foods

Many foods and cosmetics have additives that we want to avoid at all costs.

by

Every time we put a packaged potato omelet, hummus or moisturizing cream in the shopping cart, we incorporate dozens of substances into our body that often go unnoticed despite appearing on the label. The preservativesdyes, emulsifiers or sun filters are part of the usual composition of thousands of products that we buy in supermarkets. His presence responds to a legitimate industrial logic: it is necessary to extend the shelf life of a food or stabilize the texture of a cosmetic. The problem is that the regulations that regulate these additives almost always advance behind scientific knowledge. An additive can take decades to be approved and in widespread use before scientific studies force authorities to reopen its file. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) periodically reevaluates these compounds, but its way of working requires accumulating solid evidence and sustains years of continuous exposure before any regulatory change. This disconnection does not at all mean that everything permitted is automatically dangerous. In fact, the vast majority of authorized additives are supported by decades of toxicological studies. Even so, it is in consumers’ interest to know which substances have generated the most scientific controversy, in which products they appear most frequently, and which institutions have focused on them. Preservatives that are already under discussion Sodium benzoate (E211) is one of the most commonly used preservatives in packaged potato chips, pickles, sauces and soft drinks. The EFSA has reviewed your security on several occasions, the last in 2016, and has concluded that within the authorized levels it does not raise concerns about genotoxicity (the ability of a substance to damage the genetic material of a cell). It has warned, however, that certain population groups can easily exceed the acceptable daily intake. A quick note before we move forward: part of the controversy about this additive comes from research such as those of Professor Peter Piperfrom the University of Sheffield (United Kingdom), who has documented damage to mitochondrial DNA of cells exposed to sodium benzoate in in vitro assays. EFSA opts for regulatory prudence, while certain academic groups insist on stricter scrutiny Potassium sorbate (E202) follows a similar logic. It frequently appears in hummus, cheeses, yogurts or wines, and acts as an antifungal. The EFSA has reevaluated it in 2015 and again in 2019setting an acceptable daily intake together with sorbic acid of 3 mg per kilo of body weight per day. A study published in In Vitro Toxicology evaluated its genotoxic potential in human lymphocytes cultured in the laboratory, without finding relevant effects at the concentrations tested, which reinforces the official position of the agency. Another relevant note: both preservatives share the same pattern. No reference institution has classified them as carcinogenic, but there is no unanimity regarding their complete long-term safety. The EFSA opts for the regulatory prudencewhile certain academic groups insist on stricter scrutiny, especially in sensitive populations, such as children or people with an aspirin allergy. However, we are interested in putting these figures in context: the real exposure of those who eat packaged potato omelettes several times a week is well below the thresholds at which adverse effects have been observed in the most alarmist studies. The additives most highlighted by science Beyond preservatives, there are other additives that have received much stronger regulatory attention. The clearest case is that of titanium dioxide (E171), a white dye used for decades in candy, chewing gum and some cosmetics. The EFSA concluded in 2021 that its genotoxicity cannot be ruled out, especially due to its ability to accumulate in the body, which has led to the European Union to ban its use as a food additive from 2022. Even so, it is still allowed in cosmetics, such as sunscreens. The antioxidants BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole, E320) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene, E321), present in snacks, cereals and some cosmetics, illustrate well the nuances of this type of evaluations. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified BHA in group 2B as possible carcinogen for humans. BHT, on the other hand, remains in group 3, not classifiable due to insufficient evidence. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified BHA in group 2B as a possible human carcinogen. The European Commission has also placed BHA as a priority substance for endocrine disruption, while BHT only arouses similar suspicions in the scientific literature, without an equivalent institutional classification. Long-chain parabens in cosmetics follow a similar path: several of them are banned in the European Union since 2014 by decision of its scientific consumer safety committee. Sodium nitrite (E250), common in sausages and processed meats, closes the list with the best documented case: the IARC classified processed meat as a group 1 carcinogen in 2015, especially due to the formation of nitrosamines when cooked at high temperature. In the following table we summarize these six cases and identify the institution that has indicated the risk of each of them and the effects described in the scientific literature: Additive Where do we find it? Institution that has indicated the risk Described effects E211 (sodium benzoate) Packaged potato omelettes, pickles, sauces, soft drinks EFSA (2016 revision); University of Sheffield Overcoming the IDA in sensitive groups; damage to mitochondrial DNA in in vitro studies E202 (potassium sorbate) Hummus, cheeses, yogurts, wines EFSA (2015 and 2019 revisions) Possible cellular inflammation in animal models E171 (titanium dioxide) Candies, gum, sunscreen EFSA (2021 opinion) Genotoxicity not ruled out; banned as a food additive in the EU from 2022 E320 (BHA) / E321 (BHT) Snacks, cereals, some cosmetics IARC (group 2B for the BHA); European Commission (priority endocrine disruptor for BHA) BHA, possible carcinogen and hormone disruptor; BHT, similar suspicions without equivalent classification Long chain parabens Creams, shampoos, cosmetics Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (EU) Hormonal disruption; several banned in cosmetics since 2014 E250 (sodium nitrite) Sausages, processed meats IARC (group 1 for processed meat, 2015) Formation of carcinogenic nitrosamines when cooked at high temperatures Image | Kenneth Surillo More information | EFSA | European Union | IARC In Xataka … Read more

