Will Candy With 30% Less Sugar Just Make Matters Worse?

Once reformulated this candy will "only" be 36.5% free sugar by weight 

A few weeks ago I blogged about the new lower in sugar Kit Kat bar that contains 4 fewer calories than the old bar (with 0.7g less sugar). The front of its package doesn't shout out about lower sugars though, instead it hypes "extra milk and cocoa".

It was the first example I'd seen of the inevitable future of ultra-processed treats that are being designed and launched under the banner of sugar as our global, singular, dietary boogeyman.

While there's little doubt we over consume sugar, and that sugar is one of the primary drivers of hyper-palatability and obesity, if the marketplace sees an influx of "now with 30% less sugar" ultra-processed foods, I'm not sure they won't make matters worse.

And that's precisely the sort of thing we're going to see as evidenced by this new line of Nestlé candy which according to this news story, will be sold alongside the original candy "with a 30% less sugar banner on the packaging"

Sounds an awful lot like the early 1990s when we saw the launch of "Fat-Free" Snackwell cookies (and more of course).

Will the "Now With 30% Less Sugar" banner lead people to buy candy more often? To eat candy more frequently? To eat more candy at each sitting? To grudgingly give in to their naggy kids and pack it in their lunches because it's less bad? Or will it lead to an overall reduction in free sugars and calories consumed?

For the majority of folks, my money's on all of the former, and none of the latter.