Healthcare (Commonwealth Union) – Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are heavily engineered industrial products packed with added fats, sugars, refined starches, salt, and synthetic additives such as emulsifiers. Items ranging from soft drinks and packaged snacks to processed meats are often depleted of their original nutrients. These foods contain combinations of ingredients that humans did not historically consume. In the United States, UPFs now account for close to 60% of adults’ diets and about 70% of children’s diets.
Earlier research has linked high UPF intake to greater chances of developing metabolic syndrome — a cluster of conditions that includes excess weight, high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol levels, and insulin resistance. High consumption has also been associated with elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, a marker of inflammation that strongly predicts future cardiovascular disease (CVD), including heart attacks and strokes. Despite these findings, there has been limited evidence directly examining whether greater UPF intake raises the risk of cardiovascular disease itself.
As UPF consumption continues to climb while cardiovascular disease remains one of the leading causes of death in the U.S. and is growing worldwide, clarifying the relationship between the two has become increasingly important. Better understanding could influence both patient treatment decisions and broader public health strategies.
Scientists at Florida Atlantic University’s Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine investigated this question using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Their findings, published in The American Journal of Medicine, add to growing concerns for people whose diets are dominated by ultra-processed foods.
“The findings from our study, based on a large, nationally representative sample of 4,787 U.S. adults, show that those with the highest intake of UPFs suffer a statistically significant and clinically important 47% higher risk of cardiovascular disease,” explained Charles H. Hennekens, M.D., FACPM, FACC, who is a senior author, First Sir Richard Doll Professor of Medicine and Preventive Medicine, and senior academic advisor, FAU Schmidt College of Medicine. “These results have major implications for future research as well as clinical care and public policy.”
Scientists examined information from the NHANES database, a program that gathers health, nutrition and lifestyle data from a broad, randomly selected group of adults in the United States. Their analysis included 4,787 people aged 18 and older surveyed between 2021 and 2023 who had at least one full day of detailed dietary tracking and reported whether they had experienced a heart attack or stroke. Participants listed everything they consumed across two days, allowing researchers to estimate the share of each person’s total calorie intake coming from ultra-processed foods (UPFs) using a well-established food classification system. Based on these calculations, individuals were divided into four groups, from the lowest to the highest UPF consumption.
The investigation centered on cardiovascular disease (CVD), defined as participants’ self-reported history of heart attack or stroke. The researchers adjusted their analysis to reflect differences in age, sex, race and ethnicity, smoking habits and income levels. The average participant age was 55, and women made up 55.9% of the sample. After accounting for these factors, those in the top quarter of UPF consumption showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful 47% greater likelihood of CVD compared with those in the lowest quarter.
The authors point out that rising public concern and potential policy responses to UPFs may follow a pattern similar to tobacco regulation in the 20th century. The researchers further indicated that just as awareness of smoking risks developed slowly over many years, shifting dietary patterns tied to UPFs may also require time, especially given the strong influence of large multinational food companies. Meanwhile, limited access to healthier alternatives remains a real challenge for many communities, underscoring the importance of comprehensive public health strategies.
Charles H. Hennekens indicated that addressing UPFs is not just about individual choices – it is about creating environments where the healthy option is the easy option.
He further pointed out that clinical guidance and public health education are necessary to make nutritious foods accessible and affordable for everyone.