The theory said that Ozempic was going to put an end to ultra-processed foods. The reality is that it has reinvented them

by

Whoever believed that Ozempic fever was going to be a hard blow for the manufacturers of ultra-processed products I was very wrong. And, as he recently explained in the BE food technology expert Beatriz Robles, the food industry never loses, it reinvents itself. As a result of the rise of this and other GLP-1 agonist drugs, the GLP-1 friendly foodproducts that are advertised for consumption by those who take these medications, but also for those who are thinking about trying to lose weight in other ways. The term arose among some nutritionists to refer to the foods that should be included in the diet of those who take Ozempic. However, the food industry has seen a breakthrough and has decided to convert classic ultra-processed products into alleged GLP-1 friendly options that not only give these people an adequate supply of nutrients. They also make their lives easier, because they don’t have to cook. With this and the appropriate doses of marketing, a fever is achieved similar to that of the famous black labels of foods rich in protein or the craze for superfoods with exotic origins. Because no, the superfoods that were never missing in your grandmother’s pantry don’t have such good marketing on social networks. Although they are even more superfoods. What is GLP-1? Before knowing what GLP-1 friendly foods are, we must start at the beginning: What is GLP-1? The answer, broadly speaking, is simple. It is a hormone that is synthesized naturally in the intestines, usually after eating. Its function is, on the one hand, control glucose levelssince it stimulates the production of insulin, a hormone that promotes its uptake in the cells, and decreases the production of glucagon, which does the opposite, as it stimulates the synthesis of glucose. On the other hand, GLP-1 reduces appetite by two different routes: directly in the brain, and also in the stomach, since it slows down gastric emptying. If the stomach empties more slowly, we will feel full for longer and perceive less feeling of hunger. The main problem with GLP-1 is that has a very short half-lifeof very few minutessince there is an enzyme that degrades it as soon as it reaches the bloodstream. Therefore, this is where GLP-1 analogues come into play. These drugs, including Ozempic, exert exactly the same effect as GLP-1, but for a longer duration. Traditionally they were designed to patients with diabetes. However, its effect on satiety led to its consumption also to treat overweight, either under medical advice or through self-medication. The rest is history. We live in a world increasingly dominated by Ozempic. And of course, that has led the food industry to reinvent itself. What are GLP-1 friendly foods? Mainly, Ozempic and other GLP-1 analogues help you lose weight due to their effect on reducing appetite. Therefore, nutritionists recommend that people who consume these medications adjust their diet appropriately. Since they will be eating less, they must further optimize the nutrients they consume. If we think about it, it’s simple: if you consume 10 dishes a day, adding all the meals, it is not so serious that one of them is not completely nutritious. On the other hand, if your appetite only allows you to eat three dishes, you should concentrate all your daily nutritional requirements there. Experts recommend above all focusing on protein and fiber. The first is necessary to strengthen muscle mass. When we eat less, we have a caloric deficit, which forces our body to consume energy by burning fat reserves. So far so good. It is what we look for if we want to lose weight. However, there comes a point where these are no longer enough, so muscle tissue also begins to be consumed. If we do not simultaneously consume a good supply of protein and we do strength exercisewe will lose a lot of muscle mass, with all the harm that entails. Regarding gastric emptying, on the one hand it is beneficial because it increases the feeling of satiety, but it also has a negative side: constipation. That is the reason why fiber consumption is so recommended. Nutritionist Lauren Manaker, for example, recommends salmon and eggs as sources of protein, as they are also very complete foods in other nutrients. Regarding fiber, he recommends prunes and berries. Additionally, for the upset stomach that Ozempic and other similar medications can sometimes cause, he recommends probiotics and ginger. Also, remember the importance of hydration. All of these could be considered basic GLP-1 friendly foods. However, the food industry has risen to the next level. What does the food industry propose? When appetite is reduced, the desire for certain ultra-processed products is often also reduced. For this reason, many brands have jumped on the bandwagon of GLP-1 friendly processed foods. They sell them as healthy options, which provide a very adequate amount of fiber and protein in one bite. However, this is somewhat similar to environmental greenwashing. Although it usually resorts to small environmental protection measures to divert attention from very harmful practices, with these foods the focus is on protein, fiber and vitamins, while on the other hand very inadequate doses of other nutrients are provided. Nutritionist Juan Revenga gives two examples in an article for The Country. To start, Nestlé has launched its own brand GLP-1 friendly food: Vital Pursuit. One of the products included in this brand is a cauliflower pizza that contains 32% of the recommended amount of protein. It is very good for those who are not going to eat much more in a day. The problem is that it also contains 40% of the not-to-be-exceeded amount of sodium and saturated fat. With a couple of dishes like this in the day, we would almost be over. A supposedly healthy smoothie could provide more calories and cholesterol than a donut It also mentions Smoothie King brand shakes. This includes a vanilla one that provides a highly recommended amount of protein and fiber, without added sugar. Instead, it contains more calories, sodium … Read more

