Processed food

Peer-Reviewed Scientific Articles​

Ultra-Processed Food Availability and Noncommunicable Diseases: A Systematic Review

URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34299832/
Journal: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publication Date: 07/2021
Summary: Ultra-processed food (UPF) can be harmful to the population’s health. To establish associations between UPF and health outcomes, food consumption can be assessed using availability data, such as purchase lists or household budget surveys. The aim of this systematic review was to search studies that related UPF availability with noncommunicable diseases or their risk factors. PRISMA guidelines were used. Searches were performed in PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus and Web of Science in February 2021. The search strategy included terms related to exposure (UPF) and outcomes (noncommunicable diseases and their risk factors). Studies that assessed only food consumption at an individual level and did not present health outcomes were excluded. Two reviewers conducted the selection process, and a third helped when disagreement occurred. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the studies’ quality; 998 records were analyzed. All 11 eligible studies were ecological and assessed overweight and obesity as a health outcome, only one showed no positive association with UPF availability. Two studies included the prevalence of diabetes as an outcome, however no significant association was found with UPF availability. Studies relating UPF availability and health outcomes are focused on overweight and obesity. It is necessary to further explore the relationship between other health outcomes and UPF availability using purchase or sales data.

Key Takeaways

There is a positive correlation between ultra processed food consumption and obesity. Further research needs to be done to assess correlation with other diseases such as cardiovascular, diabetes, and cancer.

Is Ultra Processed Food Causing the Obesity Epidemic?

Ultra-processed food and risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies

URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34904160/
Journal: International Journal of Epidemiology
Publication Date: 08/2022
Summary: In total 2272 records were screened, of which 18 studies, including almost 1.1 million individuals, were included in this review and 72% showed a positive association between ultra-processed foods and the risk of diabetes. According to the studies included in the meta-analysis, compared with non-consumption, moderate intake of ultra-processed food increased the risk of diabetes by 12% [relative risk (RR): 1.12; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.17, I2 = 24%], whereas high intake increased risk by 31% (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.21-1.42, I2 = 60%).

Key Takeaways

Even moderate consumption of Ultra-processed food can increase your risk of diabetes by 12%, and high ultra processed food intake can increase it by 31%.

Is Ultra-Processed Food to Blame for The Diabetes Epidemic

Processed meat intake and chronic disease morbidity and mortality: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6797176/

Journal: PLoS One

Publication Date: 10/2019

Summary: Despite the nutritional value of meat, a large volume of reviews and meta-analyses suggests that processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, assessments of the quality of these published reviews internal validity are generally lacking. We systematically reviewed and assessed the quality alongside summarizing the results of previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the association between processed meat intake and cancers, type II diabetes (T2D), and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Reviews and meta-analyses published until May 2018 were identified through a systematic literature search in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of included reviews. The quality of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). All eligible reviews had to comply with two quality requirements: providing sufficient information on quality assessment of the primary studies and a comprehensive search. The results were summarized for T2D, CVD, and each of the different cancer types. The certainty in the estimates of the individual outcomes was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. In total, 22 systematic reviews were eligible and thus included in this review. More than 100 reviews were excluded because quality assessment of the primary studies had not been performed. The AMSTAR score of the included reviews ranged from 5 to 8 indicating moderate quality. Overall, the quality assessments of primary studies of the reviews are generally lacking; the scientific quality of the systematic reviews reporting positive associations between processed meat intake and risk of various cancers, T2D and CVD is moderate, and the results from case-control studies suggest more often a positive association than the results from cohort studies. The overall certainty in the evidence was very low across all individual outcomes, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision.

Key Takeaways

Previous studies that have been done to show that processed meat is linked with various types of cancers, diabetes, and heart disease gives very low quality evidence. Additionally these studies have various flaws including a large amount of bias and low precision due to conflicting results.

Why Did We Draw Conclusions From Poorly Done Studies?

Processed meat and colorectal cancer: a quantitative review of prospective epidemiologic studies.

URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20495462/

Journal: European Journal of Cancer Prevention

Publication Date: 08/2010

Summary: Meta analysis of studies examining link between processed meat consumption and colorectal cancer. the currently available epidemiologic evidence is not sufficient to support a clear and unequivocal independent positive association between processed meat consumption and CRC.

Key Takeaways

There is no high quality evidence to suggest that red meat increases your risk for colon cancer

Red Meat Does NOT Increase Risk of Colon Cancer

The need for adequate processing to reduce the antinutritional factors in plants used as human foods and animal feeds: A review

URL: http://www.academicjournals.org/app/webroot/article/article1380638739_Soetan%20and%20Oyewole.pdf

Journal: African Journal of Food Science

Publication Date: 09/2009

 Summary: There are many antinurtional and toxic compounds in plants and plant products used for human and animal foods. Processing is required to reduce the levels of these compounds.

Key Takeaways

Plant "foods" contain many anti-nutrients that interferes with digestion and utilization of any nutrients contained within the plant. Therefore, plant foods require processing to reduce levels of these compounds. Inadequate processing of plant foods can lead to bad outcomes and in some cases death.

Plant Foods Are The Original Processed Food

Want To Achieve Your Optimal Health?

Join us for a Free 30-Day Trial. Cancel Anytime.