10 ms·

Consumption of ultra-processed foods and cancer risk

40 points by mgiannopoulos 9y ago

dfee 9y ago
“Conclusions: In this large prospective study, a 10% increase in the proportion of ultra-processed foods in the diet was associated with a significant increase of greater than 10% in risks of overall and breast cancer.“ And, here is what highly processed means: “mass produced packaged breads and buns; sweet or savoury packaged snacks; industrialised confectionery and desserts; sodas and sweetened drinks; meat balls, poultry and fish nuggets, and other reconstituted meat products transformed with addition of preservatives other than salt (for example, nitrites); instant noodles and soups; frozen or shelf stable ready meals; and other food products made mostly or entirely from sugar, oils and fats, and other substances not commonly used in culinary preparations such as hydrogenated oils, modified starches, and protein isolates. Industrial processes notably include hydrogenation, hydrolysis, extruding, moulding, reshaping, and pre-processing by frying.”
open-source-ux 9y ago
This research is quite timely. A recent survey of ultra-processed food sales in 19 European countries showed a wide variety in the purchasing habits of different countries. UK consumers purchase the most ultra-processed food as a proportion of their diet (50.7%), followed by Germany (46.2%) and then Ireland (45.9%). Portugal consumes the least (10.2%). France, Italy and Greece all had relatively low consumption figures as well. Here is the full list (ultra-processed food as a % of household purchases) 1. UK: 50.7 2. Germany: 46.2 3. Ireland: 45.9 4. Belgium: 44.6 5. Finland: 40.9 6. Poland: 36.9 7. Austria: 35.0 8. Latvia: 32.9 9. Malta: 27.6 10. Lithuania 26.4 11. Hungary: 21.1 12. Spain: 20.3 13: Slovakia: 20.2 14. Cyprus: 20.1 15. Croatia: 17.9 16. France: 14.2 17. Greece: 13.7 18. Italy: 13.4 19. Portugal: 10.2 From: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/02/ultra-processed-products-now-half-of-all-uk-family-food-purchases https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/02/ultra-proces...
dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
What always amazed me is why Americans rely so much on processed foods? It seems like a cultural thing - you go out and buy a bunch of packages and then heat them instead of just cooking a meal from natural ingredients like we (mostly) do in Europe. And food companies bend over backwards to make everything even more processed. What's wrong with fresh tomatoes? Why don't you buy fresh vegetables and make a nice meal at home? Is it about saving time? I could never understand it.
- nerdponx 9y ago
  Is it about saving time Yes. Time and effort.
  - elcapitan 9y ago
    Effort is really mostly a bit of training and understanding of preparation. For example, I make a kind of base mixed salad 2 times a week, that costs me 5 minutes each time to cut a few vegetables and mix them with oil and vinegar. But I have that base salad to mix with fresh leaves every day then for zero preparation time. Similar can be done with warm food that you can store and warm up for multiple days, for example soup. The effort argument often reminds me of people who have incredibly inefficient workflows in their computer tasks, simply because they never learned how to do it right in the first place.
    - tyfon 9y ago
      In Norway, cooking, nutrition and house work is a subject in school called heimkunnskap (Home knowledge) or at least we used to have it. Not sure about todays kids. So everyone here has learned how to do basic cooking and what a healthy diet should consist of. It's not like everybody are doing it but at least the basic knowledge is there. Sometimes making food from scratch is actually easier too than making it from store bought packages.
      - elcapitan 9y ago
        > In Norway, cooking, nutrition and house work is a subject in school called heimkunnskap (Home knowledge) or at least we used to have it. Not sure about todays kids. That's really great. Of all the things constantly added to the expectations on schools, this is one that can have such a massive impact on many levels.
        mantas 9y ago
        We have same thing in Lithuania. I also learned some basic woodwork. The lessons were super lame though due to few resource to have hands-on work. It was pretty much a useless lesson that everybody saw as OK to skip if you felt like it. Fun thing is, I hated those lessons. I fell in love with this kind of work later on though. Now I want a wood workshop in my garage. Need to afford a garage first though... Anyhow, this kind of lessons is definitely helpful. I see them as sort of compilation of "how to X" Youtube videos. With a teacher to help you with more complicated steps.
edna314 9y ago
The largest data set I’ve come across so far in nutrition studies and seems like they put a lot of effort into the data analysis to correct for other cancer promoting factors like age, gender, physical activity, smoking behavior etc. (Overall pretty impressive study in my opinion, although I’m not an expert) Yet, for example, the group with the highest amount of ultra processed food in their diet contains 6% more smokers and 10% less physical activity. They correct for each factor individually but the combined effect of the two might lead to a higher risk than expected. To get these combined effects right you need a lot more data though and it’s probably hard to get good statistics on people which do a lot of sports don’t smoke and eat a lot of ultra processed food. Which brings me to the question, why for these studies it is always so desirable to find out the increase in risk of a single factor. I would expect a statement like “if you neither smoke, do sports, and eat healthy food you have x% less chance to get cancer” to be more sound.
- hutzlibu 9y ago
  "Which brings me to the question, why for these studies it is always so desirable to find out the increase in risk of a single factor. " I would say remains of Descartes etc. The (outdated) philosophy, that everything can be broken down to single factors and then correctly calculated ... It took science some time to realize that the world is too (infinite) complicated to be calculated. It surely helps though, to know the probable impact of single factors. But I believe we still generalizing way too much. Fat is bad, Sugar is bad, Cholesterine is bad (no wait good), Alcohol, smoking etc. ... Which, I believe is stupid, when humans are complex and moderation and balance is the key. (even smoking can be beneficial I believe, for certain people at certain times, not as a addiction, obviously) So seeing those single factors from studies help us as guidelines, but shouldn't be taken literally.
  - jonmb 9y ago
    Do you have an example in mind for when smoking would be healthy for you?
    - detritus 9y ago
elcapitan 9y ago
This reminds me of Talebs argument that we should be careful to put stuff through our digestive system that didn't have the chance yet to get filtered out by tens of thousands of years of evolution. That's a pretty extrem position obviously, but I think the general direction makes sense. Even if we can test individual parts of those ultra-processed foods and not find direct risk immediately, the risk of putting all that stuff together in your body 50% of the time may just create way more risk than could ever be found by isolated clinical studies.
senectus1 9y ago
what is it in highly processed food that causes cancer? is it all processes that do it? or does some highly processed food NOT have a link to cancer because they're processed differently?
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  Though I personally avoid processed foods because I believe that promotes health, I have to caution you to slow down there a second. This is a cohort study, which identifies correlation, but does not prove causation. This work is a call to action to perhaps the same institution that ran the study, or other public-interest institutions, to search for links. However, if you’re very interested in learning about the differences between processed vs. home made food, I recommend “Nourising Traditions”. This book, more than anything else, has changed our approach to cooking and food selection. And I can feel the difference.

