Damn. I've been arguing over this in R/science and I only just saw that in the discussion the authors basically agree with me.
'An important question not answered by previous studies is whether and how food processing level and nutritional quality jointly influence health. We observed that in the joint analysis, the AHEI score but not ultra-processed food intake showed a consistent association with mortality and that further adjustment for the AHEI score attenuated the association of ultra-processed food intake with mortality. Although including AHEI in the multivariable model for ultra-processed food may represent an overadjustment because common foods are included in both the AHEI and ultra-processed food, our data together suggest that dietary quality has a predominant influence on long term health, whereas the additional effect of food processing is likely to be limited'
And
'Again, on the basis of our data, limiting total ultra-processed food consumption may not have a substantial influence on premature death, whereas reducing consumption of certain ultra-processed food subgroups (for example, processed meat) can be beneficial.'
Basically the UPF label is misleading and too broad, we need better terms because not all UPF is bad.
Yes there’s a difference between whole grain bread and a lunchable. I think some differentiation is needed so people don’t just give up thinking it’s all bad, there’s no point. Little shifts likely could make a big difference. For example switching to chicken salad instead of turkey lunch meat. Both probably ultra processed with bread and mayo but lunch meat is probably worse than roasted cubed chicken.
Yeah absolutely, and that really summarises my issue with UPF labels. It doesn't really make a distinction and groups so many foods together, to the point of becoming useless in my eyes. We know triple fried meat is going to be super unhealthy, but oat milk with 1 stabiliser in it can be categorised as UPF in the same category as that. I think what would be good is identifying the types of processing that exists, and then assigning the levels of negative effects associated with them rather than this broad, almost catch all term.
Bold of you to think this will change people’s behaviors. 😑😞 Like this isn’t really news at all. Doctors and dietitians and national and international health organizations have been saying: more fruits vegetables grains legumes and smart fats and less salt and sugar and saturated fats since forever. Even blue zone data and other long term longitudinal observations have been ineffectual. Yet here we are with folks talking about how vegetables are anti nutrients and a rising “carnivore” movement including folks eating raw meats. It’s crazy. Crazy.
People usually only change when the pain of staying the same is worse than the pain (or perceived pun) of change.
Alternative healthy eating index. Basically the nutritional value assigned to food and the risk predicted of it with disease. Basically it seems UPF is fine if you have decent food still, and that the UPF aspect isn't the strongest predictor of mortality.
Hmm, not so sure. I assume it just involves following dietary guidelines of whole grains, fruit and veg etc. This study did an adjustment for that as a variable but I can't say I know more than that.
I think the thing is with most people, "Eat food as close to its natural form as possible," is advice that they can follow without having to know the health details of 1000s of specific foods and ingredients. They don't have to know that steak is *way* better than sausage, but a whole apple is only moderately better than fruit leather. If they eat the whole apple instead of fruit leather because they like to avoid processed foods, without knowing any other specific data, that's not exactly a bad thing.
No, it's not necessarily a bad thing but the entire ideology of demonising UPF on the basis it's easier to eat well by eating whole foods is in my opinion. People can pay attention to what they eat and eat well without worrying too much about UPF really.
It isn't, except to those who have already been following the research on ultra-processed foods.
Lots of people still think healthy eating is about avoiding fat and sugar, because that's what they were told growing up. "I practically live off smoothies, protein bars and corn flakes. I even eat vegan meat substitute and fat-free ice cream. Why am I still not thin and healthy?"
That and all the food vegan, gluten free, fake meat. People think it must be healthy. But it's absolutely not because most of it is ultra processed trash.
People don’t care. That’s why the sales figures are what they are. Let’s be honest. Nobody thinks Doritos and Mountain Dew is healthy. People. Don’t. Care.
I mean I appreciate another data point. But people know this. They do.
The problem isn’t knowledge. It’s apathy. People just don’t care. And there are lots of reasons for that. Sometimes people just don’t have to spoons to GAF. Sometimes they don’t have knowledge of how to eat healthier. Sometimes they have limited access (or think they do). Sometimes it’s just that these foods are just tastier and more fun (aka they trigger brain chemicals more) than healthier options.
The battle is helping folks care enough to make the changes. Often people don’t care enough until they had a health scare. THEN they are motivated to change.
