Stark health and diet inequalities revealed in new dashboard

New Health and Diet Inequalities Dashboard reveals shocking disparities, with tooth decay, obesity, diabetes and shorter life expectancy afflicting deprived constituencies 

The Food Foundation has today published a new Health and Diet Inequalities Dashboard [1], funded by the Nuffield Foundation, revealing the extent of health and dietary disparities between constituencies and regions across England. 

The dashboard includes new estimates of the health status of people living in different Parliamentary constituencies across England calculated by The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, drawing on government datasets [2].  

The dashboard shows how the national issue of poor diet is affecting people differently at a local level and looks at a range of metrics including childhood obesity (in Reception and Year 6), childhood dental decay (in Reception and Year 6), type 2 diabetes in adults, life expectancy, child poverty, and prominence of fast-food outlets. 

For each metric looked at, there is a significant variation across constituencies. For example, the number of people with type 2 diabetes is 5 times higher in the worst affected constituency (Leicester East - 1 in 8 people) compared to the least (Bristol Central - 1 in 40 people) [3]. The dashboard also shows as many as 1 in 3 Year 6 children have obesity in the worst affected constituencies (Smethwick and West Bromwich), compared to 1 in 8 in the least (St Albans) [4]. 

Nine constituencies fall in the bottom 25% across all metrics [5]. Of these, 5 are in Yorkshire and The Humber, 3 are in the North West and 1 is in the West Midlands. 

Rank	Region	Constituency	MP	Party
2	Yorkshire And The Humber	Bradford West	Naz Shah	Labour
4	Yorkshire And The Humber	Bradford East	Imran Hussain	Labour
6	West Midlands	Stoke-on-Trent Central	Gareth Snell	Labour Co-op
9	Yorkshire And The Humber	Bradford South	Judith Cummins	Labour
14	North West	Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton	Jim McMahon	Labour Co-op
15	North West	Blackpool South	Chris Webb	Labour
16	Yorkshire And The Humber	Barnsley South	Stephanie Peacock	Labour
27	Yorkshire And The Humber	Doncaster North	Ed Miliband	Labour
37	North West	Oldham East and Saddleworth	Debbie Abrahams	Labour

 

When all metrics were taken into account, 16 cabinet ministers’ constituencies were ranked in the bottom 50% overall. [6] 

Rank	Region	Constituency	MP
10	West Midlands	Wolverhampton South East	Pat McFadden
23	West Midlands	Birmingham Ladywood	Shabana Mahmood
27	Yorkshire And The Humber	Doncaster North	Ed Miliband
42	Yorkshire And The Humber	Rawmarsh and Conisbrough	John Healey
46	Yorkshire And The Humber	Barnsley North	Dan Jarvis
65	Yorkshire And The Humber	Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley	Yvette Cooper
71	North West	Stalybridge and Hyde	Jonathan Reynolds
74	East Midlands	Leicester West	Liz Kendall
83	North East	Redcar	Anna Turley
90	North East	Houghton and Sunderland South	Bridget Phillipson
118	North West	Wigan	Lisa Nandy
134	Yorkshire and the Humber	Leeds South	Hilary Benn
171	London	Tottenham	David Lammy
184	London	Ilford North	Wes Streeting
195	London	Ealing North	James Murray
199	Yorkshire and the Humber	Leeds West and Pudsey	Rachel Reeves

General trends across metrics show deprived constituencies are the worst affected. There are also notable regional divides, with constituencies in the North often being more impacted. For example, nearly 1 in 3 reception aged children from the North West have dental decay, compared to 1 in 6 in the South West [7] and a child in Year 6 living in the North East of England is a third more likely to be living with obesity than a child living in the South East. The North East is the worst affected for 6 out of the 9 metrics looked at. Meanwhile, the South East performed best overall.   

Understanding geographical disparities in both diets and the associated health issues, is key if the Government is to meet its manifesto commitments of raising the healthiest generation of children ever, halving the gap in healthy life expectancy between the richest and poorest, reducing child poverty and ending the need for emergency food parcels.  The Food Foundation is calling on policy makers to use the dashboard to target intervention where it is needed most in the Government’s upcoming Food Strategy and Child Poverty Strategy. 

