Join Health Affairs for a virtual conversation between me and Angela Odoms-Young of Cornell University discussing the evolution of US food and nutrition policy, the current policy landscape, and thoughts on what lies ahead. It’s at 1:00 p.m. EDT. To join the Webinar, register here.
by Marion Nestle
Mar
31
2025
Industry-influenced opinion of the week: Ultra-processed foods
If you have any doubts about the value of the concept of ultra-processed, the breadth and extent of industry pushback against the idea is excellent evidence. The concept is an existential threat to the processed food industry, and it is fighting back. The Italian food industry is especially concerned because it also has the Nutri-Score front-of-pack labeling system to contend with; the letter grades on ultra-processed products tend to be C’s, D’s, and E’s—as bad as they come.
Here’s an example of the pushback.
The opinion piece: Visioli, F., Del Rio, D., Fogliano, V., Marangoni F, Ricci C, Poli A. Ultra-processed foods and health: are we correctly interpreting the available evidence?. Eur J Clin Nutr 79, 177–180 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-024-01515-8
Conclusions: In summary, the available evidence regarding how different UPF were associated with health and the results of studies investigating specific food additives question the possibility that ultra-processing per se is the real culprit. Possibly, other unaccounted-for confounding factors play major roles. Consequently, the recommendation of limiting or avoiding foods carrying an unspecific “ultra-processed food” label based on the NOVA classification currently has poor scientific grounds and should be regarded as scientifically weak and in need of experimental confirmation. Furthermore, prompt public policy interventions on this topic, as advocated by some authors are premature and should be thoroughly reconsidered before being released.
Competing interests: AP and FM are the Chairman and Scientific Director, respectively, of NFI—Nutrition Foundation of Italy, a non-profit organisation partially supported by Italian and non-Italian Food Companies. All other authors declare no conflict of interest associated with this publication.
Comment: The senior (last) author and one other run the Italian Nutrition Foundation, an organization sponsored by food companies, Italan and international. This makes the Foundation an industry front group, pretending to be independent, but not. Its job is to further the commercial interests of its corporate sponsors, which is what it is doing here. It is using the tobacco industry playbook: cast doubt on the research, suggest alternatives, argue against regulation. The foundation’s authors are joined by academic and government authors, who have their own, not necessarily commercial, reasons for unhappiness with the UPF concept, which focuses on degree of processing, not nutrient content. Yes, nutrients matter, but there are better ways of getting them than through UPFs.