Walkers to change the recipes of Doritos Dippers, Baked and Popworks

Walkers changes recipes of Doritos Dippers, Baked, AND Popworks to slash salt, fat and sugar – but devastated fans say they want ‘proper crisps’ and slam ‘terrible’ healthy new flavours

• Walkers said it plans to make at least half of its products healthy or low-calorie
• It comes after the firm launched its first crisps that are not considered HFSS
• HFSS is the Government’s healthy food standard for high in fat, sugar or salt 
• Its new Walkers HFSS crisps include ‘Lightly Salted’ and ‘Mild Cheese and Onion’ 

Walkers has announced plans to introduce low-salt alternatives to its popular crisp brands, as part of a scheme to make at least half of its sales from healthy or low-calorie products by 2025.

In a move that risks upsetting its loyal fanbase, the crisps giant says it will change its Walkers Baked, Doritos Dippers and Popworks products so they are not considered HFSS (high in fat, sugar or salt) by Government standards. 

The company – which like other confectionery firms faces new regulations targeting junk food – says it will also invest £35million over the next three years into healthier product lines.

This will include reformulating some of its existing ranges and bringing new healthier products to supermarket shelves, including reduced salt ranges.

It comes after Walkers, which is owned by US giant PepsiCo, last month launched its first crisps that are not considered HFSS. 

The new Walkers ’45 per cent less salt’ range includes ‘Slightly Salted’, ‘A Dash of Salt and Vinegar’ and ‘Mild Cheese and Onion’.

The range comes in smaller portion sizes than the traditional recipe crisps – which Walkers will continue to sell alongside the lower-salt alternatives.

The move comes ahead of new rules coming into force in October that will restrict advertising and promotional deals, such as buy-one-get-one-free, on HFSS classified foods.

But the move by Walkers risks alienating loyal fans of the classic crisps – much like when Scottish soft drink Irn-Bru cut its sugar content by 50 per cent.

The recipe change left Scots rushing to stores to stockpile the full-sugar version before its lower-calorie alternative hit the shelves, while others hit out at the new lower-sugar versions.

And Walkers fans have similarly hit out, with some describing the new low-salt alternatives as ‘terrible’ and others calling for ‘proper crisps’.

Walkers has unveiled a range of crisps with less salt amid government plans to introduce restrictions on junk food advertising 

Walkers new flavours – Mild Cheese & Onion, Lightly Salted and A Dash of Salt & Vinegar – contain 45 per cent less salt than the traditional varieties 

One Twitter user wrote: Another wrote: ‘Am I the only one that thinks these NEW ‘GREAT TASTE’ lightly salted are terrible. 

‘I may as well buy the cheap supermarket ones now instead and save some cash. Rubbish.’  

Others meanwhile pledged not to buy the new low-salt crisps. One person, responding to the announcement of Walkers’ health pledge, wrote on Twitter: ‘Please don’t bother. Just as I only buy real full sugar Coke, I’m only going to buy proper fried crisps.’

The confectionary firms cutting back on salts, fats and sugars – and those allowing customers to choose for themselves 

Irn Bru

A.G. Barr – the firm behind Irn Bru – announced in 2017 that it would be cutting sugar in its famous orange drink by 50 per cent.

The move came ahead of the introduction of a sugar tax in Scotland in 2018.

But the move sparked outrage among people in Scotland – where it often described as the country’s national drink.

Scots even began stockpiling the full-sugar version before the lower-calorie option hit the shelves.

Coca-Cola

The world’s second biggest drinks manufacturer took a stand back in 2018 when the UK Government announced a sugar tax.

The firm refused to cut the sugar in its Classic Coke recipe ahead of the introduce of the sugar tax.

Instead the firm said it would push its diet and zero-sugar options and allow customers to choose which drink they wanted. 

Cadbury’s

The chocolate firm boasted back in 2019 that it had launched a healthier version of its famous Dairy Milk bar with 30 per cent less sugar.

But the firm, the second biggest confectionery firm after Mars, had reduced its bar size by 22 per cent from 45g for the old regular bar, to 35g.

