Reacción a "Reactions to study linking ultra-processed food to 32 health effects, with varying degrees of evidence"

We have sufficient scientific evidence to take the necessary actions to promote the consumption of minimally processed foods and discourage the consumption of ultra-processed foods. The results of the latest systematic review on the subject conclude that consumption of ultra-processed foods is associated with poorer health outcomes, especially increased risk of mortality, metabolic and mental illness. 

This is a systematic review of existing systematic reviews, called an umbrella review. The authors synthesise the available scientific evidence on the topic. This provides an overview of the harmful effects of the consumption of ultra-processed foods on health, but does not provide any new data, such as results obtained from original research. In order to carry out systematic reviews, it is first necessary to have original articles such as those previously carried out on the subject in our environment: BMJ 2019, Mayo Clin Proc 2019. 

An important limitation of the work is the use of the GRADE scale to assess the degree of evidence, which is useful for assessing the quality of systematic reviews based on clinical trials with drugs, but not for assessing studies on nutrition. For this purpose, the use of the NUTRIGRADE scale is proposed. Nevertheless, the results of the study highlight that the scientific evidence is convincing for implementing structural measures such as the existence of taxes on ultra-processed foods in order to make fresh foods cheaper and thus make the easiest option the healthiest option, since, after all, one of the main factors influencing the eating habits of the population is the price of food. Otherwise, the social gap in health will increase without remedy.