Industrially processed foods and beverages have increased shelf-life and availability, which has helped to manage the increasing global food demand and reduce malnutrition. However, there has been an increase in the production and consumption of ultra-processed foods and drinks (UPFD), adversely affecting health and the environment. A recent American Journal of Clinical Nutrition study investigated the combined and separate impact of ultra-processed drinks (UPD) and ultra-processed foods (UPF) consumption on the environment and all-cause mortality.

Background

Typically, UPFDs are produced using a specific food or its components. These foods are transformed into ready-to-eat consumables that contain a large amount of sugar, fat, salt, and synthetic additives. UPFDs are energy-dense food products that are rapidly replacing unprocessed foods and beverages.

In the last few decades, a rapid increase in UPFD consumption has been observed in the Netherlands. High consumption of UPFD has been associated with the manifestation of cancer, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, overweight, and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, production and consumption of ultra-processed foods not only affect human health but also have adverse consequences for the environment. It has been estimated that UPFDs account for 70% of freshwater withdrawals, 26% of the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and 78% of marine and freshwater eutrophication.

Not many studies are available regarding the environmental impact of UPFD. Certain studies have indicated a differential impact of UPFD on the environment, which depends on the food group and food type. For instance, in the context of GHG emissions, UPF production causes higher or similar emissions compared to unprocessed or minimally processed foods. However, in the case of UPD production, lower GHG emissions were noted compared to the same unprocessed or minimally processed food item.

UPFDs require more packaging, processing, and transportation, and all this affects the environment adversely. For instance, UPFD is packed with single-use plastics, transported over long distances, and requires refrigeration. These products also utilize a significantly large amount of chemicals, energy, water, and additives. 

A recent survey has estimated that the purchase and consumption of UPFDs in France, Brazil, and the Netherlands account for 24%, 20%, and 43% of diet-related GHG emissions, respectively. UPFD consumption is directly linked with environmental impacts due to higher caloric intake. Although the majority of studies have explored the association between UPFD and all-cause mortality, not many studies have assessed the individual effect of UPF and UPD consumption on all-cause mortality. 

Conclusions

The authors claim this study to be the first to investigate how UPFD, UPF, and UPD consumption affect the environment and all-cause mortality. Diets with a higher portion of UPF exhibited lower environmental impacts. In the future, more studies are required to quantify the environmental impact of UPF and UPD consumption. Taken together, compared to UPF, a lower UPD consumption could reduce the environmental impact and all-cause mortality risk.