The DOI matches its Crossref record; 227 of the 227 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 28 of the 86 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence
Open accessAbstract
This first paper in a three-part Lancet Series combines narrative and systematic reviews with original analyses and meta-analyses to assess three hypotheses concerning a dietary pattern based on ultra-processed foods. The first hypothesis-that this pattern is globally displacing long-established diets centred on whole foods and their culinary preparation as dishes and meals-is supported by decades of national food intake and purchase surveys, and recent global sales data. The second-that this pattern results in deterioration of diet quality, especially in relation to chronic disease prevention-is confirmed by national food intake surveys, large cohorts, and interventional studies showing gross nutrient imbalances; overeating driven by high energy density, hyper-palatability, soft texture, and disrupted food matrices; reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals; and increased intake of toxic compounds, endocrine disruptors, and potentially harmful classes and mixtures of food additives. The third and final hypothesis-that this pattern increases the risk of multiple diet-related chronic diseases through various mechanisms-is substantiated by more than 100 prospective studies, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, and mechanistic studies, covering adverse outcomes across nearly all organ systems. The totality of the evidence supports the thesis that displacement of long-established dietary patterns by ultra-processed foods is a key driver of the escalating global burden of multiple diet-related chronic diseases. Two companion papers in this Series specify policy actions and wider public health strategies to promote, protect, and support diets based on fresh and minimally processed foods and prevent their displacement by ultra-processed foods.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This Lancet Series paper combines narrative and systematic reviews, original analyses, and meta-analyses to argue that ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are displacing long-established diets, degrading diet quality, and increasing risk of multiple chronic diseases. It concludes the totality of evidence supports UPF displacement as a key driver of the global chronic disease burden, while calling for public health action despite remaining research gaps.
Key findings
- Across 36 countries, the dietary share of UPFs ranged from 9% (Iran) to 60% (USA) of total energy and correlated with national wealth (r=0.45, 95% CI 0.20–0.70). Repeated surveys showed increases in 8 of 9 countries; e.g., Spain rose from 11.0% to 31.7% over three decades and Canada from 24.4% to 54.9% over eight decades. Euromonitor 2007–22 data showed per capita UPF sales rose 60% in Uganda (20.3 to 32.2 kg), 40% in lower-middle-income countries (45.3 to 63.3 kg), nearly 20% in upper-middle-income countries (104.0 to 121.6 kg), and remained stable at about 200 kg in high-income countries.
- A 13-country meta-analysis found higher UPF energy share associated with higher free sugars, total fat, and saturated fat, and lower fibre, protein, potassium, zinc, magnesium, and several vitamins; it predicted a 34.7 kcal/day increase per 10% higher UPF share. Reducing UPF intake to the lowest quintile would reduce inadequate diets by 69.4% (Canada) to 92.1% (USA). At 15% UPF energy, fruits, vegetables, and legumes contributed 12.4% of energy; at 75%, this fell to 4%. In NutriNet-Santé (n=110,925), the highest versus lowest UPF quintile had two-fold higher emulsifiers, three-fold flavour enhancers, five-fold non-sugar sweeteners, and 15-fold colourings.
- The systematic review included 104 prospective adult studies; 92 reported increased risk of one or more chronic disease outcomes and 78 reported statistically significant linear trends. Meta-analyses found high versus low UPF exposure associated with 12 outcomes, with effect sizes from 1.14 (95% CI 1.06–1.23) for cerebrovascular disease or mortality to 1.90 (1.40–2.59) for Crohn’s disease; no associations were found for all-cancer mortality, ulcerative colitis, or colorectal cancer. In RCTs, the US NIH trial (20 adults) found the UPF diet led to +0.9 kg bodyweight and +0.4 kg fat mass versus −0.9 kg and −0.3 kg on the non-UPF diet; the Tokyo trial (9 adults) found +2.2 kg and +0.7 kg fat mass versus +1.1 kg and −0.4 kg; the Drexel pilot (14 adults) reported a 3.5 kg weight reduction after an 8-week intervention to reduce UPF intake.
- The paper states the evidence fulfils seven of nine Bradford Hill criteria for causality and cites an eight-country study estimating UPFs account for 4% (Colombia) to 14% (USA and UK) of premature all-cause mortality.
Methods
- Design: first paper in a three-part Lancet Series; combines narrative and systematic reviews with original analyses and meta-analyses to assess three hypotheses about the ultra-processed dietary pattern.
- Systematic review: registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022351111) and conducted per PRISMA and MOOSE; searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scielo, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase from inception to July 4, 2024; included prospective studies in adults using Nova; 104 studies met inclusion criteria; random-effects meta-analyses were done for outcomes with ≥4 studies; quality assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
- Original analyses: national food intake surveys across 36 countries; Euromonitor International food sales data from 93 countries (2007–22); NutriNet-Santé cohort (n=110,925) for additive intake; narrative review of interventional and mechanistic studies.
Limitations
- Stated: observational evidence cannot definitively establish causality; residual confounding and non-differential misclassification of exposure are possible; few RCTs exist; biological mechanisms are not fully established; data from low-income countries are scarce; Nova classification can be challenging without training and may introduce subjectivity or classification bias; UPFs vary in nutrient composition, so within-group heterogeneity may obscure health-relevant distinctions; subgroup analyses face confounding, multicollinearity, low variability, and multiple testing; the systematic review focused on adults because few child and adolescent studies were available; the Crohn’s disease association became statistically non-significant after excluding low-quality studies; no associations were found for all-cancer mortality, ulcerative colitis, or colorectal cancer.
