Latest news with #TracyParker
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Want to lose weight? New study sheds light on how processed foods affect our health
People who cook minimally processed meals at home lose more weight than if they eat ready-made, ultra-processed meals – even if these foods are healthy, a new UK study has found. Food experts have long pointed to ultra-processed foods as a key driver of the obesity crisis, which affects about one in eight people worldwide. These foods are often high in saturated fats, sugar, and salt, for example crisps, frozen dinners, and processed meats. But they also include staples like wholemeal sliced bread and baked beans, meaning ultra-processed foods are not always unhealthy. That's prompted much debate over whether it's the ingredients or the processing itself that really matters when it comes to our health. The latest study, published in the journal Nature Medicine, indicates that minimally processed diets are better for weight loss – but that diets rich in ultra-processed foods can still be healthy as long as they meet nutritional guidelines. Related Butter linked to higher death risk while plant-based oils may boost health 'Completely cutting [ultra-processed foods] out of our diets isn't realistic for most of us,' Tracy Parker, nutrition lead at the British Heart Foundation, said in a statement. 'But including more minimally processed foods – like fresh or home cooked meals – alongside a balanced diet could offer added benefits too,' added Parker, who was not involved with the study. What the study found The findings are based on a small clinical trial involving 55 adults in England. Before the study, the participants tended to have poor nutrition diets made up largely of ultra-processed foods, and on average, they had a body mass index (BMI) of about 33, which is considered obese. The trial split adults into two groups. One group started on a diet of minimally processed foods like homemade spaghetti bolognese or overnight oats, while the other ate only ultra-processed foods like ready-made lasagnas or breakfast cereals. After a monthlong break, the two groups swapped, eating meals from the other diet for another eight weeks. Notably, both of these diets met the United Kingdom's guidelines for a healthy, balanced diet, which takes into account levels of saturated fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt, and fibre, as well as fruit and vegetable intake. The only difference was how processed these meals were. Related Diets rich in ultra-processed foods linked to higher risk of early death, new study warns By the end of the study, both groups lost weight – but adults lost twice as much weight when they were on the minimally-processed diets. They lost about 2 per cent of their weight on this diet, compared with about 1 per cent on the ultra-processed diet. 'Though a 2 per cent reduction may not seem very big, that is only over eight weeks and without people trying to actively reduce their intake,' said Samuel Dicken, a researcher who helped run the trial at University College London. 'Over time this would start to become a big difference,' he added. Over the course of a year, men on the minimally processed diet would be expected to lose 13 per cent of their weight, compared with 4 per cent on the ultra-processed diet, the researchers said. For women, the findings translate to a 9 per cent weight reduction on the minimally processed diet and a 4 per cent reduction on the ultra-processed diet. Dietary differences People tended to lose more weight on the minimally processed diet because of reductions in their fat mass and body water, which the researchers said suggested they had a healthier body composition overall. They also reported fewer food cravings on the minimally processed diet. There were no big differences between the two diets when it came to other health outcomes, such as blood pressure, heart rate, and blood markers that track liver function, blood sugar, cholesterol, and inflammation. The fact that people still lost weight while on ultra-processed diets indicates that these foods aren't all bad, independent experts said. 'The most interesting result of the study is that participants on both arms lost weight – which contradicts claims that ultra-processed foods result in weight gain,' Gunter Kuhnle, a professor of nutrition and food science at the University of Reading, said in a statement. The findings 'suggest that a diet meeting current dietary recommendations is not detrimental to weight maintenance, whether it is ultra-processed or not,' added Kuhnle, who was not involved with the study. Related Ultra-processed foods account for nearly half of calories eaten by UK toddlers, study finds The study also has some limitations, namely the fact that it included only 55 people who tried both diets. Independent researchers warned that it takes time for the body to get used to new eating habits, so longer studies with more people would be needed to understand exactly how ultra-processed foods affect our health. Even so, researchers said the results are in line with other studies showing that access to nutritious food is critical to our health and wellbeing. Dr Chris van Tulleken, one of the study's authors and a researcher studying how corporations affect human health at University College London, pointed to the 'wide availability of cheap, unhealthy food' as a key driver of obesity and poor health worldwide. He called for policy action to make unhealthy options less appealing, for example through warning labels, marketing restrictions, and taxes. The study, he said, 'underlines the need to shift the policy focus away from individual responsibility and on to the environmental drivers of obesity'.
