Eating ultra-processed foods, commonly known as junk food, is associated with an increased risk of causing more than 30 different negative mental and physical health effects, a new study has found. This study highlights that eating this type of food can lead to a variety of health problems.
We are often told that we need to eat well to stay healthy. This includes packaged baked goods and snacks, sweetened sodas, candies, sweet cereals, and ready-to-eat products.
Many of us are well aware of the health risks associated with consuming a diet high in UPF, but we may not realize just how harmful it can be. Researchers pooled data from 45 different meta-analysis studies linking UPF to adverse health outcomes to provide a high-level summary, or “comprehensive review,” of the evidence.
The total number of participants included in the entire comprehensive review reached nearly 10 million. All meta-analyses were published in the past 3 years, but none were funded by the companies that produce the UPF. The researchers categorized the evidence as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or no evidence. We also rated the quality of the evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. Overall, data consistently show that higher UPF exposure is associated with increased risk of 32 adverse health outcomes ranging from death, cancer, mental, respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and metabolic health outcomes. I showed you what I'm doing.
Compelling evidence shows that high UPF intake is associated with an approximately 50% increased risk of cardiovascular disease-related death, a 48% to 53% increased risk of anxiety and general mental health disorders; It was shown to increase the risk of type 2 diabetes by 12%. . Highly suggestive evidence shows that high UPF intake is associated with a 21% increased risk of all-cause mortality and a 40% to 66% increased risk of heart disease-related death, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and poor sleep. and a 22% increased risk of depression.
There was limited evidence linking UPF to asthma, gastrointestinal health, some cancers, and cardiometabolic risk factors such as high blood fats and low levels of “good” cholesterol.
This study has received a great deal of interest from researchers and those in the medical community. Charlotte Gupta, a researcher at the Appleton Research Institute at the University of Central Queensland, said she thought the study provided “compelling evidence”, but asked people to consider why some people eat UFPs. she asked.
“[F]And some people, such as night shift workers… lack of access to fresh food or time to prepare meals, forcing them to rely on ultra-processed foods,'' said Mr. Ta. “This highlights the need for public health action to not only help individuals reduce ultra-processed foods from their diets, but also to improve access to healthier foods.”
Melanie McGrice, a practicing registered dietitian, said the study's findings were consistent with her professional experience.
“In my role as a nutritionist, I see so many people relying on ultra-processed foods,” McGrice said. “The main factors that influence the consumption of ultra-processed foods include perceived convenience, social influences, emotional eating, and advertising. As a result of reducing my intake of ultra-processed foods, I I've seen amazing results in the people I've worked with.”
And Claire Collins, professor of nutrition and dietetics at Newcastle University and co-director of the Food and Nutrition Research Program at the Hunter Medical Research Institute, pointed to the challenges in conducting further intervention studies.
“The study is observational, which means it cannot prove cause and effect, downgrading the research evidence compared to intervention studies,” Collins said. “The problem is that it's not ethical to do intervention studies for years where you give people large doses of UPF every day and wait for them to get sick and die.”
The researchers acknowledge that their study cannot prove cause and effect. This will require further research, especially randomized controlled trials. Nevertheless, they state that the rigorous and systematic approach to assessing the reliability and quality of the analyzes investigated suggests that the results stand up to scrutiny.
This study british medical journal.
Source: CIMEX