- Evident from the text: several authors developed the Nova classification system, and the Series was funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies; only one included study stated industry funding; some sales analyses rely on Euromonitor International proprietary data.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
32 Not checked yet · 17 Own interpretation · 16 Own result · 10 No basis given · 9 Partly supported · 7 Sources not found · 6 Own method · 4 Supported · 2 Supported so far · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 2 No full text of the sources · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, the two crossover RCTs on ad libitum UPF and non-UPF diets matched for presented calories and macronutrients and the pilot behavioural intervention study aforementioned found significant effects of the ultra-processed dietary pattern on weight changes.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Interventional studies
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [56] Hall, 2019, Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: an inpatient randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food intake, Cell Metab sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page not provided) describes one randomized crossover trial with ad libitum ultra-processed and unprocessed diets matched for presented calories and macronutrients. It reports significant weight gain during the ultra-processed diet and weight loss during the unprocessed diet. This paper does not establish the results of the second crossover RCT or the pilot behavioural intervention study named in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Supportedcites [58] Hamano, 2024, Ultra-processed foods cause weight gain and increased energy intake associated with reduced chewing frequency: a randomized, open-label, crossover study, Diabetes Obes Metab source
The study design and Results describe one of the crossover RCTs in the citing sentence: participants received UPF and non-UPF diets with meals matched for presented energy and macronutrients. The Results report significantly greater weight gain during the UPF period (1.1 kg; P = .021). This source supports the claim as one of the cited studies, not as evidence for the other trial or the pilot intervention. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [55] Hagerman, 2024, A pilot study of a novel dietary intervention targeting ultra-processed food intake, Obes Sci Pract source
The Results section reports that participants in the pilot behavioral intervention significantly reduced UPF intake and lost an average of 3.5 kg over eight weeks (p < 0.001). The Discussion describes the weight loss as preliminary and cautions that the small sample and self-reported weights limit interpretation. This source supports the part of the sentence about the pilot study, not the separately mentioned crossover RCTs. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Nationally representative studies from the USA found higher urinary concentrations of PFAS in people with increased UPF intake.72,73”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [72] Martínez Steele, 2020, Association between dietary contribution of ultra-processed foods and urinary concentrations of phthalates and bisphenol in a nationally representative sample of the US population aged 6 years and older, PLoS One sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report higher urinary concentrations of several chemicals with greater ultra-processed food intake, and the Discussion describes the US sample as nationally representative. But the Urinary chemical measurement section lists phthalates and bisphenols, not PFAS; this paper does not support the PFAS-specific claim. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.89)
- Partly supportedcites [73] Buckley, 2019, Ultra-processed food consumption and exposure to phthalates and bisphenols in the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2013–2014, Environ Int sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not provided) reports that, in a representative U.S. sample, higher ultra-processed food intake was associated with higher urinary concentrations of MCPP, MCNP, and MCOP. The Methods identify these as phthalate metabolites; the paper does not report the claimed association for PFAS. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Many commonly consumed UPFs are addictive when judged by standards used for tobacco products, including compulsive use and reinforcement.64”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Increased energy intake
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [64] Gearhardt, 2023, Highly processed foods can be considered addictive substances based on established scientific criteria, Addiction source
The Conclusion states that highly processed foods meet the scientific criteria used to identify tobacco products as addictive, including compulsive use and reinforcement. The Criterion 3 section gives commonly consumed examples, including potato chips, candy and cookies. The supplied passages do not provide page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In the UK Biobank cohort, dysglycaemia, dyslipidaemia, and inflammation explained 1-10% of the associations with chronic pulmonary obstructive disease.182”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [182] He, 2023, Ultra-processed food consumption, mediating biomarkers, and risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective cohort study in the UK Biobank, Food Funct source
The indexed passage (Abstract; page unavailable) reports that biomarkers explained 1.0–10.1% of the association between ultra-processed food intake and COPD in the UK Biobank cohort. It identifies glucose, inflammation, and lipids as the principal mediating pathways, consistent with the claim’s rounded range and paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Cross-sectional analyses of cohort studies found a similar inverse relationship between the share of UPFs and these protective foods.[50][51][52]”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [50] Mendonça, 2016, Ultraprocessed food consumption and risk of overweight and obesity: the University of Navarra Follow-Up (SUN) cohort study, Am J Clin Nutr sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (p. 5) report that participants in the highest quartile of ultraprocessed-food consumption had the lowest vegetable intakes and lower adherence to the Mediterranean diet, supporting an inverse relationship in baseline cohort data. The paper compares consumption in servings per day, however, rather than the share of the diet from ultraprocessed foods, and the passage does not establish the relationship for protective foods beyond vegetables. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Supportedcites [51] Srour, 2019, Ultra-processed food intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study (NutriNet–Santé), BMJ source
In “Interpretation and comparison with other studies” (page not available), the paper reports that participants with higher ultra-processed food intake consumed less fruit and vegetables. It also reports an inverse correlation between the dietary proportions of ultra-processed and minimally processed foods (r = −0.8), supporting the claimed relationship. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites [52] Bonaccio, 2021, Ultra-processed food consumption is associated with increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the Moli-sani study, Am J Clin Nutr sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that higher UPF consumption was associated with lower Mediterranean-diet adherence and lower fiber intake in the cohort’s baseline comparisons. That supports an inverse relationship with a protective dietary pattern, but our copy does not report an inverse relationship with the particular protective foods referred to as “these” in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“which is likely due to an increase in regulatory policies targeting these products.13”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 1: global displacement of long-established dietary patterns
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [13] Scrinis, 2025, Policies to halt and reverse the rise in ultra-processed food production, marketing and consumption. Lancet series on ultra-processed foods and human health, Lancet sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The supplied passage is bibliographic information, not a discussion of sales trends or their causes. Searches of our copy for sweetened carbonated drinks, high-income regions, and regulatory policies found no passage addressing whether regulation explains a decline in sales. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The density of drink products is 1 kg/L.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, misclassification of poorly detailed food items (eg, bread) does not appear to affect study conclusions.49”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [49] Kliemann, 2023, Food processing and cancer risk in Europe: results from the prospective EPIC cohort study, Lancet Planet Health source
The Methods (Procedures; page not available) use bread to illustrate uncertainty in NOVA classification and describe lower- and upper-bound classifications. The Results (page not available) report that findings were similar under both scenarios, supporting the claim that this potential misclassification did not appear to change the study’s conclusions. (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Post-hoc analyses linked these differences to the increased energy density of non-beverages and the greater content of hyperpalatable foods in the ultra-processed diet.57”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Increased energy intake
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [57] Fazzino, 2023, Ad libitum meal energy intake is positively influenced by energy density, eating rate and hyper-palatable food across four dietary patterns, Nat Food source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not checked yet
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the Drexel pilot study with 14 participants, the 8-week behavioural intervention designed to reduce UPF consumption led to a bodyweight reduction of 3•5 kg (1•8-5•2).55”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Interventional studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Hagerman, 2024, A pilot study of a novel dietary intervention targeting ultra-processed food intake, Obes Sci Pract source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirectn = 14- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not checked yet
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Effect sizes ranged from 1•14 (95% CI 1•06-1•23) for cerebrovascular disease or mortality, to 1•90 (1•40-2•59) for Crohn's disease.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 48
- Probably not a substantial claim. 17
- The quote only partly states this claim. 3