Dr Hannah Brinsden, Head of Policy and Advocacy, The Food Foundation said, “Our new Health and Diet Inequalities Dashboard highlights the stark inequalities that exist across England, and the detrimental impact that our food system is having on our health.  The Government’s Food Strategy is a huge opportunity to reduce these regional inequalities and improve the healthiness of our nation. By focusing on national action to improve our food environments, alongside harnessing the power of local leadership, bringing together local businesses, community enterprises and producers, we can ensure that everyone has access to more nutritious, affordable food, no matter where they live.” 

Paul McDonald, Chief Campaigns Officer at Health Equals commented, "This new dashboard reveals the shocking extent of families suffering from poorer health and shorter lives across England, largely because they do not have the money in their pockets to buy healthy and nutritious food.  

“Food is an essential building block of good health that we should all have access to, no matter who we are or where we live. If the government is serious about tackling health inequalities, they need to take urgent action on food insecurity, so we can Make Health Equal across the nation." 

Professor Sir Michael Marmot CH, Director, UCL Institute of Health Equity, UCL Dept of Epidemiology and Public Health, said, "Too many people in Britain have food insecurity and too many people cannot access healthy food. The result is stark inequalities in health related to nutrition. A strategy to achieve greater health equity has to include access to affordable, nutritious and attractive food.” 

 

Top and Bottom 5 constituencies for each metric 

Obesity – Reception 

Highest constituency	% children with obesity	Lowest constituency	% children with obesity
Hartlepool	14.1%	South Cambridgeshire	4.6%
Middlesborough and Thornaby East	13.6%	Ely and East Cambridgeshire	5.0%
Smethwick	13.5%	Esher and Walton	5.1%
West Bromwich	13.5%	Godalming and Ash	5.3%
-Blackpool South  -Knowsley -Wolverhampton West  (joint)	13.4%	St Albans	5.3%

 

 Obesity – Year 6 

Highest constituency	% children with obesity	Lowest constituency	% children with obesity
Smethwick	31.0%	St Albans	11.3%
West Bromwich	31.0%	Esher and Walton	11.7%
Knowsley	30.7%	Epsom and Ewell	11.7%
Tipton and Wednesbury	30.6%	Guildford	12.0%
Wolverhampton West	30.2%	Godalming and Ash	12.2%

 

Dental decay  - Reception 

Highest constituency	% children with dental decay	Lowest constituency	% children with dental decay
Brent East	43.1%	Cannock Chase	3.4%
Liverpool Riverside	42.6%	Colchester	4.0%
Brent West	42.2%	North East Hertfordshire	5.3%
Bolton West	42.2%	Hertford and Stortford	7.2%
Bolton North East	41.4%	South West Hertfordshire	7.2%

 

Dental Decay – Year 6 

Highest constituency	% children with dental decay	Lowest constituency	% children with dental decay
Wolverhampton West	39.4%	Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven	1.5%
Wolverhampton North East	34.6%	Brighton Pavilion	1.5%
Wolverhampton South East	27.6%	Hove and Portslade	1.5%
North East Cambridgeshire	27.2%	Colchester	1.5%
Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes	27.1%	Stafford	2.0%

 

Type 2 Diabetes aged 17+ 

Highest constituency	% 17+ with Type 2 diabetes	Lowest constituency	% 17+ with Type 2 diabetes
Leicester East	13.1%	Bristol Central	2.5%
East Ham	12.3%	Cities of London Westminster	3.3%
Bradford West	12.0%	Richmond Park	3.8%
Bradford East	11.9%	Oxford West and Abingdon	3.8%
Ealing Southall	11.7%	Cambridge	3.9%

 

Life expectancy at birth 

Lowest  constituency	Life expectancy at birth	Highest constituency	Life expectancy at birth
Liverpool Riverside	75.04	Winchester	85.27
Blackpool South	75.86	Richmond Park	84.63
Middlesborough and Thornaby East	76.07	Cities of London and Westminster	84.61
Birmingham Erdington	76.92	North East Hampshire	84.59
Bolton South and Walkden	76.94	Mid Buckinghamshire	84.57

 

