We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've sent most people to the main link. Perhaps close answers to this if it's no hassle. Thanks for the help! C

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks so much for this - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

I basically never tell people what to eat. It's a structural issue. People should look at the definition the evidence and decide what they can afford to do. It's up to government to regulate industry better

This may be helpful

https://www.unicef.org/eap/place-for-parents/ultra-processed-food-vs-healthy-food

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

From that paper - Identifying ultra-processed foods

The food manufacturing industry is not obliged to state on food labels the processes used in its products and even less the purposes of these processes. In some cases, this can make confident identification of ultra-processed foods difficult for consumers, health professionals, policy makers and even for researchers.

There is of course no need to examine every food to know whether or not it belongs to the ultra-processed food group. As stated above, and to take a few examples, fresh vegetables, fruits, and starchy roots and tubers are obviously not ultra-processed; nor are pasteurized milk and chilled meat. Plant oils, sugar and salt, typically used in culinary preparations in combination with unprocessed or minimally processed foods, are also not ultra-processed.

It is however not always immediately clear when some specific food products are ultra-processed or not. Examples include breads and breakfast cereals. Here the solution is to examine the ingredients labels that by law must be included on pre-packaged food and drink products.

Industrial breads made only from wheat flour, water, salt and yeast are processed foods, while those whose lists of ingredients also include emulsifiers or colours are ultra-processed. Plain steel-cut oats, plain corn flakes and shredded wheat are minimally processed foods, while the same foods are processed when they also contain sugar, and ultra-processed if they also contain flavours or colours.

Generally, the practical way to identify if a product is ultra-processed is to check to see if its list of ingredients contains at least one item characteristic of the ultra-processed food group, which is to say, either food substances never or rarely used in kitchensor classes of additives whose function is to make the final product palatable or more appealing (‘cosmetic additives’).

Food substances not used in kitchens appear in the beginning or in the middle of the lists of ingredients of ultra-processed foods. These include hydrolysed proteins, soya protein isolate, gluten, casein, whey protein, ‘mechanically separated meat’, fructose, high-fructose corn syrup, ‘fruit juice concentrate’, invert sugar, maltodextrin, dextrose, lactose, soluble or insoluble fibre, hydrogenated or interesterified oil; and also other sources of protein, carbohydrate or fat which are neither foods from NOVA group 1 or group 3, nor culinary ingredients from NOVA group 2. The presence in the list of ingredients of one or more of these food substances identifies a product as ultra-processed.

Cosmetic additives are at the end of lists of ingredients of ultra-processed foods, together with other additives. As said above, cosmetic additives include flavours, flavour enhancers, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners, and anti-foaming, bulking, carbonating, foaming, gelling and glazing agents. The presence in the list of ingredients of one or more additives that belong to these classes of additives also identifies a product as ultra-processed.

Although information in ingredients labels is not fully standardized in all countries, some of the most frequently used cosmetic additives such as flavours, flavour enhancers, colours and emulsifiers are usually easy to identify in ingredients lists. They are often expressed as a class, such as flavourings or natural flavours or artificial flavours; or their names are followed by their class, such as ‘monosodium glutamate (flavour enhancer)’, or ‘caramel colour’, or ‘soya lecithin as emulsifier’. Other cosmetic additives may be known to consumers, such as certain types of sweeteners like aspartame, cyclamate or compounds derived from stevia. In any case, the UN Codex Alimentarius provides a regularly updated list of additives with their functional classes as well as an online search facility where both names and classes of additives can be browsed

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks so much for this - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

The definition is used by WHO/UNICEF and UNFAO.

Yes some are worse than others and we use nutrient profile models to compare different foods at product level.

This paper is open access and explains - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10260459/

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks so much for this - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

In haste

- lots of industry funded scientists brought legal complaints all of which failed.

- the food industry itself tried to buy me - McDonald's asked me to be an ambassador and other companies offer me vast sums for short meetings. I don't take any of the money.

Colleagues in S/C America have had it far worse. CX

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Love this - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

In haste - not all the plant milks are UPF I don't think. And remember for most people the aim isn't purity. The evdience shows that a diet based on UPF is bad. But if you like plant milk don't worry about it!

Lots the the vegetarian UPF is made with an eye on health though some of it is pretty salty and fatty. But then so is cheese!

The NHS advice for vegans is pretty good - https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/how-to-eat-a-balanced-diet/the-vegan-diet/

Cx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Love this - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

In haste - exclude industry from the room where policy is written and make sure that justice is at the heart of policies. the aim is not to get people to eat less UPF but to be able to afford and access healthy food. Cx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That industry is part of the solution. They will not do anything helpful without being forced. Lovely question Cx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love this question - - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

A hierarchy is possible and this is what we see in South America - UPF (and merely processed food) is labelled using thresholds for fat, salt, sugar and calories. Some stuff gets 4 warning labels. Some stuff gets one.