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In the 2-week US NIH trial with 20 participants, the UPF diet led to a gain of 0•9 kg (95% CI 0•9-1•5) in bodyweight and 0•4 kg (0•2-0•6) in fat mass, while the non-UPF diet led to a reduction of 0•9 kg (0•3-1•5) in bodyweight and 0•3 kg (0•1-0•5) in fat mass.56”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Interventional studies
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [56] Hall, 2019, Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: an inpatient randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food intake, Cell Metab sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract reports 20 participants at the NIH Clinical Center, two weeks on each diet, and a 0.9±0.3 kg gain on the ultra-processed diet versus a 0.9±0.3 kg loss on the unprocessed diet. The Results and Discussion (‘Body weight and composition’; page unavailable) report the stated 0.4 kg fat-mass gain and 0.3 kg loss. The claimed 95% CI of 0.9–1.5 kg for weight gain is not supported: its lower bound is the reported point estimate, whereas 0.9±0.3 kg implies a lower bound around 0.3 kg. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirectn = 20- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The aforementioned 13-country meta-analysis predicted that when UPFs represented 15% of total energy intake, the dietary energy share of fruits, vegetables, and legumes (ie, sources of health-protective phytochemicals) was 12•4%.When UPFs represented 75% of total energy intake, that share dropped to 4%. 46”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [46] Martini, 2021, Ultra-processed foods and nutritional dietary profile: a meta-analysis of nationally representative samples, Nutrients sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (section 2.3) say the meta-analysis estimated dietary shares at 15% and 75% of energy from UPFs, and the Discussion (section 4) reports lower fruit, vegetable, and legume consumption with higher UPF consumption. The passages in our copy do not give a combined fruit–vegetable–legume energy share of 12.4% or 4%, so the quoted figures cannot be verified. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Studies on all-cause mortality were included, as 75% of global deaths result from chronic diseases.97”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Inclusion criteria
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [97] Vos, 2020, Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019, Lancet sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Global trends) and Discussion (Main findings) describe substantial burdens from chronic conditions, but neither gives the share of global deaths caused by them. Searches for “75% of global deaths” and equivalent non-communicable-disease mortality terms found no passage supporting the cited percentage. The decision to include all-cause mortality studies is the citing authors’ own method, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Furthermore, nationally representative US studies found linear inverse associations between UPF quintiles and flavonoid intake, 66 and urinary concentrations of phytoestrogens.67”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [66] Leitão, 2024, Association between ultra-processed food and flavonoid intakes in a nationally representative sample of the US population, Br J Nutr source
The Results report that total flavonoid intake decreased across UPF quintiles, with a significant linear trend (P < 0.001). The study used a nationally representative US sample. Citation 66 is attached to flavonoid intake; the separate claim about urinary phytoestrogens is attached to citation 67. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Partly supportedcites [67] Martínez Steele, 2017, Association between dietary share of ultra-processed foods and urinary concentrations of phytoestrogens in the US, Nutrients sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Methods §2.1 identifies the data as nationally representative US NHANES data. Results §3.2 reports an inverse linear trend across UPF-share quintiles for urinary enterodiol and enterolactone, but no significant linear trend for the four urinary isoflavones. Thus, the citation supports the urinary-concentration part of the sentence only for some phytoestrogens; the flavonoid-intake finding is attached to a different citation. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Three 24 h dietary recalls before and after the intervention were used, and statistically significant reductions in daily energy intake (2561 kcal to 1949 kcal), the number of UPFs consumed (11•5 per day to 6•2 per day), and the energy from UPFs (1944 kcal/day to 993 kcal/day) were reported.55”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Increased energy intake
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [55] Hagerman, 2024, A pilot study of a novel dietary intervention targeting ultra-processed food intake, Obes Sci Pract source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirectn = 14- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The Moli-sani study found that 20-33% of associations with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were mediated by sugar intake, whereas saturated fats and sodium intake had minimal effects.52”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Mechanistic studies
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [52] Bonaccio, 2021, Ultra-processed food consumption is associated with increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the Moli-sani study, Am J Clin Nutr sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The mediation table (Conclusions section; page not provided) reports that sugar accounted for 23.2% of the UPF association with all-cause mortality and 18.0% with CVD mortality—not 20–33% for those outcomes. It reports little or no mediation by saturated fat or sodium, supporting that part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“As discussed in hypothesis 2, other plausible factors include hyper-palatability, high nonbeverage energy density, disrupted food structures, soft texture, low content of health-protective phytochemicals, toxic contaminants created during processing or released from packaging materials, and potentially harmful classes and mixtures of additives.[57][58][59][60][61][62]”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Mechanistic studies
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [57] Fazzino, 2023, Ad libitum meal energy intake is positively influenced by energy density, eating rate and hyper-palatable food across four dietary patterns, Nat Food sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract reports that hyper-palatable foods and non-beverage energy density positively mediated the difference in meal energy intake between ultra-processed and unprocessed diets. It does not address the other proposed factors—disrupted structures, soft texture, phytochemicals, contaminants, or additives—or establish their links to harm. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [58] Hamano, 2024, Ultra-processed foods cause weight gain and increased energy intake associated with reduced chewing frequency: a randomized, open-label, crossover study, Diabetes Obes Metab sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not specified) identifies high energy density, disrupted food structure, softer texture, palatability, and newly formed contaminants as plausible factors. It mentions additives, but does not address harmful classes or mixtures of them, contaminants released from packaging, or low levels of health-protective phytochemicals. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Partly supportedcites [59] Krop, 2018, Influence of oral processing on appetite and food intake—a systematic review and meta-analysis, Appetite sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“After the initial submission of this Series paper, similar associations between UPF consumption and adverse health outcomes were reported in three umbrella reviews of meta-analyses.[223][224][225]”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [223] Lane, 2024, Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses, BMJ source
The Abstract (Design) identifies this paper as a systematic umbrella review of meta-analyses. The Discussion (Principal findings) reports that greater ultra-processed food exposure was consistently associated with higher risk of adverse health outcomes. This supports its citation as one of the three reviews; it need not establish the citing paper’s submission date. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [224] Barbaresko, 2025, Ultra-processed food consumption and human health: an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses, Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr source
- Supportedcites [225] Dai, 2024, Ultra-processed foods and human health: an umbrella review and updated meta-analyses of observational evidence, Clin Nutr source
The Study design and literature search section identifies this work as an umbrella review with updated meta-analyses. The Conclusions report 25 adverse health outcomes associated with higher UPF consumption. The timing relative to the citing paper’s initial submission is the citing authors’ framing, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“As noted earlier, two crossover RCTs on disease precursors confirmed the association with obesity, which was further reinforced by two similar trials published shortly before this Series paper was accepted.227,228”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [227] Dicken, 2025, Ultraprocessed or minimally processed diets following healthy dietary guidelines on weight and cardiometabolic health: a randomized, crossover trial, Nat Med source
The Results (Participant disposition and Primary outcome; page not provided) identify this as a randomized crossover trial and report significantly greater weight loss on the minimally processed than the ultraprocessed diet. This supports citing it as one of the similar trials reinforcing the obesity-related finding; the citation does not need to establish the other trial or the Series paper’s acceptance date. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [228] Preston, 2025, Effect of ultra-processed food consumption on male reproductive and metabolic health, Cell Metab source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For instance, in the Harvard cohorts, ultra-processed yoghurts and dairy desserts were associated with all-cause mortality, 118 frailty, 177 and features of prodromal Parkinson's disease; 216 had no association with cardiovascular mortality; 118 and were inversely associated with type 2 diabetes 137 and cardiovascular diseases. 217”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [118] Fang, 2024, Association of ultra-processed food consumption with all cause and cause specific mortality: population based cohort study, BMJ sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Supportedcites [177] Fung, 2024, Ultraprocessed foods, unprocessed or minimally processed foods, and risk of frailty in a cohort of United States females, Am J Clin Nutr source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Supportedcites [216] Wang, 2025, Long-term consumption of ultraprocessed foods and prodromal features of Parkinson disease, Neurology source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the 1-week Tokyo trial with 9 participants, the UPF diet led to a gain of 2•2 kg (1•8-2•6) in bodyweight and 0•7 kg (0•3-1•1) in fat mass, while the non-UPF diet led to a gain of of 1•1 kg (0•5-1•6) in bodyweight and a reduction of 0•4 kg (0•0-0•8) in fat mass.58”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Interventional studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] Hamano, 2024, Ultra-processed foods cause weight gain and increased energy intake associated with reduced chewing frequency: a randomized, open-label, crossover study, Diabetes Obes Metab source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirectn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“National surveys of children and adolescents in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, the UK, and the USA showed that the energy share of UPFs correlated positively with energy density and free sugars, and inversely with fibre.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Multiple nutrient imbalances
