Skip to main content
Tessa NewsLink
Paste a health news link, or browse

Source study found

Story checked

Ultra-processed foods enter babies’ diets early. What comes with them? (opens in a new tab)

news-medical.net · 2026-09-14

Short answerEvidenceSource

Short answer

Mostly not supported

Mostly not supported.

The claims we could check match the study, but some claims were not covered by the evidence reviewed.

  • 2 supported
  • 6 not covered

Checked against the study summary. The full text wasn't available, so some details couldn't be settled either way.

Share this check

Follow the evidence trail
1
2

NewsLink checks it

Mostly not supported

Every claim we could check holds up. Two of eight claims match the study. This overall rating is based only on the claims we could check. Six claims the study doesn't address.

  • 2 supported
  • 6 not covered
Open claim evidence
3
Then inspect each claim

Evidence layer

Claim by claim

Each claim gets a verdict. Expand it to see the evidence directly below.

8 claims in this story

Showing all 8 claimsChoose a verdict to focus the list.

Claim 1 of 8Not coveredUPF intake was not consistently associated with infant growth between 5 and 12 months.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile says growth outcomes were modeled, but it does not report growth effect estimates, directions, p-values, or whether results were inconsistent between 5 and 12 months. The story’s specific conclusion that UPF intake was not consistently associated with growth requires full-text evidence.

1

Study evidence

Growth outcomes were modeled with linear mixed-effects models alongside dietary intake, but the abstract does not report any growth-related effect estimates or associations.

“This study assesses the relationship between UPF, dietary intake, and infant growth during complementary feeding.”
Claim 2 of 8Not coveredThe study found no evidence that higher UPF intake reduced dietary diversity.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

Dietary diversity is not described as a tested or reported outcome in the abstract-level paper profile. The claim that there was no evidence higher UPF intake reduced dietary diversity cannot be verified from the supplied abstract-depth evidence.

Claim 3 of 8Not coveredThe researchers conducted a secondary analysis of dietary intake and growth data from 114 healthy, full-term infants in observational reference groups from two randomized controlled trials in the Denver metropolitan area.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated114 infants

Why this verdict

The profile supports a secondary/observational longitudinal analysis of n=114 infants with repeated 3-day diet records at 5, 9, and 12 months. However, the abstract-depth profile does not verify several details in the story claim, including Denver metropolitan area, healthy full-term status, and observational reference groups from two randomized controlled trials. The paper profile characterizes the analysis as observational, not causal.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months.9 (7, 13) vs. 20 (17, 23) kcal/kg/day; p < 0.0001

“We analyzed infant UPF intake from 3-day diet records at ages 5, 9, and 12 months (n = 114).”
2

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Claim 4 of 8Not coveredOf 1,912 unique foods identified across the three time points, 41% were classified as ultra-processed foods, and UPFs accounted for an average of 32% of energy intake from complementary foods.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated1,912 foods; 41%; 32%

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile supports that UPFs accounted for a substantial share of energy, reporting about 30% of total energy at 9 months and 38% at 12 months. It does not verify the story’s full-text-style figures of 1,912 unique foods, 41% classified as UPFs, or an average 32% of energy intake from complementary foods.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months.9 (7, 13) vs. 20 (17, 23) kcal/kg/day; p < 0.0001

“We analyzed infant UPF intake from 3-day diet records at ages 5, 9, and 12 months (n = 114).”
2

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Claim 5 of 8Not coveredUPFs were more energy-dense than minimally processed foods and contained more sodium and less fiber; added sugar was higher on average but not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated282 kcal per 100 g vs 128 kcal per 100 g

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile states generally that UPFs had lower nutrient density and higher energy density, and it mentions sodium and added sugar as common contributions. It does not verify the detailed compositional comparison, the specific 282 vs 128 kcal/100 g magnitude, lower fiber, or the statement that added sugar was higher on average but not statistically significant after multiple-comparison correction.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months.9 (7, 13) vs. 20 (17, 23) kcal/kg/day; p < 0.0001