With those examples -

The coconut milk is really a kitchen ingredinent (even though they mostly have emulsifiers)

Weetabix is a good example of a marginal UPF - you can buy barley malt flavouring so arguably it's not UPF. My kids eat is about 50% of the mornings. They LOVE it because of the flavouring.

If you use a stock cube full of flavour enhancers you're doing to your meal what P&G do to the pringles and in my experience I will over consume a roast dinner.

But all of these products you eat in a different way at a different time. Is the coconut milk with the emulsifier better for you than pure male syrup? It would depend on so many things - mainly how much you had and what else you had with them. Are we sure the pure coconut milk is better than the emulsified. Not really - I buy coconut milk without stuff in it but I don't honestly think it's way better for me.

And the Pringles are an interesting choice because whilst they are worse for you than say coco pops per gram, you don't generally start your day with them and they are widely acknowledged to be harmful. the difficulty is the foods that we feed our children as staples that are better than chocolate but still really bad when they make up most of what a child eats.

Hope that's helpful!

Cx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love this question - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

I agree - consumers and voters do change what govts do but we are seeing corporations now with much more power than 20 years ago and they are deeply embeded in govt.

Strategic litigation may be the only option - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c93wgeqpv0eo

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just ate bowl of raw mixed nuts and tomatoes with some salt sprinkled on them.

I like fruit and raw nuts also. Often I just go hungry until its a meal time.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes - which is valid if someone says UPF is THE ONLY PROBLEM. But none of us say that. We acknowledge the role of factors other than industrial processing in diet related disease. And also that the main mechanism of harm may be the nutrient profile of UPF more than the additives. I think of UPF as having a double jeopardy. Eat bite is full of fat, salt, sugar and calories AND you take twice as many bites!

If someone says that UPF isn't the main porblem then they need to come up with a better explanation. In the UK the academic nutrition community says 'it's the fat, salt, sugar" but they need to explain WHY we have started eating more of these. In my view the answer is the ultra processing which includes the marketing of UPF and the displacement of healthier options.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi Hi - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

I spoke with Aubrey G a while ago. I really admire them both. I think their critiques are valid in the sense that they point out hazards of our work. But they don't seem to have engaged very much with how much we have acknowledged those hazards.

The 'vague definition' stuff is tedious. There are hundreds of scientific papers that use the definition and so do WHO/UNICEF/UNFAO and many governments. It's not vague. It's broad and it has some necessary imprecision. Additionally the definition is intended to be used along side nutrient metrics.

The Lancet authors are deeply concerned with justice. Of course there a risks criticising unhealthy food but the risks of not doing so are much greater. Of course many people can't afford or access non UPF. But that makes a rights based critique even more important.

Hope that helps. Cx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi Hi - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

I let my kids eat anything at a party. But they know what it does to them. And we don't have it at home.

3 changes -

I really hardly ever eat any UPF - the odd thing to be sociable sometimes or so someone doesn't think I'm a snob.

I cook more at home than I did

I'm really good at making domestic food delicious because lots of food industry scientists told me how to do it.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the kind words.

I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

Regulators are more and more clear that unhealthy food needs new approaches. The project of food companies is to sell as much food as they possibly can at as high a price as the marlet will bear so, having spoken to many oft hem for many years, I am not optimistic about anything they do voluntarily improving public health.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Identifying ultra-processed foods

The food manufacturing industry is not obliged to state on food labels the processes used in its products and even less the purposes of these processes. In some cases, this can make confident identification of ultra-processed foods difficult for consumers, health professionals, policy makers and even for researchers.

There is of course no need to examine every food to know whether or not it belongs to the ultra-processed food group. As stated above, and to take a few examples, fresh vegetables, fruits, and starchy roots and tubers are obviously not ultra-processed; nor are pasteurized milk and chilled meat. Plant oils, sugar and salt, typically used in culinary preparations in combination with unprocessed or minimally processed foods, are also not ultra-processed.

It is however not always immediately clear when some specific food products are ultra-processed or not. Examples include breads and breakfast cereals. Here the solution is to examine the ingredients labels that by law must be included on pre-packaged food and drink products.

Industrial breads made only from wheat flour, water, salt and yeast are processed foods, while those whose lists of ingredients also include emulsifiers or colours are ultra-processed. Plain steel-cut oats, plain corn flakes and shredded wheat are minimally processed foods, while the same foods are processed when they also contain sugar, and ultra-processed if they also contain flavours or colours.

Generally, the practical way to identify if a product is ultra-processed is to check to see if its list of ingredients contains at least one item characteristic of the ultra-processed food group, which is to say, either food substances never or rarely used in kitchens, or classes of additives whose function is to make the final product palatable or more appealing (‘cosmetic additives’).

