Independent Online

Thursday, July 7, 2022

Like us on FacebookFollow us on TwitterView weather by locationView market indicators

Dietary experts set for renewed focus on benefits or drawbacks of ultra-processed foods

NOVA defines ultra-processed foods as those made using sequences of processes that extract substances from foods and alter them with chemicals or additives in order to formulate the final product. l AP

NOVA defines ultra-processed foods as those made using sequences of processes that extract substances from foods and alter them with chemicals or additives in order to formulate the final product. l AP

Published Jun 9, 2022

Share

A study by the American Society for Nutrition outlines the case for and against using the concept of ultra-processed foods to help inform dietary guidelines beyond conventional food classification systems.

The authors, Carlos A Monteiro, MD, PhD, of the University of Sao Paulo in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and Arne Astrup, MD, PhD, of Novo Nordisk Foundation in Hellerup, Denmark, will discuss the issue in a live virtual debate June 14 during NUTRITION 2022 LIVE ONLINE.

Story continues below Advertisement

The debate centres around NOVA, a system developed by Monteiro and colleagues that classifies foods by their degree of industrial processing, ranging from unprocessed or minimally processed to ultra-processed.

NOVA defines ultra-processed foods as those made using sequences of processes that extract substances from foods and alter them with chemicals or additives in order to formulate the final product.

Ultra-processed foods are characteristically designed to be cheap, palatable and convenient; examples include soft drinks and candy, packaged snacks and pastries, ready-to-heat products, and reconstituted meat products or plant-based alternatives.

Studies have linked consumption of ultra-processed foods – which are often high in salt, sugar and fat – with weight gain and an increased risk of chronic diseases, even after adjusting for the amount of salt, sugar and fat in the diet.

Story continues below Advertisement

While the mechanisms behind these associations are not fully understood, Monteiro argues that the existing evidence is sufficient to justify discouraging the consumption of ultra-processed foods in dietary recommendations and government policies.

"The negative dietary effects of ultra-processed foods have now been made clear by many nationally-representative studies," Monteiro wrote in his position paper.

"(Guidelines) should emphasise the preference for unprocessed or minimally processed foods and freshly made meals and make explicit the need to avoid ultra-processed foods."

Story continues below Advertisement

In a counter-argument, Astrup argues that classifying foods according to their processing methods does not meaningfully improve upon existing systems and could lead to unintended consequences.

For example, there are both nutritional and environmental benefits to increasing the emphasis on plant-based foods, yet many healthful plant-based meat and dairy alternatives are considered ultra-processed.

Astrup also contends that unhealthy foods like fries, burgers and pizza, would be considered ultra-processed if purchased from a fast-food restaurant, but minimally processed if made at home with similar ingredients.

Story continues below Advertisement

"Clearly, many aspects of food processing can affect health outcomes, but conflating them into the notion of ultra-processing is unnecessary because the main determinants of chronic disease risk are already captured by existing nutrient profiling systems," wrote Astrup.

"The NOVA classification adds little to existing nutrient profiling systems; characterises several healthy, nutrient-dense foods as unhealthy; and is counter-productive to solve the major global food production challenges."

Share