Massive study identifies 32 harmful health conditions directly linked to the consumption of ultra-processed food



A troubling new peer-reviewed study, the largest of its kind, has revealed that ultra-processed food is linked to 32 harmful health conditions and can significantly increase the risk of cancer, diabetes, and an early grave.

The study, a systematic meta-analysis published Wednesday in the BMJ, the British Medical Association's esteemed journal, found evidence pointing to "direct associations between greater exposure to ultra-processed foods and higher risks of all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease related mortality, common mental disorder outcomes, overweight and obesity, and type 2 diabetes."

The fallout of ultra-processed food exposure may be far-reaching granted the global shift in recent years from unprocessed and minimally processed foods to UPFs. According to the study, the present "share of dietary energy derived from ultra-processed foods ranges from 42% and 58% in Australia and the United States."

The study, involving experts from various top institutions, including Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Sorbonne University in France, relies on the definition of "ultra-processed foods" advanced in the Nova food classification system.

According to the Nova system, processed foods usually consist of a primary plant or animal substance to which one or more culinary ingredient — such as oil, butter, sugar, or salt — has been added. An ultra-processed food, alternatively, is not a modified primary material but rather an industrial composite of often chemically manipulated substances that have been extracted from foods, derived from food constituents, and/or cooked up in a laboratory.

UPFs appear in virtually every aisle in the grocery store. They include packaged snacks, soft drinks, instant noodles, sweetened cereals, packaged baked goods, frozen fish sticks, oven-ready pizzas, breakfast bars, and ready-made meals.

Researchers examined the findings of 14 meta-analysis studies published over the past three years with 45 distinct pooled analyses. In 87% of the pooled analyses, estimates of UPF exposure were obtained on the basis of food frequency questionnaires, 24-hour dietary recalls, and participants' dietary history.

Researchers found UPF exposure was consistently associated with 32 adverse health outcomes, including all-cause mortality; cancer-related deaths; cardiovascular disease-related deaths; heart disease-related deaths; breast cancer; central nervous system tumors; chronic lymphocytic leukemia; colorectal cancer; pancreatic cancer; prostate cancer; adverse sleep-related outcomes; anxiety; common mental disorder outcomes; depression; asthma; wheezing; Crohn's disease; ulcerative colitis; obesity; hypertension; and type 2 diabetes.

"On the basis of the random effects model, 32 (71%) distinct pooled analyses showed direct associations between greater ultra-processed food exposure and a higher risk of adverse health outcomes," said the study. "Additionally, of these combined analyses, 11 (34%) showed continued statistical significance when a more stringent threshold was applied."

Heart disease-related death, cardiovascular disease-related death, all-cause mortality, type 2 diabetes, wheezing, and depression were among the 11 adverse health outcomes that showed continued statistical significance in the face of the more stringent threshold.

The Guardian noted that evidence graded as "convincing" in the study indicated that higher UPF exposure was linked to a roughly 50% increase in cardiovascular-related death, a 48-53% higher risk of anxiety and mental disorders, and a 12% increase risk of diabetes.

"Across the pooled analyses, greater exposure to ultra-processed foods, whether measured as higher versus lower consumption, additional servings per day, or a 10% increment, was consistently associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes," added the study.

In a corresponding editorial in BMJ, a pair of Brazilian academics stressed that UPFs "are engineered to be highly desirable, combining sugar, fat, and salt to maximize reward, and adding flavors that induce eating when not hungry. Many are addictive, judged by the standards set for tobacco products, and aggressively marketed with meal deals, super sizing, and advertising."

The Brazilians suggested that investment management companies and manufacturers would "likely resist" efforts to control and reduce the production and consumption of UPFs. With the tobacco parallel in mind, the Brazilian duo recommended rolling out national dietary guidelines cautioning against UPF consumption; prohibiting sales of junk food near schools and hospitals; and regulating UPF marketing.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

UN agency telling Americans to reduce meat consumption in name of climate change is run by senior Chinese communist official



The United Nations wants Americans and other Westerners to eat less meat. Although the alleged purpose of the internationally requested diet is to futilely attempt to arrest global weather patterns, there appears to be more at play than just so-called distributive justice and climate alarmism.

