Not all ultra-processed foods are bad for you

A nuanced look at ultra-processed foods shows some options may support nutrition while policy debates continue.

Not all ultra-processed foods are bad for you

Ultra-processed foods account for a large share of calories in the United States. A CDC report shows Americans get more than 50 percent of daily calories from highly processed foods, and kids and teens pull in about two-thirds from 2021 to 2023. Diets high in UPFs have been linked to obesity, heart disease, colorectal and breast cancers, diabetes, and depression. A study from April found that for every 10 percent more UPFs in a person’s diet, the risk of premature death from any cause rose by about three percent. The analysis also tied one in seven premature US deaths to UPFs such as processed meats, candy, ice cream, and even some salads and breads. Yet not all UPFs are equal. Items like frozen vegetables, canned tomatoes, whole-grain bread, and unsweetened Greek yogurt can be nutritious options because processing preserves nutrients and avoids risky additives. Access matters too: UPFs are often cheaper than unprocessed foods, helping families stretch budgets and get dinner on the table quickly.

Experts say the key is distinction. The American Heart Association notes that foods with industrial additives are often high in saturated fat, added sugar, and salt, but not all UPFs are harmful. Some packaged items like certain whole-grain breads, low-sugar yogurts, tomato sauces, and nut or bean spreads can support diet quality while remaining affordable. Internationally, several countries have moved to limit UPFs in schools or impose taxes; the European Union and Canada have taken steps, while the United States has not set a formal regulatory definition. The risk is a broad label that could confuse shoppers or undermine trust if not carefully designed. Nutritionists urge looking for short ingredient lists and nutrient-rich components rather than painting all UPFs with the same brush.

This analysis makes a clear point: nutrition science, policy design, and daily eating habits collide in real life. Processing is not inherently evil; the pattern of consumption and the availability of healthier options matter more. Because UPFs can be affordable and convenient, policies should help people make better choices without cutting access.

The risk for readers is mixed messaging. If regulators oversimplify UPFs with a broad definition, shoppers may ignore warnings. The path forward is targeted guidance that recognizes nutritious UPFs while steering people toward minimally processed options. This shift requires clearer labeling, better nutrition data, and sustained public education.

Highlights

Policy and practice must adapt as science evolves.