Revealed: The 10 foods at risk of going EXTINCT...because Gen Z refuse to eat them
Now, this generation is also getting recognised for their hatred of certain foods.
A new survey has revealed the 10 foods at risk of going extinct in the UK...because Gen Z refuse to eat them.
Topping the list is liver, which over a third (35 per cent) of Gen Z turn their noses up at.
Meanwhile, almost a quarter (23 per cent) say they would avoid chowing down on mushrooms.
'Brits claim to eagerly embrace culinary trends and global flavours, but they can be particularly prejudiced when it comes to certain foods, and this is one of the biggest barriers to discovery,' said TV maître d'hôtel Fred Sirieix, who commissioned the research, on behalf of Boursin plant-based.
'Many ingredients including plant-based alternatives to cheese have huge negative preconceptions.
'But despite many claiming they'd be able to differentiate plant-based from dairy, even the most discerning foodies were fooled by this plant-based alternative to cheese when we let taste do the talking.'
For the survey, 2,000 British adults were asked about the foods they would refuse to eat.
The results revealed that six in 10 Brits claim to dislike foods before they've even tried them.
Liver tops the list as the food most hated by Gen Z, followed by blue cheese, which almost a third (32 per cent) refuse to eat.
Anchovies are off the menu for 30 per cent of this generation, while 29 per cent avoid black pudding, and 26 per cent say no to prawns.
Duck is a no-go for 25 per cent of Gen Z, while 23 per cent shun tofu, mushrooms, and olives.
Finally, 21 per cent wouldn't even consider going near plant-based cheese.
'There's a whole world of flavours out there waiting to be explored if you're brave enough,' Mr Sirieix said.
'Even ingredients you might dismiss because of previous experiences, judgements, or assumptions can still surprise you if prepared in the right way.
'So, embrace the challenge and let the taste do the talking.'
The survey comes shortly after research revealed the iconic British dishes at risk of going extinct in the next five years.
Kitchen appliance maker Ninja surveyed 2,000 people and studied online search trends for popular UK dishes to see how food habits are changing.
Based on the findings, the firm thinks Glamorgan sausage will be the quickest to vanish from British dinner plates for good – by November 2025.
Meanwhile, a traditional Welsh dish called tatws pum munud ('five-minute potatoes') will be gone before this Christmas.
Pan haggerty, a Northumbrian baked dish of potatoes, onions and cheese, will be extinct by summer 2026, the experts reveal.
Even the iconic shepherd's pie – originating in northern England or Ireland in the late 18th century – will disappear by June 2027.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Streeting should ‘channel Thatcher' and introduce prostate screening
Wes Streeting should 'channel Margaret Thatcher ' and introduce screening for prostate cancer without delay, one of the world's leading experts has said. Prof Jonathan Waxman, the founder of the charity Prostate Cancer UK, says the Health Secretary should learn from Thatcher's decision to introduce routine mammograms for women, which he said had saved 3,000 lives a year since they were introduced in 1988. The Telegraph has launched a campaign calling for the introduction of targeted screening for prostate cancer so those at high risk are automatically offered tests. Prostate Cancer UK has submitted evidence in favour of the policy to the UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC), which is currently considering the matter, with a decision expected later this year. Writing for The Telegraph, Prof Waxman said: 'There are interesting parallels between the prostate cancer and breast cancer screening stories. 'In the 1970s, before breast cancer screening was introduced by Government dictat, the medical consensus was, and, you have guessed it, that early diagnosis through screening mammography would not save lives. 'Mrs T, regardless of the medical consensus, waved her handbag at the doctors, ignored the consensus, and launched a screening programme for breast cancer. And the result? Screening mammography, together with treatment advances, has led to a massive improvement in survival from breast cancer. 'Before screening, just 65 per cent of patients with breast cancer survived and now over 80 per cent are cured as a result of early detection and better treatment. 'And how does this improvement manifest in the real world? Around 3,000 fewer women die each year in the UK from breast cancer than before the screening programme was introduced.' The emeritus professor at Imperial College London said Prostate Cancer UK led a consortium of men's health charities to collectively inform the committee on the importance of targeted screening for those at highest risk. But he said the NHS should act now so that GPs do far more to help men at risk of prostate cancer. He urged the NHS to rewrite its guidance so that family doctors are told to proactively start conversations with men about the PSA blood tests which can detect the disease. Current guidance says that men can ask for a test, though some GPs rebuff them. For younger men, including those with a family history of disease, offering a test is down to the clinical judgment of GPs about. In both cases, the onus is on patients to seek help in the first place, with many men including those with family histories of prostate cancer unaware they are at heightened risk of the disease. Prof Waxman said the NHS should rewrite its advice so that GPs are told that they should bring up prostate cancer with all patients who might be at extra risk. He added that the guidelines should suggest that GPs start conversations with men from the age of 45 at highest risk, so those who wish to can obtain a PSA test. 