Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39449069›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2024

A toxic relationship: ultra-processed foods & plastics.

Joe Yates, Suneetha Kadiyala, Megan Deeney, Angela Carriedo, Stuart Gillespie, Jerrold J Heindel, Maricel V Maffini, Olwenn Martin, Carlos A Monteiro, Martin Scheringer and 2 more

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Plastics matter in the food system.Communications earth & environment · 2025
    Review
  11. Questioning the validity of food addiction: a critical review.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Joe YatesLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK. Joe.Yates@lshtm.ac.uk.
Suneetha KadiyalaLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Megan DeeneyLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Angela CarriedoWorld Public Health Nutrition Association, London, UK.
Stuart GillespieIndependent Consultant, Lewes, UK.
Jerrold J HeindelHealthy Environment and Endocrine Disruptor Strategies, Commonweal, Bolinas, CA, USA.
Maricel V MaffiniIndependent Consultant, Frederick, MD, USA.
Olwenn MartinUniversity College London, London, UK.
Carlos A MonteiroUniversity of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.
Martin ScheringerInstitute of Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mathilde TouvierINRAE U1125, Sorbonne Paris Nord University, CNAM, University of Paris (CRESS), INSERM U1153, Bobigny, France.
Jane MunckeFood Packaging Forum, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmong the crises engulfing the world is the symbiotic rise of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and plastics. Together, this co-dependent duo generates substantial profits for agri-food and petrochemical industries at high costs for people and planet. Cheap, lightweight and highly functional, plastics have ideal properties that enable business models to create demand for low-cost, mass-produced and hyper-palatable UPFs among populations worldwide, hungry, or not. Evidence linking UPF consumption to deterioration in diet quality and higher risk of chronic diseases is well-established and growing rapidly. At the same time, the issue of plastic food contact chemicals (FCCs) is receiving increasing attention among the human health community, as is the generation and dispersion of micro- and nanoplastics. MAIN BODY: In this commentary, we explore how the lifecycles and shared economic benefits of UPFs and plastics interact to co-produce a range of direct and indirect harms. We caution that the chemical dimension of these harms is underappreciated, with thousands of plastic FCCs known to migrate into foodstuffs. Some of these are hazardous and have been detected in humans and the broader environment, while many are yet to be adequately tested. We question whether policies on both UPF and plastic chemicals are fit for purpose when production and consumption of these products is adding to the chronic chemical exposures that plausibly contribute to the increasing global burden of non-communicable diseases.

conclusionsIn the context of ongoing negotiations for a legally binding global treaty to end plastics pollution, and rapidly growing concern about the burgeoning share of UPFs in diets worldwide, we ask: What steps are needed to call time on this toxic relationship?

Indexed as

Fast FoodsPlasticsFood ContaminationFood, ProcessedHumansPlasticsClimate changeCommercial determinantsIndustryPlasticsUltra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID39449069
PMCPMC11500473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.