Crave
Built to Crave, Bound to Suffer: The Role of Processed Foods in Chronic Diseases
What if it’s not cigarettes or alcohol at all that are the most dangerous threats to your health; it is the chips, pop, and frozen dinners sitting in the cupboard? What if you are eating a food “so addictive” that it cancels out your brain’s natural satiety signals that is full of salt, sugar, and in many cases, other by-product chemicals that you have never heard of — and that the food is more conveniently available to you than fresh produce almost anywhere on the planet. This is not a science fiction movie. This is the contemporary food system and it all revolves around an ultra processed foods complex.
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) have proliferated the diets of the world’s populations at an alarming rate and scale over the last several decades.¹ UPFs include a broad range of industrial formulations, specifically sweet and salty snack foods, industrially prepared packaged meals, the most edible form of processed meats, as well as soft drinks that are convenient, accessible, cheap, and marketed aggressively.
However, as the scientific evidence mounts, these products come with a cost to public health that has, in all likelihood, gone completely unrecognized.² The rise of chronic diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancers have risen parallel to the global rise of UPFs.³ This relationship is not coincidental. The cultural proliferation of ultra-processed foods is a major contributor to chronic disease and should be prioritized as part of any public health initiative to combat chronic disease.
The term “ultra-processed foods” is used by nutrition researchers to describe industrial formulations that are made mostly or entirely from substances extracted from food sources (e.g., oils, sugars, and starches) or synthesized in a lab (e.g., artificial colorings and preservatives).⁴ They are made with hyper-palatability, shelf stable, and convenient in mind (not health.)
These foods are often high in calories, added sugars, unhealthy fats, and sodium while being extremely low in necessary nutrients such as fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Different from whole or minimally processed foods, ultra-processed foods digest quickly and often fail to engage the signals of satisfaction and fullness, which can lead to overeating.
Many studies have demonstrated these products do not merely represent harmless indulgences or preferences, they reflect a larger contribution to disease.⁵ A 2019 study published in BMJ specifically examined UPFs and demonstrated that increased consumption was correlated with increased cancer risk, a 10% increase in UPF consumption was related to a 12% increase in risk of cancer.
Other studies have linked high UPF consumption to higher risk for obesity, cardiovascular disease, and metabolic disease.⁷ Type 2 diabetes, once considered a disease of older adults, is now diagnosed in children and youth as well, and the research suggests a primary contributor is poor dietary quality.
While often, obesity presents as one of the more visible consequences of UPF intake (now of which contributes to over 650 million adults globally), still these products are designed to be irresistible, containing a raging mix of sugar, fat, salt and synthetic flavoring that carves through the body’s natural control mechanisms.⁸ They are also marketed incredibly aggressively, often directly targeting children and being made widely available in low-income communities where whole, healthy foods are not only limited but, often limited because they are inaccessible or unaffordable.
Blaming individuals for poor dietary choices misses the larger picture. In many neighborhoods, particularly low-income neighborhoods or rural communities, fresh fruits and vegetables can be difficult if not impossible to purchase, or are simply out of reach, while ultra-processed options are low-cost, low-nutrient, and aggressively marketed. In addition to neighborhood disparities, grocery stores are being replaced with fast-food chains.
They replace grocery stores in communities, and fast food chains propose quick meals instead of good home preparation, in addition to the many other distractions our time presents. This system imbalance creates a cycle of continued loss wrapping upon loss: poor diets force populations into the path of disease; disease leads to increased healthcare costs, which allows poverty to deepen.
Diseases associated with poor diet — heart disease, diabetes, and certain cancers — cost national healthcare systems significantly, and deterioration of these chronic health conditions damages quality of life and happiness for all populations, but particularly the more vulnerable.
Addressing the problem and correcting the system imbalance will require corrective action across many levels of government, healthcare, public health, and food manufacturer systems; addressing the issue will need to go beyond purely individual responsibility and advocacy. For example, the government needs to be able to apply stronger regulations on marketing unhealthy foods, targeting children especially.
If public health calls for similar efforts that reduced tobacco use to exist for food, then why not? If the consumer does not know what they are purchasing to put in their body, by not making food clear to them, then not only would there be less accountability on the food manufacturers, but this creates opportunity for less healthy options coupled with a similar problem of food citizenship.
Food labelling is critical; consumers should be informed for their own good. Data on front-of-package warning labels is encouraging (as seen in similar implementations in Chile and Mexico), whilst also encouraging consumers to make better choices.⁹ Health and similar taxes on sugary sweetened beverages and highly processed, unhealthy snacks can be used to drive consumption, while subsidies and other methods could potentially make fresh produce and whole grains priced significantly lower; again, meaning it is possible to become more affordable.
Importantly, education must have a major place in improving food consumption and health-associated systems of citizens. Schools should teach basic nutrition, including cooking skills, at an early age, encouraging children to learn about their own long-lasting effects of food consumption, while public campaigns would improve cultural consumption norms about food. This includes making it the norm to buy, prepare, and eat fresh food (home-cooked meals) rather than something that comes packaged and convenient.
Needless to say, personal choice still matters. While systemic change is important, individuals can begin to reduce their UPF consumption by reading ingredient lists, cooking at home, and choosing whole foods when they can.¹⁰ The most basic rule is: if you can’t recognize most of the ingredients, it probably isn’t real food. Not drinking sugary drinks, eating more fruits and vegetables, and eating less processed snacks are simple changes that can make a difference.
Community support is also crucial. Community options for supporting local nutrient dense food such as farmers’ markets, food co-ops, and community gardens help to increase access to nutritious food and foster community. These can help a person make better decisions for their own health and make less reliance upon the food industry’s worst acted upon.
There are arguments that ultra-processed foods are important for the world to feed a growing population and that they provide convenience in a world that is continuously decreasing in time.¹¹ While I accept convenience as being an important part of living in modern society, health must come first. The long-term costs of chronic disease far outweigh any perceived benefit of eating cheap, fast food in the short-term. Convenience does not have to mean sacrificing our bodies while putting responsibility on our health care systems.
The rise of ultra-processed foods is one of the most significant public health issues of our time that has yet to be recognized. Ultra-processed foods are the primary food product in modern diets, and this is not just about taste preferences, it is a responsibility of the industry, active marketing of these foods, and policy positions. The association of chronic illness with the consumption of ultra-processed foods is no longer open for debate, with more scientific consensus than ever supporting such associations.¹²
We must reinvent the production, marketing, and consumption of food to secure a more wholesomely fortified future. Fighting chronic disease starts on our plates, but goes way beyond. The fight is for equitable food access, not equitable labels. The fight is for a culture that values food and nourishment for reasonable profit, rather than nourishment for profit alone. The time for action is now. There is no time to waste in prolonging the inevitable, leaving every minute open for a preventive crisis to continue to take millions away from their health and well-being.
By: Rihana Herodico
Write and Win: Participate in Creative writing Contest & International Essay Contest and win fabulous prizes.
About the Author
