Recent commentary around people on weight-loss jabs having smaller appetites has triggered a flurry of retail activity. Brands like Greggs have openly discussed the impact on sales, and how they are adapting their menus to cater for customers with medically suppressed appetites. Meanwhile, Marks & Spencer and others are introducing nutrient dense meals for customers eating less because of their GLP-1 medications.
On the surface, it looks like a fast, pragmatic response to a new customer need. But underneath it sits a more uncomfortable truth: Food retail doesn’t usually change because it should. It changes because customers do.
How did we get here?
For years, the sector hasn’t consciously optimised for indulgence, but it has slipped there. Not through malice, but through commercial gravity. High-margin, repeat-purchase categories naturally rose to the top such as energy drinks, sweet treats, pastry-led easy eats, and anaemic packet sandwiches with limited nutritional value. Products designed for speed, grab-and-go consumption, long shelf-life, artificial flavourings and preservatives, have reigned.
That drift made sense in a world focused on convenience, throughput and operational simplicity. But it also quietly hollowed out nutritional quality. Convenience food ranges became about eating on the move, not always eating well.
The irony is that food to go should actually work in the GLP-1 age. Smaller portions, simpler meals and more frequent eating occasions align perfectly with the format. But my god, the quality and nutritional balance need to improve. If they do, that improvement benefits everyone, not just people on medication.
This pattern isn’t new. We’ve seen similar cycles before with gluten-free, vegan and plant-based ranges. What began as genuine dietary needs quickly turned into badge-led launches and opportunistic merchandising. Some of it was well intentioned, some of it less so. Too often, the label mattered more than the substance.
There’s a real risk of repeating that mistake here.
GLP-1 is not the cause, it’s the release valve
Weight-loss injections haven’t created this moment; they are a release valve on pressure that has been building for a long time. They sit alongside a social media culture that promotes transformation at speed, turning complex health journeys into simplified success stories. The uncomfortable reality is that many customers see GLP-1 as a “get rich quick” scheme for health.
People see dramatic before-and-after images online and want the same result, fast. Shortcuts become tempting. Context disappears. Support is variable.
That matters, because food retail doesn’t exist in isolation from those behaviours.
The opportunity and the responsibility
From an operator perspective, adapting ranges is not just sensible, it’s inevitable. Customers using GLP-1 medications eat differently. They should favour lighter meals, simpler ingredients, higher protein, better balance and smaller portions spread across the day. Advice for them is to avoid food that feels too rich, too heavy or too large.
But the opportunity here isn’t to medicalise food or shout about weight loss. Creating niche, labelled “GLP-1 ranges” risks being exclusionary and short-lived. The smarter response is quieter and more structural: designing sensible, nutritionally balanced food that naturally fits how people are eating now. Shout about that, be the home of that. Become a beacon for it, without losing your core customer.
There is a real responsibility on the sector in this moment.
Not everyone will seek proper medical advice. Not everyone will be supported when they come off the jab. And if food retail doesn’t react properly, if it doesn’t fix the underlying foundations and think smartly about what it puts back in front of customers, then we risk creating a vicious cycle, and setting up those on short-term GLP-1 jabs to rebound hard. Customers will come off medication and fall straight back into the same margin-friendly, long-life ranges that helped create the problem in the first place.
That’s where responsibility sits for the food sector. This isn’t about chasing a trend. It’s about using this moment to reset what everyday food looks like when appetite, behaviour and expectations change.
There’s also a danger that some responses simply swap one extreme for another. Seed crackers, powdered meal replacements and hyper-processed functional foods may tick a box, but they don’t build sustainable eating habits. If reduced appetite leads us further away from real, balanced food, then we’ve missed the point entirely.
Education, without lecturing
One of the hardest challenges here is education. Historically, the sector has avoided it. Customers don’t want lectures, and retailers don’t want complexity. But pretending the issue doesn’t exist is no longer an option.
If we can clearly label food for vegetarian and vegan customers, then there’s a strong case for a simple, non-judgemental way of signalling suitability here too: not medical claims, not diet messaging, just clarity. A strong ‘GLP-1 friendly’ indicator that helps customers make informed choices without stigma.
Handled well, this moment could quietly evolve food to go for the better. This is not through flash-in-the-pan ranges or shiny new packaging, but through better food, better balance and better decisions that last beyond the current wave of interest.
Handled badly, it becomes another reactive cycle. The industry will adapt. It always does. The real question is whether this time, it learns something lasting.
- Matt Cundrick is the founder of FTG Navigator, a global boutique food-to-go consultancy team. The business supports forecourt groups, retailers and brands across strategy, proposition design, equipment strategy and operational execution. FTG Navigator specialises in translating insight into practical, scalable food-to-go models that perform at store level.