“We analyzed infant UPF intake from 3-day diet records at ages 5, 9, and 12 months (n = 114).”
2

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Claim 6 of 8Not coveredInfant UPF consumption increased over time, from about 4 kcal/kg/day at 5 months to 20 kcal/kg/day at 12 months.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated4 to 20 kcal/kg/day

Why this verdict

The profile supports that UPF intake increased from 9 to 12 months, specifically 9 to 20 kcal/kg/day. It does not verify the story’s 5-month value of about 4 kcal/kg/day or the full 5-to-12-month trajectory at abstract depth.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months.9 (7, 13) vs. 20 (17, 23) kcal/kg/day; p < 0.0001

“We analyzed infant UPF intake from 3-day diet records at ages 5, 9, and 12 months (n = 114).”
2

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Claim 7 of 8SupportedA recent study published in Nutrients found that ultra-processed food intake during complementary feeding was associated with higher consumption of added sugar and sodium among infants in a Denver, Colorado cohort.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile supports the core associational claim: in n=114 infants, UPF intake was positively associated with added sugar and sodium at 9 and 12 months using linear mixed-effects models with Bonferroni correction. The profile identifies the cohort as U.S. infants but does not independently verify the Denver, Colorado descriptor at abstract depth.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Claim 8 of 8SupportedAt 9 and 12 months, each additional 10 kcal/kg/day from UPFs was associated with higher added sugar intake, and sodium intake showed a similar pattern.View evidenceHide evidence

As statedabout 161 mg/day more sodium at 9 months; about 124 mg/day more sodium at 12 months

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile supports this associational and hedged claim. It reports positive associations between UPF intake and added sugar at 9 and 12 months, and between UPF intake and sodium at 9 and 12 months. The sodium coefficients, β=16.08 and β=12.39, are consistent with the story’s stated approximate increases per additional 10 kcal/kg/day, about 161 mg/day and 124 mg/day.

1

Study evidence

UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change

“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
Then look for missing context

Context layer

What the story left out

Important study details the story did not include.

  • Greater intake of minimally processed foods/Nova 1 was associated with lower added sugar intake.

    This is a reported abstract-level finding in the paper profile, but the presented story claims focus on UPFs and do not clearly report the Nova 1 association with lower added sugar.

    From secondary_data; longitudinal repeated-measures observational analysis

7 things the story did carry across
  • The paper’s central abstract-level finding is that higher UPF intake during complementary feeding was associated with higher added sugar and sodium intake at 9 and 12 months, with Bonferroni-adjusted significance testing.
  • The study quantified UPF intake longitudinally in 114 infants using repeated 3-day diet records at 5, 9, and 12 months and Nova classification by two independent coders.
  • UPF intake increased over infancy and accounted for a substantial share of energy intake, with the abstract reporting 30% of total energy at 9 months and 38% at 12 months.
  • The paper also assessed growth outcomes, but the abstract-level profile does not provide growth effect estimates or clear growth-result conclusions.
  • The observational nature of the secondary cohort analysis limits causal inference.
  • The sample size was relatively small, n=114, and generalizability beyond the study sample is limited or not addressed at abstract depth.
  • Dietary exposures and outcomes depended on 3-day diet records and Nova classification, which carry measurement and classification limitations.
Then read the study layer

Study layer

Study at a glance

Scan the study first. Expand only the parts you want to inspect.

Pieces of work

3

Evidence read

study summary

Lead result

secondary data

1Lead resultsecondary dataTest associations between UPF (and minimally processed foods/Nova 1) and dietary intake outcomes (notably added sugar and sodium) across timepoints.secondary data; longitudinal repeated-measures observational analysisExpand

In plain English

Longitudinal analysis of 114 U.S. infants using 3-day diet records at ~5, 9, and 12 months assessed associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) intake (Nova classification) and dietary composition during complementary feeding. Linear mixed-effects models (repeated measures) related UPF and minimally processed food (Nova 1) intake to added sugar and sodium at 9 and 12 months with multiplicity control (Bonferroni-corrected p = 0.006 for 9 tests). UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and was positively associated with added sugar and sodium at both 9 and 12 months; Nova 1 intake was associated with lower added sugar.

