Search

Objective:To explore whether individuals who consume higher amounts of ultra-processed food (UPF) have more adverse mental health symptoms.Design:Using a cross-sectional design, we measured the consumption of UPF as a percentage of total energy intake in kilo-calories using the NOVA food classification system. We explored whether individuals who consume higher amounts of UPF were more likely to report mild depression, more mentally unhealthy days and more anxious days per month using multivariable analyses adjusting for potential confounding variables.Setting:Representative sample from the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 2007 and 2012.Participants:10 359 adults aged 18+ without a history of cocaine, methamphetamine or heroin use.Results:After adjusting for covariates, individuals with the highest level of UPF consumption were significantly more likely to report at least mild depression (OR: 1·81; 95 % CI1·09, 3·02), more mentally unhealthy (risk ratio (RR): 1·22; 95 % CI 1·18, 1·25) and more anxious days per month (RR: 1·19; 95 % CI 1·16, 1·23). They were also significantly less likely to report zero mentally unhealthy (OR: 0·60; 95 % CI 0·41, 0·88) or anxious days (OR: 0·65; 95 % CI 0·47, 0·90).Conclusions:Individuals reporting higher intakes of UPF were significantly more likely to report mild depression, more mentally unhealthy and more anxious days and less likely to report zero mentally unhealthy or anxious days. These data add important information to a growing body of evidence concerning the potential adverse effects of UPF consumption on mental health.

The present commentary contains a clear and simple guide designed to identify ultra-processed foods. It responds to the growing interest in ultra-processed foods among policy makers, academic researchers, health professionals, journalists and consumers concerned to devise policies, investigate dietary patterns, advise people, prepare media coverage, and when buying food and checking labels in shops or at home. Ultra-processed foods are defined within the NOVA classification system, which groups foods according to the extent and purpose of industrial processing. Processes enabling the manufacture of ultra-processed foods include the fractioning of whole foods into substances, chemical modifications of these substances, assembly of unmodified and modified food substances, frequent use of cosmetic additives and sophisticated packaging. Processes and ingredients used to manufacture ultra-processed foods are designed to create highly profitable (low-cost ingredients, long shelf-life, emphatic branding), convenient (ready-to-consume), hyper-palatable products liable to displace all other NOVA food groups, notably unprocessed or minimally processed foods. A practical way to identify an ultra-processed product is to check to see if its list of ingredients contains at least one item characteristic of the NOVA ultra-processed food group, which is to say, either food substances never or rarely used in kitchens (such as high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated or interesterified oils, and hydrolysed proteins), or classes of additives designed to make the final product palatable or more appealing (such as flavours, flavour enhancers, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners, and anti-foaming, bulking, carbonating, foaming, gelling and glazing agents).

Objective:The majority of groceries purchased by US households are industrially processed, yet it is unclear how processing level influences diet quality. We sought to determine if processing level is associated with diet quality of grocery purchases.Design:We analysed grocery purchasing data from the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey 2012–2013. Household grocery purchases were categorized by the NOVA framework as minimally processed, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods or ultra-processed foods. The energy share of each processing level (percentage of energy; %E) and Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) component and total scores were calculated for each household’s purchases. The association between %E from processed foods and ultra-processed foods, respectively, and HEI-2015 total score was determined by multivariable linear regression. Foods purchased by households with the highest v. lowest ultra-processed food purchases and HEI-2015 total score v. ≥60 were compared using linear regression.Setting:USA.Participants:Nationally representative sample of 3961 households.Results:Processed foods and ultra-processed foods provided 9·2 (se 0·3) % and 55·8 (se 0·6) % of purchased energy, respectively. Mean HEI-2015 score was 54·7 (se 0·4). Substituting 10 %E from minimally processed foods and processed culinary ingredients for ultra-processed foods decreased total HEI-2015 score by 1·8 points (β = −1·8; 95 % CI −2·0, −1·5). Processed food purchases were not associated with diet quality. Among households with high ultra-processed food purchases, those with HEI-2015 score Conclusions:Increasing purchases of minimally processed foods, decreasing purchases of ultra-processed foods and selecting healthier foods at each processing level may improve diet quality.