The new smaller bar still contains around 13g of sugar, compared to 25g in the classic snack.

Nestle

The Swiss confectionery firm, behind popular brands such as Kit-Kat, Aero and Smarties has attempted a different method to cutting sugar.

The firm announced in 2018 it achieved a world first by  “restructuring” the sugar it uses in its confectionery to produce a white chocolate bar with 30 per cent less sugar than its usual Milkybar brand.  

The special ‘restructured’ sugar is made by spraying sugar, milk and water into warm air and drying the mixture.

This creates a sugar mix that dissolves faster in the mouth – in the same way as candy floss – creating a quick and more intense burst of flavour, with less sugar content.

Despite the criticism, Walkers says it will push ahead with the plan and says further innovation is planned for next year.

It will also make significant advertising and marketing investment to encourage customers to make healthier choices.

Jason Richards, general manager of PepsiCo UK & Ireland, said: ‘This is a significant milestone in our long-term commitment to provide smart snacking choices, without compromising on taste.

‘We’ve been making changes to our portfolio over many years, but now is the time for even bolder action.

‘We have set ourselves the ambitious goal of a 50% sales target for non-HFSS or lower calorie snacks.

‘We’ve got a long way to go from where we are now, but we’re determined to make this happen.

‘Thanks to our research and development and nutrition experts, I’m confident that people up and down the country will enjoy these new products as much as their old favourites.’

It comes after Walkers unveiled a range of crisps with less salt amid government plans to introduce restrictions on junk food advertising. 

Walkers new flavours – Mild Cheese & Onion, Lightly Salted and A Dash of Salt & Vinegar – contain 45 per cent less salt than the traditional varieties.  

The range is the brand’s first to be ‘non-HFSS’ (high in fat, sugar and salt), meaning it will not be subject to restrictions on HFSS products. 

Last year the government announced that fast food and confectionery giants in Britain will be subject to heavier online restrictions and a 9pm TV watershed on HFSS products from 2023. 

Walkers’ rival KP Snacks will soon follow suit, with Tyrrells, Popchips and Hula Hoops Puft set get non-HFSS reformulation, according to The Grocer.   

A 25g packet of Walkers Ready Salted contains 0.34g of salt. The NHS advises adults consume no more than 6g per day. Cheese & Onion contains 0.29g while Salt & Vinegar contains 0.4g.

In contrast the new range of flavours contain between 0.16g-0.17g per 25g bag.

The new low salt options are available across UK supermarkets, 

Walkers explained the low-salt range has been inspired by research that found 79 per cent of people want to eat less salt because it’s important to them for their health. 

The brand claims the new range performed strongly in consumer taste testing.

Rachael Smith, Senior Marketing Manager at Walkers, said: ‘With lower salt alternatives now reaching over 70 per cent of UK households, we know consumers are always looking for great-tasting options.

‘We firmly believe that this choice should never come at the expense of delicious flavour and with our new range, we’re on a mission to prove that less salt is unexpectedly tasty. 

‘Our latest launch answers the demands of shoppers, whilst helping retailers to capitalise on a growing consumer trend.’

It comes as the Government prepares to bring in new legislation in October to tackle childhood obesity in the UK.   

The Government aims to ban ‘buy one, get one free’ (BOGOF) deals for unhealthy foods and junk food adverts before the 9pm watershed.

Under the wider strategy announced in July 2020, shops and supermarkets were also required to remove foods high in fats, sugar and salt from prominent places, such as by the checkouts or near entrances.

The anti-obesity strategy is considered a personal crusade for the Prime Minister, who lamented that he was ‘too fat’ when he was struck down with coronavirus in April 2020. 

Meanwhile, Walkers is the latest brand to go on a health offensive, following other popular confectionery firms, such as  A.G. Barr – the makers of Irn Bru.   

The firm sparked furore in 2017 after cutting the sugar in its famous orange concoction – often described as Scotland’s national drink – by 50 per cent.

