0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Detection Methods Human Health Effects Policy & Risk Sign in to save

Not Food: Time to Call Ultra-Processed Products by Their True Name

Gastronomy 2024 6 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 55 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Susan L. Prescott, Ashka Naik, Alan C. Logan

Summary

This perspective argues that ultra-processed products should no longer be classified as food, given mounting evidence linking them to increased risk of chronic disease, poor mental health, and higher mortality. Researchers reviewed studies showing these products often contain additives, synthetic chemicals, and packaging-derived contaminants including microplastics. The piece calls for a fundamental rethinking of how heavily processed products are labeled and regulated.

Models

Over the last decade, volumes of international studies have illuminated the potential harms associated with ultra-processed products sold as foods. These potential harms include, but are not limited to, an increased risk of non-communicable diseases, poor mental health, and early mortality. Studies examining such products and health have included top-down methods (e.g., nutritional epidemiology), bottom-up approaches (e.g., animal and pre-clinical mechanistic studies), and human intervention trials. The identification of potential harms associated with high levels of food processing has been aided by the NOVA Food Classification System, developed around 2009. Here, in this perspective essay, we argue that lexicon matters, and the continued reference to such ultra-processed products as “foods” is a barrier to policy-related discourse. Using a historical framework, we contend that the term “ultra-processed food” sits in foundational misalignment with how food has been defined, perceived, deliberated on, engaged with, and experienced by humans over millennia. Moreover, we suggest that language that positions ultra-processed products as “food” is part of a mindset that privileges technology and the continued application of isolated nutrients as a means to remedy deeply rooted socioeconomic problems. In the context of global policy, the parallels between food-like ultra-processed products and tobacco are extraordinary.

Sign in to start a discussion.

More Papers Like This

Article Tier 2

The Impact of Ultra-Processed Foods on Nutritional Quality, Food Safety and Human Health

This review examines how ultra-processed foods affect nutritional quality and food safety, including the leaching of chemical additives and microplastics from food packaging into highly processed food products, and discusses implications for human health from combined dietary exposures.

Clinical Trial Tier 1

Microplastics and mental health: The role of ultra-processed foods

This paper proposes that microplastics in ultra-processed foods may partly explain why these foods are linked to worse mental health outcomes. With over 50% of calories in the U.S. coming from ultra-processed sources, and recent findings showing alarming microplastic levels in human brains, the authors suggest that food processing and packaging introduce microplastics that could affect brain function.

Article Tier 2

Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses

This umbrella review of epidemiological studies examines the health effects of ultra-processed foods, which are a significant source of human microplastic exposure due to plastic packaging. Ultra-processed foods have been linked to a wide range of adverse health outcomes in population studies. The connection between processed food packaging and microplastic contamination adds another dimension to why reducing ultra-processed food consumption may benefit health.

Article Tier 2

Ultra-processed foods and cardiometabolic health: public health policies to reduce consumption cannot wait

Researchers argue that the strong and growing evidence linking ultra-processed foods to heart disease, diabetes, and other metabolic conditions justifies immediate public health action. Ultra-processed foods may cause harm through multiple pathways, including their plastic packaging, chemical additives, and poor nutritional quality. The authors stress that waiting for complete scientific understanding of every mechanism should not delay policies to reduce consumption of these foods.

Article Tier 2

A critical perspective on early communications concerning human health aspects of microplastics

This paper argues that the public debate around microplastics in food has outpaced the actual scientific evidence, which has mainly shown that microplastics are present in certain products without demonstrating specific health effects. The authors point out that food and beverages are likely a minor exposure pathway compared to the plastics we encounter in everyday life through packaging, clothing, and household items. They urge a more balanced discussion that addresses the root causes of plastic pollution rather than focusing narrowly on individual food products.

Share this paper