Trying to LOSE WEIGHT? Eat less processed junk science funk and lose twice as much weight WITHOUT EATING LESS
By sdwells // 2025-08-07
Copy
 
Though Big Food would love us all to believe that processed junk food isn’t really that bad for us, it definitively IS that bad, and there’s science to prove it. Ingredients like canola oil, chemical-laden gluten, and added sugars really do at up to a big fat nightmare for health reasons, pun intended. A new long-term clinical trial has found that people eating minimally processed foods (MPF) lost twice as much weight as those consuming ultra-processed foods (UPF), despite both diets being nutritionally matched and participants being allowed to eat freely. The findings, published in Nature Medicine and led by researchers at University College London (UCL) and University College London Hospitals (UCLH), suggest that food processing itself—not just nutrients—plays a crucial role in body weight regulation and overall health.
  • Twice the weight loss without eating less: Participants eating minimally processed foods lost nearly double the weight of those on ultra-processed diets, despite consuming the same amount of food and calories.
  • Better craving control: The minimally processed diet led to significantly improved craving resistance—especially for savory foods—despite greater weight loss, which usually increases cravings.
  • Improved body composition: Weight loss on the minimally processed diet came from fat mass and water, not muscle, indicating healthier body changes compared to the ultra-processed group.
  • Processing matters more than nutrients: Even when both diets were nutritionally matched, food processing alone had a major impact on weight loss and health outcomes, highlighting the importance of eating whole or homemade foods.

This Diet Helped People Lose Twice as Much Weight, Without Eating Less

This is the first experimental study of its kind to compare UPF and MPF diets in real-world conditions over an extended period. The trial involved 55 adults who followed both diets in separate eight-week phases, with a four-week break in between. Meals on both diets met the UK’s official Eatwell Guide nutritional standards and were delivered in generous portions. Participants were free to eat as much or as little as they wanted without calorie restrictions. Despite the identical nutritional content, participants lost more weight during the MPF phase—about 2.06% of body weight—compared to 1.05% on the UPF diet. This translated to an estimated daily calorie deficit of 290 kcal on the MPF diet versus 120 kcal on the UPF diet. Importantly, the weight loss on the MPF diet came from fat mass and total body water, while lean body mass remained unchanged, indicating a healthier body composition. Food cravings also significantly improved on the MPF diet. Participants reported better control over cravings—particularly for savory foods—and were more capable of resisting their most craved items. This was especially notable given that weight loss typically increases hunger and cravings. Lead author Dr. Samuel Dicken explained that while previous studies have linked UPFs to poor health, this study was designed to isolate the role of processing itself, independent of nutrient quality. The results indicate that even when nutrient profiles are equal, processing still affects outcomes like body weight, composition, and cravings. Professor Chris van Tulleken, co-author of the study, emphasized the broader public health implications. He called for shifting focus from individual responsibility to structural changes in the food system—such as regulating marketing, placing warning labels on UPFs, and providing subsidies for healthier foods—to make nutritious, minimally processed options more accessible and desirable. Interestingly, the study found no major differences between the diets in secondary health markers like cholesterol, blood pressure, liver function, or inflammation. However, researchers cautioned that these effects may take longer to manifest and require extended studies for accurate assessment. Senior author Professor Rachel Batterham added that while the UPF diet used in the study was nutritionally balanced, most real-world UPF consumption exceeds salt, sugar, and fat recommendations. She advised the public to limit energy intake, reduce processed food consumption, and focus on whole foods such as fruits, vegetables, pulses, and nuts. The study underscores that the level of processing—not just the nutrient content—can significantly impact weight management and health, reinforcing the value of cooking from scratch and avoiding packaged ready meals when possible. Tune your food news frequency to FoodSupply.news and get updates on more junk science food stuff that corporate America loads the grocery store shelves with to drive up obesity rates, chronic diseases and disorders so Big Pharma can take your money. Sources for this article include: NaturalNews.com ScienceDaily.com        
Copy