A lot has been happening lately in the field of research into the the health effects of ultra-processed items, and that’s what I want to talk about today. Last month, the results of a huge study, involving almost 10,000,000 (ten million!) individuals, were published in the BMJ [British Medical Journal], “one of the world’s most influential and respected general medical journals,” and they were…shall we say…most informative. 

I am sorry it has taken so long, but there’s no time like the present. Ten million people to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Though I can already hear the objections: “But I can’t afford to buy real potatoes instead of chips.” “Chicken costs so much more than chik’n nuggets.” “I hate broccoli.” “Vegetables are gross.” “But my kids will only eat single-serving applesauce.” Or “Lunchables(r) are so much easier.”

It’s important to understand that it is we, ourselves, who actually end up covering the medical costs of the illnesses caused by non-food items. It is only their upfront costs that are lower. Ultra processed items don’t really cost less; they just cost less at first. In fact, they cost a great deal more. Add in the cost of a few stents and, ultimately, a coronary artery bypass; decades of arthritis medication along with two joint replacements; a dozen colonoscopies and a couple of courses of chemotherapy for colon cancer; and, finally, a few years in a memory care facility; and those “breakfast cereals” and “fast food” options become significantly less budget friendly. This may feel irrelevant to folks who are living paycheck to paycheck. Then ask yourself why the American government isn’t subsidizing greens, chickpeas, apples, and avocados.

This post is really not about ultra-processed items. It’s not really about costs either, or identifying the ultimate beneficiary(ies) of those funds. It’s about the devastation to families of young parents diagnosed with colon cancer or severe mental illness. It’s about financial and food insecurity consequent to the medical costs caused by a lifetime of eating ultra-processed items. It’s about suffering. 

The BMJ article showed that consumption of diets high in ultra-processed items was associated with a 40-66 percent higher risk of cardiovascular disease-related death, a 48-53 percent higher risk of anxiety and 22 percent higher risk of depression, and a 12 percent higher risk of type 2 diabetes (the most common type). Diets high in ultra processed items were associated with a 21 percent higher risk of death from any cause.

Here’s what I want you to remember: Ultra-processed items aren’t food, but rather what I would call “food-like” items. They don’t nourish you. But it’s not a zero-sum game. It’s not just that the more ultra-processed items you eat, the less nourishing food you eat. They are actually making us sick. 

And it’s not just a few people saying it. There is, finally, real supportive data. Ten million people’s worth.

These findings will be used to begin thinking about how to dismantle the machinery responsible for production of ultra-processed items. But that will take a very long time, and a great many powerful obstacles — many as yet unnamed — will arise to stand in their way. 

So it’s critical, in the meantime, to begin developing public health measures that will aid in the reduction of their consumption. What’s next will be to begin developing materials that explain how to tell the difference between real food and manufactured calories.