UPFs: not all calories are equal!
Scientific research consistently shows that people who eat large quantities of Ultra Processed Foods are obese or overweight. Yet the reasons why this correlation exists isn't exactly clear....
A recent study from University College London, published in Nature Medicine, adds further insight. 55 adults were asked to stick to two different diets: one comprising predominantly UPFs and the other just regular foods. The two diets were specifically matched for fat, sugar, protein, and carbohydrate content. Meals were also designed to be similar in type — homemade lasagne to a supermarket ready meal.
The outcomes were informative. On the UPF regimen, participants lost 1% of their body weight, but on the MPF regimen they lost 2%. That sounds inconsequential, but in a year it means losing about 13% of body weight for men and about 9% for women. Most tellingly, perhaps, was that participants on the UPF regimen experienced more cravings, which led them to consume more calories overall.
Cravings, Speed, and Satiety
The study finds that sugar and fat content are not the only factors that make UPFs fattening, it's also a matter of how we process food. Ultra-processing has been known to alter food metabolism and satiety. A 2019 U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) trial found the same: participants given UPFs consumed approximately 500 more calories daily compared to eating minimally processed foods, although the two diets were nutritionally equivalent (NIH, 2019).
Why does this happen?
For starters UPFs tend to be softer so they require less chewing which gives the brain less time to register fullness and so the desire to eat more.
And additives such as emulsifiers and flavour enhancers may also furhter stimulate appetite.
It's also possible that UPFs are not just calorically dense but have negative impacts on metabolic health aas well.
Final thoughts
If UPFs are bad for our health we should be worried... more than half of the typical diet in the UK alone now comes from UPFs.
The simple facts show us that even if calories and nutrients are the same, eating real food has better weight outcomes and possibly lesser long-term health impacts.
Seems we should focus on how UPFs affect our cravings and feelings of fullness if we want to get better at eating and boost our health.
UPFs? 🤔 I know UPBs, Universal Preferable Behavior
… sooooo, UPF, Universal Preferable Fats? 😝
Calories are the stupidest way to measure food nutrition.
That it burns in a spoon does not mean that it powers the human body. (sawdust for an easy example)
The things that seem to destroy health is empty calories with flavor enhancers so you will eat enough of it to feel full. White flour has had all of its nutrients removed. It is truly, empty calories.
And then we have seed oils (designed for machine lubrication) that the body tries to use to replace real oils. They get used in the liver, where the liver's functioning drops. And so many other problems.
Ultra-processed sugar is one of the most deadly substances we have created for the human consumption. It throws all kinds of body processes out of whack. Also, the body tries to get rid of it, like it is a poison. Stuffing it in fat cells.
We are finding that the nutrition for the body, from a food is directly related to how much life it has in it. Life requires life? 🤔
Congratulations @revisesociology! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPWithout Macees life would not be worth living. LOL