What is the purpose of ultra-processed food? An exploratory analysis of the financialisation of ultra-processed food corporations and implications for public health

Ultra-processed foods consumption and health-related outcomes: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

The increase in ultra-processed foods (UPFs) intake has raised concerns about its impact on public health. Prospective observational studies have reported significant associations between higher intake of UPFs and adverse health outcomes. The aim of this study is to determine whether these associations could be confirmed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

We conducted a systematic review to analyze the evidence on the effects of UPFs intake on health. A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and CENTRAL up to April 22, 2024. RCTs in English, Spanish, and Portuguese evaluating the health effects of interventions to modify UPFs intake were included. The certainty of evidence was determined using the GRADE methodology.

Results

Three educational intervention studies and one controlled feeding trial were included, evaluating the effect of reducing the consumption of UPFs (455 participants, median follow-up, 12 weeks). No significant effects were observed in 30 out of the 42 outcomes evaluated. The controlled feeding trial in adults with stable weight showed a reduction in energy intake, carbohydrates, and fat (low certainty of evidence), as well as in body weight, total cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol (moderate certainty of evidence). In the educational intervention studies, a reduction in body weight and waist circumference was observed (low certainty of evidence) in women with obesity, as well as improvement in some dimensions of quality of life (very low certainty of evidence). No significant changes were observed in children and adolescents with obesity, while in overweight pregnant women, the consumption of UPFs was not reduced, so the observed benefits could be attributed to other components of the intervention.

Conclusion

Interventions aimed at reducing the consumption of UPFs showed benefits on some anthropometric and dietary intake outcomes, although significant effects were not observed for most of the evaluated outcomes. The limited number and significant methodological limitations of the studies prevent definitive conclusions. Further well-designed and conducted RCTs are needed to understand the effects of UPF consumption on health.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023469984.

"Climate-friendly" diets from an allergy point of view

Since the EAT-Lancet Commission's call for a change in diet towards more plant-based foods, especially protein sources, this so called "Planetary Health Diet (PHD)" has been widely discussed. While for some the reduction in animal foods is not enough and vegan diets are advocated to save the climate, others are sounding the alarm that the reduction is too drastic and that the PHD makes it impossible to provide a diet that meets our needs (of essential nutrients). In addition to climate aspects, health benefits often cited to justify the PHD do not take into account that vegetarians/vegans differ from the general population by far more factors than the reduction or elimination of animal foods. Also not sufficiently discussed is the fact that a diet which excludes or severely restricts animal foods is also associated with health risks if critical nutrients are not adequately covered. Moreover, the challenge of meeting protein requirements is underestimated by many. The food industry has responded to the trend towards more plant-based foods by massively expanding the range of highly processed or ultra-processed vegan foods. These - vegan or not vegan - are suspected of being partly responsible for the development of non-communicable diseases. In addition to general criticism regarding the usefulness of advertising the PHD, the replacement of animal protein sources with plant-based sources notably harbors a number of additional relevant risks for allergy sufferers so that the latter should be classified as an unfavorable target group for the implementation of the PHD recommendations.

Ultra-processed Food and Obesity: What Is the Evidence?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Obesity is a growing global healthcare concern. A proposed driver is the recent increase in ultra-processed food (UPF) intake. However, disagreement surrounds the concept of UPF, the strength of evidence, and suggested mechanisms. Therefore, this review aimed to critically appraise the evidence on UPF and obesity.

RECENT FINDINGS

Observational studies demonstrate positive associations between UPF intake, weight gain, and overweight/obesity, more clearly in adults than children/adolescents. This is supported by high-quality clinical data. Several mechanisms are proposed, but current understanding is inconclusive. Greater UPF consumption has been a key driver of obesity. There is a need to change the obesogenic environment to support individuals to reduce their UPF intake. The UPF concept is a novel approach that is not explained with existing nutrient- and food-based frameworks. Critical analysis of methodologies provides confidence, but future observational and experimental research outputs with greater methodological rigor will strengthen findings, which are outlined.