The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) recently published its independent report on ultra-processed foods. As an advisory body to the UK Government on nutrition and related health matters, the SACN aimed to review the available evidence on the links between processed food consumption and health outcomes. While most systematic reviews found that increased consumption of processed food, particularly ultra-processed food (UPF), was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, the experts also stressed the presence of uncertainties in the available evidence.
One of the uncertainties regarding UPF arises from the increasing focus on nutrition-based studies in recent years. UPF consumption has been linked to a greater risk of developing cancer and higher mortality rates. In analyzing systematic reviews, the SACN scientists found consistent links between UPF and adverse health outcomes such as overweight, obesity, chronic non-communicable diseases, depression, maternal and child health problems, and mortality risk. However, they emphasized the limitations of the available evidence, which consists mainly of observational studies. Inconsistent adjustment for covariables and discrepancies between systematic reviews regarding key covariables make it unclear whether these associations are independent of the “unhealthy” nutrient contents of UPFs, such as salt, saturated fat, or free sugars. Additionally, there is limited information on the impact of UPF consumption on different population subgroups and socially diverse groups.
The SACN also highlighted limitations related to the classification of UPF. With several classification systems developed worldwide, the most commonly used one is the NOVA food classification system. However, the scientists identified some concerns with its practical application in the UK, as certain food classifications in the system do not align with nutritional and other food-based classifications. Therefore, they recommend further assessment and development of a (ultra-) processed foods classification system that can accurately estimate processed food consumption in the UK.
The SACN’s review acknowledges the important roles food processing plays in food production, such as ensuring edible foods, enhancing safety, increasing shelf-life, preserving nutrients, modifying nutrient composition, improving palatability, and increasing convenience. Some nutrition scientists have welcomed the review’s focus on the uncertainties surrounding the available evidence on UPF consumption and health issues, stating that it provides a more balanced perspective. Professor Gunter Kuhnle from the University of Reading emphasizes that the SACN’s statement contextualizes many of the often-exaggerated claims about ultra-processed foods.
In conclusion, the SACN suggests that the consumption of (ultra-) processed foods may be indicative of other unhealthy dietary patterns and lifestyle behaviors. UPFs are typically energy-dense, high in fat, salt, or sugar, high in processed meat, and/or low in fruit, vegetables, and fiber. However, Professor Tom Sanders from King’s College London cautions against oversimplifying the issue since it fails to differentiate between nutrient-dense foods and those that only provide energy. He also highlights the critical role of modern food processing in addressing micronutrient deficiencies through fortification. While further research is needed to evaluate the potential harm of regularly consuming specific highly processed foods, food processing remains vital in feeding the population.
