Diets based on ultra-processed foods would be less effective for weight loss.

A diet based on ultra-processed foods may be less effective for weight loss and reducing the risk of cardiometabolic diseases than a diet based on minimally processed foods, even when both follow the same dietary guidelines.

British researchers led a study published in Nature Medicine suggesting that The degree of food processing can influence certain health outcomes beyond overall nutritional composition.

The study involved 55 people who were alternately fed diets based on ultra-processed or minimally processed foods, both nutritionally aligned with the Eatwell Guide, the UK government's official advice on how to maintain a healthy and balanced diet.

Both included levels of fat, saturated fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt, and fiber, in addition to providing the recommended intakes of fruits and vegetables.

In the United Kingdom, it is estimated that more than 50% of foods consumed are ultra-processed, with similar consumption levels in the United States and Europe.

Divided into two groups, one started with a diet of ultra-processed foods, such as breakfast cereals or pre-cooked lasagna, while the other started with almost unprocessed foods, such as overnight oats or homemade spaghetti Bolognese.

The first diet was followed for eight weeks, followed by the second after a one-month break, allowing the effects of both diets to be compared on each participant over a six-month period.

Participants were delivered a large amount of food (more calories than they needed) to their homes and instructed to eat as they normally would, without restricting their intake.

The team led by University College London saw that both diets caused significant weight loss, but The one based on minimally processed foods resulted in an average reduction of 2%, compared to 1% for the other.

A 2% reduction "may not seem very large," but it's only for eight weeks and without people actively trying to reduce their intake, said researcher Samuel Dicken, one of the study's authors.

With the results extrapolated over a year, a weight loss of 13% in men and 9% in women would be expected with the minimally processed diet, but only 4% in men and 5% in women with the ultra-processed diet. "Over time, this would start to make a big difference," he noted.

Furthermore, the minimally processed diet was more effective at improving body composition related to cardiometabolic health measures, such as reducing fat mass, visceral fat, and triglyceride levels, although low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was lower after the ultra-processed diet.

Although overall diet satisfaction scores did not differ significantly, participants rated the taste and flavor of the ultra-processed diet higher than the minimally processed diet.

Overall control of food cravings, according to participants, improved significantly with the minimally processed diet compared to the ultra-processed diet, which may have contributed to reduced calorie intake and, therefore, greater weight loss.

Previous research has linked ultra-processed foods with poor health outcomes, but "Not all ultra-processed foods are inherently unhealthy based on their nutritional profile," said Dicken.

The primary objective of this study was to address knowledge gaps regarding the role of food processing within existing dietary guidelines, and how it affects weight, blood pressure, and body composition, as well as experiential factors such as food cravings.

The study found significantly greater improvements in the number of cravings and the ability to resist them with the minimally processed diet compared to the ultra-processed diet.

*Stay up to date with the news, join our WhatsApp channel

Also read: How healthy is it to eat menudo meat?

OF