Child Poverty  

Highest constituency	%children living in relative poverty	Lowest constituency	%  children living in relative poverty
Birmingham Ladywood	61.9%	Harpenden and Berkhamsted	9.7%
Dewsbury and Batley	58.4%	Wokingham	12.5%
Bradford West	57.1%	Richmond Park	12.7%
Bradford East	55.5%	Sheffield Hallam	12.9%
Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North	55.1%	Mid Buckinghamshire	13.1%

 

 Proportion of food outlets that are fast food  

Highest constituency	Proportion of food outlets that are fast food	Lowest constituency	Proportion of food outlets that are fast food
Ashton-under-Lyne	37.5%	Kensington and Bayswater	14.6 %
Stalybridge and Hyde	37.5 %	Stratford-on-Avon	15.1 %
Rotherham	37.1 %	Twickenham	16.3 %
Rother Valley	37.1 %	St Ives	16.3 %
Hartlepool	36.9%	Cities of London and Westminster	16.6%

 

NOTES TO EDITOR  

[1] See: Health and Diet Inequalities Dashboard | Food Foundation 

[2] Constituency level data for England was estimated from England local authority data using a model developed by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. This model was used for 5 of the metrics included in the dashboard – obesity, diabetes, dental caries, fast food outlets and food insecurity. UK life expectancy data is directly from ONS, and UK child poverty data is used with permission from End Child Poverty Coalition. More details about the methods are available in the technical report, available here: https://foodfoundation.org.uk/initiatives/constituency-dashboard 

[3] Diabetes Profile update, 2025 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/diabetes-profile-update-march-2025/diabetes-profile-statistical-commentary-march-2025 

[4] National Child Measurement Programme, England, 2023/24 School Year. See: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/na…;

[5]  Defined as those in the bottom 25% of ranked English constituencies for each metric (lowest 25th percentile of the metric ranking).  

[6] An 'overall ranking' was determined by: 1) Giving each constituency a ranking across each metric for which they had data available. Where there were duplicate values in a metric, constituencies were given the same ranking (i,e. 1, 2 , 2 ,3) 2) Translating each constituency metric rank into a percentile value, so that comparisons can be made across metrics   3) calculating the number of metric data points available for each constituency, since not all constituencies had complete data sets. 3) creating a 'metric ranking percentile average' by summing each constituencies percentile ranking across all metrics, then dividing it by the number of metric data points available for that constituency. 4) Ordering each constituency according to their 'metric percentile average' then assigning them a score of 1 to 543 based on their place in that order, with 1 being most affected 

[7] Oral health survey of 5 year old children 2022 see:  https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/oral-health-survey-of-5-year-old-children-2022#:~:text=The%20results%20of%20the%20oral,experience%20of%20obvious%20dentinal%20decay 

AND Oral health survey of children in year 6, 2023. See: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/oral-health-survey-of-children-in-year-6-2023 

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT   

Juliet Grant, Senior Communications Manager, The Food Foundation  

E: juliet.grant@foodfoundation.org.uk  

T: 07929075489  

AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW   

Anna Taylor, Executive Director, The Food Foundation 

Dr Hannah Brinsden, Head of Policy and Advocacy, The Food Foundation  

LISTEN TO THE FOOD FOUNDATION PODCAST 

SOCIAL MEDIA     

https://linktr.ee/FoodFoundation

ABOUT THE FOOD FOUNDATION 

The Food Foundation is an independent charity working to influence food policy and business practice, shaping a sustainable food system which makes healthy diets affordable and accessible for all. We work in partnership with researchers, campaigners, community bodies, industry, investors, government and citizens to galvanise the UK’s diverse agents of change, using surprising and inventive ideas to drive fundamental shifts in our food system. These efforts are based on the continual re-evaluation of opportunities for action, building and synthesising strong evidence, convening powerful coalitions, harnessing citizens’ voices and delivering impactful communications. We are independent of all political parties and businesses, and we are not limited by a single issue or special interest Visit: www.foodfoundation.org.uk 

WITH THANKS TO OUR FUNDER 

The Nuffield Foundation is an independent charitable trust with a mission to advance social well-being. It funds research that informs social policy, primarily in Education, Welfare, and Justice. The Nuffield Foundation is the founder and co-funder of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, the Ada Lovelace Institute and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory. The Foundation has funded this project, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily the Foundation. 

Visit www.nuffieldfoundation.org