After all, the director-general of the specific U.N. agency expected to issue this demand during the COP28 summit next month happens to be a top Chinese Communist Party member whose nation, the number-one source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, will likely be among the so-called developing nations exempted from the guidance.

What's the background?

Last November, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization indicated it would develop a plan to make the world's food system more sustainable, telling sovereign nations how to change their respective food and farming industries in order to align with internationalists' goal of halting global weather patterns and somehow keeping warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Bloomberg reported that the FAO's guidelines, set to be published at the COP28 summit in December, will instruct developed nations whose populations allegedly consume too much meat — according to foreign metrics — to limit their intake.

According the FAO, the average American reportedly consumes around 279 pounds of meat a year. By way of contrast, the average Nigerian reportedly eats 15 pounds of meat annually and the average Chinese resident consumes 133.6 pounds of meat, as of 2020.

Under the guidance, developing countries, including the country with the world's second-biggest economy, will apparently be encouraged to improve their livestock farming.

Not only does the forthcoming recommendation seem to be punitive for Western nations, it may also be counterproductive.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) told Fox News Digital, "Regulating producers out of business in the U.S. will not effectively address global climate change, but export production to foreign countries with hostile regimes and worse emissions profiles while harming food security and affordability. Simply put, the world needs American farmers and ranchers more than the U.N."

Guidelines for thee, but not for Xi

China, which has all but indicated it will not live up to its Paris climate accord commitments, continues to claim it is a developing country.

Chinese dictator Xi Jinping's nominal second in command, Han Zheng, claimed at the U.N. general assembly in September that despite its $18 trillion GDP at the time, China is "the largest developing country" and "will remain a member of the big family of developing nations."

While it's presently unclear whether this self-categorization alone — which the U.N. entertains despite American criticism — would exempt China from the dietary recommendation, the director general of the FAO is unlikely to cross Beijing with his agency's road map.

Qu Dongyu has previously been accused of using his position to advance the merciless Chinese regime's foreign policy agenda. Beijing has also been accused of bribing officials to get Qu the gig.

Qu formerly served as vice minister of agriculture and rural affairs for the CCP. As FAO director, he has continued to cheerlead Chinese initiatives such as the communist regime's Global Development Initiative.

"Nobody actually takes him seriously: It's not him; it's China," a former U.N. official told Politico. "I'm not convinced he would make a single decision without first checking it with the capital."

Concerning Qu's promotion of the U.N.'s so-called sustainable development goals, Francesca Ghiretti, an analyst at the Mercator Institute for China Studies, said, "You need to be aware that these are policies that first and foremost are thought to advance China, either materially or in terms of international reputation, or in terms of diplomacy."

The Washington Free Beacon reported that a reduction in global meat production could greatly benefit China, which is the world's largest meat importer. China's foreign supply could conceivably become more stable and secure if American producers find themselves facing less domestic demand. Such security would undoubtedly be welcome after last year's large-scale food shortages and the regime's promise of material improvement in living year over year.

Concerning Qu's 2019 election to head of the FAO, Kristine Lee of the Center for a New American Security told Foreign Policy, "Chinese officials report back to Beijing and first and foremost serve the narrow interests of the [Chinese Communist Party], rather than truly advancing multilateralism and strengthening transparency and accountability at the U.N."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

California’s Income-Based Electric Bills Show It Cares More About Control Than Climate

The electrical pricing scheme may work as income redistribution social policy, but it fails the test of reducing energy consumption.

It Will Take Ambition To Counter Our Culture’s Decadence

Our decadent, stagnated, passive world is at risk, but ambition holds the key to victory.