Presentation Details
| Misspecifying mechanisms misleads policy and practical solutions: it’s not about the processing John E Hayes1, 2. 1Sensory Evaluation Center, University Park, PA, USA.2Department of Food Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA |
Abstract
HL Mencken infamously quipped every complex problem has a well-known solution that is “neat, plausible, and wrong”. We have known for 35+ years that excessive intake of highly energy dense (ED) foods that that are high in fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS) are deleterious to health. In 2009 and 2011, the terms “ultraprocessed” and “hyperpalatable” entered the scientific literature in rapid succession; systematic critiques of these concepts emerged almost immediately, but this framing caught on quickly, resulting in hundreds of publications over the past ~15 years. Here, I will argue such framing misspecifies the problem mechanistically, and in doing so unintentionally misdirects potential solutions in terms of food reformulation and public policy. Data showing that Eating Rate and Energy Density, rather than amount of processing per se, are prime determinants of energy intake will be presented, alongside data showing that food disliking, rather than food liking, is a key driver of food intake in humans. By refocusing on these empirically supported mechanisms – Eating Rate and Energy Density – we can develop more effective interventions that actually address the root causes of excessive energy intake while preserving the pleasure from food.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author.