Ultra Processed Foods and obesity

[AuroraSaab]

I don't often start new threads; every one ends up going round in circles after a bit. I thought this research was interesting though.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2420902122

It suggests that lack of exercise is a fairly small factor in obesity when comparing between economic groups (ie developed and developing world).

Specifically, exercise (energy expenditure they call it) accounts for only 10% of western obesity. The biggest correlation was between body fat and those who got most calories from ultra processed foods.

Foodie scientist explains here, but basically the ultra palatablity of upf's makes you feel less full, you don't excrete the calories as quickly or easily.


View: https://x.com/HermanPontzer/status/1945132517993927092


I have some Chinese friends who will bluntly say 'Why do you British people eat such terrible food? Why are there so many fat people?'.

With the cancer rates in young people increasing and obesity rising, what do we do about ultra processed food? We can't all take Ozempic for the rest of our lives.

 

[CXRAndy]

It will take monumental shift to force big food companies to abandon highly processed food

 

[BoldonLad]

I didn't read beyond "4213 adults in 34 populations across 6 continents". I wouldn't believe any "research" with that sample size in just the UK.

 

[Psamathe]

A complex issue and one I have no knowledge on beyond forming views from reliable reports.

I wonder if part of the problem with obesity is that there can be many causes and underlying problems and our press want a single "blame" (and thus solution).

I understand that one of the difficulties analysing the impact of UPFs is that there is no definition of what a UPF is, just characteristics. There was one article I read in The Conversation that found that the vegetarian UPFs are healthier than non-vegetarian UPFs (both not as healthy as non-UPF).

"Lack of exercise" seems to be treated as a binary thing ie you do take exercise or you don't. I suspect it's far more complex as it's a very long sliding scale. Maybe an obese person who isn't taking exercise just isn't reaching the study threshold and yet what little they are taking is preventing a bad situation being a complete disaster. Even exercise recording devices are pretty useless (I have several and set them all running through the same activity and you get radically different Active Energy data).

My personal view is that exercise could be a massive help and beyond just burning calories (eg endorphins helping mood, self image, etc. in some reducing the focus on food). But that's an unfounded personal view which I suspect would apply to some and not others.

Much of above is personal view (based on reliable articles) so I'm very open to being corrected.

Ian

 

[CXRAndy]

Obesity, diabetes epidemic began on national scale at the same time big food makers started with highly processed foods.

Increased carbohydrates was also ramped up. This all began in the 1980s

Since the late 1990s exercise in children and adults has declined too.

 

[AuroraSaab]

My personal view is that exercise could be a massive help and beyond just burning calories (eg endorphins helping mood, self image, etc. in some reducing the focus on food). But that's an unfounded personal view which I suspect would apply to some and not others.

I think you're right about the value of exercise but I do think we've been sold the idea that exercise is key in losing weight when its main benefits are fitness/endurance and mental health. Unless you're doing lots, its contribution to weight loss is pretty small in my opinion.

I do think governments will have to start to address ultra processed foods more aggressively. The US is starting on it supposedly but it never seems to come to much and they are way behind Europe in terms of additives etc anyway.

I wasn't in favour of a fat tax as it does feel a bit like a tax that will be mainly paid by the poor, but the 'nudging' method of gently getting us to stop eating crap isn't working. The increase in chocolate prices has been a deterrent for me in a way that 'It'll take 4hrs of walking to burn off that Mars bar' isn't.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I didn't read beyond "4213 adults in 34 populations across 6 continents". I wouldn't believe any "research" with that sample size in just the UK.

I don't think a study of 4k people would be statistically invalid. I assume it was spread across a number of populations to minimise bias in diet and economic development between different countries.

 

[Psamathe]

I do think governments will have to start to address ultra processed foods more aggressively. The US is starting on it supposedly but it never seems to come to much and they are way behind Europe in terms of additives etc anyway.

I think it's the general issue where Governments seem to listen to lobbyists and despite all common sense believe the fantasy pushed as "self-regulation" which is nothing more than private companies making as much profit as possible (given that in a capitalist system private companies are obliged to act in the best interests of their shareholders).

In the US there are other motives driving whatever they are and are not doing and I no longer believe they are looking for the interests of the wider population. Not UPFs but example of the US madness of regulations: As glyphosate has increasingly been linked to cancers, diquat has been being used instead. Diquat has been banned in UK, EU, China and other countries and for human health it's "quite a bit nastier" than glyphosate yet US won't ban or regulate it. Friends of the Earth non-profit found it is about 200 times more toxic than glyphosate in terms of chronic exposure. So US hardly acting to improve population health.

Ian

 

[AuroraSaab]

Yeah, the power of the food industry lobby is huge. Add to that people's resistance to what they see as nanny state-ery = we're probably scuppered. The cancer increases in young people is very worrying though, on top of the obesity issues.

 

[Psamathe]

Add to that people's resistance to what they see as nanny state-ery = we're probably scuppered.

I view this as closely linked to "regulation". To me the population need a degree of protection from harms. Sometimes harms caused because people don't have the time or motivation to research everything themselves, sometimes from our Capitalist system requiring corporate profits are the only priority, sometimes from natural events.

And reality is you'd spend more than a lifetime researching safe practice to ensure healthy diet, environment, financial security, transport safety, clean water, breathable safe air, etc., etc. so we need these regulations to protect us from those who want money without regard to our wellbeing. So to me "nanny-state"=public protections and is mostly a good thing. And even if you researched everything much would be beyond your control eg can you stop others wood burning or heavy traffic outside your house causing health and developmental issues for your children?

So when UK Government take about "tearing up red-tape" they are using emotive language and actually mean removing protections from everybody.

 

[matticus]

I wasn't in favour of a fat tax as it does feel a bit like a tax that will be mainly paid by the poor, but the 'nudging' method of gently getting us to stop eating crap isn't working. The increase in chocolate prices has been a deterrent for me in a way that 'It'll take 4hrs of walking to burn off that Mars bar' isn't.

The other view you could take is that it's a tax worth paying. i.e. our health is worth spending quite a lot of money ob, if only we knew it.

Hopefully someone will come up with a more equitable solution ...

 

[matticus]

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2420902122

It suggests that lack of exercise is a fairly small factor in obesity when comparing between economic groups (ie developed and developing world).

Specifically, exercise (energy expenditure they call it) accounts for only 10% of western obesity. The biggest correlation was between body fat and those who got most calories from ultra processed foods.

UPFs have been fingered in many studies. Here's a more "accesible" one (for people like me); by the BBC! With actual Doctors! https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017tcy