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The analysis also reveals that this share correlates with national wealth (r=0•45; 95% CI 0•20-0•70), but is also influenced by cultural and other food systems factors.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > The Nova food classification system and levels and distribution of ultra-processed food consumption
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the same 2007-22 period, annual per capita overall sales and sales of the ten UPF subgroups increased in south Asia, southeast Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa (starting <100 kg), as well as in central Europe, eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, central Asia, eastern Asia, north Africa, and the Middle East (starting between 100 kg and 150 kg).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > (Panel continues on next page)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The energy contribution of UPFs to total household food purchases nearly tripled in Spain 39 over three decades (11•0% to 31•7%), more than doubled in Canada 40 over eight decades (24•4% to 54•9%), and increased from 10% to 23% in Mexico 41 and Brazil 42 over four decades (figure 1).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Key messages
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [39] Latasa, 2018, Added sugars and ultra-processed foods in Spanish households (1990–2010), Eur J Clin Nutr source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [40] Moubarac, 2014, Processed and ultra-processed food products: consumption trends in Canada from 1938 to 2011, Can J Diet Pract Res source
- Not checked yetcites [41] Marrón-Ponce, 2018, Trends in ultra-processed food purchases from 1984 to 2016 in Mexican households, Nutrients source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“UPF intake was associated with elevated circulating concentrations of acrylamide biomarkers in the USA 69 and industrial trans-fatty acids in Europe.70”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [69] Martínez Steele, 2023, Ultra-processed food consumption and exposure to acrylamide in a nationally representative sample of the US population aged 6 years and older, Prev Med source
- Not checked yetcites [70] Huybrechts, 2022, Characterization of the degree of food processing in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition: application of the Nova classification and validation using selected biomarkers of food processing, Front Nutr source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the 104 studies, 92 reported associations between exposure to the ultra-processed dietary pattern and increased risk of one or more chronic disease outcomes, including all-cause mortality; cancer-related, cardiovascular-related, or cerebrovascular-related morbidity and mortality; and gastrointestinal, respiratory, kidney, liver, gallbladder, joint, metabolic, and mental illnesses.Of these 92”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“During pregnancy, an increased UPF intake was associated with greater maternal concentrations of phthalates 74 and umbilical cord PFAS.75”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74] Baker, 2024, Ultra-processed and fast food consumption, exposure to phthalates during pregnancy, and socioeconomic disparities in phthalate exposures, Environ Int source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [75] Naspolini, 2021, Maternal consumption of ultra-processed foods and newborn exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), Cad Saude Publica source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From 2007 to 2022, annual per capita sales of UPFs increased by 60% (20•3 kg to 32•2 kg) in Uganda, the only low-income country assessed by Euromonitor; by 40% (45•3 kg to 63•3 kg) in lower-middle-income countries (n=22); and by nearly 20% (104•0 kg to 121•6 kg) in upper-middle-income countries (n=26; figure 2).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Key messages
plaindirectn = 22- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Further analysis of eight of the 13 countries showed that reducing UPF intake to the lowest quintile would substantially decrease the prevalence of diets with insufficient fibre intake or with excessive energy density, free sugars, or saturated fat, and would reduce the percentage of diets inadequate in all four parameters by 69•4% (in Canada) to 92•1% (in the USA).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Multiple nutrient imbalances
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“diets with higher UPF energy shares had higher contents of nutrients directly associated with chronic disease risk (ie, free sugars, total fat, and saturated fat), and lower contents of nutrients inversely associated with chronic disease risk (ie, fibre, protein, potassium, zinc, magnesium, and several vitamins).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Multiple nutrient imbalances
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Participants consumed approximately 500 kcal more with the UPF diet and ate faster (with a higher energy intake rate), despite equivalent nutrient profiles.56”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Increased energy intake
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [56] Hall, 2019, Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: an inpatient randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food intake, Cell Metab source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Latin America and the Caribbean, overall UPF sales declined after 2016 due to reduced sweetened drink sales and stable trends in other subgroups (figure 3).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > (Panel continues on next page)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In maximally adjusted models, high exposure to the ultra-processed dietary pattern was associated with a greater risk of 12 outcomes: overweight or obesity, abdominal obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, cardiovascular disease or mortality, coronary heart disease or mortality, cerebrovascular disease or mortality, chronic kidney disease, Crohn's disease, depression, and all-cause”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results remained unchanged in a sensitivity analysis excluding low-quality studies, except for Crohn's disease, where the association became statistically non-significant (for two high-quality studies; appendix p 27).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“UPF sales declined in North America, Australasia, and western Europe, where sales already exceeded 200 kg in 2007, because of declining sweetened carbonated drinks sales and stable or modest increasing sales of other UPF subgroups.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > (Panel continues on next page)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No associations were found for all-cancer mortality, ulcerative colitis, and colorectal cancer.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“During the UPF week, participants consumed 813 kcal/day more and had fewer chews per calorie, compared with the non-UPF week.[59][60][61][62]”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Increased energy intake
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] Krop, 2018, Influence of oral processing on appetite and food intake—a systematic review and meta-analysis, Appetite source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [60] Robinson, 2014, A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of eating rate on energy intake and hunger, Am J Clin Nutr source
- Not checked yetcites [61] Forde, 2020, Ultra-processing or oral processing? A role for energy density and eating rate in moderating energy intake from processed foods, Curr Dev Nutr source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaincorrelationaln = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Within countries, the dietary share of UPFs tends to be elevated in groups with high socioeconomic status, where overall UPF intake is low, and in groups with low socioeconomic status, where overall UPF intake is high (appendix p 2).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > The Nova food classification system and levels and distribution of ultra-processed food consumption
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite limitations of observational studies (eg, residual confounding and non-differential misclassification of the exposure), associations were consistent across large, highquality cohorts, and some trials.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increases were greater in countries with initially low UPF shares (ie, <20%) and smaller where the share was already high (ie, 50%).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 1: global displacement of long-established dietary patterns
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From 2007 to 2022, annual UPF sales (initially <150 kg/person) rose in low-income, lower-middleincome, and upper-middle-income countries, and across all lower income regions.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 1: global displacement of long-established dietary patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The density of drink products is 1 kg/L.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most existing evidence on the adverse health effects of UPFs is observational and cannot definitively establish causality.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) Criticism
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“National surveys, large cohorts, and three interventional studies consistently show that exposure to the ultraprocessed dietary pattern broadly degrades diet quality.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 2: extensive deterioration of diet quality