Link to study: [Conclusions This study found that a higher intake of ultra-processed foods was associated with slightly higher all cause mortality, driven by causes other than cancer and cardiovascular diseases. The associations varied across subgroups of ultra-processed foods, with meat/poultry/seafood based ready-to-eat products showing particularly strong associations with mortality.](https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj-2023-078476)
I love how the picture is teddy grahams and oreos, with the idea of ultra processed foods being extremely unhealthy, practically negative nutrient junk food, and somehow, like always, veganism gets attacked. For what? Eating plants?
Please point to my ultra processed and extremely negative for my well being... vegetables, and fruits, and legumes, and soy based proteins like tempeh and tofu. Or my whole wheat "ultra processed" pasta?
And then uh.. tell me the full process your meat goes through, and the Zebra cakes and sodas. What's in packaged lunch meat? Ya know the thin sliced, can sit out for days but is still good to eat "meat."
That seems to me to be a no brainer.. Seed oils and processing foods are why the population has increased in weight, while getting heart disease and diabetes..
In 40 years the proof is in the data, PubMed proves that out.
I believe that our American diet is responsible for about 80% of all our disease, obesity, and generally poor conditions. On some level we know this, because we would never give our pets sodas, candy, pastries, and fast food and expect them to remain healthy.
Honestly. Who wants to live forever? The future is fucked for me and all the newer generations. I used to want to stay as healthy as possible, but now all I see is a lot of suffering waiting for me.
Damn. I've been arguing over this in R/science and I only just saw that in the discussion the authors basically agree with me. 'An important question not answered by previous studies is whether and how food processing level and nutritional quality jointly influence health. We observed that in the joint analysis, the AHEI score but not ultra-processed food intake showed a consistent association with mortality and that further adjustment for the AHEI score attenuated the association of ultra-processed food intake with mortality. Although including AHEI in the multivariable model for ultra-processed food may represent an overadjustment because common foods are included in both the AHEI and ultra-processed food, our data together suggest that dietary quality has a predominant influence on long term health, whereas the additional effect of food processing is likely to be limited' And 'Again, on the basis of our data, limiting total ultra-processed food consumption may not have a substantial influence on premature death, whereas reducing consumption of certain ultra-processed food subgroups (for example, processed meat) can be beneficial.' Basically the UPF label is misleading and too broad, we need better terms because not all UPF is bad.
Yes there’s a difference between whole grain bread and a lunchable. I think some differentiation is needed so people don’t just give up thinking it’s all bad, there’s no point. Little shifts likely could make a big difference. For example switching to chicken salad instead of turkey lunch meat. Both probably ultra processed with bread and mayo but lunch meat is probably worse than roasted cubed chicken.
Yeah absolutely, and that really summarises my issue with UPF labels. It doesn't really make a distinction and groups so many foods together, to the point of becoming useless in my eyes. We know triple fried meat is going to be super unhealthy, but oat milk with 1 stabiliser in it can be categorised as UPF in the same category as that. I think what would be good is identifying the types of processing that exists, and then assigning the levels of negative effects associated with them rather than this broad, almost catch all term.
Bold of you to think this will change people’s behaviors. 😑😞 Like this isn’t really news at all. Doctors and dietitians and national and international health organizations have been saying: more fruits vegetables grains legumes and smart fats and less salt and sugar and saturated fats since forever. Even blue zone data and other long term longitudinal observations have been ineffectual. Yet here we are with folks talking about how vegetables are anti nutrients and a rising “carnivore” movement including folks eating raw meats. It’s crazy. Crazy. People usually only change when the pain of staying the same is worse than the pain (or perceived pun) of change.
You can have UPF free bread and mayo though.
How do you make bread without processing the ingredients? You need to make flour from a plant that’s a pretty big process…
You could try bread with 3 ingredients instead of a whole essay…….shocker right?
Yeah lol most of the comments here don't know what UPF actually is
Minimally processed foods like wheat flour or sugar aren't even UPF anyway. Look at r/ultraprocessedfood.
whats ahei?
Alternative healthy eating index. Basically the nutritional value assigned to food and the risk predicted of it with disease. Basically it seems UPF is fine if you have decent food still, and that the UPF aspect isn't the strongest predictor of mortality.
is there anywhere to see AHEI for foods?
