2024-03-02 09:04:00
– Pulses, fish and nuts: the right foods to be in shape
Mathilde Tournier, French scientist and nutrition expert, will give a conference on Tuesday in Geneva to decipher the links between diet and health.
Published today at 10:04 a.m.
One in five deaths worldwide are linked to nutritional factors.
Getty Images
Do you eat pulses and fish twice a week? You should. It is now scientifically established that nutrition – which includes diet and physical activity – is one of the major determinants of the most widespread diseases, from obesity to cardiovascular pathologies. One in five deaths worldwide are linked to nutritional factors.
To better understand this causal link, the Louis Jeantet Foundation invited French expert Mathilde Touvier, director of the nutritional epidemiology research team at INSERM and Sorbonne Paris Nord University; she will give a conference this Tuesday March 5 in Geneva. The opportunity to review current recommendations, some fake news and the Nutri-Score.
Besides eating five fruits and vegetables a day, limiting fat, salt and sugar, what are the other recommendations to reduce the risk of pathologies such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease?
Mathilde Fournier: Thanks to decades of research, we have a clear vision of several risk and protective factors. In addition to the recommendations cited above, we add the consumption of dried vegetables (lentils, red beans, chickpeas, etc.) at least twice a week because they are sources of vegetable proteins and fiber, a maximum of 150 g of cold meats and 500 g of red meat per week – reduction in the risk of colorectal cancer in particular. Then, we recommend a handful of nuts per day, fish twice a week. Finally, favor local, organic and seasonal foods, which often contain more vitamins and minerals than products stored for months and fewer preservatives. If we can follow this advice, the health benefits are enormous.
What about ultra-processed foods and additives?
Research on these foods began in the late 2000s. As part of our NutriNet-Santé study, we showed for the first time that the consumption of ultra-processed products was associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. Other studies around the world point in the same direction. We also highlighted links with some of their additives – emulsifiers, nitrites, sweeteners.
Fashions and fake news, superfoods, demonization of gluten… how to separate the true from the false?
By favoring scientifically supported information, which makes up the official recommendations. There is a lot of fake news circulating, some of which is orchestrated by economic interests. We observe trends such as anti-dairy products – even though there is no basis to justify doing without them. Finally, some people blame gluten for all ills even though it does not pose a real problem for a large majority of the population. On the other hand, we ask questions about the effect of gluten added to processed foods and its possible impact on the mechanisms leading to hypersensitivity, for example.
Official recommendations are not fully followed. What can we do to change behavior?
Nearly 72% of French people eat less than five portions of fruit and vegetables per day, 87% do not meet the recommendations for dried vegetables and 63% eat too much cold meats… I don’t know the Swiss figures, but it is likely that these recommendations are not completely respected. To change behavior, we must act on two levels. At the individual level, for better knowledge of good practices from a very young age, with reinforced information work at school. However, we cannot simply blame the individual. We must modify access to the food supply and this is played out at the political level, with for example a regulation of advertising aimed at children, a limitation of the doses of additives if some prove problematic in the light of new studies , the establishment of incentive measures which favor the products most favorable to health or, on the contrary, taxation against the most unfavorable ones – on the model of taxes on tobacco or sugary drinks, which have proven their worth.
Applications for scanning product barcodes and knowing their composition are multiplying. Are they relevant?
These smartphone applications have changed the situation, they have contributed to a sort of empowerment of consumers over the contents of their plate, and sharpened their critical thinking. However, the scientific validity of some is variable. Yuka, for example, integrates the processing and pesticides dimension by calculating a weighted overall score, which is premature. We prefer to recommend the Openfoodfact application, which is more factual.
“The Nutri-Score, help for an “informed” choice
Nutri-Score is a food labeling system created by Mathilde Touvier’s laboratory. It makes it possible to evaluate, on a range from A to E, the nutritional profile of a food, taking into account its caloric intake, its content of sugar, salt and saturated fats, fiber and proteins. The expert pleads for its generalization, at a time when it is used in only seven European countries and on a non-obligatory basis.
In terms of public health, what are the effects of Nutri-Score?
Several years of hindsight are still necessary but more than a hundred studies already show that consumers of products well classified by the Nutri-Score have less risk of developing certain chronic diseases. We also showed that this system had a positive impact on the nutritional quality of the shopping basket. Finally, we see that the Nutri-Score is starting to become a marketing argument, because sales of certain poorly rated products are declining while those of better ranked foods are increasing.
In its calculation, the Nutri-Score does not take into account the presence of additives or the degree of processing, why?
It integrates nutritional elements for which strong levels of evidence have been recognized for years in terms of impact on health. The science is more recent regarding the impact of processing and certain additives but it is progressing. We hope to be able to refine the Nutri-Score in the future with this new information. Already, the algorithm revised this year now includes a penalization of drinks containing sweeteners (aspartame for example). In addition, we propose adding a black frame to the Nutri-Score on ultra-processed products. But it won’t be right away, because studies are necessary and lobbies as well as economic interests are counterbalancing…
Some criticize the Nutri-Score for putting foods with nutritional benefits on the same rating plan, such as olive oil or cheese, and chips…
The Nutri-Score aims to help the consumer make “informed” choices in order to balance their plate; it is not designed to compare non-substitutable products. More generally, we must be wary of detractors, some hide industrialists with economic interests which do not always go in the same direction as public health.
Read alsoAurélie Toninato has been a journalist in the Geneva section since 2010 and a graduate of the Academy of Journalism and Media. After covering the field of Education, she is now mainly responsible for issues related to Health.More info
Did you find an error? Please report it to us.
0 comments
1709371285
#Nutrition #eat #stay #healthy