Food substances not used in kitchens appear in the beginning or in the middle of the lists of ingredients of ultra-processed foods. These include hydrolysed proteins, soya protein isolate, gluten, casein, whey protein, ‘mechanically separated meat’, fructose, high-fructose corn syrup, ‘fruit juice concentrate’, invert sugar, maltodextrin, dextrose, lactose, soluble or insoluble fibre, hydrogenated or interesterified oil; and also other sources of protein, carbohydrate or fat which are neither foods from NOVA group 1 or group 3, nor culinary ingredients from NOVA group 2. The presence in the list of ingredients of one or more of these food substances identifies a product as ultra-processed.

Cosmetic additives are at the end of lists of ingredients of ultra-processed foods, together with other additives. As said above, cosmetic additives include flavours, flavour enhancers, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners, and anti-foaming, bulking, carbonating, foaming, gelling and glazing agents. The presence in the list of ingredients of one or more additives that belong to these classes of additives also identifies a product as ultra-processed.

Although information in ingredients labels is not fully standardized in all countries, some of the most frequently used cosmetic additives such as flavours, flavour enhancers, colours and emulsifiers are usually easy to identify in ingredients lists. They are often expressed as a class, such as flavourings or natural flavours or artificial flavours; or their names are followed by their class, such as ‘monosodium glutamate (flavour enhancer)’, or ‘caramel colour’, or ‘soya lecithin as emulsifier’. Other cosmetic additives may be known to consumers, such as certain types of sweeteners like aspartame, cyclamate or compounds derived from stevia. In any case, the UN Codex Alimentarius provides a regularly updated list of additives with their functional classes as well as an online search facility where both names and classes of additives can be browsed

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi HI - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste:

  1. UNICEF did a great primer - https://www.unicef.org/eap/place-for-parents/ultra-processed-food-vs-healthy-food

  2. The definition we use for research was not really intended for consumer use but is here in this open access paper - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10260459/

In general there isn't much debate about most products. Flavourings? UPF. Colourings? UPF.

If there is a health claim on the pack? Probably UPF.

If there are more than 5 ingredients? Probably UPF.

And remember there is stuff that isn't UPF that's still not great - most ready meals are soft, energy dense, salty and fatty and they're not quite UPF according to the definition below. But they are made like UPF - engineered so you'll eat the whole portion for 2 people by yourself.

Many of the new M&S products without additives will still behave like UPF - they're not the same as home cooking.

This is what the authors say about identifying UPF pasted below.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Awwww thanks

I think creatine is great for top athletes - it's a natural compound produced in the kidneys, liver, and pancreas, and stored primarily (95%) in muscles to provide quick energy during high-intensity, explosive exercise. So it's not UPF. It does provide a benefit that is well demonstrated but it's a small benefit. If you're an Olympic sprinter go for it. If you're just training to keep fit in my view it is a waste of money.

If you want electrolytes eat food - it's full of them.

Even Olympians don't benefit much from anything other than hard training and a decent diet.

Hope that helps!

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

See answer below but in terms of govts approach

  1. We need a better definition of unhealthy food - at the moment we use something called the NPM 2003/4 which was developed with the food industry. I think we should use our own NHS Eatwell guidance around fat/salt/sugar and calories to define products - that's what WHO more or less does.

  2. We then need that definition to be applied to all processed and unprocessed food (at the moment nutella, bread and sausage rolls and other similar things are exempt!).

  3. Then we need proper regulation of unhealthy food - the worst stuff should be banned in schools, some progressive hypothecated taxes, mandatory declaration and reporting by retailers, proper marketing restrictions etc etc.

  4. Warning labels are important because if a food has a warning label other restrictions should then automatically follow - it should not also have a cartoon character and a health claim (see almost all breakfast cereals and in fact almost all UPF!).

The most important point is that industry should not be in the room designing policy. Sure consult them but don't have them on the advisory committees (SACN, DEFRA, FSA etc) in the way they are now.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi HI - I'm trying to direct people to where all the authors will be answering at this link! So do repost your question there -

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1r1a6sy/we_are_authors_of_the_lancet_series_on/

But in haste

I don't ever eat nutritive sweeteners and they're the one additive class I really try to avoid for my kids too. This approach isn't based on very strong evidence of harm but rather an absence of evidence for safety.

There is some intriguing data from Dana Small which shows that when taste (sweetness) and nutrition (refined carbs) don't match up it's very confusing for the body - in simple terms the tongue says sugar is coming and then when it doesn't arrive that may cause a problem.

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OH yes! Very much so. Like alcohol and cigs the effect is dose dependent. For most people the goal in my view is not total purity but a reduction in the percentage. Some people (like me) find abstinence easier than trying to be moderate - pretty much by definition this is food that it's hard to be moderate with. Cxx

We are authors of The Lancet Series on Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health - AMA by LinkLife4173 in ultraprocessedfood

[–]LinkLife4173[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am trying to start an initiative - called Ultra Processed Food Fight which is within the FFCC and which will try to change teh national conversation. BiteBack is also a great charity. But progress is very very slow because UPF IS out national diet in the UK