Study suggests link between ultra processed foods and lung cancer
After an average of 12 years the team identified 1,706 cases of lung cancer.
And food survey questionnaires revealed consumption of UPFs, including ice cream, fried foods, bread, cakes, pastries, salty snacks, breakfast cereals, instant noodles and soups, margarine, confectionery, soft drinks, sweetened fruit drinks, hamburgers, hot dogs, and pizza.
The research team, led by academics in China, found that average UPF consumption was nearly three servings a day, but ranged from 0.5 to six.
The three types of food that featured the most were lunch meat and soft drinks.
People who consumed the highest amounts of UPFs were 41% more likely to develop lung cancer compared with those who consumed the least amount, academics wrote in the journal Thorax.
Hamburgers, hot dogs, and pizza were among the UPFs consumed (PA)
They found an increased risk found for both non small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer.
The authors said that they did make adjustments to their findings based on whether or not people smoked but they did not make adjustments for smoking intensity, which may have an impact.
They stress that 'causality cannot be determined' from their findings and the data should be interpreted with caution.
'Although additional research in other populations and settings is warranted, these findings suggest the healthy benefits of limiting UPF,' the authors said.
They added: 'Limiting trends of UPF intake globally could contribute to reducing the burden of lung cancer.'
Commenting on the study, Professor Sam Hare, consultant chest radiologist at the Royal Free London NHS Trust, said: 'A quarter of lung cancer cases occur in non-smokers so we do need research exploring whether other factors are associated with lung cancer.
'We also know immunity is linked to cancer biology so it is a good idea to do research into factors like diet.
'However, further work is needed to establish direct causation between UPFs and lung cancer, crucially, whilst the study does make some adjustments for smoking status, the amount of smoking is not factored in, which is known to be directly related to lung cancer development.
'Dietary habits also change considerably over the course of such long-term studies, as such, it is difficult to directly conclude that lung cancer is related to the level of UPF consumption alone given it was only declared at the start of the study.
'That said, given the relative dearth of information on non-smoking related risk factors in lung cancer, it is important that the scientific community conducts more studies like this – we need genuine evidence-based advancement in the early diagnosis of lung cancer in non-smokers, but this study isn't quite able to give us the answers yet.'
The researchers stressed that 'causality cannot be determined' from their findings (Alamy/PA)
It comes as a separate study examined teenage smoking rates over 50 years in the UK.
Researchers, led by academics from the University of Michigan in the US, looked at data on smoking among 16 and 17-year-olds in 1974, 1986 and 2018.
They found that teenage smoking dropped from 33% to 12% during the study period.
The 2018 study found that 11% of older teenagers used vapes.
The study authors estimate that teenagers who vape are more likely to go on to be smokers.
Writing in the journal Tobacco Control, they said that the likelihood of smoking was 1.5% among teenagers who do not vape, but 33% among those who do.
'Tobacco control efforts should continue to focus on the prevention of general youth nicotine use and to specifically target youth who use e- cigarettes because their risk of cigarette smoking is similar to youth in the 1970s,' they wrote.
But academic commentators have said that this conclusion is 'not justified'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
12 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Shroud of Turin mystery deepens as burial cloth was NEVER laid on Jesus' body but a sculpture, scientists claim
The shroud has been the centre of controversy and debate for centuries SACRED RELIC Shroud of Turin mystery deepens as burial cloth was NEVER laid on Jesus' body but a sculpture, scientists claim Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE mystery surrounding one of the world's most famous religious relics may finally be solved, according to new research. The Shroud of Turin, a length of linen believed to have been used to wrap Jesus after his death on the cross, draws thousands of faithful visitors every year. