What you should know about ultra-processed foods

Should you avoid eating ultra-processed foods?

Nutrition policy advocates think you should. That’s a surprisingly recent perspective, as is their recommendation that ultra-processed foods should be better identified on food labels. But the wheels of government policy move slowly; while 2025 was once seen as an opportunity to set that labeling change  in motion, it’s now unlikely to occur any time soon.

Whole, minimally processed foods are popularly seen as good choices for a nutritious diet (just think of Michael Pollan’s bestselling advice, “Don’t eat anything your great grandmother wouldn’t recognize as food.”) However, that advice hasn’t been entirely reflected in federal nutrition guidelines. Researchers contended for a long time that “all foods are processed” and that a food’s health potential should be defined based on the nutrient content, not the extent of processing.  That approach changed, though, after a newer method of classifying foods revealed an extensive list of negative health outcomes linked to higher intakes of ultra-processed food (which is generally defined as a category of processed food products which contain very little, if any, whole food.)

As a direct result, influential nutrition policy advocates have called for mandatory labels to help consumers identify ultra-processed foods and reduce their consumption. Advocates believe such tools would help encourage people to center their diets around whole and minimally processed foods, to best support their health.

At one point 2025 was seen as a new chance to identify ultra-processed foods for consumers. That’s because the federal Dietary Guidelines for Americans are being updated. The guidelines, updated every five years, influence a broad range of nutrition programs (including the national school lunch program), educational efforts (including MyPlate) and funding priorities for nutrition education and research. They are an ambitious and impactful target for influencing U.S. nutrition policy.  The guidelines, developed to support healthy eating patterns for the general U.S. population, have always previously made recommendations for healthy eating based on specific nutrients of public health concern, without considering the extent of food processing. In 2024, for the first time, the scientific committee responsible for updating these guidelines listed ultra-processed food as a new topic for review, noting a growing body of research linking higher rates of ultra-processed food consumption with poor health outcomes. However, the committee ultimately did not recommend addressing ultra-processed food in the guidelines when it issued its report in December, saying there was insufficient research to back such a change. Leading food policy scholar Marion Nestle called that decision “a travesty.”

Still, there is a good chance you will be hearing more about this controversial category of food products, which make up an increasing portion of the U.S. diet.

How much ultra-processed food DO Americans eat?

Ultra-processed foods represent three-fourths of the total number of food products in U.S. supermarkets and it is estimated that ultra-processed foods make up over one half of the total calories consumed by adults in the U.S., Canada, and the United Kingdom. Children and adolescents have even higher intake patterns. These rates have increased in recent decades.

Americans are relying more on pre-packaged, convenience foods that require very little effort to prepare beyond opening a carton and popping in the microwave.  Many of these convenience foods contain ingredients not found in home kitchens, including thickeners, emulsifiers, flavor enhancers, preservatives, and very little (if any) whole intact food.  Today’s food products contain twice as many additives per product than similar products two decades ago, according to a 2022 research study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

Over the past two decades there has also been a notable increase in nutrition research focusing on the health outcomes associated with industrial food processing and the use of food additives.

The concept of ultra-processed food was first described by Brazilian scientist Carlos Monteiro in 2009 .  Monteiro describes ultra processed foods as those with “little if any whole food” and containing ingredients with “little or no culinary use.”  These industrial formulations have been described, as one article put it, as “made by deconstructing natural food into its chemical constituents, modifying them and recombing them into new forms that bear little resemblance to anything found in nature.”

What foods are ultra-processed?

Informally, ultra-processed foods are “unable to be made in home kitchens” and “not obviously related to the whole foods from which they were derived,” according to Nestle. Nestle also describes ultra-processed food as “heavily marketed” and “highly profitable” for the food industry – factors which have accelerated the increase in consumption patterns in the U.S. and some other countries.  Technically, though, ultra processed foods are now most often defined in nutrition research studies using the Nova classification system which groups food based on increasing levels of industrial processing. For example, the Nova classification can be used to classify whole foods (such as an apple) as group 1, processed ingredients (apple juice) as group 2, minimally processed foods (applesauce with sugar and cinnamon) as group 3, and ultra-processed industrial formulations with little whole food (such as apple candy, when made with artificial sweeteners, preservatives or stabilizers) as group 4.

