Like ultra-processed food (UPF) itself, the subject of UPF is everywhere – radio, TV, Twitter, you name it, the topic crops up. I too could not resist writing a post on it a few months ago. And now I am publishing another one but one in a slightly more irritated mood.
Why do these endless discussions on UPF irritate me?
To start with, there is no uniform definition of UPF, and many commentators seem more than a little confused about what UPF actually is. One definition holds that Ultra-processed foods are foods that have been altered to include fats, starches, sugars, salts and hydrogenated oils extracted from other foods. They contain ingredients, additives, and preservatives that are not normally used in home cooking. It seems obvious that discussions on UPF without a clear and understandable definition of the term are merely generating confusion in the general public.
But there are, of course, lists of UPF that might render the subject a bit clearer. The trouble, however, is that these lists reveal disagreement among each other. Thus they are prone to generate even more confusion.
Next, there is the evidence – and there is lots of it. It suggests that the regular consumption of UPF is bad for virtually every aspect of health. And if there is no evidence that it is detrimental for a given condition, it probably is merely because nobody has yet bothered to do the analyses. The trouble is, however, that all the relevant research comes from either basic science or epidemiology. This means that causality is unproven.
A further problem is that even the experts don’t know what the alleged causal factors in UPF are.
- Is it the processing?
- The additives?
- The sugar?
- The fats?
- If so, which fats exactly?
- Is it perhaps a complex inter-play of some of these factors?
If we want to make progress, we need to know! If not, we cannot possibly begin to avoid the health-threatening effects of UPF.
The final and arguably biggest problem is that UPF is everywhere. Nobody living in an industrialized country and earning a regular living can avoid consuming UPF. This means, I fear, that all the current hype about UPF is not just irritating but possibly counter-productive.
Imagine an average person trying to make sense of these discussions. She would soon give up and conclude that all these ‘clever’ experts know nothing at all. Her foremost concern is to make ends meet. In the end, she will carry on as before. Alternatively, she might even conclude that, as the even experts do not make sense, UPF cannot be all that bad after all.
After reading about and listening to the arguments around UPF, I ask myself this: would it not be more productive to apply more common sense and focus on a few nutritional messages that are 1) solidly based on evidence and 2) an average person can actually follow?
11 Responses to Ultra-processed food: a few critical thoughts
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Edzard … great subject !
The impact on the world health as a result of eating UPF is quite large in my opinion.
Edzard said;
“And if there is no evidence that it is detrimental for a given condition, it probably is merely because nobody has yet bothered to do the analyses.”
Lots of “studies” but not the studies that actually prove much… aka… RCTs. We can’t expect the folks (corporations) that benefit from selling the UPFs, nor the pharma corps to spend huge amounts of money to go against their own interests.
Edzard said;
“Nobody living in an industrialized country and earning a regular living can avoid consuming UPF.”
That might be true for the low-income earners. I see average income earners able to afford a healthy diet, it’s more a matter of choices. Although not all UPF foods are inexpensive…. many are. It’s largely about how committed the population is to be sticking with better choices.
My choices to avoid;
Avoid highly processed seed oils, and hydrogenated oils
Avoid additives (preservatives)
Avoid added sugar in any form, especially high-fructose corn syrup
Avoid packaged foods (not referring to packaged fresh meat, fish, cheese … or the like)
Avoid fake butter
Restrict grains
This diet combined with fasting will result in better health.
“This diet combined with fasting will result in better health.”
your opinion or evidence?
It’s my opinion based on the fact that everybody I know that has intuited fasting as a daily or weekly regimen combined with a reasonable diet has seen the benefits. Reduced fat and weight, reduced A1C levels, lower blood pressure, and in most cases very good cholesterol levels.
For me Rheumatoid arthritis pain went away. I need no other proof.
Yes Sir, my opinion based on evidence. I’ll believe my own evidence many times over some study. If you are waiting for a study to confirm to you everything you need to know, you might just die waiting.
Maybe your opinion is right, maybe not… Hemeopaths qlso values their observations…
Or perhaps it is none of the above, such as what is NOT in UPF, e.g. fibres and vitamins. Or perhaps people who consume a lot of UPF also have other lifestyle problems, such as obesity, insufficient exercise, more stress, bad dental health … Or …
Yes, it’s strange that this extremely popular topic isn’t supported by more research tot tell us something about actual causality.
Some cereals are fortified with the vitamins and minerals, so do they count as UPFs or not?
One suggestion I’ve heard is that there may not be a specific ingredient that causes the alleged harm. It’s more a matter of the greater palatability and ease of consumption of these foods that leads to over consumption of the fats, salt, sugar etc. They typically need little or no preparation and are relatively soft so need little chewing.
I can’t recall the source, it was part of a BBC R4 Food Programme, but it was claimed that in a trial those on a diet including UPFs ate on average 500 calories a day more than those on UPF free diets. How robust this trial was I’ve no idea but it sounds plausible.
Here is a recent NPR (read govt-funded liberal media) article on the state of UPF research: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/05/25/1178163270/ultra-processed-foods-health-risk-weight-gain. For what it is worth, the RCT featured in this article recruited only 20 people.
That does sound like it may be the study referred to.
20 seems a rather small group though I imagine it would be difficult and expensive to accommodate a much larger group for four weeks. It also raises the question of how taking people out of their normal environment would affect their eating habits.
Looking at the definition of UPF I realise I eat very little of the stuff – so why am I overweight and hypertensive? Surely it can be anything to do with the wine?
But Socrates, wine is a product of natural fermentation process. Many people on the internet say that if it is natural it can’t hurt. Surely that must be true. 🙃
“”It does need the whole society to pay attention to this, to work together, including the food industry, including the government, to be able to reduce the amount of ultra-processed food our kids are consuming in their day,” she says.”
I have no expectation of the food industry to police themselves; they are being capitalistic, I get that.
It would go a long way toward better health for all if the government would just wake up and stop recommending more carbs. Beyond that, it would be nice to see the three letter agencies do a better job of protecting the general public as we see in the EU. The US FDA allows far too many containments in the food supply…. including hazardous chemicals, preservatives and additives.