What explains increasing anxiety about ultra-processed plant-based foods?
Vegan diets
can contain more UPFs on average – but this might not be a problem.
For most
people living in industrialised societies, it's difficult to avoid
ultra-processed foods altogether. My cereal is ultra-processed. So is the
whiskey in my cabinet, the hot sauce in my fridge and the crisps in my
backpack.
The term
"ultra-processed" is poorly understood and inconsistently used, even
sometimes by scientists. While in some circles it has become a catch-all term
for foods with little nutritional benefit, a wide variety of foods fall under
this umbrella.
Ultra-processed
foods are popular with consumers for their convenience (frozen pizza), taste
(wrapped cookies), and durability (sandwich bread). These elements, plus the
relatively low cost of ingredients, make them profitable for manufacturers.
But recently
another motivation for ultra-processed foods has emerged: to replace meat or
dairy among those attempting to eat a more plant-based diet. With this new
category has come anxiety about the health effects of these products, leading
to headlines such as "The unhealthiest fake meats you can buy (and why
it's better to go to McDonald's)". These concerns were exacerbated by
recent research, which found that those who consume 10% more ultra-processed
foods derived from plants have a 12% higher risk of death related to diet.
However, things are not quite as they seem. Are plant-based diets really so
rich in ultra-processed foods, and are they any worse for you?
Identifying
ultra-processed foods
An
established method for categorising the levels of processing in food is Nova.
Fernanda Rauber, a nutritional epidemiologist at the University of São Paulo in
Brazil, explains, "Nova distinguishes between different levels of
processing, acknowledging that not all processed foods are harmful. In fact,
many types of processing, such as pasteurisation or fermentation, are important
for food safety and nutrition." It's the more intense processing that
concerns Rauber. "One type of industrial processing is harmful to health –
the kind that produces ultra-processed foods."
In the Nova
system, a food product is considered ultra-processed if at least one of its
ingredients is a substance that home cooks generally don't use (such as
high-fructose corn syrup or hydrolysed protein), or is an additive designed to
increase the product's appeal (such as a thickener or emulsifier).
Why
ultra-processed foods can be harmful
Some experts
have criticised the four-category Nova system as simplistic and imprecise,
arguing that foods aren't automatically unhealthy simply because they're
ultra-processed. For instance, ultra-processed cereals and breads can have
beneficial fibre, although diets high in UPFs tend to be limited in fibre and
other nutrients in general.
Nor are foods
good for you just because they're less processed. Red meat has been linked with
higher mortality from cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease and
stroke, yet is classified as unprocessed or minimally processed by Nova.
In practice
many UPFs are also high in salt, sugar or fat. The food industry uses a great
deal of sugar not only to sweeten foods, but also to enhance their texture,
colour, preservation, or even bulk.
Notwithstanding
the occasional exception, overall, the health effects of ultra-processed foods
are negative. A 2023 UK study found that a 10% increase in UPFs within diets
was associated with a 2% higher rate of cancer overall, and a 19% higher rate
of ovarian cancer.
This is
partly linked to obesity. It's easy to overeat ultra-processed foods, which
tend to be less filling, and possibly even addictive, often while requiring
less chewing. Unsurprisingly, then, they're linked with higher calorie
consumption and weight gain. The proportion of the diet made up by
ultra-processed foods varies widely across the globe; UPFs make up 16% of mean
caloric intake in Colombia, 20% in Taiwan, and 22% in Brazil. On the other
hand, they make up 48% in Canada, 57% in the UK and 58% in the US. In some
North American groups it can be as high as 80%.
There is
also emerging evidence that certain food additives and packaging contaminants
are carcinogenic, and cause inflammation and other bodily changes.
Patterns of
eating plant-based ultra-processed foods
Among
plant-based foods, ultra-processed ones are linked to higher risk of
cardiovascular disease. A 2024 UK study that garnered much attention found that
a 10% increase in caloric intake of plant-sourced ultra-processed food was
associated with a 5% higher risk of cardiovascular disease, and a 12% greater
risk of dying from this. On the other hand, there was a slightly greater
reduction in cardiovascular disease risk from consuming more plant-sourced
foods that were not ultra-processed. The ultra-processed foods included a
number of foods considered "vegan by default", such as bread, crisps
and condiments. Meat alternatives were the smallest contributor to calories
among the participants overall, at 0.2%.
This
research didn't assess specific foods like plant-based ones in isolation,
stresses Rauber, one of the study's coauthors. "From an epidemiological
perspective, what truly matters is the overall dietary pattern, rather than
focusing on individual foods," Rauber says. Thus, "it's not just the
origin of the food – whether animal or plant – but the degree of processing
that has significant implications for health".
A 2021
French study found that ultra-processed foods made up more of the overall
calorie intake of non-meat-eaters. UPFs accounted for 37% and 39.5% of energy
intake for vegetarians and vegans, respectively, mainly due to meat and dairy
substitutes. This was significantly higher than the 33% figure for meat eaters.
But while the vegan participants consumed more UPFs, they also consumed more
unprocessed foods (accounting for 31.2% of energy intake for vegans and 29% for
meat eaters), and fewer fatty and sweet foods.
Study
participants who had recently made the switch to vegetarian and vegan consumed
more UPFs than longtime meat avoiders. In general, it's common for people
experimenting with reducing animal products to lean on substitutes and packaged
foods initially.
Comparing
apples to oranges?
While
nutritional research abounds, so does confusion. This is partly due to
differences in what is being analysed, such as whether these are meat alternatives
or other foods that happen to not contain animal products, such as bread. In
other words, are researchers looking at vegan burgers, the buns they're
sandwiched between, or the crisps on the side? It depends.
