Rethinking Ultra-Processed in a Time of Rising Nutrition and Health Concerns
Debates about ultra-processed foods have intensified across public health and nutrition policy, often creating more confusion than clarity. As CEO Amy DeLisio highlights, unclear terminology can erode trust and risk stigmatizing foods that are safe, affordable and culturally meaningful for families and communities.
In a new opinion piece for Agri-Pulse Communications, Amy underscores the need for science-aligned definitions and more effective communication to help distinguish between processing that enhances safety and equity versus products that may contribute to chronic disease.
Read the article below or access it directly on Agri-Pulse.
It's time for clarity on ultra-processed foods
America’s health crisis is unfolding in plain sight: an abundance of food choices alongside rising disease. Discussions around ultra-processed foods (UPFs) reveal how access and policy shape what ends up on the plate for millions of Americans. As rates of chronic disease and childhood obesity continue to rise and disparities widen, understanding how food processing shapes nutrition and health is essential for science-based solutions.
Many families struggle to access nutrient-dense foods that support lifelong wellness, strategies to improve diet quality while meeting people's unique needs, preferences, and values are complex. Understanding how foods are produced, including the role processing plays in safety, nutrition and access is essential to improving diet quality.
Not All Processed Foods Are Created Equal — and Not All Processing Is Bad
UPFs are increasingly the center of the conversation around food and nutrition, from consumers to health experts and policymakers. However, a lack of understanding of what constitutes UPFs creates confusion. Much of the food we eat today undergoes processing to improve safety, preserve or enhance nutrients, and make healthy options more affordable benefits worth considering as we discuss the role different types of processing play in supporting health.
Research shows that some processed foods that have low nutritional value are consistently linked to poor health outcomes. However, there are many nutrient dense foods, like whole-grain cereals, canned beans, frozen vegetables and yogurt, that retain their nutritional value and have beneficial health impacts.
Pasteurization ensures milk safety and quality, enabling the production of nutrient-rich dairy foods that contribute essential nutrients across the lifespan. Fermentation, used for yogurt, kefir and many cheeses, adds beneficial bacteria that support gut health, strengthen the microbiome and provide functional benefits beyond basic nutrition
Processing also allows companies to improve nutritional profiles—reducing sodium, added sugars and saturated fats while fortifying beneficial nutrients. Yet these innovations are often overlooked in UPF classifications that focus on the extent of processing rather than nutrient density.
An Evolving Regulatory Landscape Requires Clarity and Sound Science
As awareness of UPFs grows, policymakers are examining how definitions and regulations might shape nutrition guidance and food access. This reflects both the importance and the complexity of the issue and the need for careful, science-based approaches.
California was the first state to address UPFs by passing a law in 2023 banning synthetic food dyes from being served in schools to Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order in January 2025 directing state agencies to assess the health effects of additives and ingredients commonly found in UPFs.
The Real Food, Healthy Kids act, signed into law on October 8, 2025, seeks to phase out harmful UPFs from public schools by 2035. The law defines UPFs as foods high in saturated fat, sodium or added sugars, and contains industrial additives like artificial colors, flavors, sweeteners and emulsifiers and tasks the California Department of Public Health with identifying harmful UPFs for removal from school meals.
At the national level, the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S. Department of Agriculture jointly issued a Request for Information in July 2025 to explore whether a uniform federal definition of UPFs should be adopted for use in food labeling, research and policy.
In early 2026, the new Dietary Guidelines for Americans may address UPF-related recommendations which could affect foods available through federal nutrition programs, including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the National School Lunch and School Breakfast programs, which collectively serve more than 30 million families nationwide. These programs are a vital source of nutrition security for families and are especially critical for pregnant women and children, when proper nutrition sets the foundation for healthy growth, brain development and lifelong wellness.
Policy decisions must be informed by credible science, reflect the realities of food production, and avoid unintentionally limiting access to nutritious foods.
A Call to Action for the Agriculture and Food Community
The food and agriculture sectors have an opportunity to lead by showing how responsibly produced foods can support balanced eating patterns and improve public health outcomes. Educating consumers and policymakers on the role of processing methods to improve safety, shelf life, and nutritional value while reducing food waste is essential.
By staying engaged and collaborating across the food system, we can ensure that nutrition policy advances health, reflects sound science and supports resilient, equitable access to nutrient-dense foods.