A Study Linked Ultra-Processed Foods to Gut Health Risks.

In a recent study published in the journal Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, researchers summarized existing understanding on the effects of food additives and ultra-processed foods (UPFs) on gut health.

Ultra-processed foods • Food processing • Nutrition • Diet — ultra-processed foods to gut health risks.

As ultra-processed foods and food additives become more prevalent in the world’s diets, they have been linked to negative gut outcomes such as changes in microbial communities and intestinal permeability, which can lead to chronic inflammation or diseases like inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and colorectal cancer. However, human intervention research on this area is scarce.

Identification of ultra-processed foods

Nutritionists utilize criteria to define foods as UPFs, including how different an item is from the original unprocessed foodstuff, how it is processed, if additives were used, whether it was professionally created rather than handmade, and whether it was used for appearance or convenience.

However, differing classification schemes make comparisons difficult; the most common is used by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and includes powdered and packaged meals, carbonated soft drinks, and sweetened morning cereals as UPFs. However, some items, like as wholemeal bread and plant-based animal substitutes, are frequently regarded as healthful while meeting UPF standards.

UPF consumption and intestinal health.

While UPFs are common, there are significant variances across people and nations. In the United States, UPF consumption contributes for 59.7% and 67% of total energy intake in adults and young individuals.

Individual variables related with higher UPF consumption include female sex, younger age, poorer income, lesser education, living alone, being overweight or obese, reduced physical activity, and mealtime screen use.

People that eat more UPFs had higher levels of free sugars, saturated fats, and calories in their diets, but less dietary fiber, protein, and micronutrients. Vegetarians and vegans are more likely to eat UPFs, whereas individuals on Mediterranean diets ingest less.

Controlling for dietary quality and food intake, evidence of links between UPF consumption and illness exists. However, UPF intake from fruit yogurts, fortified morning cereals, and wholemeal bread is better than UPF consumption from ready meals, burgers, and pastries.

Cohort studies have revealed a link between UPF consumption and increased mortality and morbidity from cancer, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Observational studies reveal associations with depression, metabolic syndrome, overweight, and obesity. These impacts are most likely due to processing, rather than UPFs’ nutritional and energy content.

Effects of Food Additives

Sweeteners, colors, stabilizers, emulsifiers, thickeners, and gelling agents are all examples of food additives. There is a lot of overlap between UPFs and food additives since anything containing a commercial food ingredient is considered a UPF. Mechanistic research on the influence of food additives on the microbiota have included animal and in vitro experiments, with few human population studies.

In vitro studies demonstrate that emulsifiers like polysorbate 80 can induce bacterial overgrowth in the small intestine, whilst carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) can transport germs across in vitro epithelial cells. This might result in chronic inflammatory illness, as proven in mouse studies. In mice, consumption of CMC and polysorbate 80 was linked to tumor growth and anxiety-like behaviors.

Artificial sweeteners, which pass through the gastrointestinal tract but are not digested, come into direct touch with the gut flora, but this has not been well investigated in people. However, in vitro and animal studies have shown that sweeteners such as aspartame, sucralose, and saccharin can alter the microbiota, affect gut permeability, shorten colonic length, and increase mortality.

However, they were short-term experiments with far larger dosages than those used in humans. An observational research on humans discovered no variations in microbiota intake after four days of sweetener use, but did not account for baseline diet or dose-response associations.

Conclusion

There is significant evidence that UPFs and food additives cause negative health consequences, however methodological discrepancies and deficiencies in human studies must be resolved. The authors emphasize the need of high-quality research for interpreting the effects of dietary treatments. As UPF availability and use grow, public health policy should prioritize ultra-processed foods reformulation and consumer behavior.