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 5 The shroud is believed to have been used to wrap Jesus after his death on the cross Credit: Alamy 5 Cicero Moraes used digital modelling software to study the shroud Credit: Credit: Cicero Moraes/Pen News 5 For his research, Moraes compared two different digital 3D bodies Credit: Credit: Cicero Moraes/Pen News The cloth bears the image of a man after Crucifixion, leading believers to claim it was the very shroud that bore Christ's body. Yet it has been the centre of controversy and debate for centuries. Sceptics suggest the shroud is nothing more than a hoax dating to the Middle Ages. But a new study published in the journal Archaeometry seems to have put the debate to rest. Brazilian 3D digital designer Cicero Moraes used digital modelling software to reach his final conclusion. He believes the shroud was never wrapped around Jesus' body, based on a study using 3D imaging tech. "The Shroud's image is more consistent with an artistic low-relief representation than with the direct imprint of a real human body," he wrote. Moraes argues that the imprints on the linen could only have been made by a sculpture, not an actual person's body. For his research, Moraes compared two different digital 3D bodies. One was that of a human body, and the other was a low-relief sculpture. Watch monstrous black hole GOBBLE up a star before Earth-shattering explosion in incredible new Nasa clip He then used 3D simulation tools to digitally drape a shroud over each of them. Moraes compared both to pictures of the Shroud of Turin. He found that the low-relief sculpture was a worthy match for the centuries-old relic, while the one based on a human was more distorted. This is down to a phenomenon called the Agammemnon Mask Effect - named after a wide death mask found in Greece. The effect sets out that if someone pressed their face against a paper towel, it would be wide and distorted - and would not accurately reflect the individual's features. Moraes told Live Science: "The image on the Shroud of Turin is more consistent with a low-relief matrix. "Such a matrix could have been made of wood, stone or metal and pigmented - or even heated - only in the areas of contact, producing the observed pattern." Accusations that the Turin Shroud is a fake have been around since its first recorded mentions in the 14th century. More recently, carbon dating analysis has placed its likely time of creation somewhere between 1260 and 1390 AD. Moraes thinks it is likely the shroud was made in a funerary context, and is a "masterpiece of Christian art". He wrote that it is "plausible to consider that artists or sculptors with sufficient knowledge could have created such a piece, either through painting or low relief". However, it's unlikely that Moraes' work will being an end to speculation over the shroud's veracity. University of Padua professor Giulio Fanti has claimed in a study that the blood stain patterns offer evidence that the shroud is the real deal, according to the New York Post. 5 Carbon dating analysis has placed its likely time of creation somewhere between 1260 and 1390 AD Credit: Reuters
Scottish Sun
3 days ago
- Scottish Sun
Ozempic-like fat jabs linked to horror side effect that causes sudden blindness, study reveals
Injections could pose a risk to vital nerve behind the eye JAB FEARS Ozempic-like fat jabs linked to horror side effect that causes sudden blindness, study reveals Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) WEIGHT loss jabs could raise the risk of sudden blindness, a study warns. Injections like Wegovy, Mounjaro and Ozempic are all the rage because of their rapid slimming effects – but they are not without side effects. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Weight loss jabs' popularity has soared in the past three years (stock image) Credit: Alamy Users mostly report gut problems that tend to end after they stop taking the medicines. But new research warns weight loss jabs might pose a permanent risk to patients' eyes. A study of type 2 diabetes patients taking semaglutide – the ingredient in Ozempic and Wegovy – found a link to non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. The condition, known as NAOIN, causes sudden blindness. Sufferers lose blood supply to the nerve behind the eye, breaking the connection between eye and brain and leaving the eye completely blind. It typically happens quickly and painlessly to one eye and cannot be cured. A study by the US National Institutes of Health analysed data from 3.8million type 2 diabetes patients over the age of 65. It found semaglutide raised the risk by 15 per cent compared to other diabetes medications such as insulin or metformin. Writing in the journal JAMA Ophthalmology, researchers said: 'Our findings demonstrate an association between semaglutide use and an increased risk of NAION.' 'Patient safety is top priority' It adds to a previous study that suggested the medicine increased the risk as much as four to eight times above average. Watch Ellen's weight loss journey on fat jabs The authors of that study said: 'As with any drug, therapeutic benefits are inseparable from adverse effects.' Novo Nordisk, which makes Wegovy and Ozempic, said: 'Patient safety is our top priority, and we take any reports about adverse events from the use of our medicines very seriously. 'In June 2025 we concluded that the data did not suggest a reasonable possibility of a causal relationship between semaglutide and NAION and that the benefit-risk profile of semaglutide remains favourable. 'Novo Nordisk will continue to collaborate with the MHRA to discuss any UK impact. 'We recommend that any patients experiencing side effects while taking our medicines report them to their healthcare provider.'
