This is an important book about food, and how food has become something other than food in the last fifty years. Chris van Tulleken has executed a deep dive into the additives and processing methods of industrial food, and what his research reveals is eye-opening. My son has long criticized my occasional foray to McDonalds for "The Big Breakfast", telling me, "Dad, you know that's not real food, right?" Turns out he was right. One of the Italian scientists the author talked to corrected him when he used the term "ultra-processed food"; no Chris, she said, those are not foods, they are manufactured edible substances. Van Tulleken has interviewed dozens of scientists, regulators, activists, and food industry officials to get a picture of the current state of food safety, and it's not pretty.
Anyone who has read the ingredients list of almost any packaged food will notice items like xanthum gum, maltodextrin, and various emulsifiers, or three to four letters acronyms for other chemicals like flavorings. Van Tulleken looks at what these additives do, and why we should be worried about them, and in the process he examines the food regulatory process, or, more properly, the lack of a food regulatory process, especially in the US, UK, and Canada. As to what the additives do, they have three primary functions: make the food item shelf stable at a wide range of temperatures, make it more appealing to the customer by making it soft and easy to consume, and crucially, reduce the cost of manufacturing and transport of the food so as to maximize profit. It's no secret that companies, including food companies, are in business to make money, but governments should be in the business of insuring that food is safe for their citizens. Unfortunately, the structure of regulation, especially in the US and UK means that the regulators are always a step behind the corporations. The onus is on the regulator to prove that an additive does harm, rather than it being the responsibility of the company to prove the additive does no harm before it can be used. In the US, there are approximately 10,000 additives in use, and that number is a guess, because no one, including the FDA keeps a comprehensive list. There are multiple studies that show that UPF "foods" are more appealing, and that people will eat more of a UPF meal than of an exactly equivalent non-UPF food. There are several theories about why this is so, but the evidence is there that it is so.
There is a lot of additional research that should be done on UPF additives, and it has started, but at a low level, and with no real impetus from governments. Also, the amount of money available to Nestle or other food companies to lobby governments or market their products simply dwarfs the resources of all governmental food regulatory agencies worldwide, and the food companies have no interest in changing the way they do business. There is a strong correlation between the explosion of obesity in the US, UK, Brazil, Mexico and other countries, and the introduction of UPF foods to those countries. There have also been preliminary, but persuasive studies linking many additives to behavioral issues in children, which is quite scary to me as a grandfather.
One interesting side note that has caused me to re-think another book I read recently (Outlive) is the effort by Peter Attia and his partner to pin the blame for the obesity epidemic on sugar. Attia and Taube founded an organization called NuSI to study how sugar in food drives obesity, and, to give them credit, they had a strict scientific methodology in their studies. The problem is that studies showed no difference between calories obtained from fat or carbohydrate or protein in terms of obesity outcomes. What does make a difference is whether the food has high UPF content. Attia, in his book, pushes a high protein diet but says he now believes nutrition is far less important than exercise in controlling weight. I think this new stance comes from being burned (and losing millions of dollars) in his NuSI initiative, so I now have other questions about Attia's assertions in his book. But I digress.
On a personal level, van Tulleken says that the revelations of his research made both he and his twin brother extremely vigilant consumers of food, and as a result, van Tulleken's twin lost about 45 pounds (20kg). Since reading this book I have been diligently reading ingredient labels on various food packaging labels, and I've been moving toward a more whole food diet, which is, admittedly, more expensive and more trouble to prepare, but I'm persuaded of the benefits. A side effect of moving toward whole foods is that one simply eats less because, to me at least, the food seems more filling, and the corollary of this is I'm not eating UPF foods which have been designed to make one want more.
My only complaint in this otherwise wonderfully informative book is that I think van Tulleken could have better organized and shortened the book. That said, this is a book that could change the way you think about food and what you eat. It has for me.
August 2024 update: I have upgraded my rating to five stars because I keep thinking about things I learned in this book, which is a sign of a very good book.