Noah Praamsma, nutritionist, “many ultra-processed foods are actually beneficial for health”

by

Noah Praamsma is a dietitian Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine American and is about to become the number one enemy of the supporters of “real” food. Saying that some ultra-processed foods are healthy (although we have known this for years) has become almost taboo. And Praamsma, like most experts, is restrictive regarding the weight of this type of products in our diet. He latest HER report from Duke University for the USestimates that ultra-processed foods represent 53–58% of the calories of adults and 62% of those of children and adolescents. Therefore, it proposes measures to limit its exposure and consumption. But, immediately afterwards, he adds “with the reception of healthy ultra-processed foods.” That is the heart of the artichoke. But what is a ‘healthy ultra-processed’? Right now, the exception criteria are very demanding, to be honest. We are talking about products that provide adequate amounts of recommended food groups, that keep sugars, salt and saturated fat below recommended thresholds and that do not contain non-caloric sweeteners. That is to say, right now many breads or cereals that are sold as healthy (or ‘realfooder’) would not make the cut. And this is not a minor detail. Because right now there is a lot of noise about ultra-processed foods and health because, although we have known for a long time that “not everyone is the same”, In the US, a new regulation is being discussed and the “regulatory frontier” is going to be key for many industries. It is not, therefore, an academic debate, it is a pitched battle to get the Administration to leave certain industries in a good place. But we digress… The interesting thing about Noah Praamsma’s idea is that, if we look at the data, he is right. In 2024, Kenny Mendoza and his team at Harvard University analyzed all available evidence on the impact of ultra-processed foods on health and reached an interesting conclusion: while sugary/sweetened beverages and processed meats are associated with a higher cardiovascular risk, whole grain bread and cereals, yogurt and some salty snacks show an inverse association. That is, the idea that ultra-processed foods are bad is a heuristic. A very useful one, but a heuristic: a simple ‘mental shortcut’ to make better decisions or achieve good results. That is to say, and for that very reason, something that admits nuances. But why do you say that the heuristic is useful? Because the message “we can establish differences within the category” does not mean that the category is harmless. He The same Harvard study pointed out that the more consumption of ultra-processed foods (regardless of whether they are good or bad) is associated with a 17% higher cardiovascular risk, 23% higher coronary heart disease and 9% higher stroke risk. That is, you can recognize that there are healthy ultra-processed foods and, at the same time, recommend that they be consumed as little as possible. In fact, that is what I take advantage of this space to do. Because, at the end of the day, large epidemiological studies they are warning us that eating large amounts of ultra-processed foods is associated with more health problems, lower quality of life and, ultimately, a higher chance of premature death. Image | Noah Praamsma / Fish Huang Xataka | Making extra rice is no longer a mistake: cooling and reheating it can reduce its calories according to some nutritionists

The owner of Mercadona believes that in a few years kitchens will disappear from homes. The consumption of precooked foods proves him right