Medical News Today
3 days ago
- Medical News Today
High amounts of ultra-processed foods may increase lung cancer risk by 41%
As the proportion of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) in the Western diet increases, concerns are growing about their health have linked UPFs with many health conditions, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and several types of a study suggests that high consumption of UPFs could increase a person's chance of developing lung cancer. While observing a link, the study cannot prove that UPFs cause lung cancer, but highlights a need for further foods (UPFs) — formulations of food substances often modified by chemical processes and then assembled into ready-to-consume hyper-palatable food and drink products using flavors, colors, emulsifiers, and many other cosmetic additives — are often in the news for their effect on our health. These products, which include carbonated soft drinks, mass-produced bread, confectionery, ice creams, sweet and savory snacks, and ready meals, make up around 60% of the energy consumed in the United suggest that high UPF consumption may increase a person's risk of several health conditions, including many types of cancer.A new study has now linked high UPF intake with an increased risk of developing lung cancer. The research, published in Thorax, found that high consumption of UPFs was associated with a greater risk of both non-small cell (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC).Nilesh Vora, MD, board-certified hematologist and medical oncologist and medical director of the MemorialCare Todd Cancer Institute at Long Beach Medical Center in Long Beach, CA, who was not involved in the study, found the link surprising: 'The study generates a compelling hypothesis that needs further research to validate the claim,' he told Medical News average of 2.8 servings a dayThe researchers collected data from people enrolled in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO). They included 50,187 men and 51,545 women in the study. Participants had a mean age of 62.5 years at the start. At enrolment, all participants completed a baseline questionnaire, which recorded demographics, medical history, and other risk factor information, and a diet history questionnaire, to assess the frequency and portion size of food consumption and nutrient intake during the previous the diet questionnaire and four 24-hour dietary recalls, the researchers assessed how much UPF people consumed, dividing them into 4 quartiles for UPF lowest quartile consumed around 0.5 servings of UPF per day, and the highest 6.0 servings, with a mean intake of 2.8 servings per UPF intake linked to lung cancerResearchers followed up the participants for a mean of 12.2 years, during which time there were 1,706 lung cancer diagnoses. Of these, 1,473 (86.3%) were NSCLC, and 233 (13.7%) who ate more UPF had a higher likelihood of being diagnosed with lung cancer. In the lowest UPF intake group, 331 out of 25,433 people (1.3%) were diagnosed with lung cancer, and in the highest UPF group, 485 out of 25,434 (1.9%) had a lung cancer researchers concluded that those who ate the most UPF had a 41% relatively higher hazard of lung cancer than those in the lowest factors may increase lung cancer riskPeople in the highest quartile for UPF consumption also had lower intake of minimally processed foods like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, which the American Institute for Cancer Research advises can lower a person's risk of many researchers suggest several possible reasons why UPF might increase lung cancer risk, including:poor nutritional quality of UPF and lower nutrient availability due to industrial of the additives commonly used in UPFs, such as glutamate and carrageenan, could increase lung cancer risk, possibly by disrupting the lung and gut contaminants from processing and packaging that could be Brown, senior cancer intelligence manager at Cancer Research UK, who was not involved in the study, cautioned that firm conclusions could not be drawn from the research:'What we'd want to see in the lung cancer space specifically, we'd want to see really, really close adjustment for smoking and for occupational exposures. Without that, in the lung cancer space, it's impossible to draw firm conclusions from research. And also more accurate measurement of diet because if you're looking at a diet study, you have to be measuring it really, really accurately. It's very difficult to do that. It's incredibly difficult to do that at scale.''There's also the possibility, I think, of shared risk factors. If you have a diet high in UPFs, are you also more likely to smoke cigarettes? Are you also more likely to be in a job where you're exposed to these other risk factors?' she UPFs cause lung cancer? More research neededThis was an observational study that relied on self-reported information about diet, so the findings cannot prove that UPFs cause lung authors highlight this and other limitations of their study, including a lack of data about smoking intensity for participants and the lack of ethnic diversity of the participants, most of whom were non-Hispanic highlighted some of these limitations:'There is adjustment for smoking in the paper, but there's nothing about how long a person smoked for, or how heavily they smoked. And we know that those are variables that are very closely associated with lung cancer incidence.' 'Also,' she added, 'the lack of adjustment for occupational exposure is a concern. There are a number of substances that can increase lung cancer risks, typically encountered at volume in occupational settings. Asbestos, silica, lots of dusts and chemicals can have quite a high relative risk for lung cancer.'Vora emphasized that to generate more significant data: 'More research should be done in a prospective fashion with controlled variables.'Limiting ultra-processed foods benefits healthThis latest study linking UPFs to lung cancer adds to the evidence of potential harms from UPFs. An umbrella review of adverse health outcomes associated with UPF exposure found direct associations with 'higher risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease-related mortality, common mental disorder outcomes, overweight and obesity, and type 2 diabetes.'Other studies have linked high intake of UPFs with increased overall cancer risk and risk of both breast and ovarian cancer, suggesting that obesity and type 2 diabetes resulting from UPFs could be increasing these cancer risks.'UPFs can be high in fat, salt and sugar, which are associated with overweight and obesity, and we know that overweight and obesity can increase cancer risk. Cutting down on these types of foods can be part of a healthy, balanced diet. When it comes to lung cancer, not smoking is the best thing people can do to reduce their cancer risk.'— Katrina Brown, Cancer Research UKWhile welcoming the study, Brown told MNT:'I don't think that we would say that this study sounds huge alarm bells. But we certainly wouldn't disagree with the core recommendation to try and reduce the amount of processed food that you consume and replace it with healthier alternatives.''It's interesting as it gets as further to knowing more about UPFs. It's that body of evidence that we need to build up, but this single study doesn't tip the balance,' she added.
