Innovative New Study on Over-Processed Food Provides Possible Caused Firearms For Our Global Obesity

[Disclosure, the lead author, Kevin Hall, is a friend of mine and we co-authored a paper together in the past]

A huge pre-print paper was published yesterday, "Extremely processed diets cause excessive intake of calories and weight gain: a one-time, one-time, once-in-a-tempered controlled ad libitum food test that if its results are foldable and longer could explain the rapidly increasing burdens of the world.

While it has been proven that as food supplies become more industrialized (also referred to as Westernized), weights increase, the reasons why it has remained unclear. Many have tried to explain profits as shifts in the macronutrient composition of the diet of a society and, depending on the age (or the guru), showed intense dietary fat, dietary carbohydrates, animal proteins, lectins, seeds, sugar and much more. Some have done so partly because when the dietary demos of their choice are removed from their supporters' diet, they seem to lose weight, often even when there are no traces of calories or anything else on the subject. But most of these diets and jokes are their need to abandon our highly processed world and bring much more preparation for cooking and meals instead.

Before we come to Kevin's study, here is a basic definition of over-processed foods

"compositions mainly from cheap industrial sources of nutritional energy and nutrients plus additives, using a series of procedures"

If you are interested, you can read more about them here. But for the sake of this study, think of them as cans and jars ready to eat and ready for heat food.

So what did Kevin and his colleagues do?

They received 10 males and 10 female age-stable adults as nurses in the Metabolic Clinical Research Unit at NIH where they lived for 28 days. They were randomly assigned to either the over-processed or unprocessed diet for 2 weeks, so they went to the second diet for two weeks.

During each diet arm, participants were offered 3 daily meals and were given the mandate to eat as much as a few of what they wanted. The menus were designed to match total calories, energy density, macronutrients, fiber, sugar and sodium, but varied in the percentage of calories from over-processed sources.

And the results;


When consuming highly processed diets, people ate an average of 508 more calories a day. This is about a valuable meal. This is huge!

And it's no surprise that people gained weight in the highly processed diet (1.7 pounds in just 2 weeks) and weighed on the other side (2.4 pounds in just 2 weeks).

And there was another surprise. The participants did not rate the highly processed foods as more enjoyable or intimate – which means that the results do not seem to reflect the highly processed menu that is just more delicious.

What is happening?

People eat faster processed foods and the energy densities of these foods are higher and both of these factors may explain part of the increased calorie consumption, but the other possibility according to the authors may be protein. Extremely processed diets contain slightly less protein, which Kevin believes could help explain up to 50% of increased calorie intake through an energy-called lesion protein hypothesis suggesting that our body is trying to maintain a steady intake proteins people who consume less protein than over-processed foods can eat more of them to try to maintain some preset physiologically desirable directed protein intake.

It is now a very brief overview and there will undoubtedly be deeper dives in it, among other things with regard to the various metabolic parameters measured (including hunger hormones and peptides), but considering how important the findings are, I think get out of something quickly and the piece of calories is by far the most impressive and important in terms of being a weapon combining smoking for global weight gain.

It is also worth noting that Kevin did so on Twitter and in the newspaper itself, and the results of this study certainly suggest that significantly reducing or eliminating over-processed foods in our diet can greatly help with our burdens, which requires much of the privilege, time, skills and expense. The good news is, however, that there are a number of levers in the food environment that would help make it mature for reform that have nothing to do with customized customized lenses and jerks that include:

  • Improved policies for school food and school food that reduce highly processed offers
  • Supporting the case for returning home finances
  • Promoting calls to ban the marketing of unwanted food in children (and adults)
  • Changing the food culture so that over-processed foods are not the cornerstone of any event, no matter how small
  • Getting highly processed junk out of sport and sports sponsorship
  • Ending the highly processed concentration of undesirable foods
  • Reforms of institutional and corporate cafeteria offers
  • Strengthening the front of package labeling reforms may not allow the front of packaging claims in over-processed foods

and no doubt there are many others.

Even more good news is that focusing on over-processed food as a whole, especially at a point of causality, is a focus that almost every diet cult can get steadily back.