By Stephen Beech via SWNS
Cutting out junk food does not necessarily make for a healthy diet, warns new research.
The findings suggest that the types of food we eat may matter more than the level of processing used to make them, say scientists.
And more expensive, non-processed food isn’t always healthier, according to the study.
American scientists compared two menus reflecting a typical Western diet – one emphasizing minimally processed foods and the other emphasizing ultra-processed foods.
They found that the less processed menu was more than twice as expensive and reached its expiration date over three times faster without delivering any additional nutritional value.
Ultra-processed foods are high in added sugar, fat and salt, and low in protein and fiber. Examples include ham, sausages, burgers, ice cream, crisps, mass-produced bread, breakfast cereals, canned baked beans. biscuits, fizzy drinks, fruit-flavored yogurts, instant soups, and some alcoholic drinks such as rum.
Unprocessed or minimally processed foods include meats such as simple cuts of beef, pork and chicken, plus fruit and vegetables.
Study leader Dr. Julie Hess, of the US Department of Agriculture’s Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center in North Dakota, said: “This study indicates that it is possible to eat a low-quality diet even when choosing mostly minimally processed foods.
“It also shows that more-processed and less-processed diets can be equally nutritious – or non-nutritious, but the more-processed diet may have a longer shelf life and be less costly.”
The research builds on a study the team published last year, which showed that it was possible to build a high-quality menu that aligns with dietary guidelines while deriving most of its calories from foods classified as ultra-processed.
For the new study, the team asked the opposite question: is it possible to build a low-quality menu that derives most of its calories from “simple” foods?
To find out, they constructed a less-processed menu, which derived 20% of its calories from ultra-processed foods, and a more-processed menu, which derived 67% of its calories from ultra-processed foods.
The two menus were calculated to have a Healthy Eating Index score of about 43 to 44 out of 100, a relatively low score that reflects poor adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
The research team estimated that the less-processed menu would cost $34.87 per day per person compared with $13.53 per day for the more-processed menu.
They also calculated that the average time to expiration of the less-processed menu items was 35 days compared to 120 days for the more-processed menu items.
The researchers said their findings draw attention to the “disconnects” between food processing and nutritional value.
Dr. Hess noted that some nutrient-dense packaged foods can be classified as ultra-processed – including unsweetened apple sauce, ultra-filtered milk, liquid egg whites and some brands of raisins and canned tomatoes.
She added: “The results of this study indicate that building a nutritious diet involves more than a consideration of food processing.
“The concepts of ‘ultra-processed’ foods and ‘less-processed’ foods need to be better characterized by the nutrition research community.”
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition in Chicago.
