Don’t be so quick to condemn processed foods
|
Played
an essential role in offering edible, safe and nutritious foods to all
Canadians, yet food processing remains misunderstood
|
By Sylvain Charlebois
Professor in Food Distribution and Policy
Dalhousie University
Processed
foods exist so we can save time, money and energy. They’ve made our
food systems more efficient over the years. It’s all about convenience.
But
in recent years, the health attributes of processed foods have
increasingly come under scrutiny for a variety reasons, biased and
unbiased. Many reports by professional organizations and interest groups
have been unkind to processed foods, causing many consumers to believe
that they should be avoided at all costs.
A
fascinating study to be released in April, published in Trends in Food
Science and Technology, looked at the underlying basis of the food
classification systems used to determine what food is processed. Over
400 publications were screened for definitions of processed food.
The
study argues that food classification systems used around the world,
including in Canada, were mostly designed to examine the relationship
between industrial food products and health.
The
study shows clearly that there’s no consensus on what factors determine
the level of food processing. In fact, the concept of ‘processing’ is
considered by the authors of the study as a chaotic conception, largely
concerned with technical processes.
While
Canada’s Food Guide recommends that we stay away from ultra-processed
foods, our classification system doesn’t include quantitative measures.
Instead, it implies a correlation between industrial processing and
nutrition. That’s right – there’s no direct relationship between
processed food and their nutritional value.
The
anti-ultra-processing pundits will be quick to indicate that those are
the foods to be condemned and banned from the marketplace. This movement
against ultra-processed foods is largely motivated by a classification
system called NOVA.
The
study didn’t provide any clarity or justification for the use of the
NOVA system. The system looks at additives and other features associated
with overeating, but it doesn’t include proper nutrient profiling and
other formerly assessed nutritional aspects of food.
Food
processing is a complex issue. Although it has played an essential role
in offering edible, safe and nutritious foods to all Canadians, food
processing remains largely misunderstood.
Based
on the study, we can only assume that the rationale used by Health
Canada to support Canada’s Food Guide and discourage Canadians from
consuming ultra-processed foods aren’t well articulated or evidenced.
The study argues that the subjective rhetoric often used by public
health officials about nutrition is rather inappropriate for use in
policy.
Processed
foods have played an important socio-economic role in the last few
decades. Some have argued that without processed foods, gender
inequalities would be more predominant than they are now.
Knowing
women have historically spent more time in the kitchen on average than
men, women have been able to play a much larger role in our economy by
having access to pre-processed foods. Many decades ago, most of the food
processing occurred in the kitchen, accomplished largely by women.
More
needs to be done on gender equality, of course, but food processing has
certainly not been an obstacle to our quest to have a more equitable
society. This shouldn’t be forgotten.
We
need to make sure we avoid pompous misconceptions and properly educate
ourselves on what food processing means. Many believe processed foods
can only lead to a more obese and unhealthy society.
Certainly,
some processed foods shouldn’t exist. But processing has a particularly
important economic role within our food systems. It reduces waste
across the supply chain and allows food costs to remain at reasonable
levels for Canadians by using better technologies and knowledge.
In
countries where access to technologies is limited, food waste and price
volatility at retail tends to cause major challenges. Food processing
provides stability across the food supply chain.
Instead
of using guilt or value-laden terms, consumer understanding can only
grow by appreciating the healthiness of food products we eat and buy
every day.
The
study simply recommends that we need to improve the scientific basis
for food classification systems and to support consumer understanding.
Otherwise,
ideology and nutritional elitism will continue to mislead the public
and our policies will unceasingly misguide consumers in their food
choices.
Dr.
Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab
and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
id="blogfeeds"><$BlogFeedsVertical$>
id="postfeeds"><$BlogItemFeedLinks$>