by

The forecast sounded so far-fetched, it clashed to such an extent with the gastronomic tradition of Spain, that it generated a considerable stir. Just a year ago, during the presentation of Mercadona’s accounts, Juan Roig surprised by predicting death (almost) imminent of domestic kitchens. “I said it and I maintain it: in the middle of the 21st century there will be no kitchens,” cried the businessman. In the future imagined by Roig we go from making our own food in the vitro at home to taking it already prepared from supermarkets, which have become an absolute reference for food. The sector data They confirm that, no matter how dystopian Roig’s prophecy sounds, it seems to be coming true. A percentage: 3.8%. Spain is a benchmark for the Mediterranean diet. But also, and increasingly, a country of families who are no longer willing to spend hours and hours in the kitchen. That’s what it suggests at least. the last balance of the Spanish Association of Prepared Meal Manufacturers (Asefapre). According to the data of the sector, in 2025, ready-made foods “reinforced their weight in the shopping basket”, with an increase in consumption of 3.8%. In total, 715,052 tons of prepared meals were sold, “a new record,” recalls Asefapre, which consolidates the trend of the last decade. Translated into hard and fast euros, sales rose to 4,309 million, with an annual increase of 5%. A figure: 18 kilos a year. To give us an idea of ​​what this growth means, Asefapre calculates that last year each Spaniard ate on average about 18 kilos of prepared dishes. As a reference it is almost the same amount of fish products that we Spaniards consume in our homes (another thing is the restaurants) throughout 2024. The difference between precooked and fish is that the demand for the latter takes time to increase. low hours (both fresh and frozen) while the former grows at a good pace. The latest balance sheet of the employers’ association reflects an annual increase of 4.7% in the consumption of prepared foods, a growth rate that comfortably exceeds that of food as a whole (0.6%). What do we eat? Asefapre segregate your data of sales, which offers us an interesting vision of what exactly we Spaniards consume. The cake goes to “refrigerated” products, with a sales volume of 330,602 t shipped in 2025, 5% more than the previous year. In second place are “frozen products”, with sales that amounted to 297,023 t (+2.5%). The “dishes prepared at room temperature”, very common in some supermarket chains, are quite far behind, with 87,426 tons sold, but they leave an interesting fact: their demand grew by 4.1%. From pizza to potatoes and pasta. If we go down to detail we see that what we Spaniards like most (at least it is what we demand most) are pizzas, the leading producer in the sector with a sales volume that amounted to 131,600 tons. They are followed by frozen potatoes, with 98,056 t, and pasta-based dishes, which totaled 72,405 t. The three categories grew, with sales increases ranging between 2.6 and 7.2%. Beyond the Spanish market, one fifth (21.4%) of the industry’s production ends up being exported. More than just strategy. At this point the question is obvious: Why do we buy more and more pre-cooked foods? What leads us to feed ourselves with prepared dishes, whether frozen, refrigerated or food sold at room temperature ready for consumption, like what Mercadona offers in its supermarkets? The answer is complex. On the one hand there is the sector’s strategy, which has increased and perfected its range of products, adding foreign dishes that aim in part at the growing population immigrant living in Spain. Beyond the efforts of the industry, the increase in consumption of prepared dishes also responds to profound changes at a social and cultural level. They increase the single-person householdsit gets complicated conciliation between professional and family life and even change the kitchen structure in the houses. Also our way of thinking, as Asefapre herself remembers: today it no longer ‘squeaks’ at us that they serve us a pre-cooked dish on Christmas Eve or New Year’s Eve or that in families there are no longer people willing to lock themselves between the stoves. Of new grandmothers and homes. “Grandmas are not like they used to be and prefer to go walking with friends, do pilates or travel,” he reflected during the presentation of the balance sheet the president of Asefapre, David Aldea. It is not the only cultural change he cited. Added to this are others, such as the fact that it is increasingly easier to find “homes with fewer members” or homes in which the space dedicated to cooking has been reduced to a minimum. The trend seems to confirm Roig’s prediction, which a year ago I already confirmed the good progress of Mercadona’s business line for ready-to-eat dishes, launched in 2018. “It is profitable and continues to grow.” Images | Andalusian Government (Flickr), Mercadona and Asefapre In Xataka | Mercadona has grown so much in Spain that for the US it is no longer just a supermarket chain: it is a “cultural phenomenon”

The brain asks for ultra-processed foods when it has nothing to do and science thinks it knows why

by

There is a fairly classic scene in the lives of many people: not being hungry but wandering around the kitchen, opening the refrigerator, looking and closing it. Minutes later, this operation is repeated. The final result? End up eating something we probably didn’t needwhich is what can be popularly known as ‘gluttony’, but nutrition science has a more precise term: emotional eating. Investigation. Reference researchers in Spain such as Dolores Corella and Jordi Salas-Salvadó from CIBERobn, have focused on how factors more than calorieslike emotions or genetics, determine our weight. And the conclusion is quite clear: boredom is as real a metabolic risk factor as sugar. The boring brain. When we get boredthe brain detects a stimulation deficit that it tries to compensate with the fastest route to pleasure. And this is where the ultra-processed darlings come in. In this case, science indicates that these foods not only nourish us poorly, but activates dopaminergic reward circuitsin a very similar way to how certain addictive substances do. In this case, we have, first of all, a stimulus that is boredom that causes our mood to drop. Here the brain looks for a quick peak of dopamine and an apple is usually not enough, but rather it looks for fats and refined sugars, since their consumption causes a peak of pleasure followed by a sudden drop. Something that promotes excessive consumption and therefore favors gaining weight. The danger of getting bored. Not having things to do during the day or even at night, the truth is that it can be the ideal seed for consuming more calories than necessary. And above all, boredom tends to attack more strongly at the end of the day, when obligations end and this is where “boredom eating” collides head-on with chrononutrition. Researcher Marta Garaulet has shown that the moment in which we eat is critical, since snacking out of boredom after 9:00 p.m. is metabolically disastrous, especially in Spain. Why Spain. We Spaniards have a much worse time eating for boredom beyond 9 at night due to a genetic load in half of the population related to the MTNR1B gene. In this case, whoever has this gene and eats late, the consequences are quite clear: the body secretes less insulin and tolerates the glucose that we are introducing less well. The result here is that what is eaten due to nocturnal boredom it makes you fatter and more inflammatory than if you eat during the day, due to the desynchronization of circadian rhythms and the enzymes necessary to process food. How to counter it. If boredom is the trigger for this situation and ultra-processed foods are the gasoline, the solution to break this vicious circle is in PREDIMED studies. In this case, they pointed out that increasing fiber intake through fruits, vegetables and legumes improves glucose regulation. Something that enhances the reduction of glucose drops that can encourage the brain to eat some sugar urgently. In addition to this, the PREDIMED study confirms that the Mediterranean diet Supplemented with extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) or nuts, it reduces anxiety about eating. Unlike ultra-processed foods, which leave you wanting more, a handful of nuts activates long-lasting satiety mechanisms that prevent us from falling into eating a muffin or chocolate ice cream during the night. Routine vs. chaos. Since intermittent fasting lacks solid long-term evidence, experts like Salas-Salvadó suggest focusing on marked routines: bringing forward dinner to extend your overnight fast naturally. Having a fixed schedule reduces moments of “down time” where hunger attacks due to boredom. With all this, what has been achieved is that the brain does not adapt to situations with high levels of dopamine, such as a time of large, very copious late-night dinners. That is why the strategy is not about prohibiting, but about understanding that when you open the refrigerator at eleven at night without hunger, it is not the stomach that speaks but the brain looking for the entertainment it needs. Images | Toby Towfiqu barbhuiya In Xataka | Scientists have found the key to obesity in a protein: mice that do not gain weight even if they consume a fatty diet

