A second, but much broader study than the results presented at the US National Cancer Institute conference last July, has once again confirmed the toxic dangers of consuming ultra-processed foods. This time, the impact has been reviewed across 240,000 people, and the findings show that the more UPFs you consume, the more you increase your risk of all-cause mortality.

Previous information we’ve published shows that our love for the ultra-processed starts at a young age, so it’s encouraging that the latest study reinforces the call for global action to reduce UPF consumption and supports regulatory and fiscal policies that foster healthier environments. But how easy is that, and where does it begin?

Recently, I became aware of some interesting work in some California schools. Their efforts and experiences could serve as a model for others to follow. The state is working towards banning “particularly harmful” ultra-processed foods (UPFs) from school meals, with support from figures like HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 

However, while the aim is to improve student diets, implementation is complex and requires substantial input from schools and staff.

Previous efforts to enhance school meals via the National School Lunch Program, while intending to offer more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, resulted in less appealing meals because of budget limits and more administrative work. Consequently, schools relied more on pre-packaged UPFs, and scratch cooking infrastructure and staffing decreased.

Major menu adjustments

Eliminating UPFs requires significant adjustments to menus, kitchens, and staffing. The definition of UPFs is also debated, and a strict ban could limit breakfast options like cereals and pre-made baked goods that many students adore.

Whole food plant-based (WFPB) followers can probably relate. Most of our meals rely on scratch cooking or reheating of previously prepared fare. Our incentive for diet change is often (if not mostly) prompted by a medical event. Of course, there are others who have an epiphany after reading the evidence, still believe in climate change, or do it to save the animals.

But weaning people off UPFs isn’t the same thing. Education, of course, helps, but mandates, as with smoking, may be the only option. We’re talking about the general public here, not an option we might choose freely in our homes.

Transitioning to scratch cooking means evaluating and improving kitchen infrastructure, training staff, increasing working hours, and providing better wages. More funding is essential for these changes, and incentives like higher per-meal reimbursement for schools committed to UPF reduction could encourage this transition.

The need for worldwide action cannot be underestimated here.

Premature deaths increase

The latest study, which analysed data from eight countries, shows a significant rise in premature deaths linked to UPF consumption, correlating with their share in total energy intake. UPFs, which for study purposes were defined as ready-to-eat or heat industrial formulations with minimal whole foods, are replacing traditional diets.

These foods contain artificial ingredients and additives that create health risks beyond high sodium, trans fats, and sugar levels. A 10 per cent increase in UPF consumption is associated with a 3 per cent increase in the risk of death from all causes.

In 2018, 124,000 premature deaths in the United States were linked to UPF consumption. High UPF consumption is linked to 32 diseases, including cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, cancer, and depression.

For young people, the prospects look especially tragic. Professor Justin Stebbing makes this clear in his review piece of the study done on the incidence of colorectal cancer in young adults in Europe over the last 25 years.

It’s worth noting that Stebbing, while highly respected by many colleagues, is a controversial figure, having been the subject of a misconduct case five years ago. He was not struck off, received unprecedented support regarding his clinical competence, and the examining panel found it in the public interest for him to return to practice “as soon as possible.”

Possible link to UPFs

In his review piece, he suggests a potential link between ultra-processed foods and early-stage colorectal cancer. There is no definitive connection at this point, but the problem of early-stage colorectal cancer is known to begin at a young age, and UPFs are in the spotlight.

Apart from the mental shift required to attack the UPF problem, it still comes down to money and mostly, the sheer lack of it.

New Zealand revamped its school lunch program earlier this year in a cost-cutting exercise that reduced the per-lunch provision price from around $5 to $3. Apart from the pricing matter and some subsequent short-term teething/disaster problems as the program was introduced, the entire effort was overshadowed by the attitude of its political advocate, Associate Education Minister David Seymour.

On launch, he proudly announced that the lunches were a return to basics and contained no “woke or trendy” foods – couscous, hummus and quinoa were out. What defined his stand was neatly covered in The Spinoff in May last year, where they set out to explain the “wokeness levels” of various foods. WFPBers – read and weep.

California also has issues around school lunch funding, as recent announcements from the Chef Ann Foundation explain.

“The USDA’s decision to cut over $1 billion in local food funding undermines progress in improving school meal quality and children’s health,” the foundation says.

Negative impacts

“These cuts will force schools to reduce or abandon local purchasing efforts, hindering the provision of healthy, scratch-cooked meals. Local farmers will also be negatively affected. The cuts will affect over 16,000 schools working with the Chef Ann Foundation to serve fresh meals.”

The foundation says schools will revert to purchasing food from large farms outside their states and force them to buy cheaper, more processed options.

When I review the broader public discourse around what constitutes healthy eating, I find it hard to accept the confusion. WFPB makes it all so simple. Apart from some angst around the use of oil lately, there is clear expression on what we need to do to become and stay healthy.

There are some encouraging signs, though. In fact, one worth noting was reported in The Guardian recently. It featured the Danish State Railways canteen’s efforts to deliver healthy meals to feed 900 workers each day. While it might not be everything a hard-bitten WFPB’er would be proud of, there’s certainly a strong commitment to putting more plants on customers’ plates, and there is top-level political support here too.

Also, and back here in New Zealand, Auckland City Council, in association with Future Fit has teamed up with the NZ Diabetes Foundation to bring ‘different dinners’, a collection of 12 tasty, healthy, and budget-friendly plant-based recipes, “to make meal planning a breeze,” their publicity says.

Although they’re dipping their fingers, waiting for the politicians to save us continues to be an exercise in pure frustration; grassroots action is still where it’s at.