Ultra-Processed Foods May Be Fueling a Major Global Health Crisis

Experts are once again raising red flags about ultra-processed foods, or UPFs. And this time, they’re armed with a growing body of data.

In November, researchers published a trio of papers in The Lancet, providing a detailed look at how UPFs might impact our health. 

“The first paper summarizes the evidence, showing that ultra-processed foods are spreading globally,” the team wrote in a statement. “Our second paper outlines policy options for governments that wish to address the problem,” and the third, they shared, “asks why ultra-processed foods are taking over human diets and how to mobilize a global public health response.” 

Here’s what you need to know about their findings. 

How are ultra-processed foods defined? 

The researchers used the Nova food classification system to determine which foods are considered UPF, categorizing products into four groups. The first group includes foods that are completely unprocessed or minimally processed. This minimal processing can include measures of food preservation, including the “removal of inedible or unwanted parts, cutting, drying, crushing, grinding, fractioning, roasting, boiling, pasteurisation, refrigeration, freezing, placing in containers, vacuum packaging, and non-alcoholic fermentation.” 

Group two is for “processed culinary ingredients,” which include foods that are still close to their natural state, such as oils, butter, lard, table sugar, honey, and salt. The team also mentioned that these substances “are not consumed alone but are used to season and cook group one foods and turn them into freshly prepared dishes and meals.” 

Group three includes foods that contain added salt, sugar, and oil, such as vegetables in brine, fruits in syrup, canned and cured fish, breads and cheeses, and any “commercial food or drink product made from foods in group one and ingredients from group two.”

And last up is group four, which represents ultra-processed foods. “UPFs are branded, commercial formulations made from cheap ingredients extracted or derived from whole foods and combined with additives,” the team wrote. “Most contain little to no whole food, and are designed to compete with the other three Nova groups … and maximize industry profits.” They noted that these UPFs can have “attractive packaging,” and often feature “implied or actual health claims, usually made with synthetic materials, concludes the sequence of processes.” 

UPFs also include all “carbonated soft drinks; reconstituted fruit juices and fruit drinks; cocoa, other modified dairy drinks, and energy drinks; flavored yogurt; confectionery; margarines; cured meat or fish with added nitrites or nitrates; poultry and fish nuggets and sticks, sausages, hot dogs, luncheon meats, and other reconstituted meat products; powdered instant soups, noodles, and desserts.” 

Ultra-processed foods are crowding out traditional diets

To understand global consumption patterns, the team analyzed dietary surveys from 36 countries and identified a clear trend: UPFs are increasingly replacing traditional, whole-food diets. They found that UPFs now account for between 9% of total energy intake in places like Iran and up to 60% in the U.S. The trend also appears to be rising elsewhere, including in Spain, where UPF purchases rose from 11% to 31.7% of food purchases, and in Canada, where they increased from 24.4% to 54.9% in the span of a few decades.

Diet quality tends to degrade as UPF consumption climbs

Not surprisingly, diets high in ultra-processed foods generally have lower nutritional quality. A meta-analysis across 13 countries revealed that people who consumed the most UPFs ingested more sugar, total fat, saturated fat, and calories, while getting less fiber, protein, and essential micronutrients such as potassium and magnesium. The study also found that those who ate the most UPFs had higher intakes of additives, including food coloring and emulsifiers. Interestingly, the researchers noted that in two studies, participants who ate more UPFs tended to eat more quickly than those who ate less.

UPFs tend to increase the risk of multiple chronic diseases 

The researchers in this Lancet report reviewed 104 prospective studies and found that 92 of them showed a positive association between higher UPF consumption and at least one adverse health outcome. This included everything from increased risk of obesity to type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease to depression, and even “all-cause mortality.” This finding is supported by other recent studies, including one by Harvard researchers, which found a strong connection between ultra-processed foods and adenomas—masses of cells that are precursors to colorectal cancer. 

What the experts say we can, and should, do about it

The researchers clearly outlined potential solutions to improve global food relationships. Their paper presented several policy options, including setting limits on certain additives and implementing “mandatory front-of-pack warning labels, which work well to inform consumers and reduce purchasing.” They recommended protecting children from UPF advertising on digital platforms, taxing sugary drinks, and using the revenue to subsidize fruits and vegetables for lower-income households, along with “curbing corporate power.” As the experts wrote in their statement, “governments could do more to regulate companies’ portfolios and monitor and constrain the proportion of sales from ultra-processed foods; strengthen competition policy and consider tax reforms that curb excessive market power.” 

While federal government regulation hasn’t gone this far yet, some U.S. states are already taking baby steps, including California, which approved legislation in September that will ban ultra-processed foods from public school meals by 2035.

Of course, like any study, this one has limitations too. 

“The claims about the health effects of ultra-processed foods are largely based on observational data,” Gunter Kuhnle, professor of nutrition and food science at the University of Reading, who wasn’t involved in the study, said. “Randomised clinical trials — the gold standard in nutrition research — have not given cause for concern: While they have shown that some ultra-processed foods can result in overconsumption, they have also shown that a diet with ultra-processed foods that follows current dietary guidelines is not detrimental to health.”

Still, the researchers said they believe their findings are more than enough to keep the UPF conversation moving forward. “Our papers show that without policy action and a coordinated global response, ultra-processed foods will continue to rise in human diets, harming health, economies, culture, and planet,” they wrote. The time to act is now.”