Goodbye to ultra-processed foods and spending on snacks

by

We knew that drugs like Ozempic either wegovy They were changing the scales of thousands of people around the world without having to undergo surgery, but what we were not so clear about was how they were doing. transforming the shopping cart. Something that fully affects the domestic economy and a change in habits that is undoubtedly the final objective of these medications. A new study. Made in Denmark and published in JAMA Network Open has put figures to a phenomenon that market analysts had been sensing for some time: these medications they not only reduce appetitebut they structurally modify what we buy, how much we spend and what sections of the supermarket we visit. His method. Until now, much of what we knew about the diet of GLP-1 users came from what they themselves reported in surveys. The problem is that sometimes humans lie or even our memory fails to remember what we really eat on a daily basis. To avoid this bias, a team led by Kathrine Kold Sørensen, from Copenhagen University Hospital, decided to go to the source of truth more objective: purchase receipts. The result. The study analyzed more than 2 million transactions from 1,177 Danish participants. By comparing receipts before and after starting treatment (between 2019 and 2022), the researchers detected an obvious change in pattern. The highlight without a doubt was the reduction in the purchase of ultra-processed foods, which fell from 39.2% to 38%. And although it may seem like little, in the control group without the drug, consumption increased. Reducing ultra-processed foods meant that the basket was filled with real food, which increased from 46.9% to 47.8%. This was combined with fewer calories being purchased per 100 grams by reducing sugar, saturated fat and carbohydrates. On the other hand, proteins began to increase. A hit to the pocket. If the Danish study focuses on nutritional quality, other recent reports focus on the economic impact. A Cornell University study published in December 2025, based on data from Numeratorreveals that the impact on spending is immediate. In the United States specifically, households with patients taking Ozempic reduced spending in supermarkets by approximately 5.5%. If we break down this reduction, spending on salty snacks, sweets, industrial pastries and cookies plummeted between 10 and 11%. On the other hand, there was a slight increase in the purchase of yogurts, fresh fruit and protein bars. Why doesn’t it happen? The key is not just willpower. Spanish experts such as Cristóbal Morales and Joana Nicolau, cited by the Science Media Center Spain, they explain that the mechanism is physiological, since the drugs act on the brain’s reward system. In preclinical studies in animals they already showed that, under the effects of GLP-1, rats lost their usual preferences for foods that are rich in fats and sugars. In humans, this means that the impulse to buy, to buy that bag of chips or that soda, simply disappears or is drastically attenuated. The small print. Not everything is good news regarding these drugs, since, as has been repeated on different occasions when treatment is abandonedpurchasing patterns partially revert to the previous ones. That is why the change in habit seems to be “rented” to the duration of the pharmacological treatment. Additionally, the study has limitations inherent to the observational design, as it does not test direct chance and there is potential “selection bias.” And people willing to share their purchase receipts and start these treatments are usually more motivated by initial health or receiving parallel nutritional advice. Images | Haberdoedas Ishaq Robin In Xataka | If you want a “miracle” weight loss drug, you no longer turn to Ozempic: the competition is beginning to surpass it

There are foods that literally hijack your brain.

