Abstract
Despite the accumulating evidence that increased consumption of ultra-processed food has adverse health implications, it remains difficult to decide what constitutes processed food. Indeed, the current processing-based classification of food has limited coverage and does not differentiate between degrees of processing, hindering consumer choices and slowing research on the health implications of processed food. Here we introduce a machine learning algorithm that accurately predicts the degree of processing for any food, indicating that over 73% of the U.S. food supply is ultra-processed. We show that the increased reliance of an individual’s diet on ultra-processed food correlates with higher risk of metabolic syndrome, diabetes, angina, elevated blood pressure and biological age, and reduces the bio-availability of vitamins. Finally, we find that replacing foods with less processed alternatives can significantly reduce the health implications of ultra-processed food, suggesting that access to information on the degree of processing, currently unavailable to consumers, could improve population health.
Competing Interest Statement
A.-L.B. is the founder of Scipher Medicine and Foodome, companies that explore the use of network-based tools in health, and Datapolis, that focuses on urban data.
Funding Statement
This work was conducted with support from Harvard Catalyst|The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Award UL 1TR002541) and financial contributions from Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers, or the National Institutes of Health. A.-L.B is partially supported by NIH grant 1P01HL132825, American Heart Association grant 151708, and ERC grant 810115-DYNASET.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We are using epidemiological data from NHANES (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All codes are available upon request at g.menichetti@northeastern.edu. All datasets can be accessed through the cited references.
