2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Perspective: A Research Roadmap about Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health for the United States Food System: Proceedings from an Interdisciplinary, Multi-Stakeholder Workshop

      brief-report
      1 , , , 1 , , 2 , 3 , 4 , 1 , 1 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 3 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 9 , 5 , 6 , 12 , 1 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 12 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 14 , 20 , 21 , 10
      Advances in Nutrition
      American Society for Nutrition
      ultra-processed food, Nova classification system, dietary assessment, ingestive behavior, cardiometabolic health, food environment, built environment, food science, food technology, food engineering

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Our objective was to convene interdisciplinary experts from government, academia, and industry to develop a Research Roadmap to identify research priorities about processed food intake and risk for obesity and cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) among United States populations. We convened attendees at various career stages with diverse viewpoints in the field. We held a “Food Processing Primer” to build foundational knowledge of how and why foods are processed, followed by presentations about how processed foods may affect energy intake, obesity, and CMD risk. Breakout groups discussed potential mechanistic and confounding explanations for associations between processed foods and obesity and CMD risk. Facilitators created research questions (RQs) based on key themes from discussions. Different breakout groups convened to discuss what is known and unknown for each RQ and to develop sub-RQs to address gaps. Workshop attendees focused on ultra-processed foods (UPFs; Nova Group 4) because the preponderance of evidence is based on this classification system. Yet, heterogeneity and subjectivity in UPF classification was a challenge for RQ development. The 6 RQs were: 1) What objective methods or measures could further categorize UPFs, considering food processing, formulation, and the interaction of the two? 2) How can exposure assessment of UPF intake be improved? 3) Does UPF intake influence risk for obesity or CMDs, independent of diet quality? 4) What, if any, attributes of UPFs influence ingestive behavior and contribute to excess energy intake? 5) What, if any, attributes of UPFs contribute to clinically meaningful metabolic responses? 6) What, if any, external environmental factors lead people to consume high amounts of UPFs? Uncertainty and complexity around UPF intake warrant further complementary and interdisciplinary causal, mechanistic, and methodological research related to obesity and CMD risk to understand the utility of applying classification by degree of processing to foods in the United States.

          Related collections

          Most cited references104

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them

          The present commentary contains a clear and simple guide designed to identify ultra-processed foods. It responds to the growing interest in ultra-processed foods among policy makers, academic researchers, health professionals, journalists and consumers concerned to devise policies, investigate dietary patterns, advise people, prepare media coverage, and when buying food and checking labels in shops or at home. Ultra-processed foods are defined within the NOVA classification system, which groups foods according to the extent and purpose of industrial processing. Processes enabling the manufacture of ultra-processed foods include the fractioning of whole foods into substances, chemical modifications of these substances, assembly of unmodified and modified food substances, frequent use of cosmetic additives and sophisticated packaging. Processes and ingredients used to manufacture ultra-processed foods are designed to create highly profitable (low-cost ingredients, long shelf-life, emphatic branding), convenient (ready-to-consume), hyper-palatable products liable to displace all other NOVA food groups, notably unprocessed or minimally processed foods. A practical way to identify an ultra-processed product is to check to see if its list of ingredients contains at least one item characteristic of the NOVA ultra-processed food group, which is to say, either food substances never or rarely used in kitchens (such as high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated or interesterified oils, and hydrolysed proteins), or classes of additives designed to make the final product palatable or more appealing (such as flavours, flavour enhancers, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners, and anti-foaming, bulking, carbonating, foaming, gelling and glazing agents).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake

            We investigated whether ultra-processed foods affect energy intake in 20 weight-stable adults, aged (mean ± SE) 31.2 ± 1.6 years and BMI = 27 ± 1.5 kg/m2. Subjects were admitted to the NIH Clinical Center and randomized to receive either ultra-processed or unprocessed diets for 2 weeks immediately followed by the alternate diet for 2 weeks. Meals were designed to be matched for presented calories, energy density, macronutrients, sugar, sodium, and fiber. Subjects were instructed to consume as much or as little as desired. Energy intake was greater during the ultra-processed diet (508 ± 106 kcal/day; p = 0.0001), with increased consumption of carbohydrate (280 ± 54 kcal/day; p < 0.0001) and fat (230 ± 53 kcal/day; p = 0.0004), but not protein (-2 ± 12 kcal/day; p = 0.85). Weight changes were highly correlated with energy intake (r = 0.8, p < 0.0001), with participants gaining 0.9 ± 0.3 kg (p = 0.009) during the ultra-processed diet and losing 0.9 ± 0.3 kg (p = 0.007) during the unprocessed diet. Limiting consumption of ultra-processed foods may be an effective strategy for obesity prevention and treatment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Ultra-processed food intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study (NutriNet-Santé)

