% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Berden:304503,
author = {J. Berden and G. T. Hanley-Cook and B. Chimera and D. Aune
and M. G. M. Pinho and G. Nicolas and B. Srour and C. J.
Millett and E. Koc Cakmak and E. Kesse-Guyot and E. M.
González-Gil and E. P. Vamos and J. Blanco Lopez and J.
Baudry and J. Berlivet and K. Chang and M. Touvier and C. Le
Cornet$^*$ and C. Marques and C. C. Dahm and D. B. Ibsen and
F. Jannasch and G. Skeie and M.-J. Sanchez and M. B. Schulze
and S. Grioni and Y. T. van der Schouw and A. M. Jimenez
Zabala and A. Winkvist and A. Tjønneland and C. Sacerdote
and C. Kyrø and E. Weiderpass and M. Guevara and P. Frenoy
and R. Tumino and S. Panico and V. Katzke$^*$ and X. Ren and
P. Vineis and P. Ferrari and C. Lachat and I. Huybrechts},
title = {{Q}uantifying the {E}nvironmental and {F}ood {B}iodiversity
{I}mpacts of {U}ltra-{P}rocessed {F}oods - {E}vidence from
the {EPIC} {S}tudy.},
journal = {Public health nutrition},
volume = {nn},
issn = {1368-9800},
address = {Cambridge},
publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
reportid = {DKFZ-2025-01892},
pages = {nn},
year = {2025},
note = {epub},
abstract = {While associations of ultra-processed food (UPF)
consumption with adverse health outcomes are accruing, its
environmental and food biodiversity impacts remain
underexplored. This study examines associations between UPF
consumption and dietary greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe),
land use, and food biodiversity.Prospective cohort study.
Linear mixed models estimated associations between UPF
intake (grams/day and kcal/day) and GHGe (kg
CO₂-equivalents/day), land use (m2/day), and dietary
species richness (DSR). Substitution analyses assessed the
impact of replacing UPFs with unprocessed or minimally
processed foods.368,733 participants in the European
Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
study.Europe.Stronger associations were found for UPF
consumption in relation with GHGe and land use compared to
unprocessed or minimally processed food consumption.
Substituting UPFs with unprocessed or minimally processed
foods was associated with lower GHGe $(8.9\%;$ $95\%CI:$
-9.0; -8.9) and land use $(9.3\%;$ -9.5; -9.2) when
considering consumption by gram per day and higher GHGe
$(2.6\%;$ $95\%$ CI: 2.5: 2.6) and land use $(1.2\%;$ 1.0;
1.3) when considering consumption in kilocalories per day.
Substituting UPF by unprocessed or minimally processed foods
led to negligible differences in DSR, both for consumption
in grams $(-0.1\%;$ -0.2; -0.1) and kilocalories $(1.0\%;$
1.0; 1.1).UPF consumption was strongly associated with GHGe
and land use as compared to unprocessed or minimally
processed food consumption, while associations with food
biodiversity were marginal. Substituting UPFs with
unprocessed or minimally processed foods resulted in
differing directions of associations with environmental
impacts, depending on whether substitutions were weight- or
calorie-based.},
keywords = {environmental impact (Other) / food biodiversity (Other) /
food processing (Other) / ultra-processed foods (Other)},
cin = {C180 / C020},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)C180-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C020-20160331},
pnm = {313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:40931427},
doi = {DOI:10.1017/S1368980025101067},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/304503},
}