'This puts the power of informed choice back in the hands of men who need it the most and is a crucial step on the path to early diagnosis,' he says. In the past, screening advisers have rejected the practice on the grounds that the tests are too unreliable, and could result in too many men undergoing needless procedures. However, in recent years the back-up diagnostics used to confirm the initial test findings have significantly improved. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesman said: 'This Government has been clear we would like to see screening in place, but the decision must be evidence-led. 'The UK National Screening Committee is looking at this as a priority – including reviewing the evidence for screening men with a family history of prostate cancer. 'While the review is taking place we are getting on with improving cancer treatment and prevention, as well as funding tens of millions of pounds of research – GPs should consider risk factors and use clinical judgment when considering if patients need a prostate cancer test.' Prostate cancer is a lot more than a nuisance By Jonathan Waxman Sixty years ago, around 10,000 people in the UK were diagnosed annually with prostate cancer. Currently over 50,000 men are diagnosed each year and prostate cancer has the dreadful distinction of being the commonest cancer in men. In parallel, the number of prostate cancer deaths has increased from 3,300 to over 12,000 men annually. So, what to do? We can hope that the treatment of prostate cancer will improve and improve, and cures are found. Treatment is getting better. Thankfully, in 2025, well over 80 per cent of men with prostate cancer that has not spread beyond the prostate will be cured and the duration of survival for men with cancer that has spread has doubled compared with 25 years ago. These improvements have come because of modern medicine's marvellous miracles, developing from brilliant university research and big pharma's R & D. Prostate Cancer UK has invested over £120m in research over the years. But clearly despite the gloss of shiny medical breakthroughs, prostate cancer remains a fundamentally unpleasant problem, and a lot more than a nuisance. What can be done? Find it early, you say? Yes, that would seem logical. How do we do this? Well, if we want to find prostate cancer early then the obvious answer is to screen for prostate cancer. There is no UK screening programme for the early detection of prostate cancer, a cancer which is often without symptoms. The National Screening Committee is currently considering the role of screening for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer UK has led a consortium of men's health charities to collectively inform the committee, which advises government, on the importance of targeted screening for those at highest risk. There are interesting parallels between the prostate cancer and breast cancer screening stories. In the 1970s, before breast cancer screening was introduced by Government dictat, the medical consensus was, and, you have guessed it, that early diagnosis through screening mammography would not save lives. Mrs T, regardless of the medical consensus, waved her handbag at the doctors, ignored the consensus, and launched a screening programme for breast cancer. And the result? Screening mammography together with treatment advances have led to a massive improvement in survival from breast cancer. Before screening, just 65 per cent of patients with breast cancer survived and now over 80 per cent are cured as a result of early detection and better treatment. And how does this improvement manifest in the real world? Around 3000 fewer women die in the UK from breast cancer each year than before the screening programme was introduced. To return to the debate on screening for prostate cancer. We are now at a critical inflection point in the history of prostate cancer screening. Last year, Prostate Cancer UK published research that showed prostate cancer diagnosis is safer and more accurate than ever before, and this in part is thanks to research the charity funded leading to MRI – Magnetic Resonance Imaging – being introduced into the diagnostic pathway. The National Screening Committee, under the iron baton of its excellent chair, is currently deliberating on the evidence for and against screening for prostate cancer and will issue a report this year. In heavily trailed remarks, Wes Streeting has indicated that he is in favour of screening but not for everyone, just for selective high risk groups of men. We at Prostate Cancer UK welcome this ministerial support, for it is also our view that there is a need for screening, and we believe the evidence is now there for targeted screening. We welcome his remarks at a time when we are about to launch TRANSFORM, a multi-centre screening trial using sophisticated technologies based on current diagnostic tools, an adaptive trial that is open to new screening tests. Prostate Cancer UK's trial invests £42m in a very long-term campaign to assess the survival benefits of modern screening methods. So, who are Mr Streeting's selective high risk groups of men at increased risk of prostate cancer? These are men with family histories of prostate cancer who constitute 1 to 5 per cent of all diagnosed patients, and black men, who have a one in four risk of prostate cancer, which is twice the risk of white men. What to do whilst we await the Screening Committee's conclusions? Currently GP guidelines concerning testing for prostate cancer are outdated. We urgently need these NHS guidelines updated to empower GPs to proactively start conversations about PSA testing with men from the age of 45 at highest risk. This puts the power of informed choice back in the hands of men who need it the most and is a crucial step on the path to early diagnosis. So, yes, prostate cancer is a bit of a nuisance, but let us see if we can do something about that nuisance. Prof Jonathan Waxman OBE is the founder and president of Prostate Cancer UK
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Sir Chris Hoy explains why he feels 'lucky' after cancer diagnosis granted him 'the time to really appreciate life'