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meta-analyses of 15 outcomes (with ≥4 studies) found statistically significant associations for 12, including: overweight or obesity; type 2 diabetes and other cardiometabolic risk factors; cardiovascular, kidney, and gastrointestinal diseases; depression; and all-cause mortality.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All studies controlled for sociodemographic variables; most adjusted for smoking and physical activity (n=96), BMI (n=79), alcohol (n=57), and potential dietary mediators, including key nutrients (eg, sodium, saturated fat, and added sugar) and food groups (eg, fruits, vegetables, and legumes), or diet quality scores combining these nutrients and food groups (n=54).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“MLCL, RBL, LFMR, and GCA evaluated study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.98”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Study selection
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [98] Wells
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only one study stated industry funding.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022351111) and conducted following PRISMA 95 and MOOSE 96 guidelines.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [95] Page, 2021, The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews, BMJ source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [96] Stroup, 2000, Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group, JAMA source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sensitivity analyses were conducted by excluding studies with Newcastle-Ottawa scores below 7 and studies with fewer than 10 000 participants.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Statistical analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“85 studies were rated as good quality (ie, ≥7 of 9 points on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale), 98 18 were rated as fair (5-6 points), and one as poor (<5 points; appendix pp 14-16).”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Observational prospective studies
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [98] Wells
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Disagreements were resolved by MLCL.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Study selection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two trained reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, as supervised by MLCL.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Study selection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Assigning some items within Nova groups can be challenging without adequate training and standardised methods, 201 but the use of validated protocols and trained raters reduces inaccuracies.202”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [201] Braesco, 2022, Ultra-processed foods: how functional is the NOVA system?, Eur J Clin Nutr source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked yetcites [202] Hutelin, 2024, Creation and validation of a NOVA scored picture set to evaluate ultra-processed foods, Appetite source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each study was assessed independently by two researchers, with disagreements resolved by consensus among all evaluators.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Study selection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This pattern mirrors the socioeconomic distribution of obesity, 36 indicating that UPFs, like obesity, 37 first affect wealthier populations before spreading to groups on lower incomes.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > The Nova food classification system and levels and distribution of ultra-processed food consumption
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Jaacks, 2019, The obesity transition: stages of the global epidemic, Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [37] Monteiro, 2004, Socioeconomic status and obesity in adult populations of developing countries: a review, Bull World Health Organ source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, these studies all compare UPF subgroups to the overall non-UPF diet, hindering the isolation of specific effects of ultra-processing within food categories and conflating processing effects with those of the food type.219”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 2: extensive deterioration of diet quality
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [219] Monteiro, 2024, Impact of food ultra-processing on cardiometabolic health: definitions, evidence, and implications for dietary guidance, J Am Heart Assoc source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“Tobacco smoking involves exposure to thousands of chemical compounds, many of which are toxic or carcinogenic.212”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [212] Rodgman, 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several 24 h dietary recalls and food frequency questionnaires specifically designed to assess consumption of Nova food groups have been developed 202,206,[208][209][210][211]”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [202] Hutelin, 2024, Creation and validation of a NOVA scored picture set to evaluate ultra-processed foods, Appetite source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [206] Oviedo-Solís, 2022, Relative validity of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire to estimate dietary intake according to the NOVA classification in Mexican children and adolescents, J Acad Nutr Diet source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [208] Dinu, 2021, Reproducibility and validity of a food-frequency questionnaire (NFFQ) to assess food consumption based on the NOVA classification in adults, Int J Food Sci Nutr source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The specificity and analogy criteria do not apply due to the multiplicity of outcomes and the absence of equivalent exposures.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, a study across eight countries with varying levels of UPF consumption estimated that UPFs account for 4% (in Colombia) to 14% (in the USA and the UK) of premature all-cause mortality.226”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [226] Nilson, 2025, Premature mortality attributable to ultraprocessed food consumption in 8 countries, Am J Prev Med source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not checked yet
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, analyses of the health effects of individual UPF subgroups, rather than the overall ultraprocessed dietary pattern, face methodological challenges.These include confounding by other food components (both UPFs and non-UPFs), multicollinearity between UPF subgroups and total UPF intake, low consumption and little variability within specific subgroups, and uncorrected multiple model testing.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 2: extensive deterioration of diet quality
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [220] Monteiro, 2024, Are all ultra-processed foods bad for health?, Lancet Reg Health Eur source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [221] Gomes, 2023, Comment on Chen et al. Ultra-processed food consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: three large prospective US cohort studies, Diabetes Care source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Packaged bread was positively associated with anxiety disorders and inversely associated with metabolic syndrome; yoghurts and dairy desserts were inversely associated with type 2 diabetes; and spreads had no association with chronic diseases.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 2: extensive deterioration of diet quality
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harmful consequences include major nutrient imbalances; multiple features that promote overeating; reduced intake of health-protective phytochemicals; and increased intake of toxic compounds, endocrine disruptors, and potentially harmful classes and mixtures of food additives.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 2: extensive deterioration of diet quality
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the Mediterranean diet is widely promoted with incomplete knowledge of the specific mechanisms underlying its protective effects, 214”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [214] Schwingshackl, 2020, Mediterranean diet and health status: active ingredients and pharmacological mechanisms, Br J Pharmacol source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These criteria are consistency (ie, increased risk repeatedly observed in many countries and settings by different researchers using different methods and research designs); strength (risk equivalent to the protection conferred by the Mediterranean dietary pattern); temporality (exposure precedes the outcome); biological gradient (the higher the dietary share of UPFs, the higher the risk of”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Hypothesis 3: high risk of chronic diseases
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Strong evidence already supports the plausibility of several mechanisms acting alone or in combination: gross nutrient imbalances; [46][47][48][49][50][51][52] overeating 46,55,56,58 driven by UPFs with high energy densities and hyper-palatability, 57 as well as degraded food matrices and soft textures; [58][59][60][61][62] reduced intake of healthy phytochemicals; 66,67 and increased exposure to”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Martini, 2021, Ultra-processed foods and nutritional dietary profile: a meta-analysis of nationally representative samples, Nutrients source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Martinez Steele, 2022, Potential reductions in ultra-processed food consumption substantially improve population cardiometabolic-related dietary nutrient profiles in eight countries, Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [48] Neri, 2022, Ultraprocessed food consumption and dietary nutrient profiles associated with obesity: a multicountry study of children and adolescents, Obes Rev source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“John Snow's landmark study 215 linking cholera outbreaks to contaminated water, and his action to block the source, preceded the discovery of Vibrio cholerae.”
§ Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health 1 Ultra-processed foods and human health: the main thesis and the evidence > Response
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [215] Snow, 1855
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The authors state this as an assumption.
The density of drink products is 1 kg/L.
“The density of drink products is assumed to be 1 kg/L.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“UPF intake is associated with obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and other chronic diseases.”
From Food Service Directors’ Knowledge and Beliefs About Ultraprocessed Foods in California’s San Joaquin Valley Schools (2026) · cites this paper as [5]
Citations
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
Vos, T., Lim, S. S., Abbafati, C., Abbas, K. M., Abbasi, M., Abbasifard, M., Abbasi-Kangevari, M., Abbastabar, H., Abd-Allah, F., Abdelalim, A., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30925-9 · Cited by 19,358
The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation?