Many of the ingredients found in ultra-processed foods are added for longer shelf lives and enhanced taste, and they can also be added to mimic other sensory properties of foods, such as the use of gums and starches to create gluten-free breads, or stabilizers and emulsifiers for vegan ice creams. One reason food manufacturers incorporate these additives is because these ingredients can mimic the texture and mouthfeel of bread, dairy products and a range of other foods containing ingredients that people may need to avoid because of food allergies and intolerances.  This also extends to the “plant-based” trend as products such as the Impossible Burger, a recent entry into the veggie burger category whose product website lists “protein from soy…flavor from heme, yeast, and other flavors, oils… (and) binders (to) hold it together.”  This plant-based product contains over a dozen ingredients and is a useful representation of how ultra processed foods are engineered for the marketplace.

Is eating ultra-processed food harmful?

The majority of health research on ultra-processed food is based on observational research designs that follow people over a period of time, rely on self-reported food intake and are unable to demonstrate true cause and effect relationships.  However, when these individual “real world” (as opposed to “experimental”) studies are combined and analyzed together a clear and consistent pattern emerges, linking higher consumption of ultra-processed foods with a wide range of health conditions. This emerging body of evidence was summarized in a 2024 “umbrella review” article published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). This meta-analysis of 45 previous review articles analyzing a range of health outcomes associated with ultra-processed food intake reported that higher ultra-processed food consumption rates were associated with 32 different health conditions and disorders – including mental health, heart health, and gastrointestinal health outcomes. The strongest associations were observed for cardiovascular disease, mental health disorders, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and overall mortality.

This growing body of well-designed observational research, conducted in different population groups, all over the world, controlling for nutrient intake and other variables, demonstrates a consistent relationship between higher rates of ultra processed food consumption and poor health outcomes.  The researchers have demonstrated meaningful differences attributed to these conditions, for example, a 40% greater risk of heart disease, diabetes, and metabolic health outcomes were reported in the 2024 “umbrella” review in BMJ.  Nations with the highest rates of ultra-processed food intake seem to also have the highest rates of obesity, and a 2019 experimental research study found that a high intake of ultra processed food led to large increases in the number of calories consumed, as well as significant weight gain (in a tightly controlled research environment).  In discussing this consistent body of research linking intake of ultra processed food with poor health outcomes, Monteiro asserts that “no reason exists to believe that humans can fully adapt to these products.”

Changing the paradigm

Notably lower intakes of ultra-processed foods have been observed in Portugal, Italy, Brazil, Taiwan, and many other parts of the world.  Unlike the U.S., a growing number of nations around the world are making efforts to address this growing health concern by explicitly stating the need to avoid highly processed foods in their national guidelines for healthy eating.  For instance, Brazil’s food guidelines specifically recommend that to best support health, citizens should “Always prefer natural or minimally processed foods and freshly made dishes and meals to ultra-processed products.”

Some U.S. nutrition researchers argue that more research is needed before making any population-based recommendations about ultra-processed foods here in the U.S. Critics of the Nova concept argue the need to better refine this classification, as it is currently so broad that the Nova Group 4 category makes up over half of the calories consumed in U.S. and over 70% of food products on U.S. supermarket shelves. The lack of a clear mechanism for explaining the relationship between ultra processed food and health outcomes is another reason why some in the medical and nutrition professions are hesitant to start telling everyone to avoid convenience foods (and spend more time in the kitchen, which isn’t practical for many people).

Despite these hesitations, a 2021 research study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition concluded that there is a need to limit ultra-processed food intake and “encourage natural or minimally processed foods, as several national nutritional policies recommend.” This statement, published in a high-impact U.S. nutrition journal illustrates the paradigm shift occurring in nutrition science. Yes, it is true that “all foods are processed” but it’s also true that the most health promoting foods seem to be those that are as close to their original, whole food forms as possible. The first nutrition article to cite the concept of ultra processed food was published in 2009, the same time Michael Pollan was warning of the dangers of industrial food with sayings such as “if it came from a plant, eat it, if it was made in a plant, don’t.”

Nutrition researchers around the world are recognizing the long-held wisdom of “natural food” shoppers — that a diet centered around single-ingredient, whole foods should be a goal for anyone who is interested in selecting foods that best support their health. One day, official government policy may follow.

Nick Rose is an Assistant Professor at Bastyr University where he teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in nutrition research, sustainable food systems, and community nutrition. Nick recently earned a Ph.D. in Food systems and a Certificate of Graduate Study in Public Health, both from the University of Vermont, and his 2024 dissertation is titled “Beyond nutrition panels: a mixed methods analysis of the healthfulness perceptions of natural and ultra processed foods.”