This column is part of our The Last Word series, which invites noted professionals to provide closing thoughts at the end of each issue of Commercial Baking. See the full issue here.

KANSAS CITY, MO — The ultra-processed food (UPF) conversation has moved from academic journals to the bread aisle. For bakers, the instinct is to play defense: argue the science, lobby for better definitions, wait for NOVA to be clarified. That’s a mistake. Consumers aren’t waiting for scientific consensus; they’re trying to buy food that feels right for them now.

The consumer driving this conversation is one I call the “Integrity Seeker.” For years, the health-
conscious shopper focused on the “chemistry” of food, scanning ingredient lists for words they couldn’t pronounce. That mindset hasn’t disappeared, but it’s gaining a physics companion. Integrity Seekers are asking a new question: Why are you breaking down a perfectly good whole thing (like a grain or fruit) just to rebuild it? They judge food by how far it’s been transformed from its original form, drawing a sharp line between processing that exploits an ingredient and processing that enhances it. Extruding, isolating and puffing read as exploitive (done to force palatability or disguise cheap inputs). Fermenting, stone-milling and even laminating read as justified, done in an understandable way to make food convenient and delicious.

Consumers aren’t rejecting processing if it’s justifiable, and baking is the original justified processing. Heat transforms flour and water into bread, not disguising a less expensive input, but unlocking it. That puts bakers on the right side of this conversation, but you have to claim it, not assume it.