KANSAS CITY, MO — The current lack of a comprehensive definition for ultra-processed foods (UPFs) means that, for now, it exists in the crosshairs of perception, reality and politics. It’s difficult for everyone, from bakers to policymakers, to agree on the best path forward to provide clear, actionable nutrition guidance for consumers. While the food industry awaits the FDA’s definition of UPFs, commercial bakeries can seize the moment as an opportunity for innovation, both in messaging and product.
The emergence of the four-tiered NOVA Food Classification System in 2009, which categorizes foods by level of processing rather than nutritional value, added confusion rather than clarification because of a disconnect between what it was designed to do — serve as a research tool — and how it’s being implemented as a guideline. Nearly 20 years later, that confusion has taken on a life of its own.
“One thing that’s helpful to keep in mind is that [the NOVA] framework was put together by Brazilian public health researchers to provide a tool to close the massive knowledge gap between what we know about food and health and the clear trajectory of poor dietary health outcomes,” said Charlotte Biltekoff, PhD, professor of American studies and food science and technology and Darrel Corti-endowed professor of food, wine and culture at the University of California — Davis. Her most recent book, Real Food, Real Facts: Processed Food and the Politics of Knowledge, examines the intersection of food, science, processed food and consumer concerns.



