Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has continuously advocated against ultra-processed foods, and with his confirmation as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, the food industry can expect those foods to be a key focus of 2025.
But what exactly are ultra-processed foods? Are they as bad for you as some would have you believe? And what should the food industry prepare for?
While there is no real, single definition for these foods, there is some agreement that they include products made primarily of fats, oils, sugars, and starches, and/or manufacturing additives that would not be commonly used by a home cook; particularly those linked to health problems (e.g., obesity, diabetes, etc.).
Even as originally coined for the NOVA Food Classification System as industrial formulations made entirely or mostly from substances extracted from foods, derived from food constituents, or synthesized in laboratories from food substrates or other organic sources, the term is infused with a negative connotation. Yet that same NOVA System’s list of foods considered to be ultra-processed includes such foods as fruit yogurts, packaged vegetables, and even infant formulas. So, is the perception of unhealthy really relevant; or is ultra-processed being unduly maligned?
A paper on the NOVA systems takes this a step further, noting that in the last decade processed foods (PF) have been systematically criticized “as if all PF were nutrient-poor and as if everything homemade were nutritionally rich and safe for consumption.” Not only is this misleading, as many PFs have more positive nutrient benefits than raw or home-prepared products, it “dismisses the proven benefits of diets chosen with the right mix of foods at all levels of processing.”
So, there is some work to be done in better defining the term ultra-processed to adequately reflect healthfulness or lack thereof, particularly if there are to be regulations, or even guidance issued around it. On the plus side for the industry, although Kennedy reiterated his position during his Senate confirmation hearings against the foods, he indicated that his intention was not to ban ultra-processed foods, but to ensure Americans are educated about their health effects.
We would certainly agree that such education is critical, but also would assert that it should be balanced, and that it clarifies that processed, and even ultra-processed, does not necessarily equate to unhealthy. Unfortunately, the negative focus on processed foods has caused a widespread consumer perception that products that are not close to “natural” are unhealthy. But as stated in Food Business News, “the challenge is some form of processing is necessary to turn plants into edible ingredients and finished products.” Additionally, the continuing growth of the global population is putting a stress on the world’s natural resources, and processing technologies can help meet the increasing demand for safe, nutritious, accessible food while conserving natural resources.
So, what should the food industry expect as 2025 rolls out – and what should food establishments be doing?
As a first step in deciphering the way forward, we took a look at what Kennedy himself has said he intends to do to “make America healthy again.” Key among his food-related goals, according to his MAHA website, are to:
- ban food additives and chemicals that other countries prohibit; and
- change regulations, research topics, and subsidies to reduce the dominance of ultra-processed food.
With additives and chemicals already undergoing close scrutiny by the states and, more recently, by the FDA, we can absolutely expect that this will not only continue to be a focus, but that it will increase in priority. So, food facilities should start taking a proactive look at your ingredient lists to determine how a product may need to be reformulated if an additive is banned. One place to start is to look at your chemical exposure and determine if you are using any chemicals, additives, etc. that are not allowed in the EU but are being used in your formulations. While we don’t know if this is an approach that will be taken, it is at least a starting point. Be aware of additive and chemical regulation and discussions, both domestic and foreign, and – yes – stay attuned to TAG’s newsletter for our continuing updates.
Recommendations for “ultra-processed” foods is a bit hazier, in part because of the lack of clarity in the definition and, in part, because of the unalterable need for processing and many of the so-called ultra-processed foods. But understanding that the focus on these foods is due to their lack of healthfulness (or perception thereof), it is wise to consider your ingredients with a focus on healthfulness and conduct your own consumer education on products that are mistakenly perceived as unhealthy.
At the beginning of the year, we predicted that 2025 would be a year of change, and that is already panning out. TAG will continue to work to stay, and keep you, informed through both our Insights articles and news blurbs – for which we are increasing our coverage of food industry-related government and regulatory news.
So, if you are not subscribed, click here to add our weekly newsletters to your priority reading list!
All written content in TAG articles, newsletters, and webpages is developed and written by TAG experts, not AI. We focus on the realities and the science to bring you the most current, exacting information possible.
