“It is scary to see the result after only two weeks”: the BBC experiment on the effects of ultra-processed foods

“It’s a little scary to see those results after just two weeks.”

Aimee, 24, has spent two weeks following a diet of ultra-processed foods as part of a study carried out by scientists at King’s College London for the BBC’s Panorama programme.

LOOK: Unabomber dies: The fascination for the case of the gifted anarchist who for 17 years terrorized the United States.

Nancy, her twin sister, followed a diet that contained exactly the same amount of calories, nutrients, fat, sugar, and fiber. But in her case, she ate only fresh or little processed food.

Aimee, who registered worse blood sugar levels and an increase in fat levels, he gained almost a kilo. Meanwhile, her sister Nancy lost the same amount of weight.

The conclusions of the possible impact of the so-called ultra-processed foods on our health come from a short-term study done with a pair of twin sisters by panorama.

Tim Spector, a professor of epidemiology at King’s College London and a researcher into disease behaviour, supervised the trial.

Emulsifiers improve the appearance and texture of food, and help extend its shelf life. (GETTY IMAGES).

In the last decade, evidence has been accumulating that ultra-processed foods are harmful to health in unexpected ways.

“We are talking about all types of cancer, heart disease, stroke and dementiaSpector says.

The term “ultra-processed foods” came into use only 15 years ago. This type of food represents approximately half of what we eat in places like the United Kingdom.

From sliced ​​whole wheat bread to ready meals and ice cream, this is a group of foods made with varying – but often high – levels of industrial processing.

The ingredients used for its preparation such as preservatives, artificial sweeteners and emulsifiers are not usually used in home cooking.

The term “ultra-processed foods” came into use only 15 years ago. (Getty Images).

“Ultra-processed foods they are the most profitable companies can make,” says Professor Marion Nestle, a food policy expert and professor of nutrition at New York University.

As our consumption of them increases, so do the rates of diabetes and cancer.

Some academics believe that the relationship is not accidental.

The Panorama program accessed new scientific evidence showing the relationship between these types of chemicals and diseases such as cancer, diabetes and stroke.

medical journal The Lancet published in January one of the most comprehensive studies on ultra-processed foods conducted by the Imperial College School of Public Health.

The study carried out in 200,000 adults in the United Kingdom determined that a greater consumption of ultra-processed foods may be related to an increased risk of developing cancer in general and, specifically, ovarian and brain cancer.

__________________________

The most common ultra-processed foods:

________________________

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended last month avoid sustained consumption of artificial sweeteners,due to possible health risks.

Proving that certain ingredients cause disease can be difficult because there are a number of factors in our lifestyle that can cause disease. For example, lack of exercise, smoking or sugary diets.

The first investigations on mortality and consumption of ultra-processed foods began in France, at the Sorbonne Paris North University, as part of the ongoing study on the eating habits of 174,000 people.

“We have 24-hour dietary records during which they tell us all the food and drinks they ingest,” explains Dr. Mathilde Touvier, who led the research.

Emulsifiers, the jewel of the ultra-processed

Lately, the impact of a specific ingredient in food has been studied: emulsifiers, a substance that acts as a glue in ultra-processed foods.

Emulsifiers are a jewel for the food industry: they improve the appearance and texture of food and contribute to extending its shelf life much more than that of less processed foods.

Ultra-processed foods represent approximately half of what we eat. (GETTY IMAGES).

This element is everywhere: in mayonnaise, chocolate, peanut butter and meats. If you eat, it is likely that you consume emulsifiers as part of your diet.

Panorama had exclusive access to the first results of the researcher Touvier, which have not yet been reviewed by experts, a crucial step for the verification of scientific studies.

“We have observed a clear relationship between the intake of emulsifiers and an increased risk of cancer in general, and breast cancer in particular, but also cardiovascular diseases”, says the researcher.

“This means that we have seen a pattern between the consumption of ultra-processed foods and disease risk. But more research is needed.”

Aspartame, sweeter than sugar

One of the most controversial additives among ultra-processed foods is the sweetener aspartame.

Two hundred times sweeter than sugarhas been heralded as a great low-calorie alternative, turning previously unhealthy sugary drinks, ice creams and mousses into products marketed as “healthy”.

Aspartame is 200 times sweeter than sugar. (GETTY IMAGES).

During the last two decades, doubts have been raised about its possible harmful effects.

Last month, the World Health Organization stated that although the evidence is inconclusive, it is concerned that the long-term use of sweeteners such as aspartame may increase the risk of “type 2 diabetes, heart disease and mortality”.

In 2013, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) decided that aspartame was safe, as did the Toxicity Committee which determined in 2013 that the results “do not indicate the need to take measures to protect the public health”.

However, six years later, Erik Millstone, a professor at the University of Sussex, decided to review the same evidence examined by EFSA, to see who had funded the different studies.

Millstone discovered that the 90% of the studies defending the sweetener were funded by large chemical companies that make and sell aspartame, and that all studies suggesting that aspartame might be harmful were funded by independent, non-commercial sources.

EFSA assures that it will study the ongoing evaluation of the WHO on this additive.

Source: Elcomercio