Ultra-processed foods have been linked with tens of thousands of early deaths in the UK in a new study.
If you’re anything like the typical Brit, you may well be eating dozens of these foods today alone.
They could include cereal and flavoured yoghurt for breakfast (even cornflakes are often UPF), sliced bread with cream cheese or ham for lunch, a ready meal for dinner, and some biscuits or crisps as a snack.
But these foods could be harming our health in ways that are still not fully understood, the study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine says.
They looked at data from eight countries around the world and found UPFs made up 53% of people’s energy intake in the UK – the second highest in the study after 55% in the US.
The researchers suggested that in 2018/19, some 17,781 premature deaths in the UK could have been linked to UPFs, according to their model.
Premature deaths attributable to UPFs ranged from 4% of premature deaths in lower consumption settings, such as Colombia, up to 14% of premature deaths in the UK and US, according to their mathematical modelling.
Authors called on governments to issue dietary recommendations aimed at cutting consumption of UPFs.
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson told Metro: ‘This government is committed to tackling poor diets and the obesity crisis to protect future generations.
‘We have already taken action to end the targeting of junk food adverts to children, across TV and online and we have handed local authorities stronger powers to block applications for new takeaways near schools.
‘We are also commissioning research to improve the evidence on the health impacts of ultra processed foods. Through our Plan for Change, we will shift the focus from sickness to prevention, reducing the burden of obesity on public services and the NHS.’
In recent years, ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, have been a growing concern, with Facebook groups springing up full of people trying to cut down, and brands such as M&S and Crosta Mollica responding with products free of the additives and emulsifiers that typify industrially produced foods.
It follows the smash hit success of the book Ultra-Processed People by Chris van Tulleken, who went as far as to say many of these new processed substances are not even really ‘food’ at all.
What are ultra-processed foods?
An exact definition has been hard to pin down, but one popular one is that they include ingredients you wouldn’t typically find in a home kitchen, such as E-numbers, emulsifiers, thickeners, and colourings: potentially things like potassium sorbate, soy lecithin, mono and diglycerides, guar gum and aspartame.
The Nova classification system sought to break it down, splitting foods into unprocessed, minimally processed, processed and ultraprocessed.
The further something gets from its original ingredients, the more processed it is.
Why are UPFs bad for us?
We still don’t know for sure.
UPFs have been linked previously to poor health, including to an increased risk of obesity, heart disease, cancer and early death.
It could just be that they are often high in saturated fat, salt, and sugar,so eating them means we have less room in our diets for more nutritious foods.
But it could be because they tend to include additives and ingredients that are unhealthy, such as preservatives, emulsifiers and artificial colours and flavours.
Some emulsifiers, for example, used to bind foods together, have been accused of disrupting the gut biome and causing inflammation.
What did the study authors say about UPFs?
Lead investigator Eduardo Nilson, from the scientific body the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation in Brazil, said: ‘UPFs affect health beyond the individual impact of high content of critical nutrients (sodium, trans fats, and sugar) because of the changes in the foods during industrial processing and the use of artificial ingredients, including colourants, artificial flavours and sweeteners, emulsifiers, and many other additives and processing aids, so assessing deaths from all causes associated with UPF consumption allows an overall estimate of the effect of industrial food processing on health.’
Dr Nilson said the study found ‘each 10% increase in the participation of UPFs in the diet increases the risk of death from all causes by 3%’.
Does everyone agree on UPFs?
Probably not the companies who make UPFs, but aside from them, scientists caution that it is too early to rush to conclusions about the dangers of UPFs.
A spokesperson for the Food and Drink Federation, which represents manufacturers in the UK, said: ‘We believe that the term ‘ultra processed foods’ is irresponsible and confusing for consumers.
‘It goes against government’s healthy eating guidelines and demonises a wide variety of foods that can help people achieve a healthy balanced diet, such as yoghurt, pasta sauces or bread.
‘Similarly, all additives that are used by food manufacturers are approved by the Food Standards Agency, who have robust processes in place to ensure that these are safe for us to eat and drink. It is irresponsible to state these ingredients are a risk to health.’
Nerys Astbury, associate professor from the University of Oxford, said it is known that consuming diets higher in calories, fat and sugar can have detrimental effects on health, including premature mortality.
She said: ‘Many UPF tend to be high in these nutrients, and studies to date have been unable to determine with certainty whether the effects of UPF are independent of the already established effects of diets high in foods which are energy dense and contain large amounts of fat and sugar.
‘The authors of the study conclude that advice to reduce UPF consumption should be included in national dietary guideline recommendations and in public policies.
‘However, rushing to add recommendations on UPF to these recommendations is not warranted based on this study in my opinion.’
She said the Nova system, which defines foods according to different levels of food processing, ‘has many limitations, including arbitrary definitions and overly broad food categories’ and added: ‘More research is needed to ascertain a causal link between UPF and disease and to establish the mechanisms involved.’
Should I throw out all my leftover Easter eggs?
You’d have to balance the health benefits with the joy of a little indulgence.
If you really want to be on the safe side, a boiled egg and an apple would probably be better for you.
Jen Mills