40 points by mgiannopoulos 9y ago

dfee 9y ago

“Conclusions: In this large prospective study, a 10% increase in the proportion of ultra-processed foods in the diet was associated with a significant increase of greater than 10% in risks of overall and breast cancer.“ And, here is what highly processed means: “mass produced packaged breads and buns; sweet or savoury packaged snacks; industrialised confectionery and desserts; sodas and sweetened drinks; meat balls, poultry and fish nuggets, and other reconstituted meat products transformed with addition of preservatives other than salt (for example, nitrites); instant noodles and soups; frozen or shelf stable ready meals; and other food products made mostly or entirely from sugar, oils and fats, and other substances not commonly used in culinary preparations such as hydrogenated oils, modified starches, and protein isolates. Industrial processes notably include hydrogenation, hydrolysis, extruding, moulding, reshaping, and pre-processing by frying.”

open-source-ux 9y ago

This research is quite timely. A recent survey of ultra-processed food sales in 19 European countries showed a wide variety in the purchasing habits of different countries. UK consumers purchase the most ultra-processed food as a proportion of their diet (50.7%), followed by Germany (46.2%) and then Ireland (45.9%). Portugal consumes the least (10.2%). France, Italy and Greece all had relatively low consumption figures as well. Here is the full list (ultra-processed food as a % of household purchases) 1. UK: 50.7 2. Germany: 46.2 3. Ireland: 45.9 4. Belgium: 44.6 5. Finland: 40.9 6. Poland: 36.9 7. Austria: 35.0 8. Latvia: 32.9 9. Malta: 27.6 10. Lithuania 26.4 11. Hungary: 21.1 12. Spain: 20.3 13: Slovakia: 20.2 14. Cyprus: 20.1 15. Croatia: 17.9 16. France: 14.2 17. Greece: 13.7 18. Italy: 13.4 19. Portugal: 10.2 From: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/02/ultra-processed-products-now-half-of-all-uk-family-food-purchases https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/02/ultra-proces...

dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago

What always amazed me is why Americans rely so much on processed foods? It seems like a cultural thing - you go out and buy a bunch of packages and then heat them instead of just cooking a meal from natural ingredients like we (mostly) do in Europe. And food companies bend over backwards to make everything even more processed. What's wrong with fresh tomatoes? Why don't you buy fresh vegetables and make a nice meal at home? Is it about saving time? I could never understand it.