by

A potato chip crunches, the salty flavor mixes with the sweetness of the soda, and the brain asks for more. It’s not a coincidence. What seems like a simple craving is actually a programmed reaction: a dopamine rush as powerful as that caused by some drugs. More and more scientists argue that certain foods are hooking us. A new approach? For a long time, obesity and eating disorders were seen as simple matters of will. However, advances in neuroscience are changing that perception. Psychiatrist Claire Wilcox explains thatlittle by little, scientists agree on something surprising: some foods activate the brain almost the same as drugs like nicotine or alcohol. “Eating certain products—cookies, soft drinks, industrial pastries— activates the brain’s reward centersgenerating a feeling of immediate well-being. And the more we repeat that stimulus, the more we need it,” he details. The problem is that, unlike tobacco or alcohol, we cannot stop eating. What happens in our head? addictions They share three brain systems clue: The reward system, which releases dopamine when something gives us pleasure. The stress response system, involved in tolerance and withdrawal. The executive control system, which regulates impulses and helps make rational decisions. When we eat very tasty foods, the brain releases dopamine into the reward network. Learn to associate that flavor with a pleasant sensation and seek to repeat it. Over time, the circuit is “rewired”: more is needed to feel the same effect, and rational control decreases. Wilcox explains it like this: “Over time, damage to areas of executive control becomes more difficult to resist cravings, just as it is with drugs.” The science behind the debate. In recent years, research into food addiction has exploded. An article from Nature Medicinewhich analyzed almost 300 studies in 36 countries, concluded that ultra-processed foods can “hijack” the brain’s reward systems. The result: cravings, loss of control, and persistent consumption, even when there are negative consequences. Neuroscientist Mark S. Gold and psychologist Ashley Gearhardt, from the University of Michigan, they go further: “We don’t get addicted to apples, but to products designed to hit the brain like a drug.” However, medical consensus has not yet arrived. Neither the WHO nor the American Psychiatric Association recognizes food addiction as an official diagnosis. “Eating is a physiological need —remembers teacher Elisa Rodríguez Ortega—and the boundaries between addiction, bulimia or binge eating remain unclear. In the center of the bullseye. For years, sugar was identified as the great villain of the modern diet. Today, studies point to a more complex scenario: it is not just sugar, but the combination of ingredients, textures and additives in ultra-processed foods. which can make them addictive. These products—industrial blends of fats, salt, sugars, and flavor enhancers—are designed to generate immediate pleasure and encourage repeated intake. According to the Nature reviewthis “hyperpalatable” composition activates the reward system more intensely than natural foods, which would explain why it is so difficult to stop after the first bite. For its part, sugar continues to play a key role. Research, cited in JAMA Internal Medicineshow that an excess of added sugars not only increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases, but also alters the dopaminergic response, reinforcing dependence mechanisms. Qero nor we are all equally prone. Psychologist Michelle S. Hunt, a specialist in food addictions, details that there is a combination of genetic, emotional and environmental factors. “Foods rich in carbohydrates, fats or sugars activate the same areas of the brain as drugs or alcohol. Over time, the brain adjusts its receptors and requires higher doses to feel the same well-being,” he points out. Stress, anxiety and early exposure to ultra-processed foods are other triggers: the brain learns from a young age to associate pleasure with highly tasty products. “People who use food to deal with discomfort are the most vulnerable,” Hunt warns. The border with other types of disorders. Distinguishing food addiction from other eating disorders is not an easy task. According to the Eating Disorder Hope portalin both cases similar signs appear: loss of control, guilt, anxiety and, often, social isolation. a study published in Nature observed that people with bulimia or binge eating episodes present similar changes in the areas of the brain that regulate dopamine. That suggests there could be a common neurobiological basis. Dr. Mark S. Gold sums it up clearly: “Obesity and binge eating are not just behavioral problems; they also share brain mechanisms with other addictions.” For this reason, current treatments combine cognitive-behavioral therapy with cessation programs and emotional support. Reeducation with food. Unlike drugs, total abstinence is not possible: we all need to eat. For this reason, current treatments seek to reeducate the emotional relationship with food. Psychiatrist Kim Dennis runs a clinic where it combines models of addiction and eating disorders: patients learn not to restrict calories extremely – to avoid the rebound effect – but to identify the so-called “trigger” foods, those that unleash uncontrollable cravings. In parallel, drugs are also opening new avenues. Dr. Gold highlights the use of medications such as naltrexone and bupropion, or the newer GLP-1 (such as Ozempic or Mounjaro), which interrupt the link between pleasure and consumption, reducing both food intake and the desire for addictive substances. The final question. Although science has not yet settled the debate, the evidence is increasingly clear: some foods not only nourish or make you fat, they also shape the brain and habits in a profound way. Each bite leaves a mark on the pleasure circuits and the way we learn to eat. It is not about demonizing food or denying pleasure, but about accepting that eating today is an act conditioned by factors that go far beyond appetite. In a world where every flavor is optimized for hooking, true willpower may lie in knowing how to stop before the next bite. Image | Unsplash Xataka | When it comes to meat, science knows there’s something better than protein shakes: lean pork

