Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) have been labeled as “poison,” “addictive,” and “junk,” sparking justified concerns due to their links with various health issues, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, anxiety, and depression.
Their rapid rise has transformed the food landscape so drastically that what we consume today would be unrecognizable to even recent generations. From an evolutionary perspective, our bodies certainly aren’t equipped to handle them.
It’s no surprise that UPFs are a primary focus in efforts to tackle diet-related chronic diseases in the UK and US. However, we believe that the prevailing panic surrounding UPFs needs to be replaced with more thoughtful discussions. Not all ultra-processed items, like flavored yogurt or whole grain bread, deserve the same cautionary approach as sweets or sugary cereals. Being ultra-processed doesn’t inherently equate to being unhealthy; our perspective should be informed by previous scientific research.
As people consume more UPFs, their intake of saturated fat, sodium, and sugar tends to rise, while their intake of fiber, protein, and vital micronutrients declines. This trend runs counter to a healthy diet. Kevin’s recent research indicates that UPFs are often overeaten when they are energy-dense (more calories per bite) or particularly palatable (often combining nutrients such as sugars and fats that rarely coexist in nature).
On the other hand, Kevin’s research demonstrates that consuming UPF-rich meals that are energy-dense but less palatable can prevent weight gain. In fact, you could potentially lose weight even without intending to follow such a diet.
These insights hold significant implications, not only for individual choices but also for nutrition policies and regulations. Instead of broadly targeting all UPFs, efforts should concentrate on those that don’t meet healthy food standards. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is already heading in this direction, having recently introduced a definition of “healthy” food. This approach mirrors the UK’s nutritional profiling system, which emphasizes increasing the consumption of ingredients like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains while restricting sugar, sodium, and saturated fat. By honing in on UPFs with high-calorie or palatability-inducing combinations of nutrients, we can better tackle products that significantly contribute to obesity and related health concerns.
Addressing these specific foods requires implementing public health policies akin to those used in reducing tobacco usage, such as marketing limitations, compulsory labeling, and robust taxation. Furthermore, we must promote policies that improve the convenience, affordability, and accessibility of healthy foods, while also encouraging companies to reformulate UPFs to be healthier. For instance, envision a pizza made with a frozen whole-wheat crust topped with vegetables.
Some UPFs already align with FDA standards for healthy foods (such as whole grain bread and yogurt), and these items are today free from such regulations. Many people rely on UPF pasta sauces, hummus, frozen meals, canned beans, and bread, which can easily fit into a healthy diet. Therefore, it is crucial to pinpoint which UPFs pose the greatest risk.
While UPFs are not going away anytime soon, their narrative is still evolving. Let’s move past the fear and toward informed coexistence by recognizing how certain UPFs can be detrimental and taking appropriate action.
Co-authored by Julia Belluz and Kevin Hall. Food Intelligence: The science of how food nourishes and harms us.
topic:
Source: www.newscientist.com