nerdponx 9y ago
Is it about saving time Yes. Time and effort.
- elcapitan 9y ago
  Effort is really mostly a bit of training and understanding of preparation. For example, I make a kind of base mixed salad 2 times a week, that costs me 5 minutes each time to cut a few vegetables and mix them with oil and vinegar. But I have that base salad to mix with fresh leaves every day then for zero preparation time. Similar can be done with warm food that you can store and warm up for multiple days, for example soup. The effort argument often reminds me of people who have incredibly inefficient workflows in their computer tasks, simply because they never learned how to do it right in the first place.
  - tyfon 9y ago
    In Norway, cooking, nutrition and house work is a subject in school called heimkunnskap (Home knowledge) or at least we used to have it. Not sure about todays kids. So everyone here has learned how to do basic cooking and what a healthy diet should consist of. It's not like everybody are doing it but at least the basic knowledge is there. Sometimes making food from scratch is actually easier too than making it from store bought packages.
    - elcapitan 9y ago
      > In Norway, cooking, nutrition and house work is a subject in school called heimkunnskap (Home knowledge) or at least we used to have it. Not sure about todays kids. That's really great. Of all the things constantly added to the expectations on schools, this is one that can have such a massive impact on many levels.
      - mantas 9y ago
        We have same thing in Lithuania. I also learned some basic woodwork. The lessons were super lame though due to few resource to have hands-on work. It was pretty much a useless lesson that everybody saw as OK to skip if you felt like it. Fun thing is, I hated those lessons. I fell in love with this kind of work later on though. Now I want a wood workshop in my garage. Need to afford a garage first though... Anyhow, this kind of lessons is definitely helpful. I see them as sort of compilation of "how to X" Youtube videos. With a teacher to help you with more complicated steps.

edna314 9y ago

The largest data set I’ve come across so far in nutrition studies and seems like they put a lot of effort into the data analysis to correct for other cancer promoting factors like age, gender, physical activity, smoking behavior etc. (Overall pretty impressive study in my opinion, although I’m not an expert) Yet, for example, the group with the highest amount of ultra processed food in their diet contains 6% more smokers and 10% less physical activity. They correct for each factor individually but the combined effect of the two might lead to a higher risk than expected. To get these combined effects right you need a lot more data though and it’s probably hard to get good statistics on people which do a lot of sports don’t smoke and eat a lot of ultra processed food. Which brings me to the question, why for these studies it is always so desirable to find out the increase in risk of a single factor. I would expect a statement like “if you neither smoke, do sports, and eat healthy food you have x% less chance to get cancer” to be more sound.

hutzlibu 9y ago
"Which brings me to the question, why for these studies it is always so desirable to find out the increase in risk of a single factor. " I would say remains of Descartes etc. The (outdated) philosophy, that everything can be broken down to single factors and then correctly calculated ... It took science some time to realize that the world is too (infinite) complicated to be calculated. It surely helps though, to know the probable impact of single factors. But I believe we still generalizing way too much. Fat is bad, Sugar is bad, Cholesterine is bad (no wait good), Alcohol, smoking etc. ... Which, I believe is stupid, when humans are complex and moderation and balance is the key. (even smoking can be beneficial I believe, for certain people at certain times, not as a addiction, obviously) So seeing those single factors from studies help us as guidelines, but shouldn't be taken literally.
- jonmb 9y ago
  Do you have an example in mind for when smoking would be healthy for you?
  - detritus 9y ago

elcapitan 9y ago

This reminds me of Talebs argument that we should be careful to put stuff through our digestive system that didn't have the chance yet to get filtered out by tens of thousands of years of evolution. That's a pretty extrem position obviously, but I think the general direction makes sense. Even if we can test individual parts of those ultra-processed foods and not find direct risk immediately, the risk of putting all that stuff together in your body 50% of the time may just create way more risk than could ever be found by isolated clinical studies.

senectus1 9y ago

what is it in highly processed food that causes cancer? is it all processes that do it? or does some highly processed food NOT have a link to cancer because they're processed differently?

CodeWriter23 9y ago
Though I personally avoid processed foods because I believe that promotes health, I have to caution you to slow down there a second. This is a cohort study, which identifies correlation, but does not prove causation. This work is a call to action to perhaps the same institution that ran the study, or other public-interest institutions, to search for links. However, if you’re very interested in learning about the differences between processed vs. home made food, I recommend “Nourising Traditions”. This book, more than anything else, has changed our approach to cooking and food selection. And I can feel the difference.