Ultra-processed foods linked to damage in all major human organs, study finds | Ultra-processed foods
Ultra-processed foods (UPF) are linked to damage in all major organ systems of the human body and pose a seismic threat to global health, according to the world’s largest study.
UPF is also rapidly replacing fresh foods in the diets of children and adults on all continents and is associated with increased risk of a dozen health problems, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease and depression.
The surge in UPF consumption worldwide is driven by for-profit companies using a range of aggressive tactics to boost consumption, muddle scientific debate and prevent regulation, the review of evidence suggests.
The findings, from a series of three papers published in the Lancet, come as millions of people increasingly consume UPF products such as ready meals, cereals, protein bars, soft drinks and fast food.
In the UK and US, more than half of the average diet now consists of UPF. For some, particularly those who are younger, poorer or from disadvantaged areas, a plan including up to 80% UPF is typical.
Evidence reviewed by 43 of the world’s leading experts suggests that diets high in UPF are linked to overnutrition, poor nutritional quality and higher exposure to harmful chemicals and additives.
A systematic review of 104 long-term studies conducted for the series found that 92 of them reported higher risks associated with one or more chronic diseases and early death from all causes.
One of the authors of the Lancet series, Professor Carlos Monteiro, professor of public health nutrition at the University of São Paulo, said the findings highlight why urgent action is needed to combat FPU.
“The first article in this Lancet series indicates that ultra-processed foods harm all major organ systems in the human body. The evidence strongly suggests that humans are not biologically adapted to consume them.”
He and his Brazilian colleagues developed the Nova classification system for foods. It groups them by level of processing, ranging from one – unprocessed or minimally processed foods, such as whole fruits and vegetables – to four: ultra-processed.
This category is made up of industrially manufactured products, often using artificial flavors, emulsifiers and colors. They include soft drinks and packaged snacks, and tend to be extremely tasty and high in calories but low in nutrients.
They are also designed and marketed to replace fresh foods and traditional meals, while maximizing business profits, Monteiro said.
Critics argue that UPF is a poorly defined category and that existing health policies, such as those aimed at reducing sugar and salt consumption, are sufficient to address the threat.
Monteiro and his co-authors acknowledged valid scientific criticisms of Nova and UPF – such as the lack of long-term clinical and community trials, an emerging understanding of mechanisms, and the existence of subgroups with different nutritional values.
However, they argued that future research should not delay immediate action to combat the scourge of FPU, which they said is warranted by current evidence.
“The growing consumption of ultra-processed foods is reshaping diets around the world, replacing fresh, minimally processed foods and meals,” Monteiro warned.
“This shift in what people eat is fueled by powerful global corporations generating huge profits by prioritizing ultra-processed products, backed by extensive marketing and political lobbying to end effective public health policies aimed at supporting healthy diets. »
The second article in the series proposes policies to regulate and reduce the production, marketing and consumption of UPFs. Although some countries have adopted rules to reformulate foods and control FPUs, “the global public health response is still in its infancy, much like the anti-tobacco movement was decades ago,” he says.
The third article argues that global corporations, not individual choices, are behind the rise of the UPF. UPF is a leading cause of the diet-related “chronic disease pandemic,” with food companies putting profit above all else, the authors said.
The main obstacle to health protection lies in “corporate political activities, coordinated transnationally through a global network of front groups, multi-stakeholder initiatives and research partners, to counter opposition and block regulation.”
Series co-author Professor Barry Popkin, from the University of North Carolina, said: “We are calling for ingredients that are UPF markers to be included on front-of-pack labels, alongside excess saturated fat, sugar and salt, to avoid unhealthy ingredient substitutions and enable more effective regulation. »
The authors also proposed tighter marketing restrictions, particularly for advertisements aimed at children, as well as banning UPFs in public places such as schools and hospitals and limiting UPF sales and shelf space in supermarkets.
One success story is Brazil’s national school food program, which has eliminated most UPFs and will require 90% of food to be fresh or minimally processed by 2026.
Scientists not involved in the series generally welcomed the review of the evidence, but also called for more research into UPF, cautioning that association with health harm does not necessarily mean causation.
