Nothing to do with wealth or being able to choose their own food and stick to it.

There is also evidence that a healthy gut microbiome can make a 50% difference in a positive response to immunotherapy used in cancer (papers available online as evidence.)

Most of the stuff you're posting isn't right and it's a shame you don't realise this.

Wizzardry · 06/01/2025 12:32

Alpen is 21% sugar.

A 45gm portion (which is tiny) is almost 2 teaspoons of sugar.

Dieticians class anything over 5% sugar as high.

UnstableEquilibrium · 06/01/2025 12:28

MumWifeOther · 05/01/2025 21:34

Most cereal is honestly horrible stuff with next to no nutritional value.

Alpen (which is one of the OP's existing picks) isn't too bad. None of the spookier additives and contains fibre, nuts, protein.

More sugar than ideal perhaps, but a hell of a lot more nourishing than Rice Krispies.