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Maps reveal how many fast food outlets are in your area
Almost every part of England has seen a rise in the number of fast food outlets, despite growing concerns about the county's obesity crisis. And the number of shops selling foods such as burgers, pizza, kebabs, chicken, takeaways, and fish & chips shows no sign of decreasing either. Camden, in north London, has replaced Bury, in Greater Manchester, as the area with the most fast food purveyors per head of population. Other parts of the North West and Greater London also top the latest league tables. The data was branded "infuriating" by Katharine Jenner, director of Obesity Health Alliance (OHA). She said: "Almost every local authority has seen the number of unhealthy food outlets per population either grow or remain largely unchanged in recent years. This is happening at a time when the food industry should be making healthy food more appealing and affordable, not actively working against it." She added: 'We deserve better and we can't let the food industry continue to profit off our poor health. We can't afford to wait any longer.' While burgers, battered fish and bhajis might be delicious, they - and many other offerings in the nations fast food outlets - are also likely to be packed with excessive fat, salt and sugar. High salt intake is associated with high blood pressure, which can lead to strokes and heart attacks. A McDonald's Big Mac, for example, contains 2g of salt - a third of the 6g adult daily intake recommended by the NHS. Although an essential part of diet, particularly for the absorption of key vitamins, the government's guidelines advise the public to cut down on all fat intake and, where possible, substitute saturated fat with unsaturated fats. High fat intake, particularly saturated fat found in meat and butter, is associated with high cholesterol, type 2 diabetes and heart disease. Sugar is linked to weight gain, which can can lead to an increased risk of a range of health conditions and complications, including cancer. Fast food is also likely to make greater use of red and processed meats, which increase the risk of developing bowel cancer. Tracy Parker, senior dietitian at the British Heart Foundation (BHF), said: 'Takeaways and restaurant meals have become an increasingly significant part of many people's diets. And often, the foods we choose are higher in calories, saturated fat, salt and sugar, and in larger portions than we'd normally eat. 'Over time, eating too many foods that are high in salt, saturated fat and sugar can increase our risk of heart and circulatory diseases, such as heart attacks and strokes.' Despite a wealth of evidence and years of public campaigns, fast food outlets continue to multiply across England. New data from the Office for Health Improvement & Disparities (OHID) showed there were 116 fast food outlets per 100,000 population in 2024 - up from 98 per 100,000 in 2017. Only a handful of areas have seen a decline in fast food outlets. Wokingham in Berkshire has retained its status as the area with the fewest outlets per population, while Camden, in north London, overtook Bury, in Greater Manchester, as the area with the most. The number of fast food outlets per head of population in the most deprived areas of England are double the level in the least deprived areas, at 147 per 100,000 compared with 73 per 100,000. 'On average, the local authorities with a higher deprivation score, which include several large city authorities, have a higher number of fast food outlets per 100,000 population,' a spokesman for the OHID said. 'Prevalence of obesity in England increases with increasing levels of deprivation and fruit and vegetable consumption decreases with increasing levels of deprivation.' However, the OHID also conceded some areas may have a greater number of takeaways if they serve large numbers of tourists or workers. A spokesman for Camden Council, which has seen its number if outlets more than double since 2017, said: 'Camden is a world-famous, tourist hotspot and we know many visitors will grab food on the go either before or after gigs, theatre and night-time events, or before they get their train home after a day out in London. 'We support our residents to access healthy food and to follow a balanced diet, and there's lots of community food projects and food growing initiatives in Camden helping with this.' Local authorities in England are responsible for granting planning permission for new fast food outlets. Existing guidance allows new applications to be restricted via: School exclusion zones, which prevent new premises being opened within a set distance of education facilities Limits on the density of fast food outlets within a set area Limits on new fast food outlets in areas where a set proportion of the population is classified as overweight or obese Last year, Newcastle, the home of bakery chain Greggs, followed neighbouring Gateshead in imposing tough rules banning new takeaways from city wards where more than 10% of children aged 10-11 are obese. Other areas have seen success with similar tactics, such as Hartlepool, just down the coast from Newcastle, which has fallen steeply from fourth in the OHID rankings last time to 37th (138 per 100,000) this time around. Hartlepool Council leader Brenda Harrison said: "The health sector of the council has been working closely with the planning department to try to reduce the number of takeaways coming in. "There's still a lot and we obviously don't want to get rid of them all, but it's about keeping a check on the numbers."