Hill, A. B. (1965) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1177/003591576505800503 · Cited by 6,974
Ng, S. C., Shi, H. Y., Hamidi, N., Underwood, F. E., Tang, W., Benchimol, E. I., Panaccione, R., Ghosh, S., Wu, J. C. Y., Chan, F. K. L., et al. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32448-0 · Cited by 6,087
The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments
Swinburn, B. A., Sacks, G., Hall, K. D., McPherson, K., Finegood, D. T., Moodie, M. L., & Gortmaker, S. L. (2011) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60813-1 · Cited by 4,888
Self-citationUltra-processed foods: What they are and how to identify them
Monteiro, C. A., Cannon, G., Levy, R. B., Moubarac, J.-C., Louzada, M. L., Rauber, F., Khandpur, N., Cediel, G., Neri, D., Martinez-Steele, E., et al. (2019) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980018003762 · Cited by 2,964
Self-citationEDC-2: the endocrine society's second scientific statement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals
Gore, A. C., Chappell, V. A., Fenton, S. E., Flaws, J. A., Nadal, A., Prins, G. S., Toppari, J., & Zoeller, R. T. (2015) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/er.2015-1010 · Cited by 2,407
The UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing
Monteiro, C. A., Cannon, G., Moubarac, J.-C., Levy, R. B., Louzada, M. L. C., & Jaime, P. C. (2018) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980017000234 · Cited by 2,333
Self-citationInvestigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7304.101 · Cited by 2,225
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- 2021, Diabetes is “a pandemic of unprecedented magnitude” now affecting one in 10 adults worldwide, Diabetes Res Clin Pract, 181
- Zapata, 2022, Intake of energy and critical nutrients according to the NOVA classification in Argentina, time trend and differences according to income, Cad Saude Publica, 38
- Gomes, 2023, Comment on Chen et al. Ultra-processed food consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: three large prospective US cohort studies, Diabetes Care, 46, 1335, 10.2337/dc22-1993 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–300 of 340
Role of nutritional interventions to reduce cardiometabolic disease burden in the community
López‐Arana, S., Rincón‐Cervera, M. Á., & Pereyra, I. (2026) · Current Opinion in Cardiology · doi:10.1097/hco.0000000000001319
Ernährung im Spannungsfeld zwischen Nachhaltigkeit und Verarbeitungsgrad
Schindler, K. (2026) · Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde · doi:10.1007/s00112-026-02419-6
Primärprävention metabolischer Erkrankungen – worauf kommt es an?
Loss, J., & Esipova, V. (2026) · Info Diabetologie · doi:10.1007/s15034-026-5274-9
Eggs at the family table and their impact on child and adolescent health
López-Sobaler, A. M., Carrasco-Ruiz, M. F., Loria‐Kohen, V., & Salas‐González, M. D. (2026) · Nutrición Hospitalaria · doi:10.20960/nh.06953
Ferrinho, P., de Barros, F. P. C., & de Almeida, F. (2026) · doi:10.29327/5872428.1-12
Ferrinho, P., & de Barros, F. P. C. (2026) · doi:10.29327/5872428.1-11
de Barros, F. P. C., & Ferrinho, P. (2026) · doi:10.29327/5872428.1-7
A insegurança alimentar no universo da CPLP
Lopes, H. D. S., Miguel, A., MARTINS, D. S. M. V.-C., Ferrinho, P., Cá, B., de Barros, F. P. C., Manuel, É., Manguele, A. L. J., Vaz, F., David, L. C., et al. (2026) · doi:10.29327/5872428
Idoate-Bayón, A., Gómez-Taylor, B., Mohedo, J. C., Claramunt, F. E., Vacas-Cortés, M., Pérez, M. G., Gómez, R. P., & Sandri, E. (2026) · Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.nut.2026.113343
An important new data source for obesity trends in England
Gulliford, M. C. (2026) · The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/s2213-8587(26)00130-0
Gombi‐Vaca, M. F., Steele, E. M., Andrade, G. C., Louzada, M. L. D. C., & Levy, R. B. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18132075
Self-citationKrystyjan, M., Kmita, M., Khachatryan, G., Khachatryan, K., Lenart-Boroń, A. M., Socha, R., Areczuk, A., & Sobolewska-Zielińska, J. (2026) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms27135685
Follow the microbes: a new perspective on health inequalities
Day-Thompson, R. (2026) · British Journal of General Practice · doi:10.3399/bjgp26x746025
Braga, M. C. S., Guerreiro, N. D. A., Andreoni, S., & Tomita, L. Y. (2026) · Revista Brasileira em Promoção da saúde · doi:10.5020/18061230.2026.15877
Zhao, S., Guo, C., Zhang, X., Li, Y., Hu, J., Huang, J., Dai, L., Liu, Z. H., & Zhang, T. (2026) · Food & Function · doi:10.1039/d6fo00970k
Ultra-Processed Foods Controversy: Myths, Realities, and Policy Implications
Zampelas, A. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18132118
Giampieri, F., Leonardi, A., Costanzo, G. D., Mera, T. A., Rosi, A., Frías-Toral, E., Ammar, A., Zambrano-Villacres, R., Abdelkarim, O., Aly, M., et al. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18132128
Self-citationDesigning a Model for Developing Food Literacy Among Youth: Insights from Summer Camps
Laberee, L., Desroches, S., Chamberland, K., Turcotte, M., & Provencher, V. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18132168
Unhealthy Food and Beverage Marketing on Public Transport Infrastructure in Western Melbourne
Zsori, M., Gardiner, T., Boelsen‐Robinson, T., Romanes, F., Alpren, C., Graham, V., & Ampt, F. (2026) · Health Promotion Journal of Australia · doi:10.1002/hpja.70205
Wang, J., Tan, J., Sun, H., Jiang, H., Wei, H., Peng, J., & Zhou, Y. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10183985/v1
Misalignment between ultra-processed status and ‘better for you’ claims on premix alcohol products
Pettigrew, S., Yusoff, A., Coyle, D. H., O’Brien, P., Jongenelis, M. I., Petticrew, M. P., Bowden, J. A., & Barrett, E. M. (2026) · International Journal of Drug Policy · doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2026.105395
Rao, R. V., Subramaniam, K. G., Gregory, J., Bredesen, A. L., Coward, C., Okada, S., Kelly, L., & Bredesen, D. E. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18132206
Gupta, A., Duran Gomez, A. Z., Matheson, D., Sharma, A., Richard, V., Ritchie, L. D., de la Rosa, A., Delgado, D., Islas, G., Hecht, C. A., et al. (2026) · Preventing Chronic Disease · doi:10.5888/pcd23.250379
Rathi, N., Sharma, A., Sandilya, S., Ghosh, S., Chowdhury, R., Singh, M., Worsley, A., & Bruening, M. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1886704
Weitzman, M. L. (2026) · Progress in Pediatric Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.ppedcard.2026.101958
Rao, N., Bhanjdeo, A., Kamtam, M., Kaur, G., & Banerjee, T. (2026) · Current Developments in Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2026.109434
Eating in the city: Food, place-making and wellbeing among forced migrants in Sydney, Australia
Alloun, E., Serova, N., Veber, M., Haigh, F., Weber, D., & Yashadhana, A. (2026) · Wellbeing Space and Society · doi:10.1016/j.wss.2026.100442
