ABSTRACT
Our objective was to convene interdisciplinary experts from government, academia, and industry to develop a Research Roadmap to identify research priorities about processed food intake and risk for obesity and cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) among United States populations. We convened attendees at various career stages with diverse viewpoints in the field. We held a "Food Processing Primer" to build foundational knowledge of how and why foods are processed, followed by presentations about how processed foods may affect energy intake, obesity, and CMD risk. Breakout groups discussed potential mechanistic and confounding explanations for associations between processed foods and obesity and CMD risk. Facilitators created research questions (RQs) based on key themes from discussions. Different breakout groups convened to discuss what is known and unknown for each RQ and to develop sub-RQs to address gaps. Workshop attendees focused on ultra-processed foods (UPFs; Nova Group 4) because the preponderance of evidence is based on this classification system. Yet, heterogeneity and subjectivity in UPF classification was a challenge for RQ development. The 6 RQs were: 1) What objective methods or measures could further categorize UPFs, considering food processing, formulation, and the interaction of the two? 2) How can exposure assessment of UPF intake be improved? 3) Does UPF intake influence risk for obesity or CMDs, independent of diet quality? 4) What, if any, attributes of UPFs influence ingestive behavior and contribute to excess energy intake? 5) What, if any, attributes of UPFs contribute to clinically meaningful metabolic responses? 6) What, if any, external environmental factors lead people to consume high amounts of UPFs? Uncertainty and complexity around UPF intake warrant further complementary and interdisciplinary causal, mechanistic, and methodological research related to obesity and CMD risk to understand the utility of applying classification by degree of processing to foods in the United States.
Subject(s)
Fast Foods , Food, Processed , Humans , Fast Foods/adverse effects , Diet , Energy Intake , Obesity/etiology , Food HandlingABSTRACT
The objective of this systematic literature review was to evaluate the efficacy of probiotic, prebiotic, and synbiotic interventions compared with control on improving growth outcomes of children living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Probiotics had a beneficial effect on ≥1 of the growth outcomes in 5 out of the 11 included studies. Of these, 3 studies were conducted in undernourished children, 1 in healthy children, and 1 in children without a described health status. No effect of prebiotics on growth outcomes was seen in the 4 included studies. Synbiotics had a beneficial effect on growth outcomes in 3 out of 4 studies. Although a limited number of studies with high heterogeneity indicate that probiotics and synbiotics may have the potential to improve the growth of both undernourished and healthy children living in LMICs, more research is needed to confirm the observed effects. This review was registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ as CRD42020212998.