Avoiding ultra-processed foods 'could mean people eat even less healthily'

Ultra-processed foods which include items like ice cream, processed meats, crisps, mass-produced bread, some breakfast cereals, biscuits and fizzy drinks, have been associated with poor health outcomes

Warnings to avoid ultra-processed foods (UPFs) could potentially lead to even unhealthier eating habits, according to researchers.

Two experts from the universities of Aberdeen and Liverpool have argued that research on UPFs is still in its early stages and more information is needed before advising people to stop consuming them. They suggested that public health guidance should continue to emphasise a diet rich in fruit, vegetables and wholegrains, while also limiting foods high in fat, sugar and salt.

UPFs, which include items like ice cream, processed meats, crisps, mass-produced bread, some breakfast cereals, biscuits and fizzy drinks, have been associated with poor health outcomes such as increased risk of obesity, heart disease, cancer and premature death. These foods often contain high levels of saturated fat, salt, sugar and additives, which experts say leaves less room in people’s diets for more nutritious foods.

UPFs also tend to include additives and ingredients not typically used in home cooking, such as preservatives, emulsifiers and artificial colours and flavours. However, some experts question whether the link between UPFs and poor health is due to processing, additives or because people who consume them tend to eat less nutritious other foods.

In a new article published in PLOS Medicine, experts argued that those less well-off could be most affected by any blanket health warnings about UPFs without more scientific evidence. Professor Eric Robinson from the University of Liverpool, who co-authored the study, has warned against the dangers of ultra-processed foods.

He cautioned: "Foods classed as ultra-processed which are high in fat, salt and/or sugar should be avoided, but a number of ultra-processed foods are not. We should be thinking very carefully about what advice is being given to the public, as opposed to providing simplified and potentially misleading messages that grab headlines."

The study highlights the "social cost for many people with more limited resources" when convenient options are removed and notes the potential negative mental health impacts on "those who worry about their health or live with eating disorders, particularly if social circumstances make avoiding UPFs difficult".

It also mentions that "avoiding some types of UPFs" could inadvertently lead individuals to opt for alternatives "that are higher in energy or macronutrients of concern."

Mr Robinson added: "We know with certainty that foods which are energy dense and/or high in saturated fat, salt or sugar are detrimental to health and we should continue to advise consumers to limit consumption of these foods. Likewise, we should be encouraging consumption of health-promoting foods, like fruits, vegetables and wholegrains."

Professor Alexandra Johnstone from the Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, at the University of Aberdeen, and one of the study's authors, said: "We must guard against the possibility that the people in our society who are already most at risk of not being able to afford to eat healthily are not put in an even worse position as we continue to investigate the links between some ultra-processed foods and poor health."

"We need more high-quality mechanistic research in humans, using controlled diets, to tease out the effects of nutrient profile and ultra-processing per se. Based on the balance of current evidence, we do not believe it is appropriate to be advising consumers to avoid all UPFs and we await further evidence to inform consumer guidance on the need to limit consumption of specifics foods based on their degree or type of processing."

Prof Johnstone detailed her funding sources including UK Research and Innovation, charities, and the Scottish Government. She said: "I also lead the DIO Food project, also funded by UKRI, with other UK retailers involved in data analysis and consumer trend reporting around HFSS purchase patterns."

Prof Robinson revealed that between 2014-2016, he was involved in research funded by Unilever and the American Beverage Association. He said: "I do not receive any financial awards or fees from the food industry."

Dr Hilda Mulrooney, a nutrition expert at London Metropolitan University, commented on the significance of the study, saying: "This is an important and timely paper, given the current level of interest in UPFs and their potential effects on health..." She added, "It is important to acknowledge the fact that, for some groups in particular, foods classed as UPFs make very significant contributions to nutrient intakes, and these would be difficult to achieve otherwise."

Dr Mulrooney: "Much of the research available shows associations between UPFs and health outcomes and cannot demonstrate causality. This distinction is important, given that many UPFs (e.g. breakfast cereals, breads) make substantial contributions to nutrient intakes in the UK population.”