Key findings

  • UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and represented a substantial share of energy.9 months median 9 kcal/kg/day (IQR 7,13) vs 12 months 20 kcal/kg/day (IQR 17,23); UPFs accounted for ~30% total energy at 9 months and ~38% at 12 months; p < 0.0001 for change
  • Higher UPF intake was associated with greater added sugar intake at 9 and 12 months.β = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36] at 9 months; β = 0.25 [0.20, 0.30] at 12 months; p < 0.0001
“Linear mixed-effects models were used to model dietary intake and growth outcomes.”
What this piece can’t prove
  • Multiplicity control was applied (Bonferroni p = 0.006 for 9 tests), which changes the significance threshold and may be conservative.

3 further details could not be confirmed from the summary.

2secondary dataQuantify ultra-processed food (UPF) intake across infancy (5, 9, 12 months) during complementary feeding in a U.S. infant cohort using 3-day diet records and Nova classification.Longitudinal observational cohortExpand

In plain English

Longitudinal observational analysis of 114 U.S. infants using repeated 3-day diet records at 5, 9, and 12 months. Foods were coded by two independent coders using the Nova classification. UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months and composed a substantial share of energy intake (reported as kcal/kg/day and % of total energy). Linear mixed-effects models were used for longitudinal analyses; multiple testing was addressed with a Bonferroni-corrected p-value.

Key findings

  • UPF intake increased between 9 and 12 months.9 (7, 13) vs. 20 (17, 23) kcal/kg/day; p < 0.0001
  • UPFs comprised a substantial and increasing share of energy intake during complementary feeding.30% of total energy at 9 months; 38% at 12 months
“We analyzed infant UPF intake from 3-day diet records at ages 5, 9, and 12 months (n = 114).”
What this piece can’t prove

1 further detail could not be confirmed from the summary.

3human in vivoTest associations between UPF intake and infant growth outcomes during complementary feeding.Longitudinal repeated-measures cohort; mixed-effects modelsExpand

In plain English

Abstract reports that the study assessed relationships between ultra-processed food (UPF) intake, dietary intake, and infant growth during complementary feeding using linear mixed-effects models in a cohort of 114 infants with 3-day diet records at 5, 9, and 12 months. The abstract presents detailed results for dietary outcomes (UPF energy contribution, added sugar, sodium) but does not report growth outcome effect estimates or associations in the abstract text.

Key findings

  • Growth outcomes were modeled with linear mixed-effects models alongside dietary intake, but the abstract does not report any growth-related effect estimates or associations.
“This study assesses the relationship between UPF, dietary intake, and infant growth during complementary feeding.”
What this piece can’t prove
  • Abstract does not present specific growth outcome measures (e.g., weight-for-age, length-for-age, weight-for-length) or the timing of anthropometry used in models.
  • Multiple testing correction (Bonferroni) was applied; it is unclear which tests were included and how this affected growth outcome inference.

2 further details could not be confirmed from the summary.

Finally, the search trail

Method layer

NewsLink found the paper. Tessa takes you deeper.

NewsLink checks the story. Tessa is where you inspect the paper, authors, evidence, and research context.

Open the paper in Tessa

Ultra-Processed Food Intake Is Associated with High Consumption of Added Sugar and Sodium in U.S. Infants

Nutrients · 2026

Source record (opens in a new tab)

Why this one

Near certain

NewsLink found the paper. Tessa is where you inspect it deeply.

Papers considered

The selected paper, plus nearby candidates.

Crossref, PubMed, Europe PMC · 36 candidate papers

Selected

Ultra-Processed Food Intake Is Associated with High Consumption of Added Sugar and Sodium in U.S. Infants

Nutrients · 2026 · Crossref

Source (opens in a new tab)
Candidate

Effects of Early Exposure to Protein-Rich Complementary Foods on Toddlers Liking and Acceptance: The MINT Study

Current Developments in Nutrition · 2025 · Crossref

Source (opens in a new tab)

And 30 more candidates considered.