Sir Chris Hoy says his terminal cancer diagnosis has given him something many others never get: time to reflect, reset priorities and truly appreciate life. The Olympic legend, who revealed in October that he has stage four prostate cancer, has become a powerful voice for early detection and a living example that serious illness need not mean the end of meaningful living. Speaking to The Telegraph, Hoy reflected on friends who died suddenly, without the chance to say goodbye. He said: 'What would they have given for that? And therefore, for me, I think: "Well, aren't I lucky?" Look at the privilege I've got, the time to really appreciate life.' Hoy had no symptoms before his diagnosis. Then a sore shoulder led to a scan, which revealed a tumour. Further tests confirmed the cancer had spread to his bones. He was 47. Since then, Hoy, now 49, has thrown himself into raising awareness — particularly for men over 45 or those with risk factors like a family history. His own father was diagnosed with prostate cancer shortly before the London 2012 Olympics, but made a full recovery thanks to early detection. Hoy has also seen the impact of speaking out. NHS data shows a sharp rise in urological cancer referrals since his announcement, while Prostate Cancer UK has reported a major spike in risk assessments among men. He's not one to seek praise — in fact, he draws inspiration from others who spoke publicly about their diagnoses, including Rob Burrow and Doddie Weir. 'They stood up and they smiled and they used humour and they recognised that they could make a difference. I don't really see myself in the same vein as those two, but if I could have any impact at all…' Hoy is currently training for his September event, the Tour de 4, a mass-participation charity ride with routes for all abilities. He'll be tackling the toughest 56-mile route and says the goal is to challenge public perceptions of what living with stage four cancer can look like. He's also clear-eyed about the emotional toll of his diagnosis — including the fear, panic and difficult conversations with his children. But he credits his family, his support network, and the simple power of staying in the present for getting him through. 'It's the fear of the future that causes anxiety and stress for most people,' he said. 'So it's not allowing yourself to fast forward and try and predict what's going to happen because you never know.' Hoy's wife Sarra was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis just weeks after his own news. The couple have faced both challenges side by side, and Sarra is now training for Tour de 4 too. Between workouts, Hoy has returned to motor racing, recently driving at Le Mans with Top Gear's Chris Harris. But he insists the everyday moments matter most — time with his children, a good film, a shared laugh. He hopes his public platform will help others facing cancer feel less alone, and inspire men to get checked before it's too late. 'If my legacy is that less men are dying from prostate cancer, that would be incredible,' he concluded.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
People are just realizing what paprika is made from and why it is red
It is one of the most common spices in the kitchen, used for everything from seasoning meat to flavoring stews. But the exact origin of paprika has many people scratching their heads. Most spices' names are derived directly from the plant they are made of. Cinnamon, for example, was once cinnamon sticks. Cumin is dried cumin seeds. And ginger is made of ground ginger root. The word 'paprika' also comes from its parent plant. But you might have to work a little harder work out its provenance. The indirect translation comes from the Latin word for 'pepper' according to Etymonline. So when you've sprinkled paprika onto your chicken, chili, or deviled eggs, you're really adding dried out, finely ground bell peppers. Its bright color is thanks to the type of bell pepper used, which is often red. The spice can add tangy, smoky, and even sweet flavors to cooking. It is also dense in nutrients like vitamin A, capsaicin, and carotenoid antioxidants. Vitamin A supports a healthy immune system and helps maintain good vision. Capsaicin is good for heart health, weight loss, and pain management. And carotenoid antioxidants can reduce risk of obesity, diabetes, and some types of cancer. Recently, many people on social media have been stunned to learn the origin of their favorite spice. One person on X posted: 'Why did I just learn that paprika is made from a red bell pepper,' accompanied by a mind-blown emoji. Another shared the revelation and received hundreds of commenters who, likewise, had no idea. 'Okay, why did it take me 31 years of life to find out that PAPRIKA IS JUST GROUND RED BELL PEPPER?!?,' she wrote. ' seriously?!,' one person reacted. 'I refuse to accept this,' commented another. One account, who has labeled themselves the Plant Daddy, explained further that, 'It's Capsicum annum species of which bell pepper are a cultivar, but can be other types of less hot / more sweet pepper cultivars. 'Also is smoked in some regions over oak for diff flavor, other locales also blend in hotter varieties, etc.!' Cultivar plants, like bell pepper, are created through a selective breeding process. Through carefully controlled seed production, farmers can breed produce with the right flavors and colors to eventually make the perfect paprika. Paprika production involves drying out ripe peppers and grinding them into a powder. The spice typically lasts for between two and three years before it begins to lose its potency and color but is still safe to eat. It should be stored in an airtight container in a cool, dry area to maximize its longevity. Originally cultivated in central and southern America, paprika was brought to Europe in the 16th century and proliferated from there. Today it is used in cuisines all across the world, but is particularly associated with Hungarian cooking.
