this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023

154 points (92.8% liked)

News

23310 readers

5390 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

dezmd@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

Blackbeard@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

154

Researcher explains connection between ultra-processed foods and depression (www.pbs.org)

submitted 11 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 64 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This study is going to lead to tons of wowthanksimcured advice for depressed people so I just want to state to anyone out there listening:

My most severe period of depression as an adult happened during a time where I was eating healthfully (almost no processed foods) and doing 5+ days per week of moderate-to-heavy exercise. I didn't drink or use drugs during that time either. It came on after 9 months of consistency and I powered through two more months, consistently eating right and exercising before it overwhelmed me.

It's super unhelpful to suggest eating right and exercising to a depressed person if you're not their licensed medical or mental health caregiver.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The point is that that ultra-processed or unhealthy foods increase the risk for depression in the general public. I get it's not helpful or correct to tell a person who's actively depressed to exercise and eat right so they feel less depressed, but exercising, eating right, and getting enough sleep has been the first recommendation doctors and therapists will give to someone seeking a longer-term improvement in their mood for a long time.

I should add that I'm a mental health professional, and in my anecdotal experience, there are different "types" of depression, even if they all meet criteria for MDD. Some people fall into a chasm due to their brain chemistry, and only meds, ECT, TMS, time, or a combination of these will get them out. Sounds like this may be what you experienced. Others (I would say the majority of those diagnosed with depression who land in the hospital) have a more low level depression that can absolutely be improved with lifestyle changes and/or psychotherapy. Point being, I still think this is helpful information for a large segment of those experiencing depression.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No, the point is that there is a correlation between eating processed foods and developing "incident depression" over a 15 year period in mostly white populations of middle-aged women.

The study doesn't say what you're already claiming it does because of a headline, and that is what leads to very unhealthy advice given.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The negative mood effects of unhealthy lifestyle choices are well established and not arguable. I'm not making that statement on this study, but rather the entire body of literature showing this to be the case.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

The point is that that ultra-processed or unhealthy foods increase the risk for depression in the general public.

This is you, making a false statement that is about the study OP posted, not general "not arguable" bodies of knowledge.

This is harmful, not helpful.

Edit: for those downvoting me, the quote from the person before me is NOT based on decades of non arguable research. It is only based on their opinions, biases, and the headline OP posted.

The study we are discussing opening paragraph says the following:

Despite extensive data linking ultraprocessed foods (UPF; ie, energy-dense, palatable, and ready-to-eat items) with human disease,4 evidence examining the association between UPF consumption and depression is scant.

Unless this random internet person knows more than these researchers, then I'd say that this person is doing the exact harmful thing I was trying to prevent.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Ok, I'll say it again. The negative mood effects of unhealthy lifestyle choices are well established and not arguable. I'm not making that statement on this study, but rather the entire body of literature showing this to be the case. Sorry there was a misunderstanding.

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They’re established to be linked to incidental depression, not clinical. It may help SOME people get out of a tailspin, but those with clinical/chronic depression will not experience the benefits of ‘healthier lifestyle choices’.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Healthy lifestyle choices reduce the incidence of depression at the population level.

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Yes. This is not a cure all, but will indeed reduce (but not purge) situational depression among the populace. I did not disagree with you, I added nuance; no need to repeat your statement.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If you're not talking about the study, why did you quote the headline almost word for word?

[+] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world -7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Then go edit your post to remove the statement that contradicts what you're saying now.

What I am trying to do is to prevent people from reading the headline and making the false statement that you then made based off of it and using that to try and give advice about diet and exercise to people with clinical depression.

[–] XbSuper@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You need to work on your reading comprehension. They clearly state that the claim they're making is based of decades of research, not simply this headline.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

The statement they made, which I quoted, IS NOT BASED ON DECADES OF RESEARCH! It is based on their assumptions and the headline in this article.

The study we are talking about makes it very clear in its first paragraph that there has been little-to-no prior research on the effects of processed foods and depression.

Despite extensive data linking ultraprocessed foods (UPF; ie, energy-dense, palatable, and ready-to-eat items) with human disease,4 evidence examining the association between UPF consumption and depression is scant.

It is literally the justification for this specific study having been done at all.

This study only involved middle-aged white women (95% of participants) who didn't suffer from depression at the start of the study. It measured incident depression over the course of 15 years and correlated that with various processed food categories.

That person making the statement that processed foods increase the chance of depression in the general public is doing exactly what I was trying to get people to not do, which is turn this headline into false assumptions and unhelpful advice about general depression.

I hate these reddit moments.

[–] XbSuper@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Jesus Christ dude. Read what they said, they are a medical professional, they are not making claims based on an article, but rather years of research.

This has nothing to do with reddit, you're just a moron.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They said this:

The point is that that ultra-processed or unhealthy foods increase the risk for depression in the general public.

