Different levels of ultra-processed food and beverage consumption and associations with environmental sustainability and all-cause mortality in EPIC-NL

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 (HR_Q4vsQ1 1.20, 95%CI 1.10,1.30 and HR_Q4vsQ1 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 (HR_Q2vsQ1 0.93, 95% CI 0.85,1.00; HR_Q3vsQ1 0.91, 95% CI 0.84,0.99), while Q4 was not statistically significant (HR_Q4vsQ1 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.

Pure Fruit Juice and Fruit Consumption Are Not Associated with Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes after Adjustment for Overall Dietary Quality in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (EPIC-NL) Study

BACKGROUND

Dietary guidelines on pure fruit juice consumption vary from country to country regarding the inclusion of pure fruit juice in the recommendations as an acceptable alternative for fruit. Current epidemiological evidence on the association between pure fruit juice consumption and diabetes risk is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

We studied the association of both pure fruit juice and fruit consumption with diabetes risk and investigated the differences between low and high fruit consumers in the association of pure fruit juice consumption with diabetes risk.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 36,147 participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (EPIC-NL) Study aged 20-69 y at baseline. Fruit juice and fruit consumption were assessed using a validated food-frequency questionnaire; amounts of consumption were divided into 5 categories and quintiles, respectively. Incident type 2 diabetes cases were mainly self-reported and verified against medical records. Cox regression was used to estimate adjusted HRs and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

After an average follow-up of 14.6 y, 1477 verified incident cases of type 2 diabetes were documented. Compared with no consumption, pure fruit juice consumption was not significantly associated with type 2 diabetes, with adjusted HRs ranging from 0.92 (95% CI: 0.79, 1.09) to 1.03 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.26). The associations did not differ between participants with low and high fruit consumption. None of the categories of fruit consumption were associated with type 2 diabetes (lowest quintile as reference). Adjusted HRs ranged between 0.93 (95% CI: 0.78, 1.10) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.84, 1.19). Adjustment for the Dutch Healthy Diet Index, as an overall measure of dietary quality, strongly attenuated the observed associations of type 2 diabetes with both fruit juice and fruit consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence for associations between pure fruit juice and fruit consumption and diabetes risk after adjustment for overall dietary quality for participants in the EPIC-NL study. This trial was registered at https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6939 as NL6939.