Cecchini, V., Miralvand, N. Z., Papapanagiotou, V., Avesani, C. M., & Ioakeimidis, I. (2026) · Digital Health · doi:10.1177/20552076261467799
Exposure to processing from ultraprocessed diets and in feeding studies
Roos, Y. H., & Forde, C. G. (2026) · Current Research in Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.crfs.2026.101504
Wang, M. E., Britton, A. R., Katsoulis, M., Chang, K., Vamos, E. P., & Llewellyn, C. H. (2026) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-026-05081-7
da SILVA, V. G., de Aquino, N. B., Barbosa, M. S. D. S., Soares, L. D. L., de Menezes, R. C. E., & Oliveira, J. S. (2026) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph23070936
Ultra-processed and High fat-salt-sugar (HFSS) foods in India: a dual-axis framework for regulation
Chakraborty, S., Gavaravarapu, S. M., Samarasimha Reddy, N., & Kulkarni, B. (2026) · The Lancet Regional Health - Southeast Asia · doi:10.1016/j.lansea.2026.100823
Santos, C. E. D. M., Nascimento, M. L. S., & Pereira, J. D. S. (2026) · Revista Científica Integrada · doi:10.59464/2359-4632.2026.4135
Wu, B., Liu, Z., Chen, Z. Y., Hong, C., Zhang, Y., & Liu, Y. (2026) · Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism · doi:10.1177/20420188261465525
ALIMENTOS ULTRAPROCESSADOS E AGROTÓXICOS: DUPLO VENENO PARA O CÉREBRO
Scorza, F. A., Beltramim, L., Bombardi, L. M., & Teixeira, P. (2026) · Revista de Geopolítica · doi:10.56238/revgeov17n7-141
Introduction to Special Issue on Food Packaging: Marketized health in the world’s cupboards
Machín, D., & Eriksson, G. (2026) · Visual Communication · doi:10.1177/14703572261436932
Robinson, E., Brealey, J., Cummings, J. R., Evans, R. A., Finlay, A. H., Fisher, E., Gough, T., Jones, A., Jutla, M., Morenikeji-Ibilola, E., et al. (2026) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2026.108666
ULTRA-PROCESSED FOODS AND PESTICIDES: DOUBLE POISON FOR THE BRAIN
Scorza, F. A., Beltramim, L., Bombardi, L. M., & Teixeira, P. (2026) · Seven Editora eBooks · doi:10.56238/sevened2026.026-043
O’Mahony, B. W., Thompson, A., Morrin, A., & O'Donoghue, B. N. (2026) · Early Intervention in Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/eip.70226
Sustainable dietary recommendations for the Spanish population
López‐García, E., Irene, B. L., Díaz‐Perales, A., Moreno-Arribas, M. V., Portillo, M. P., Rivas, A., Fresán, U., Parro-Magán, L., Carretero, C. R., & Carlos-Chillerón, M. Á. (2026) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/s41430-026-01795-2
Paladino, N., Martínez‐González, M. Á., López-Gil, J. F., Grosso, G., & Martín‐Calvo, N. (2026) · European Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1007/s00431-026-07287-6
Ultraprocessed Plant-Based Foods: Considerations for Nutrition Educators
Lazouras, W., & Landry, M. J. (2026) · Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2026.06.221
Vatta, L., Panwar, S., Ahmadi, F., Worsley, A., & Rathi, N. (2026) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-026-28698-y
Crowley, R. J., Beachy, M. W., Carr, P., Beachy, M. W., Carr, P., Box, L. A., Johnson, A. C., Jumper, C., Leser, E., Lin, T. L., et al. (2026) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/annals-26-00864
Food Functional Factors and Nutritional Health
Li, B., & Le, G. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18152550
Salles‐Costa, R., de Castro, P. C. P., Lignani, J. D. B., da Silva, A. C. F., Ghiggino, L. T., Barbosa, J. C., & Ferreira, A. A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10348277/v1
Yao, L., Landry, M. J., & Odegaard, A. (2026) · American Journal of Preventive Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.ajpc.2026.101786
Nutrition and cardiometabolic health in cystic fibrosis: Emerging evidence and research gaps
Lynch, V., Barrett, J., Collins, S., Elliott, P., Sills, D., Snowball, J., Douglas, P., Smyth, A. R., Tierney, A., Downey, D. G., et al. (2026) · Journal of Cystic Fibrosis · doi:10.1016/j.jcf.2026.07.1983
Magharehabed, Y., Ibrahim, Z., Shiekhtholth, H., & Yusuf, N. (2026) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms27167123
Braga, M. C. S., Guerreiro, N. D. A., Andreoni, S., & Tomita, L. Y. (2026) · Revista Brasileira em Promoção da saúde · doi:10.5020/18061230.2026.17176
Machado, P. P., Tolstova, N. Y., Lane, M. M., Costa, C. D. S., Steele, E. M., Rauber, F., Levy, R. B., McNaughton, S. A., Lawrence, M. A., Monteiro, C. A., et al. (2026) · Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · doi:10.1016/j.jand.2026.156434
Self-citationDu, W., Wen, J., Sun, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Zeng, P., & Zhang, L. (2026) · Food Chemistry X · doi:10.1016/j.fochx.2026.104291
da Rosa, D. S. X., Pereira, H. D. S., Baptista, J. A., ROSA, P. C., & Branquinho, C. (2026) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2026.1869997
Beyond False Dichotomies in Ultra‐Processed Food Policy
Gearhardt, A. N., Brownell, K. D., & Brandt, A. M. (2026) · Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.70119
Self-citationMetabolic and neural responses to ultraprocessed foods: a randomized, controlled, crossover study
Hutelin, Z., Ahrens, M., Baugh, M. E., Nartey, E., Herald, D. L., Hanlon, A. L., & DiFeliceantonio, A. G. (2026) · Nature Metabolism · doi:10.1038/s42255-026-01619-4
Can We Trust AI Agents in the Supermarket? Sugar Content Inference from Product ImagesPreprint
Berengueres, J. O. L. (2026) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.12359
Creating a Healthier Food Environment
McClements, D. J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-33712-2_10
Formulation of Ultra-Processed Foods: Ingredients and Additives
McClements, D. J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-33712-2_4
Desigualdades territoriais do ambiente alimentar de regiões metropolitanas brasileiras
Scaciota, L. L., Kanai, C. M., da Silva, M. A. L., & Levy, R. B. (2026) · Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia · doi:10.1590/1980-549720260040.2
Self-citationImpacts of Ultra-Processed Foods on Human Health
McClements, D. J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-33712-2_7
The Rise of Ultra-Processed Foods
McClements, D. J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-33712-2_1
When ultra-processing obscures sustainable dietary transitions
López‐Moreno, M., & López-Gil, J. F. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1908823
Hammond, K. (2026) · Massey Research Online (Massey University) · doi:10.82921/mro-22
Cordeiro, M. S., Avelar, B. A., da Camara, A. O., de Oliveira, D. C. R. S., & de Menezes, M. C. (2026) · Food Ethics · doi:10.1007/s41055-026-00230-3
Human gut microbiome as a composite health biomarker
Braun, T., Harounian, O., Hadar, R., Ziv, A., Shulman, S. B.-A., Kalter‐Leibovici, O., Efroni, G., Ziv, R., Fenesh, M., Abbas‐Egbariya, H., et al. (2026) · Gut Microbes · doi:10.1080/19490976.2026.2719055
Ghosh, A., Muley, A., Verma, R., Zunjur, A. C., Borse, S., & Adhikari, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1889456