Studies of
multiple European countries have found notable associations between multiple
diseases, including type 2 diabetes, and ultra-processed products in general –
yet those same studies found lesser risk for plant-based alternatives compared
to animal-based products. And a 2024 US study concluded that the strongest
links between mortality and ultra-processed foods showed up in ready-to-eat
products based around meat, poultry or seafood.
Lewis
Bollard, who directs the farm animal welfare programme at the foundation Open
Philanthropy, says that in the plant-based space, criticisms have tended to
focus on alternative proteins. According to Bollard, critics include
meat-industry companies concerned about their profit model, as well as people
following whole-food plant-based diets themselves.
"It's
important to look at what's actually in the ultra-processed foods," notes
Paul Behrens, a food systems expert at the University of Oxford. "Of
course, we should aim for delicious, whole-food, plant-based meals as the core
of our diet, but ultra-processed plant-based foods generally have much better
nutrition scores than ultra-processed meat foods,” he says. "One study
found that, on average, vegan sausages had a nutrition impact score over twice
as good as pork sausages."
So one key
question is what is being replaced. A bean stew might be more nourishing than a
pea protein sausage. But a pea protein sausage is likely more nourishing than a
mixed-meat sausage – not to mention the differences in environmental and animal-welfare
impacts.
A 2024
review comparing animal and plant-based meat found that the meat alternatives
were lower overall in saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, cholesterol and
calories, while being higher in fibre, carbohydrate and polyunsaturated fat.
Not all fats are created equal. Polyunsaturated fat, found at higher levels in
meat alternatives, has an important place in diets. And a 2018 study of US
healthcare professionals found lower heart disease risk among people who ate
more plant-based monounsaturated fat (such as vegetable oils), though not
animal-based monounsaturated fat (such as red meat).
However,
Rauber cautions, "While saturated fats are often linked to animal-based
foods, it's important to note that many ultra-processed plant-based products
can also be high in saturated fats due to the use of modified oils and fats
during processing".
Meat
alternatives have captured so much public discussion for several reasons, says
Tamsin Blaxter, a writer and researcher at Table, a network of universities
researching food systems. One is their novelty factor. Another is the
preoccupation in certain affluent countries with protein, and thus with
alternatives to it. Throughout history, there have been waves of thinking,
without necessarily being grounded in evidence, that a diet high in animal
protein is more natural for humans, and that natural is better. Bollard also
points out that it's common for people in industrialised societies to have
misconceptions about how animal protein is actually produced and how
"natural" it is.
How
companies and societies are responding
Concerns
over ultra-processed foods are affecting public health policy. For instance,
Nova has influenced dietary guidelines in Brazil, whose government is also
considering imposing taxes on ultra-processed foods and regulating them more
strictly in schools. Carlos Monteiro, the University of São Paulo
epidemiologist who coined the term "ultra-processed" in 2009, now
believes that ultra-processed foods should be regulated similarly to tobacco,
with advertising restrictions and heavy taxation.
Yet Eileen
Gibney, a nutrition professor at University College Dublin, has argued that the
world will need to embrace food processing in the transition toward more
plant-based diets, if consumers want plant-based versions of the foods they're
already accustomed to.
Companies
making foods without animal products have to navigate between perceptions that
vegan food is too healthy and boring, and conversely that it is overly
processed and unhealthy. Anke van Eijk, the R&D manager for Dutch
plant-based business Schouten, says that many consumers, especially
flexitarians, "still want a seamless transition to plant-based eating, and
highly processed products deliver on that expectation".
Some food
manufacturers and retailers have responded to consumer concerns by creating
products with fewer ingredients and additives, according to van Eijk. "An
example would be the growing interest in whole-food-based products, like
plant-based patties made with recognisable ingredients such as beans,
vegetables or grains." She says that it will not be easy for manufacturers
to move beyond standard industrial processes or ingredients, though Schouten
has recently developed its own fibre to replace textured proteins.
Yet more
broadly, Blaxter believes "there's a danger here that the reformulation
question only leads to quite narrow incremental change". She points to
previous health panics, for instance around fat. While she acknowledges the
need for further research to tease out health outcomes related to
ultra-processed foods, plant-based or otherwise, she's concerned that
over-attention to one aspect of food risks distracting from overall food
systems, which ultimately impacts our eating habits and health more.
As well, Blaxter
worries about the "weaponisation of disgust using the term
'ultra-processed food'", which can seep into judgements toward people with
different life circumstances. Altogether, she calls ultra-processing "a
really complicated and contested concept" that is currently intersecting
with cultural, political and technological anxieties around control of food and
plant-based innovations.
What all
this means for consumers
Many
nutrition experts urge people to minimise their consumption of ultra-processed
food.
Rauber says
that emphasising the nutritional benefits of particular plant-based
ultra-processed products has limitations. This perspective "tends to
overlook the fact that these foods are still highly processed, often lack whole
food ingredients, and may contain various additives that make them
hyper-palatable and can lead to overconsumption."
Sarah Berry,
a nutrition professor at King's College London, and the chief scientist at the
nutrition company ZOE, calls for balance. "Whether animal-based or
plant-based, it's important that consumers know that not all UPFs are created
equal," Berry says.
For her,
"The key takeaway is that you don't need to avoid all UPFs, and it would
be very difficult to do so. It's your overall dietary pattern that matters for
long-term health. If you regularly consume fruits and vegetables – whether
they're tinned, frozen or fresh – nuts, seeds, and legumes, you're on the right
path. As long as you have a good overall diet across weeks and months, if some
UPFs make it into your shopping trolley, it's not a major concern. However,
it's worth trying to consume ultra-processed meat products and fizzy drinks
just once in a while."
Source :From BBC news
Comments
Post a Comment