Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are often under scrutiny due to their abundance in supermarkets and a growing body of evidence linking them to various public health issues. These concerns have increased to such an extent that Carlos Monteiro, the nutritionist who introduced the term UPF a decade and a half ago, recently proposed measures such as warning labels akin to those seen on cigarette packets and a ban on UPFs in schools and hospitals.
What exactly are UPFs?
UPFs are a broad category of food and beverage which includes cereals, industrially produced bread, protein bars, fizzy drinks, crisps, ready meals and fast food. It has been documented that in both the UK and the US, UPFs make up more than half of a typical diet. This is even worse in the case of younger individuals, those from low-income backgrounds, and those residing in underprivileged areas, as up to 80% of their diet can consist of UPFs. Studies suggest that this dietary pattern is becoming increasingly prevalent in Ireland. In the most extensive worldwide review of its nature, UPFs were associated with 32 negative health outcomes, such as an elevated risk of heart disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes, mental health issues, and premature death.
Identifying a UPF is not straightforward, as more and more items for sale in stores that may seem nutritious are nevertheless considered UPFs. These include, for instance, fruit-flavoured yoghurts filled with sugar, flavourings and thickeners such as guar and carob bean gum, or pre-packaged bread with additives like soy lecithin and monoglycerides added alongside basic ingredients like flour and water. These factory-produced items are typically high in fats, starches, sugars, and other additives.
“UPFs are gaining dominance in global diets, despite the health risks they pose, such as the increase in the likelihood of multiple chronic diseases,” Monteiro expressed in a statement to The Guardian ahead of a conference in Brazil on obesity. “They not only displace healthier, less processed foods, but they also degrade the quality of our diets due to their numerous harmful properties. This group of food items is a significant contributor to the global epidemic of obesity and other chronic diseases linked to diet.”
Monteiro assisted in the creation of the Nova system in 2009, which evaluates both nutritional value and the level of processing in food and drink. It categorises them into four groups: minimally processed food, processed culinary ingredients, processed food and ultra-processed food.
How then, should we best address the issue of UPFs?
Monteiro asserts that more than just sharing medical studies, it is vital to launch health awareness campaigns similar to those targeting tobacco, in order to mitigate the risks associated with Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs). He supports the implementation of severe restrictions or an outright ban on UPF advertisements and mandates for front-of-pack warnings akin to those on cigarette packets.
Monteiro also advocates for a high tax on UPFs, using the funds garnered for subsidising fresh food products.
He observes that colossal food corporations marketing UPFs strive to make their offerings more enticing, affordable, and easier to prepare than homemade food to enhance their competitiveness. He argues that to enhance profits, these products must not only have a lower production cost but also be overconsumed.
He defends the idea of equating UPF manufacturers to tobacco companies, stating that both UPFs and tobacco contribute to a variety of serious health conditions and early mortality. These companies often employ aggressive marketing tactics for their appealing or habit-forming products and oppose legislation.
However, not everyone agrees on this approach to stress the hazards of UPFs. London Metropolitan University’s nutrition expert, Dr Hilda Mulrooney, opines that comparing UPFs and tobacco is a rather oversimplified view. There are no safe cigarettes, whereas our bodies require a variety of nutrients such as fat, sugar and salt, whose functions in foods extend beyond taste and flavour enhancement.
This debate affirms that concerns about our contemporary diet aren’t solely tied to individual ingredients and nutrients but are equally about how our food is processed.