              Abstract Objective To assess the prospective associations between consumption of ultra-processed foods and risk of cardiovascular diseases. Design Population based cohort study. Setting NutriNet-Santé cohort, France 2009-18. Participants 105 159 participants aged at least 18 years. Dietary intakes were collected using repeated 24 hour dietary records (5.7 for each participant on average), designed to register participants’ usual consumption of 3300 food items. These foods were categorised using the NOVA classification according to degree of processing. Main outcome measures Associations between intake of ultra-processed food and overall risk of cardiovascular, coronary heart, and cerebrovascular diseases assessed by multivariable Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for known risk factors. Results During a median follow-up of 5.2 years, intake of ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of overall cardiovascular disease (1409 cases; hazard ratio for an absolute increment of 10 in the percentage of ultra-processed foods in the diet 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.20); P<0.001, 518 208 person years, incidence rates in high consumers of ultra-processed foods (fourth quarter) 277 per 100 000 person years, and in low consumers (first quarter) 242 per 100 000 person years), coronary heart disease risk (665 cases; hazard ratio 1.13 (1.02 to 1.24); P=0.02, 520 319 person years, incidence rates 124 and 109 per 100 000 person years, in the high and low consumers, respectively), and cerebrovascular disease risk (829 cases; hazard ratio 1.11 (1.01 to 1.21); P=0.02, 520 023 person years, incidence rates 163 and 144 per 100 000 person years, in high and low consumers, respectively). These results remained statistically significant after adjustment for several markers of the nutritional quality of the diet (saturated fatty acids, sodium and sugar intakes, dietary fibre, or a healthy dietary pattern derived by principal component analysis) and after a large range of sensitivity analyses. Conclusions In this large observational prospective study, higher consumption of ultra-processed foods was associated with higher risks of cardiovascular, coronary heart, and cerebrovascular diseases. These results need to be confirmed in other populations and settings, and causality remains to be established. Various factors in processing, such as nutritional composition of the final product, additives, contact materials, and neoformed contaminants might play a role in these associations, and further studies are needed to understand better the relative contributions. Meanwhile, public health authorities in several countries have recently started to promote unprocessed or minimally processed foods and to recommend limiting the consumption of ultra-processed foods. Study registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03335644.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Adv Nutr
                Adv Nutr
                Advances in Nutrition
                American Society for Nutrition
                2161-8313
                2156-5376
                16 September 2023
                November 2023
                16 September 2023
                : 14
                : 6
                : 1255-1269
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD, United States
                [2 ]Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Erlanger, KY, United States
                [3 ]Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Decatur, IL, United States
                [4 ]University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Arkansas Children’s Research Institute, Little Rock, AR, United States
                [5 ]Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States
                [6 ]Arkansas Children’s Nutrition Center, Little Rock, AR, United States
                [7 ]Bell Institute of Health & Nutrition, General Mills, Minneapolis, MN, United States
                [8 ]SR Strategy, Washington, DC, United States
                [9 ]University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Arkansas Children’s Nutrition Center, Little Rock, AR, United States
                [10 ]Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, Boston, MA, United States
                [11 ]Penn State University, University Park, PA, United States
                [12 ]Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands
                [13 ]National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States
                [14 ]Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States
                [15 ]National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States
                [16 ]Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Grand Forks, ND, United States
                [17 ]New York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States
                [18 ]Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
                [19 ]Faculdade de Saude Pública, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
                [20 ]Soy Nutrition Institute Global, Pittsfield, MA, United States
                [21 ]Food Science and Technology, University of California at Davis, CA, United States
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. lauren.oconnor@ 123456usda.gov
                [†]

                LEO and KAH contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                S2161-8313(23)01378-9
                10.1016/j.advnut.2023.09.005
                10721509
                37722488
                d5389d34-ee9a-4bcf-957c-d2b721584d87

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 24 May 2023
                : 6 September 2023
                : 13 September 2023
                Categories
                Perspective

                ultra-processed food,nova classification system,dietary assessment,ingestive behavior,cardiometabolic health,food environment,built environment,food science,food technology,food engineering

                Comments

                Comment on this article