The makers of Irn Bru sparked furore in 2017 after cutting the sugar in its famous orange concoction – often described as Scotland’s national drink – by 50 per cent

Just days after the announcement of the move – which was driven by the introduction of a sugar tax in 2018 – people in Scotland began stockpiling to drink.

Ryan Allen, who started the Hands Off Our Irn Bru campaign, said at the time: ‘It is a national treasure in Scotland and really is part of our culture with its unique taste, branding and marketing.

Why are brands such as Walkers making changes now? 

Moves by confectionery brands to reduce fat, sugar and salt come as the Government is preparing to bring in new legislation in October to tackle childhood obesity in the UK.   

The Government aims to ban ‘buy one, get one free’ (BOGOF) and three-for-two deals for unhealthy foods and junk food adverts before the 9pm watershed.

Under a wider strategy announced in July 2020, shops and supermarkets were also required to remove foods high in fats, sugar and salt from prominent places, such as by the checkouts or near entrances.

The anti-obesity strategy is considered a personal crusade for the Prime Minister, who lamented that he was ‘too fat’ when he was struck down with coronavirus in April 2020. 

It follows on from the introduction of a sugar tax in 2018.

Manufacturers of soft drinks containing more than 5g of sugar per 100ml have been made to pay a levy of 8p a litre to the Treasury, or 24p a litre for sugar content over 8g per 100ml, since the tax came into force in April 2018.

‘It’s also well known to alleviate the effects of a hangover and is many a persons’ craving, saviour or go-to drink after a night on the tiles.

‘Don’t do it Barr – please have a rethink on this.’

While firms like Irn Bru have bowed to Government pressure to change their recipes, soft drink competitor Coca-Cola has refused.

The firm said it would not cut its sugar in its Classic Coke, instead saying it would allow customers to chose themselves between their sugar drinks and low-calorie options.

A spokesperson for the firm, speaking at the time of the introduction of the UK sugar tax in 2018, said: We believe people should still be able to choose a Coca‑Cola Classic if that’s what they want to drink.

‘If people want the great taste of Coke without the sugar, we have Diet Coke and Coca‑Cola Zero Sugar, neither of which is subject to the Government’s Soft Drinks Tax.’  

Other firms have tried to reduce the size of their products in order to make them lower in sugar.

The chocolate firm Cadbury boasted back in 2019 that it had launched a healthier version of its famous Dairy Milk bar with 30 per cent less sugar.

But the firm, the second biggest confectionery firm after Mars, had reduced its bar size by 22 per cent from 45g for the old regular bar, to 35g.

The new smaller bar still contains around 13g of sugar, compared to 25g in the classic snack.  

Nestle, the Swiss confectionery firm, behind popular brands such as Kit-Kat, Aero and Smarties has attempted a different method to cutting sugar.

The firm announced in 2018 it achieved a world first by  “restructuring” the sugar it uses in its confectionery to produce a white chocolate bar with 30 per cent less sugar than its usual Milkybar brand.  

The special ‘restructured’ sugar is made by spraying sugar, milk and water into warm air and drying the mixture.

This creates a sugar mix that dissolves faster in the mouth – in the same way as candy floss – creating a quick and more intense burst of flavour, with less sugar content.

The great protein branding sham: How ‘muscle-building’ alternatives to cereals, energy bars and milk can have more fat, sugar AND salt than their originals (and only marginally more protein) 

By Joe Davies, Health Reporter for MailOnline – Published on March 28, 2022

High-protein versions of popular foods can actually contain more calories, fat, sugar and salt than their originals, MailOnline can reveal. 

Demand for products with more protein has rocketed in recent years, with household brands like Weetabix, Mars and Snickers among those to launch versions with extra amounts of the muscle-building nutrient. 

Supermarkets have even dedicated entire aisles to the products, which are popular among gym-goers because of protein’s role in building muscle and repairing fibres after a work out.

Experts and campaign groups told MailOnline this may give an impression that the products may be healthier than their originals — even though in many cases the additional protein is minimal. 

