The Coming Definition of Ultra-Processed Foods and What It Means for Your Diet

For over 15 years, researchers have studied the health effects of “ultra-processed foods,” but a consensus definition has remained elusive among doctors, food scientists, nutritionists, and U.S. Policy experts. That may be about to change. U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Announced that a federal definition is expected as early as April 2026 , potentially paving the way for modern front-of-package food labels.

What Are Ultra-Processed Foods?

The category of ultra-processed foods extends far beyond typical junk food like potato chips, sugary cereals, candies, and sodas. It encompasses a surprisingly wide range of grocery items, including some whole wheat breads, store-bought hummus, and flavored yogurts. The defining characteristic isn’t necessarily a lack of nutritional value, but how the food is made.

According to researchers, as little as one ingredient can classify a food as “ultra-processed.”

The Brazilian “Nova” System: A Leading Definition

The most influential definition currently comes from Brazil’s “Nova” system, developed by University of São Paulo researchers in 2009. This system categorizes foods into four groups based on the extent and purpose of industrial processing:

• Group 1: Unprocessed or Minimally Processed Foods: These are foods in their natural state or those slightly altered for preservation or safety (e.g., fresh fruits, vegetables, meats, eggs, oats, freezing, drying, pasteurizing).
• Group 2: Processed Culinary Ingredients: These are items used in cooking, such as butter, olive oil, honey, sugar, and salt.
• Group 3: Processed Foods: These are created by combining Group 1 and Group 2 foods through processes like salting, curing, fermentation, or canning (e.g., salted nuts, cured meats, sugared fruits, pickles, fresh bread, cheese).
• Group 4: Ultra-Processed Foods: These are “formulations of ingredients, mostly of exclusive industrial use, that result from a series of industrial processes… many requiring sophisticated equipment and technology.” Examples include sodas, packaged snacks, candies, mass-produced breads, cereals, fruit yogurts, chicken nuggets, and hot dogs.

A key distinction: if you can make it in your kitchen, it’s likely in the first three groups. If it requires a factory and a chemistry degree, it’s likely Group 4.

The Potential for Front-of-Package Labeling

Kennedy indicated that once a federal definition is established, the FDA may require front-of-package (FOP) labels to support consumers identify ultra-processed foods. He suggested a “red light, yellow light, green light” system indicating a food’s healthfulness, considering all ingredients. The FDA has been considering FOP labeling since the Biden Administration, previously proposing a “Nutrition Info” box detailing saturated fats, added sugars, and sodium levels.

Challenges to Regulation

Translating a classification system like Nova into American policy presents challenges. Experts note that research definitions are designed for studies, not legally enforceable regulations. Determining whether a food is ultra-processed often relies on identifying ingredients that are rarely used in home kitchens or additives designed to enhance palatability. This can be imperfect, as not all processing is reflected on ingredient labels.

new regulations are likely to face legal challenges from the food industry and concerns about food access and affordability.

The GRAS Loophole and Industry Influence

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Has likewise highlighted concerns about the “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) exemption, a 67-year-ancient government rule allowing companies to independently determine ingredient safety without FDA oversight. He argues that this loophole has been “hijacked by the industry,” leading to a proliferation of ultra-processed foods with ingredients that haven’t undergone full safety reviews. Estimates suggest there could be between 4,000 and 10,000 ingredients in American food products.

Is Processing the Problem?

Experts continue to debate whether focusing on processing is the most effective approach to improving diet and health. Even as research links ultra-processed food consumption to negative health outcomes like obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and cancer, many studies are observational and don’t prove causation.

Some argue that the way food is processed matters, affecting digestion and satiety. Others contend that nutritional content is more significant, pointing out that some ultra-processed foods can be nutritious, while some minimally processed foods can be unhealthy.

Looking Ahead

The potential for a federal definition of ultra-processed foods marks a significant step toward addressing concerns about the impact of these foods on public health. Whether it will lead to meaningful changes in the American diet remains to be seen, but it signals a growing awareness of the need to re-evaluate our relationship with food and prioritize whole, minimally processed options.