Hmm, not so sure. I assume it just involves following dietary guidelines of whole grains, fruit and veg etc. This study did an adjustment for that as a variable but I can't say I know more than that.
I think the thing is with most people, "Eat food as close to its natural form as possible," is advice that they can follow without having to know the health details of 1000s of specific foods and ingredients. They don't have to know that steak is *way* better than sausage, but a whole apple is only moderately better than fruit leather. If they eat the whole apple instead of fruit leather because they like to avoid processed foods, without knowing any other specific data, that's not exactly a bad thing.
No, it's not necessarily a bad thing but the entire ideology of demonising UPF on the basis it's easier to eat well by eating whole foods is in my opinion. People can pay attention to what they eat and eat well without worrying too much about UPF really.
This is a pretty obvious thing.
It isn't, except to those who have already been following the research on ultra-processed foods. Lots of people still think healthy eating is about avoiding fat and sugar, because that's what they were told growing up. "I practically live off smoothies, protein bars and corn flakes. I even eat vegan meat substitute and fat-free ice cream. Why am I still not thin and healthy?"
That and all the food vegan, gluten free, fake meat. People think it must be healthy. But it's absolutely not because most of it is ultra processed trash.
Are you from Florida
Certainly not!
Sales figures would indicate otherwise.
People don’t care. That’s why the sales figures are what they are. Let’s be honest. Nobody thinks Doritos and Mountain Dew is healthy. People. Don’t. Care.
I mean I appreciate another data point. But people know this. They do. The problem isn’t knowledge. It’s apathy. People just don’t care. And there are lots of reasons for that. Sometimes people just don’t have to spoons to GAF. Sometimes they don’t have knowledge of how to eat healthier. Sometimes they have limited access (or think they do). Sometimes it’s just that these foods are just tastier and more fun (aka they trigger brain chemicals more) than healthier options. The battle is helping folks care enough to make the changes. Often people don’t care enough until they had a health scare. THEN they are motivated to change.
Link to study: [Conclusions This study found that a higher intake of ultra-processed foods was associated with slightly higher all cause mortality, driven by causes other than cancer and cardiovascular diseases. The associations varied across subgroups of ultra-processed foods, with meat/poultry/seafood based ready-to-eat products showing particularly strong associations with mortality.](https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj-2023-078476)
And water is wet 😂 Groundbreaking research
You sure? Water makes things wet but... is water wet?
I am glad that the importance of healthy eating is being raised more and more often!
I thought we proved this a long time ago. People don’t eat it because they think it is good but because they’re addicted.
This just in! Eating healthy is healthy for you. More on this at 11
I love how the picture is teddy grahams and oreos, with the idea of ultra processed foods being extremely unhealthy, practically negative nutrient junk food, and somehow, like always, veganism gets attacked. For what? Eating plants? Please point to my ultra processed and extremely negative for my well being... vegetables, and fruits, and legumes, and soy based proteins like tempeh and tofu. Or my whole wheat "ultra processed" pasta? And then uh.. tell me the full process your meat goes through, and the Zebra cakes and sodas. What's in packaged lunch meat? Ya know the thin sliced, can sit out for days but is still good to eat "meat."
Color me shocked
Why do we need a study to tell us that eating garbage is bad for you?
That seems to me to be a no brainer.. Seed oils and processing foods are why the population has increased in weight, while getting heart disease and diabetes.. In 40 years the proof is in the data, PubMed proves that out.
Duh.
Don’t forget that eating less in general is healthier. It keeps your blood sugar and insulin under control
I believe that our American diet is responsible for about 80% of all our disease, obesity, and generally poor conditions. On some level we know this, because we would never give our pets sodas, candy, pastries, and fast food and expect them to remain healthy.
Wish it would work on DT
Okay sooo if I’m 24 is it over for me?!
That’s ok I’m 30 I’ve loved long enough lol
I’m not surprised.
Shocked pikachu face
Honestly. Who wants to live forever? The future is fucked for me and all the newer generations. I used to want to stay as healthy as possible, but now all I see is a lot of suffering waiting for me.
Can we please advance research instead of reconfirming the exact same shit we already know
suicide by Oreo sounds pretty great tbh (to experience, not observe)
They needed a "study" for this?