Quaker’s Oat So Simple Protein Porridge, for example, has more salt, sugar and calories than its standard Rolled Oat, with more than twice as much fat. 

Per 100g, the protein-laden version has 380 calories, 1.2g of sugar and 7.6g fat. By comparison, the standard one has 374 calories, 1.1g of sugar and 3.2g of fat. In a standard sachet of 37g, the Oat So Simple option offers just 3.7g more protein than 40g of the rolled oats, despite packaging bragging about it being ‘high in protein’. 

Weetabix’s Protein Cereal alternative is also slightly less healthy on three of the four key measures than its original breakfast classic. 

Per 100g, the protein variety contains 365 calories, 4.7g of sugar, 2.4g of fat and 0.23g of salt per 100g, while the original contains 362 calories, 4.2g of sugar, 2g of fat and 0.28g of salt in the same amount. 

Katharine Jenner, director of the campaign group Action on Sugar and Action on Salt, has urged the public to be aware that high-protein products’ popularity is often down to marketing rather than any real health benefit.

She said there is nothing to stop brands marketing themselves to fitness enthusiasts, even if they are considered to have high levels of salt, sugar or fat.

Quaker’s Oat So Simple Protein (right) porridge, for example, has a higher salt, sugar and calorie content, with more than twice as much fat as its standard Rolled Oats (left)

High-protein versions of popular foods can actually contain more calories, fat, sugar and salt than their originals, MailOnline can reveal

Weetabix’s Protein Cereal (right) alternative is also less healthy on all four measures than its original breakfast classic (left), and offers just 3.75g more protein per biscuit

Nature Valley’s Protein Peanut and Chocolate bars (right) were also found to be unhealthy, with high (red) levels of fat at 30g. This is 25 per cent higher than the 24g of fat found in the company’s equivalent Sweet and Salty Dark Chocolate With Nuts (left) bars

Tesco’s homebrand High Protein Granola (right) has a quarter more sugar and four times as much salt as the supermarket’s Grains and Seeds (left) variety

A 200ml serving of Alpro’s vegan Soya High Protein drink (right) has more than a more calories and nearly 50 per cent more fat than its original dairy-free drink (left)

Kellogg’s Special K Protein (right) also has higher fat per 100g as the company’s original Special K (left) cereal

MailOnline’s analysis found a standard serving of Alpro’s vegan Soya High Protein drink has more than a third extra calories and nearly 50 per cent more fat than its original dairy-free drink. 

The protein drink contains 114 calories, 5g of sugar, 5.6g of fat and 0.2g of salt per 200ml glass. Most cereals require 120ml of milk.

The non-protein equivalent has 84 calories, 5g of sugar, 3.8g of fat and 0.16g of salt in the same serving, by comparison. 

And the ‘High Protein’ equivalent contains 10g of protein, just 3.4g more then Alpro’s original product (6.6g). 

And Arla’s Protein Blueberry yoghurt actually has less protein than its standard Skyr Yogurt for the same portion. 

Per 100g, the blueberry yoghurt has 10g of protein, 72 calories, 0.2g of fat, 6.3g of sugar and 0.25g of salt.

The low fat option has 10.6g of protein, 63 calories, less than 0.5g of fat, 46g of sugar and 0.14g of salt for the same amount.

MailOnline also found Tesco’s homebrand High Protein Granola has a quarter more sugar and four times as much salt as the supermarket’s plain Grains and Seeds Granola. 

Per 100g, the protein version has 12.3g of sugar — giving it an amber colour on the Department of Health’s traffic light scheme for packaging — compared to 9.8g in the original granola.

The high protein alternative also contains 0.4g of salt per 100g — another amber level — four times the amount of grain and seeds (0.1g), which is considered a low amount, signalled green on packaging. 

Tesco today told MailOnline it is reformulating its High Protein Granola with reduced calories and fat. 

Ms Jenner, a nutritionist at Queen Mary University, told MailOnline: ‘Protein is suddenly being added to a huge range of food and drink products, and their popularity is down to marketing — not because people actually need more protein.

