Policy shift accelerates as health concerns mount over ultra-processed foods

As ultra-processed foods become central to public health debates, regulators and researchers move towards defining and restricting these products amidst rising links to obesity and chronic diseases.

Ultra-processed foods have moved from a niche nutrition debate into the centre of public health policy, with researchers, regulators and food companies all wrestling with how to define them and what, if anything, should be done about them. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor of nutritional sciences at Penn State, said the issue has gained urgency because these foods are widely eaten, often cheaper than less processed alternatives and increasingly tied to concern over obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

Petersen drew a distinction between foods that are industrially formulated and those that are merely processed for safety or shelf life. In her view, a can of vegetables with salt added, or pasteurised milk, should not be placed in the same category as sweets, crisps, processed meats and other products made with additives designed to alter flavour, texture or appearance. Healthline and Cleveland Clinic both describe ultra-processed foods as heavily altered products that commonly contain preservatives, sweeteners, hydrogenated oils and other additives rarely used in home kitchens.

The health concerns are substantial. Petersen said research links higher intake of ultra-processed foods with obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and some cancers, while clinical trials have shown that diets heavy in these products can lead people to eat more and gain weight. The American Heart Association has also pointed out that more than half of daily calories in the typical US diet come from ultra-processed foods, echoing federal estimates that children get more than 60% of their energy from them and adults just over 50%.

For consumers trying to make sense of labels, Petersen said the nutrition facts panel is more useful than the ingredient list alone. A long or scientific-sounding ingredient name is not necessarily a red flag, she said, whereas products that are high in added sugar, saturated fat or sodium are more likely to deserve caution. That advice lines up with guidance from the American Heart Association and the FDA, which say the key question is not simply whether a food is processed, but how much sugar, salt and unhealthy fat it contains.

The policy response is still taking shape. According to the FDA, the federal government is working on a definition for ultra-processed foods, in part because different groups use different standards. Axios reported that California has already become the first state to move on school meals, with a law that will phase out the most concerning ultra-processed foods over the coming decade and require formal state definitions by June 2028. Time reported that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., during his January 2025 Senate confirmation hearings, condemned ultra-processed foods and additives, though he said he did not plan to ban them outright.

Petersen said the most practical advice for families is not perfection but gradual improvement. A healthy diet, she said, is built around vegetables, fruit, whole grains, beans and nuts, while limiting foods high in sugar, salt and saturated fat. She acknowledged that the food system makes that difficult: ultra-processed products are widespread, convenient and often less expensive, and fresh produce can be costly or spoil quickly. For that reason, she said, canned or frozen fruit and vegetables can still be a better choice than skipping them altogether.