Experts open up debate on ultra-processed food in bid to redefine what is “healthy”
08 Jun 2022 --- Nutrition experts are deliberating the findings of two studies published in Great Debates in Nutrition, one which evidences the increased risks of morbidity and disease correlated with ultra-processed foods, and another which argues that this food type may not be as bad as expected.
The studies and the following debate are based on NOVA, a food classification system that classifies food as unprocessed, minimally processed and ultra-processed. Ultra-processed is defined as foods manufactured through multiple processing sequences and added chemicals.
“Poor diet contributes to a massive worldwide burden of obesity, diabetes and heart disease. Identifying the specific unhealthy components of aspects, is of tremendous scientific and public health interest – which is the motivation for our current debate on ultra-processed foods,” David Ludwig, associate editor at The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition and professor at Harvard Medical School, tells FoodIngredientsFirst.
The system is being questioned as to what extent ultra-processed food is the underlying factor for many claimed health conditions, and the definitions of NOVA are being questioned.
Examples of ultra-processed foods are soft drinks, sweets, mass-produced products, reconstituted meat products and ready-to-eat products.
Ultra-processed food has previously been said to promote the overconsumption of energy, causing obesity. Studies have shown that this energy intake may be explained by other factors rather than the processing method itself, such as added sugars, intrinsic fiber, energy density and glycemic load.
Ultra-Processed foods contribute to many health issues - study questions whether it is the process or the ingredients. Supporting NOVA
The study opposing the consumption of ultra-processed foods recommends consuming freshly made products, or minimally processed foods, aligning with NOVA. Its results provide evidence that ultra-processed food is associated with increased morbidity and several chronic diseases that may be fatal.
The various additives of ultra-processed foods may likely affect different health outcomes in different combinations, the researchers warn.
The results found evidence of negative health impacts following an ultra-processed diet, such as weight gain caused by increased ad libitum calorie intake. It also showed associations with hypertension, type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, breast cancer, depression and other chronic diseases that cause mortality.
“Another issue regarding consuming ultra-processed foods is that it serves to legitimize, endorse and promote further consumption,” the researchers stress.
Need for a more comprehensive range
The contrary study opens up the debate that ultra-processed food may not be the sole villain behind negative health outcomes.
Instead, it argues there are several aspects to consider when achieving a nutritious diet. It claims that the NOVA food classification system relies on “poorly supported claims” and definitions of food processes and food additives, which quickly leads to misclassifications from a chemically heterogeneous group.
The researchers also argue that it is “not a fair representation or necessary to conflate them as ultra-processed foods”.
They claim that the NOVA classification system has been shown to characterize nutrition-dense and healthy foods as unhealthy and mentions that this is a “counterproductive approach to solving global food challenges”.
Healthy vs. unhealthy
“Healthy vs. unhealthy” requires a more comprehensive overview and updated definition, according to the researchers.
The research opposing ultra-processed foods concludes that these foods within this category should be replaced by processed or minimally processed foods manufactured with healthy fats, and preferably no added sugar or salt.
The contrary study concluded that the term “healthy” requires another definition.
Plant-based alternatives, animal food alternatives and intelligent processing could boost the health potential of diets and bring additional environmental benefits. Continued arguments for increased production of plant-based alternatives are that food demand rises to feed the growing global population, not compromising on nutritional components and decreasing carbon emissions.
However, the salt content of plant-based meat products was previously uncovered in separate research as being “unnecessarily high.”
By Beatrice Wihlander
