The FDA’s push to standardize the definition of ultra-processed foods could reshape American diets and force the food industry to reformulate thousands of products that make up 60% of the average American’s daily calories.
At a Glance
- Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) constitute about 70% of grocery store items and make up 60% of an average American’s daily calories and 70% of children’s diets
- Studies have linked UPFs to health issues including obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and early death
- The FDA is working to develop a standard definition for UPFs that could encourage companies to label products as “non-ultra-processed”
- The NOVA food classification system categorizes foods based on their level of processing, but definitions have varied significantly
- Policy recommendations include investing in nutrition research and strengthening nutritional standards in federal food programs
Understanding Ultra-Processed Foods and Their Impact
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are industrial formulations made from substances derived from foods and additives, often containing ingredients like high-fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils. According to research, these products make up approximately 70% of grocery store items in the United States and constitute 60% of the average American’s daily caloric intake, with that number rising to 70% for children. This prevalence has raised significant concerns among health professionals and policymakers, especially as research continues to link these foods with serious health consequences.
The health impacts of UPFs are primarily documented through observational research showing associations with obesity, cardiovascular problems, certain cancers, depression, and gastrointestinal disorders. These foods are typically nutrient-poor but calorie-dense, which can lead to overconsumption and potential weight gain. The mechanisms connecting UPFs to disease may be both direct, through the effects of certain ingredients, and indirect, involving excess calorie intake and nutrient deficiencies that develop over time.
The Evolution of UPF Classification
The NOVA food classification system has been the primary framework categorizing foods based on their level of processing. However, since its inception, the definition of ultra-processed foods has varied significantly, creating inconsistencies in identifying which foods fall into this category. This has led to confusion among consumers, researchers, and policymakers. The definition has evolved to incorporate various elements including food additives, convenience factors, and palatability enhancers.
Public health advice from NOVA suggests avoiding ultra-processed foods to improve nutrient intake, particularly concerning fat, sugar, and salt. Studies in the US, UK, France, Brazil, and Canada show changes in sugar and fiber intake across different levels of ultra-processed food consumption. However, research has not consistently linked body mass index with ultra-processed food consumption in national surveys from the UK and France, indicating the complexity of the relationship between UPFs and health outcomes.
FDA’s Initiative and Policy Implications
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is now working to develop a standardized definition for ultra-processed foods, a move that could have far-reaching implications for food policy and public health. This initiative aims to encourage companies to label products as “non-ultra-processed” and potentially drive reformulation of many common food products. The U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans do not currently mention UPFs, but the 2025–2030 Advisory Committee has been tasked with evaluating research on UPF consumption.
Research has identified 25 policy actions related to UPFs from 1983 to 2022, with most occurring between 2011 and 2022. Internationally, some countries have already integrated UPFs into dietary guidelines and school food programs, which could inform future U.S. policies. Policy recommendations include investing in nutrition research, which currently receives less than 5% of the NIH budget, prioritizing children’s health, and strengthening nutritional standards in programs like WIC and CACFP.
Regulatory Approaches and Future Directions
The U.S. regulatory system for food additives differs significantly from European approaches, allowing easier introduction of new additives compared to the precautionary principle used in Europe. This difference in regulatory philosophy has implications for how ultra-processed foods are defined and regulated across regions. As the FDA works toward a standard definition, it must balance public health concerns with industry interests and practical implementation considerations.
The development of a standard definition for ultra-processed foods represents a significant step in addressing the public health crisis associated with diet-related chronic diseases. By engaging with experts, stakeholders, and the public, the FDA aims to create a policy framework that effectively responds to current trends in food production, marketing, and consumption. The resulting framework could guide legislative and regulatory initiatives, potentially reshaping the landscape of food governance and public health outcomes for generations to come.