Ali, A. M., Giovannucci, E. L., & Liu, J. J. (2026) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.70290
Velázquez, A. M., Lara-Árevalo, J., Mendoza-Martínez, L., & Drewnowski, A. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0355198
Liu, H., Fang, Y., Gu, H., Wan, X., Zhang, T., Yang, S., & Liang, G. (2026) · Journal of Hazardous Materials Advances · doi:10.1016/j.hazadv.2026.101534
Asrofi, D. A. N., & Astuti, Y. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10697416/v1
Artificial Intelligence in Food, Nutrition, and Health
Seljak, B. K., Cenikj, G., Gjorgjevikj, A., Stojanov, R., Seneviratne, O. W., Mohbat, F., Zaki, M. J., Yamakata, Y., Dragoni, M., Menichetti, G., et al. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-40344-6.00116-2
Synthetic Food Colorants and Gut Microbiota: A Systematic Review of Preclinical Studies
Torrisi, S. A., Domenico, F. M. D., Leggio, G. M., Caruso, G., Frias-Toral, E., López, N. M. M., Micek, A., Bonaccio, M., Godos, J., & Grosso, G. (2026) · Food Frontiers · doi:10.1002/fft2.70326
Self-citationPenney, J. C., Scapin, T., Cameron, A. J., White, C. M., Hammond, D. G., & Gómez‐Donoso, C. (2026) · Health Promotion Journal of Australia · doi:10.1002/hpja.70235
Barahona-Fuentes, G. D. F., Rezende, L. F. M., Wahrhaftig, J., Hernández, P. A. F., Nilson, E., & Ferrari, G. (2026) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2026.117381
Self-citationLotti, S., Martini, D., Angelino, D., Fernández‐Rodríguez, R., Colombini, B., & Dinu, M. (2026) · International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/09637486.2026.2729429
Pinatel, J. (2026) · Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · doi:10.71781/36160
Jomaa, L., Chokor, F. A. Z., Hwalla, N. C., & Nasreddine, L. (2026) · Journal of Nutritional Science · doi:10.1017/jns.2026.10145
Cordeiro, M. S., Neves, F. S., Jaime, P. C., Mendes, L. L., Nilson, E. A. F., Canella, D. S., Claro, R. M., & de Menezes, M. C. (2026) · The Lancet Regional Health - Americas · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2026.101636
State of the Science on Ultra-processed Foods and the Ultra-processed Food Addiction Construct
LaFata, E. M., Juarascio, A. S., Butryn, M. L., Hagerman, C. J., & Forman, E. M. (2026) · Current Obesity Reports · doi:10.1007/s13679-026-00758-9
Experiência alimentar na modernidade urbana
Jorge, T. P., Jacob, M. C. M., & de Freitas, M. D. C. S. (2026) · The Journal of the Food and Culture of the Americas · doi:10.35953/raca.v7i1.240
Podwiak, F. (2026) · Health Problems of Civilization · doi:10.29316/hpc/236241
He, Y., Song, Y., Xie, B., Yang, J., Zhu, J., Xia, P., Zhao, L., Xu, D., Wang, H., & Tian, W. (2026) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.6c06392
Whole grains and cardiometabolic health: strong evidence, new questions in an ultra-processed world
Kyrø, C., Tjønneland, A. M., & Olsen, A. (2026) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehag724
Guerado, E., Gómez‐Palomo, J. M., González-Quevedo, D., Porras, J. C., Sánchez-Siles, J.-M., & Tamimi, I. (2026) · Revista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología · doi:10.1016/j.recot.2026.10.020
Forbes, S. F., Burke, L. M., Mantzioris, E., & Forsyth, A. K. (2026) · Sports Medicine - Open · doi:10.1186/s40798-026-01098-7
Santos, I. D. S., Carvalho, M. R., Baroni, N. F., de Lima, M. C., Carreira, N. P., Crivellenti, L. C., & Sartorelli, D. S. (2026) · Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease · doi:10.1017/s2040174426100749
Revised diets and urban infrastructure can improve human health and the global environment
Drangert, J.-O. (2026) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2026.1881497
Fardet, A., & Ohlau, M. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1901940
Louie, J. C. Y. (2026) · Current Obesity Reports · doi:10.1007/s13679-026-00765-w
Turner, D. P., Ottesen, A., Kocurek, B., Lane, J. T., & Findlay, V. J. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.09.17.752391
Household consumer purchases and chronic disease
Møller, F. T., Junker, T. G., Torp-Pedersen, C. T., Clements, M., Andersen, M. P., Dillner, J., Ethelberg, S., Melbye, M., & Sørensen, K. K. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-71152-7
Eighty Years After Vague: Advances in Understanding Ectopic Fat and Metabolic Dysfunction
Conte, C., Sumithran, P., le Roux, C. W., Miras, A. D., & Gaal, L. V. (2026) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/obr.70229
(2026) · Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials Research · doi:10.47275/2692-885x-132
Småbarnsforeldres valg om å unngå ultraprosessert mat: En kvalitativ intervjustudie
Berggrav, E., & Krohne, K. (2026) · Norsk tidsskrift for ernæring · doi:10.18261/ntfe.24.3.2
Dicken, S. J., & Theis, D. R. Z. (2026) · medRxiv · doi:10.64898/2026.09.24.26363859
Lambert, K., Beer, J., Brauer, D., Conley, M. M., Dawson, J., Kariyawasam, D., Morris, A., Nash, C., Notaras, S., Trimingham, C., et al. (2026) · Seminars in Nephrology · doi:10.1016/j.semnephrol.2026.151728
Ibsen, D. B., Fridén, M., Tomova, G. D., Ortega, N., & Tennant, P. W. G. (2026) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-026-05214-y
Pan-hypoileism: an endocrine disease
Santoro, S. (2026) · Einstein (São Paulo) · doi:10.31744/einstein_journal/2026rw2548
Metadata
- Authors
- Monteiro, C. A., Louzada, M. L., Steele-Martinez, E., Cannon, G., Andrade, G. C., Baker, P., Bes-Rastrollo, M., Bonaccio, M., Gearhardt, A. N., Khandpur, N., Kolby, M., Levy, R. B., Machado, P. P., Moubarac, J.-C., Rezende, L. F. M., Rivera, J. A., Scrinis, G., Srour, B., Swinburn, B., & Touvier, M.
- Affiliations
- Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Istituto Neurologico Mediterraneo (IT)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Deakin University (AU)
- Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública (MX)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Inserm (FR)
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Monteiro, Carlos A
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-12
- Volume
- 406
- Issue
- 10520
- Pages
- 2667-2684
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W4416347057
- Semantic Scholar
- 756f79fdb3e65fa46432c97c29aec7f6703f30bf
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 203
- Citations by year
- 2026: 326 · 2025: 13
- FWCI
- 44.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.wur.nl
- Licence
- Locations
- The Lancet (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Bloomberg Philanthropies
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Keywords
- ultra-processed foods, dietary habits, whole foods, diet-related chronic diseases, diet quality, nutrient imbalance, energy density, food additives, endocrine disruptors, phytochemicals, food sales, global burden of disease, minimally processed foods, food policy
- MeSH terms
- Food, Processed, Chronic Disease, Diet, Feeding Behavior, Food Handling, Humans
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