Not all processed foods are a risk to our health. Some tricks can help us choose the best

by

Not all processed and ultraprocessed foods They affect the same way To our health. Although the damages of this type of food have been contrasted on numerous occasions, many experts remember that terms such as “processed” and “ultraprocessed” are nothing more than broad categories that can be orientative but sometimes hide a more complex reality. What is an ultraprocess? The first issue we should consider is the question of what is an ultraprocess food? There is no universal response, but the answer is relatively intuitive and we can guide ourselves by the definitions made by experts in the field. An example of this is the so -called nova classification, FAO employeethe United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The first category in this classification (Nova1) is reserved for unprocessed or minimally processed foods. The fruit or raw vegetable would be examples of this type of food. A second category (Nova2) is reserved for processed culinary ingredients. This category refers to usual products such as oil, sugar, salt or butter, usually employed in the elaboration of dishes but not consumed alone. Processed and outrage. The two key categories in this context are that of the defendants (Nova3) and Ultraprocess (Nova4). The first of these categories includes foods with intermediate processing, such as legumes and canned fruit, sausages or some smoked foods. An article Posted last year In the magazine BMJ (British Medical Journal) he remembered that, although considering this category at a general level, we find evidence that the ultra -process consumption can be linked to a lower life expectancy, the relationship was more complex. Not all the same. We usually consider that Ultraprocessin general, they are less healthy, dense foods in calories and poor in other nutrients. However, even within this category we can find high diversity. An article Posted last year In the magazine BMJ (British Medical Journal) he remembered that, although considering this category at a general level, we find evidence that the ultra -process consumption can be linked to a lower life expectancy, the relationship was more complex. Three tips to choose better. In A recent article in The conversation, Clare Collins, an expert in nutrition and dietary at the University of Newcastle, in Australia, gave some clues about how we can choose processed foods, and even ultraprocessed, which less risk suppose for our health. The first of the tips is to take time to read the list of product ingredients. The expert recommends looking for those products with less additives and “ingredients that could be found in the kitchen of a house.” It should be remembered that sometimes additives lists hide common products that we do in our kitchens under names or codes, so we cannot assume that all additives are harmful, but the amount of these can give us a clue about the product’s elaboration process. Regarding the label, Collins also recommends looking at the additional information given by products labels. In Spain, for example, we would have the Code Nutriscore that, although it is far from being perfect, it can help us in our decision. Habit. The third and last Collins advice It is “to think about what we eat a product.” Consuming ultraprocessed occasionally will not put our well -being at risk, it is usually doing so when we incur a higher risk. That is why the expert recommends focusing our efforts on those products that we consume once or more per week. In Xataka | To the question of whether ultraprocessed foods are as bad as they have told us, science still has no clear answer Image | Famingjia inventor

To the question of whether ultraprocessed foods are as bad as they have told us, science still has no clear answer

by

When going to the supermarket it is easily being surrounded by fried potato bags with different flavors, cookies, soft drinks, frozen pizzas or chicken nuggets that are part of our shopping basket. They are the so -called ultraprocessed foods (UPF), products that have gone through multiple industrial phases and often contain ingredients that are not found in house kitchen, such as corn syrup or hydrogenated oils. A debate for a long time. The alarm was given in the early 2000s Brazilian researcher Carlos Monteiro. While trying to decipher The increase in obesity and type 2 diabetes in your countrydiscovered something paradoxical: people bought less sugar and salt than before. The explanation was in the Super cart: they had replaced the basic ingredients with precooked and ready products to consume that they were loaded with these same foods. Growing evidence. From that moment on, scientists began to put the batteries to try to demonstrate whether there was a link between the high consumption of these products with health problems, because they had increased at a vertiginous pace. From there, dozens of studies associate high diets in ultraprocessed with higher risk of obesity, cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes, cancer and even depression and anxiety. A large -scale study with more than 110,000 adults in the United States found that those with the highest consumption of ultraprocessing were 4% more likely to die for any cause during the monitoring period. Variations between countries. The same amount of ultraprocessing in all countries is not consumed of our area. While in the United States and the United Kingdom Almost 60% of calories come from ultraprocessed In Spain the figure is around 26-30%. Despite being in the lower part of the table compared to Anglo -Saxon countries, recent studies, such as the one published by The BMJ, alert that the strongest evidence associates ultraprocessed exposure with cardiometabolic health problems, metal disorders and mortality in general. Is El Villano processing? Despite the overwhelming correlations, not the entire scientific community agrees to demonize the ultra -processed as a category. The main argument of skeptics is that The group is too broad and heterogeneous. In this way, the question is raised if it is logical to put some donuts, fried potatoes and a supermarket yogurt in the same bag. Some researchers wonder if the association with poor health is not due, simply, that these products are usually rich in fat, sugar and salt, and poor in fiber and vitamins. However, several studies have tried to clear this unknown. A clinical trial of the University College of London He compared two dietsone based on minimally processed foods and another with ultraprocessed, but both with identical levels of key nutrients such as proteins, fats, fiber and sugar. Surprisingly, participants lost twice the weight with the minimally processed food diet. This suggests that nutritional composition is not everything. Beyond calories. A breaker essay led by physiologist Kevin Hall in the National Institutes of Health of the United States (NIH) locked -literally -20 adults In a research center and gave them freedom to eat everything they wanted. For two weeks they followed an ultraprocess diet, and two others an unprocessed diet. The results were revealing: with the ultraprocessed diet the participants consumed 500 calories more a day and won almost a kilo. Hall and others investigations suggest that energy density and food texture are key. Many ultraprocess, having less water, concentrate more calories in less grams. In addition, its texture is often softer, which leads us to eat faster. By eating faster, our brain does not have time to register satiety signals, which facilitates excess caloric consumption. Ciaran Forde, researcher at the University of Wageningen, demonstrated that people ate much less when they were presented with hard texture foods (such as gofre -type fries) compared to soft texture foods (such as potato puree), regardless of whether they were ultra -processed or not. “What we saw was that the speed of eating and the texture properties of the meals boost consumption, not the degree of processing,” says Forde. What do we do then? Although the debate on the definition and the exact mechanisms continues, the general trend is clear: a diet with a high percentage of ultraprocesses is consistently associated with worse health results. The solution, however, does not seem to be a total prohibition. Kevin Hall himself, one of the most critical researchers, admits which consumes salad salads and dressings bought in the store. His advice for friends and colleagues is pragmatic: “Eat more vegetables without starch, legumes, fruits, integral grains and limits the intake of added sugars, sodium and saturated fats. Choose the ultra -processed that help you to be convenient and affordable, and avoid those that make it difficult.” Images | Alan Alves Xataka | Making rice of more is no longer a mistake: cooling it and reheating it can reduce your calories according to some nutritionists

