Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them.

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).

Adherence to the ultra-processed dietary pattern and risk of depressive outcomes: Findings from the NutriNet Brasil cohort study and an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to analyze the prospective association between adherence to the ultra-processed dietary pattern and risk of depressive outcomes using original data from the NutriNet Brasil cohort and via a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies that have investigated the same association. METHODS: In our original research analysis, we used data from 15,960 adults (≥18 y) participating in the NutriNet Brasil cohort study, free of depression or depressive symptoms during the baseline (77.5% women, 45.8 ± 13.0 y). The mean dietary share of ultra-processed foods (%Kcal/d), calculated from two baseline 24-h dietary recalls, was used to measure the adherence to the ultra-processed dietary pattern. New cases of depressive symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 over the follow-up period (mean: 18.3 months). Cox proportional hazards models were used for the main analyses. In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we incorporated effect estimates from six prospective cohort studies that have examined the same association, including ours. RESULTS: In the adjusted model, each 10% increase in the dietary share of ultra-processed foods was associated with a 10% increase in the hazard of incident cases of depressive symptoms (HR:1.10; 95%CI: 1.07-1.14). This association was slightly attenuated in the models including potential mediators. In our meta-analysis of six prospective studies, high versus low exposure to ultra-processed foods was associated with a summary hazard ratio of depressive outcomes of 1.32; 95%CI: 1.19-1.46; I2: 71%. CONCLUSION: A higher adherence to the ultra-processed dietary pattern was associated with a higher risk of developing depressive outcomes in the NutriNet Brasil cohort and in the meta-analysis.