Research Links Ultra-Processed Foods to Higher Disease Risk

A study published by The Lancet warns that daily consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF) has reached historic levels worldwide, reshaping dietary patterns and increasing the risk of chronic disease. The research, comprising three coordinated papers and contributions from 43 international experts, presents one of the most comprehensive assessments to date on the health, economic and policy implications of UPF consumption. The authors call for a global response similar to past regulatory actions targeting the tobacco industry.

The Lancet series builds on the NOVA classification system developed in 2009 by Carlos Monteiro, Brazilian researcher, which categorizes foods into four groups based on processing levels. According to NOVA, ultra-processed products are industrial formulations made with substances not commonly used in household kitchens, including hydrogenated oils, syrups, emulsifiers, and flavorings. 

Monteiro said the global dietary shift is significant. “The growing consumption of ultra-processed foods is transforming diets worldwide, displacing fresh and minimally processed foods,” he honey, adding that this trend is driven by powerful global corporations supported by intense marketing and political lobbying.

Rising Consumption and Documented Health Risks

National dietary surveys included in the studies show rapid increases in UPF consumption over recent decades. Caloric intake from these products rose from 11% to 32% in Spain and from 4% to 10% in China over the past 30 years. In Mexico and Brazil, UPF participation doubled from 10% to 23%. In the United States and the United Kingdom, UPF levels have remained above 50% for more than 20 years.

The health evidence summarized by The Lancet includes 104 longitudinal studies, 92 of which associate higher UPF intake with adverse outcomes such as obesity, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and premature mortality. The research indicates that ultra-processed food consumption increases the risk of Type 2 diabetes by 25% and overweight or obesity by 21%. Mortality from all causes and cardiovascular disease rises by 18%. Depression risk also increases by 23%, according to several of the reviewed studies.

Mathilde Touvier, Representative, French National Institute of Health and Medical Research, said that while scientific debate is ongoing, the weight of evidence justifies policy intervention. “The growing number of studies suggests that diets high in ultra-processed foods harm health globally and supports the need for regulatory measures,” she noted.

Regulatory Proposals and Policy Responses

The second article in the Lancet series details potential government interventions. Camila Corvalán, Researcher, Chile’s Center for Research on Food Environments and Prevention of Chronic Diseases Associated with Nutrition, emphasized the need for coordinated action: “Governments must take the initiative and implement bold and coordinated policies, from including UPF indicators on front-of-package labels to restricting commercialization and implementing taxes to finance greater access to nutritious and affordable foods.”

The researchers highlight Brazil’s school food program, which aims to source 90% of inputs from fresh or minimally processed foods by 2026,  as a relevant policy precedent.

Barry Popkin, Researcher, University of North Carolina argued that labeling should specify the additives and industrial ingredients characteristic of UPFs to reduce unhealthy substitutions and increase transparency for consumers.

Industry Influence and the Need for Global Oversight

The third study examines how global food corporations have driven the expansion of ultra-processed products through cost-efficient industrial methods, aggressive marketing and political lobbying. Annual sales of UPFs reach US$1.9 trillion, providing the industry with significant resources to influence regulation, public debate and scientific discourse.

Simon Barquera, Researcher, Mexico’s National Institute of Public Health, stated that large corporations, and not individual decisions, are behind the global rise of ultra-processed foods. Phillip Baker of the University of Sydney added that reducing consumption cannot be left solely to citizens, comparing the necessary response to past actions against the tobacco industry.

South African expert Karen Hoffman called for a bold and coordinated global response to curb the disproportionate power of ultra-processed food corporations and build food systems that prioritize health and well-being.

While critics argue that more clinical trials are needed to clarify causality and distinguish processing effects from overall nutritional quality, the authors conclude that existing evidence supports immediate public-health action.