The study we are talking about literally says this:

Despite extensive data linking ultraprocessed foods (UPF; ie, energy-dense, palatable, and ready-to-eat items) with human disease,4 evidence examining the association between UPF consumption and depression is scant.

We are talking about a study that in its opening paragraph, with sources, contradicts what they, as a random internet stranger claiming to be a medical professional, are claiming as the truth.

I, for one, am going to side with the study over the person making claims with no evidence. Even a study that I think will cause people like you and the other person to act in foolish, unscientific, and very harmful ways.

Anyway, you should go back to reddit with that attitude. Or downvote and move on. You added nothing of value here and were a jerk for absolutely no reason.

[–] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago (1 children)

PBS asked Harvard about causation vs correlation and got a long winded answer with no substantive response to the question.

No follow up

PBS asked Harvard how strong is the connection and got no response to that question whatsoever.

No follow up.

[–] formergijoe@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, someone who only has the time to microwave dinonuggets before watching YouTube and going to sleep probably feels worse than the person who has enough time to cook a proper meal for themselves.

[–] June@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Ah man, I can’t imagine not even being able to toss my Dino nugs in the toaster oven. Same amount of work just a bit more time and 1000% better than microwaved. And I’m a depressed fuck. Someone who can’t even muster that much together must really be suffering. :(

[–] Longjohnson@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Even though they said they controlled for confounding variables, there is definitely not enough information in this article to justify that. They made no mention of socio-economic status which seems like a big one here. Not to mention more depressed people might opt for ready-made processed food because they don't have the energy to cook a full meal. Does anyone know where to find the full paper? I would need to see that before drawing a conclusion on this one.

[–] Bigtiddygothgrany@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Absolutely this. When I'm depressed there's no way I have the energy to cook or clean up what I cook with. The knowledge of having something to clean while I'm feeling like shit just makes me feel more like shit.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Socioeconomic variables were definitely accounted for in the study:

with adjustment for known and suspected risk factors for depression, including age, total caloric intake, body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), physical activity, smoking status, menopausal hormone therapy, total energy intake, alcohol, comorbidities (eg, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia), median family income, social network levels, marital status, sleep duration, and pain.

Here's a link to the JAMA letter

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512104/

[–] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Not sure which one is referenced, but here's a list from google scholar.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2023&q=link+between+the+consumption+of+ultra-processed+foods+and+an+increase+in+the+risk+of+depression&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 22 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Eat shitty food -> feel bad about eating shitty food.

Give me a grant now!

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 11 points 11 months ago

You are truly pushing the limits of science, I'm in awe.

[–] JTFCOAPS@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The study found an association, and cannot find causation. So it could be that eating more ultra-processed foods leads to a greater risk of depression, or that depression leads to eating more ultra-processed foods, or that something else entirely causes both. The article seems to assume it’s only the first possibility without mentioning the others, which makes me think this is not worth reading.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The actual paper discusses the reverse causation hypothesis and using data over a 4 year period: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512104/

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You are doing (a) god's work. Unfortunately, most people have a naive understanding of how science is done in medicine and don't understand the value of cohort studies.

[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

If you are depressed, you don't have the energy or motivation to process food yourself, so you eat (pre-)processed food.

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

"found a link between"? Please demonstrate statistical significance via null hypothesis rejection.

Downvotes all you want, this is standards statistics for demonstrating correlation

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Compared with those in the lowest quintile of UPF consumption, those in the highest quintile had an increased risk of depression, noted for both strict definition (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.26-1.76; P < .001) and broad definition (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.20-1.50; P < .001) (Table). Models were not materially altered after inclusion of potential confounders. We did not observe differential associations in subgroups defined by age, BMI, physical activity, or smoking. In a 4-year lag analysis, associations were not materially altered (strict definition: HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54; P < .001), arguing against reverse causation.

"Found a link between" typically is pop science speak for small p value. Not that I would take it for granted that it does, so you should just read the paper if you have a question about the details: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512104/

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Thank you. I was definitely a bit salty yesterday for unrelated reasons.

[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

We don't really understand what this is about yet. Processed foods tend to offer a big sugar hit, a brain chemical rush. It's no surprise that people struggling with depression will reach for a chemical rush. It's also no surprise when they're constantly squeezing their brain for it that the brain runs dry.

But this means we have the same issue as we do with all behavioral addictions: what is the underlying issue that leads us to use in the first place? Did junk food alone make me depressed? Or did I start binging junk food during my depression, which made the depression worse? Can anyone safely binge eat junk food without getting depressed? Can you? How long?

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Given enough time, we will eventually find out that ALL things that exist contribute to depression.

[–] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Realism is pessimism.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago

All things in your life maybe, but definitely not all things.