Although processed foods get a lot of bad press, their undeserved poor press may not be entirely justified in terms of nutrition.
In a recent study, scientists contrasted two diets, one that placed more of an emphasis on ultra-processed meals and the other on foods with little to no processing. They discovered that eating “simpler,” or less processed, food does not always equate to a healthy diet. This implies that the kinds of foods we eat might matter more than how processed they are.
The study’s lead researcher, Julie Hess, Ph.D., a research nutritionist at the USDA-ARS Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, stated in a press release that “this study indicates that it is possible to eat a low-quality diet even when choosing mostly minimally processed foods.”
“It also shows that more-processed and less-processed diets can be equally nutritious or non-nutritious, but the more-processed diet may have a longer shelf life and be less costly,” the speaker said.
Processed foods: what are they?
The degree to which a food is altered physically, biologically, or chemically prior to eating is referred to as processed food. Minimal processing can involve chopping, grinding, drying, fermenting, or pasteurizing; examples of this type of processing are packaged nuts, grains, and cereals, as well as chopped or frozen vegetables.
Conversely, foods that have undergone extensive processing undergo notable changes such as hydrogenation of oils, modification of starches, addition of flavor enhancers, or coloring additives. Flavored yogurt, soft drinks, canned or quick soups and sauces, and margarine are a few examples.
The idea that consuming more minimally processed foods inevitably results in a higher-quality diet has been questioned by researchers from the Soy Nutrition Institute Global, the Universities of Minnesota and North Dakota, and the USDA-ARS Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center.
This confirms earlier research that found it is possible to prepare a healthy menu that complies with dietary recommendations even when the majority of the calories originate from foods that the NOVA scale, which rates items according to processing levels, classifies as ultra-processed.
They altered a previously created menu for the standard Western diet, which typically consists of high-calorie, low-nutrient items like red meat, refined grains, high-sugar foods and beverages, and high-fat dairy products, in order to find out. They then designed a menu that was comparable but, whenever possible, substituted simpler, less processed foods with highly processed ones.
20% of the calories on the menu with fewer processed meals came from minimally processed foods, and the remaining 67% came from ultra-processed foods; however, at the time of publication, exact item specifics were unavailable.
The team then evaluated the cost and shelf-life of the foods featured, as well as the nutrient content and index scores for both meals, in order to analyze the socioeconomic and nutritional consequences.
Poor Nutrition Regardless of Processing Level
The two diets scored 44 and 43 out of 100 on the Healthy Eating Index, respectively, for nutritional value. According to the press release, this is a rather low score that indicates poor adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Additionally, the less processed food cost more than twice as much per person each day—$34.87 compared to $13.53 for the ultra-processed menu. The food that had undergone minimum processing also had a shorter shelf life, with a median expiration date of 35 days as opposed to 120 days for the highly processed items.
Hess stated, “This study indicates that it is possible to eat a low-quality diet even when choosing mostly minimally processed foods.”
Nutrition won’t always improve by just switching to less processed foods in place of processed ones. Hess and her colleagues’ earlier work actually demonstrated that it is possible to have a high-quality meal that satisfies dietary recommendations even when the majority of the calories come from highly processed items.
This study cautions against discounting processed meals based only on catchphrases because doing so may have detrimental effects on nutrition and spending. “The results of this study indicate that building a nutritious diet involves more than a consideration of food processing as defined by NOVA,” Hess said.
This means that for consumers, eating a balanced diet entails considering the kinds of foods and their nutritional content rather than needlessly concentrating on how processed they are.