In a bold proposal that echoes public health efforts against tobacco, a leading nutritionist is calling for ultra-processed foods (UPF) to come with cigarette-like warning labels.
Professor Carlos Monteiro of the University of Sao Paulo said: Who first coined this term? It was called “ultra-processed food.” Parents “UPF is expanding its share and dominance in the global diet despite the health risks it poses in terms of increasing the risk of multiple chronic diseases,” he said ahead of the International Congress on Obesity.
“A public health campaign similar to the anti-tobacco campaign is needed to combat the dangers of UPF,” Monteiro told the outlet in an email. “Such a campaign would include the health risks of consuming UPF.” “UPF advertisement Should be banned or severely restrictedand introduce front-of-pack warnings similar to those used on cigarette packets.”
The recommendation comes amid growing concern about the health impacts of highly processed foods that have become prevalent in the modern diet. With obesity rates soaring and diet-related diseases reaching epidemic proportions, the push for more transparent labeling aims to give consumers instant, visual information about the potential risks associated with these foods.
The difference between ultra-processed foods and minimally processed or whole foods
Dr Shruti Badarinath Pranav, Consultant Paediatrics and Paediatric Gastroenterology “The difference is not just in the processing but the extent and nature of the processing. Ultra-processed foods are often industrially produced and made from a variety of substances that are far removed from their original state,” says Dr Sparsh Hospital in Bangalore.
These concoctions often contain ingredients not typically found in a home kitchen.
Cosmetic additives: Emulsifiers, sweeteners, No Artificial Colors or Flavorsand preservatives designed to improve appearance, taste and shelf life.
Refined ingredients: Refined sugars, fats and starches have been stripped of their natural nutrients and fiber and only provide empty calories with little nutritional value.
New ingredients: Substances resulting from industrial processes are Hydrolyzed Proteinmaltodextrin, and high fructose corn syrup have raised concerns about their long-term health effects.
“Combining these ingredients often requires techniques such as extrusion, molding and hydrogenation, further moving UPF away from minimally processed foods such as fruits, vegetables and whole grains,” explains Dr. Shruti.
Major health concerns associated with consumption of ultra-processed foods
Dr Shruti says there is growing evidence that there are cause for concern regarding regular consumption of UPF.
*Obesity: UPF is energy dense, highly palatable and designed to encourage overeating, leading to excess calorie intake and subsequent weight gain.
*Type 2 diabetes: High in sugar and refined carbohydrates It can disrupt blood sugar regulation, cause insulin resistance, and lead to diabetes.
*Cardiovascular Disease: UPF is high in unhealthy fats, sodium and added sugars – three dangerous elements to heart health, raising blood pressure and cholesterol levels.
*Cancer: Emerging research suggests a potential link between UPF and certain cancers, putting some additives and processing by-products under scrutiny.
*All-cause mortality: Alarmingly, studies have found a correlation between increased UPF intake and increased risk of all-cause mortality, highlighting the widespread negative health effects of UPF.
Would putting warning labels on ultra-processed foods, similar to those on tobacco products, be effective in encouraging people to reduce their consumption?
“While research specific to UPF is ongoing, lessons learned from tobacco control and other public health efforts provide compelling evidence,” said Dr. Shruti.
these are:
Raising awareness: Graphic warnings clearly communicate health risks and encourage consumers to reconsider their choices.
Behavior Modification: A study on warning labels on sugary drinks found that Influence purchasing decisions and promote healthier choices.
public opinion: Surveys reveal significant public support for UPF warning labels, indicating a desire for greater transparency and informed decision-making.
Industry response: Faced with the possibility of negative labeling, food companies may be motivated to improve their products to offer healthier options for consumers.