‘These findings are deeply concerning as there are currently no rules around whether health and nutrition claims can be used on products that would receive a ‘red’ traffic light label. 

‘In practice, this means that a consumer may reach for a breakfast cereal — which may have a red traffic light label for its harmful sugar or saturated fat content — simply owing to its ‘high in protein’ label.

‘Manufacturers should seriously commit to making their products genuinely healthier, and stop making health and nutrient claims on products deemed high in fat, salt and sugar.’ 

Nature Valley’s Protein Peanut and Chocolate bar were also found to be less healthy than the company’s equivalent Sweet and Salty Dark Chocolate With Nuts bars, with high (red) levels of fat at 30g — 25 per cent higher than the 24g of fat found in the original.

The protein variety even has higher salt content than the ‘Salty’ variety — 1g compared to 0.8g — as well as higher calories — 495g compared to 464g.

And Kellogg’s Special K Protein Berries, Clusters and Seeds also has higher fat than the company’s original Special K cereal. It contains 371 calories, 14g of sugar, 3.2g of fat, 0.67g of salt and 12g of protein per 100g of cereal, compared to 392 calories, 14g of sugar, 1.3g of fat, 0.84g of salt and 8g of protein in the original variety.

But while many of the cereals and milks have higher levels of fat, salt, sugar or calories than their equivalents, Mars and Snickers’ protein bars are actually healthier. 

A 50g Mars protein bar contains 189 calories, 5.6g of fat, 17.8g of sugar, 10.1g of protein and 0.35g of salt. Its 50g original bar has 224 calories, 8.4g of fat, 30g of sugar, 2.2g of protein and 0.21g of salt.

Snickers Protein has 192 calories, 7.8g of fat, 14.1g of sugar, 10g of protein and 0.27g of salt for the same portion. Its original bar has 245 calories, 13.4g of fat, 21.6g of sugar, 4.6g of protein and 0.22g of salt.

Professor Gunter Kuhnle, an expert in nutrition and food science at the University of Reading, told MailOnline the figures show many protein products on the market actually aren’t more healthy than their equivalents.

He said: ‘Based on the data here, I don’t see why the high protein versions should [claim to] be healthier. They often have more fat, sugar and salt. 

‘They might have more fibre and protein often fills up more quickly — but I don’t think that’s enough to justify a claim of being more healthy.

‘I think it is important for consumers to understand that a healthy diet consists of more than just a single food item, and so all of these products can be part of a healthy diet. 

‘But I don’t think that the high protein ones are more healthy.’

Protein is more satiating than fat and carbohydrates — the other main macronutrient groups — leaving people fuller for longer, which can help them eat less. 

Weetabix said: ‘Protein at breakfast is important as it helps to regulate appetite and balance daily food intake. 

‘For those who need, or are keen, to boost their protein intake, Weetabix Protein offers a delicious alternative breakfast that contains almost twice as much protein as our regular biscuits.

‘Due to the added wheat protein, a 100g serving of Weetabix Protein does include slightly higher levels of sugar, calories and fat compared to our Weetabix Original. 

‘However, Weetabix Protein is still categorised as a green product on the nutritional wheel, providing a healthy, balanced and great tasting breakfast.’

A Kellogg’s spokesperson said: ‘Special K Original and Special K Protein are two very different recipes — our Original cereal consists of one flake made up of rice, wheat and barley. 

‘Our Protein cereals contain two types of flake, as well as clusters. They also include ingredients such as nuts, berries and seeds which of course means the nutritional information, including fat content, is different to that of our Original cereal.

‘Special K Protein is slightly lower in sugar than Special K Original, however, all have an amber traffic light for sugar content. 

‘They are classed as non-high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) using the government’s own nutrition standards.’

A Tesco spokesperson said: ‘The health of our customers is incredibly important to us and we’ve worked hard to provide our customers with great-tasting own brand foods.

‘A reformulated version of our High Protein Granola with reduced calories and fat will be on sale in the coming weeks.’

Quaker, Danone and General Mills have been approached for comment.

Source: Read Full Article