We are carrying the design of protein foods where to eat clear tuna is from males

by

The hallway has changed a lot in recent years. Light -low fat products are a thing of the past, now what is carried are proteins. Not only with yogurts, Proteíca fever It is in many foods and almost everyone has a design clearly oriented to attract the male audience, but perhaps we are going out of hand. All to black. They commented on this Bluesky thread Following the design of the container of the tuna cans to the natural day. Black background, a small detail in blue and high protein very large. It is not the only product with a design from style; yogurts, fresh cheese, paste and even Frozen Noodles (¿? ¿?). Most have containers in which black color predominates and, to a lesser extent, red, with aggressive designs that highlight the amount of protein that the product has. If you had not noticed, you just have to look for “proteins” in any supermarket. Day, Carrefour, Consume, Mercadona… The trend is clear. Products “high in protein” in day supermarkets. Black does not mean more protein. Or at least not many more. The case of day tuna is a good example. In their container they indicate that it is high in protein, specifically 14.3 grams per can, 25 grams per 100 grams of drained product. However, it is enough to compare it with the Normal natural tuna of the same brand To see that it only has 2 more protein. Of course, the price is much higher: 19.20 euros/kilo for the high protein version and 11.67 euros a kilo for normal. The public. Protein -rich products are aimed at those who seek to increase their muscle mass. Traditionally, the male public has been the most interested in strength training and everything around him. However, we have seen that in recent years every time More women began to do strength trainingto the point that Almost half of gym subscriptions are women. Some powdered protein containers. Gym aesthetics. Although gymnasiums are a more balanced terrain as far as gender is concerned, the aesthetics of training related products such as Protein milkshakes It is already entrenched. A lot of black, intense colors, aggressive typefaces and an aesthetic that seems to shout “if you take this, you will get strong.” The food industry has adopted this visual language, first were the energy drinks And now we see how it has spread to all kinds of products. The containers are sexist. We like it or not, It is so. Right now there is an obsession with eating more protein, but we have also lived others such as low -fat products. If protein -rich products are black, Light They are pink and have softer fishes. The reason is clear: traditionally the female audience has been the most concerned with weight loss. We can still find many products like this In the super, but the fashion of proteins seems to have moved them. Influences. We can think that the container does not matter, but the reality is that it is key in the purchase decision. In This study They found that the container influenced the perception of whether a product was healthy or not, even altering its perception of flavor and determining the purchase decision. The participants tended to associate the products that had a female packaging as healthier, while the most masculine were perceived as less healthy. Some containers of cosmetic products for men. Packaging For males. There is another predominantly feminine industry where we can see this trend more clearly even: cosmetics. The men More and more care about their personal care Beyond the shaving and many brands have launched products of products oriented to them where we find dark colored containers such as black or blue. This ‘masculinization’ is also reflected in the name of the products, such as the ‘fuel’ facial of Kiehl’s or the ‘pure carbon’ of l’Oreal to refer to a facial cream. Perhaps the most exaggerated example we have with This makeup for men To which ‘War Paint’ have baptized, because of course, a real man does not make up, he goes to war. Cover image | Day supermarkets, own edition In Xataka | We had been thinking that creatine served to train better. It turns out that the greatest benefit was in the brain

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.