Vellinga RE, van den Boomgaard I, Boer JM, van der Schouw YT, Harbers MC, Verschuren WMM, van 't Veer P, Temme EH, Biesbroek S. Different levels of ultra-processed food and beverage consumption and associations with environmental sustainability and all-cause mortality in EPIC-NL.
Am J Clin Nutr 2023:S0002-9165(23)62420-7. [PMID:
37207984 DOI:
10.1016/j.ajcnut.2023.05.021]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Revised: 04/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/15/2023] [Indexed: 05/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
The adverse health effects of high ultra-processed food and drink consumption (UPFD) are well documented. However, its environmental impact remains unclear and the separate effects of ultra-processed foods (UPF) and drinks (UPD) on all-cause mortality are not previously studied.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the association between levels of UPFD, UPF and UPD consumption with diet-related environmental impacts and all-cause mortality in Dutch adults.
METHODS
Habitual diets were assessed by FFQ in 1993-1997 among 38,261 participants of the EPIC-NL cohort. The mean follow-up time was 18.2 years (SD 4.1), 4,697 deaths occurred. FFQ-items were categorized according to the NOVA classification. Associations with quartiles of UPFD, UPF, and UPD consumption and environmental impact indicators were analyzed using general linear models and with all-cause mortality by Cox proportional hazard models. The lowest UPFD, UPF, UPD consumption quartiles were used as comparator.
RESULTS
The average UPFD consumption was 181 (SD 88) g per 1000 kcal. High UPF consumption was statistically significantly inversely associated with all environmental impact indicators (Q4vsQ1: -13.6% to -3.0%) whereas high UPD consumption was, except for land use, statistically significant positively associated with all environmental impact indicators (Q4vsQ1: 5.9% to 1.2%). High UPFD consumption was heterogeneously associated with environmental impacts (Q4vsQ1: 2.6% to -4.0% ). After multivariable adjustment, the highest quartiles of UPFD and UPD consumption were significantly associated with all-cause mortality (HRQ4vsQ1 1.20, 95%CI 1.10,1.30 and HRQ4vsQ1 1.19, 95%CI 1.09,1.29, respectively). UPF consumption of Q2 and Q3 were associated with a borderline significant lower risk of all-cause mortality (HRQ2vsQ1 0.93, 95% CI 0.85,1.00; HRQ3vsQ1 0.91, 95% CI 0.84,0.99), while Q4 was not statistically significant (HRQ4vsQ1 1.05, 95% CI 0.96,1.15).
CONCLUSIONS
Reducing UPD consumption could lower environmental impact and all-cause mortality risk, however this was not shown for UPF. When categorizing foods consumption by their degree of processing trade-offs are observed for human and planetary health aspects.
Collapse