Research increasingly links higher consumption of ultra-processed foods to negative health outcomes. This research often uses the Nova food classification system, which categorizes foods based on their level of industrial processing.
Read More
Ultra-processed foods include a variety of packaged snacks, candy, sweetened beverages, and ready-to-eat items. A systematic review led by Erica M. LaFata, a research scientist at the Oregon Research Institute (ORI), analyzed 69 academic articles published from 2009 to 2025 that focused on criticisms of the Nova system and the potential benefits of ultra-processed foods. The study also investigated the food industry relationships of 232 authors identified in these articles.
The results were significant: 91.3% of the articles had at least one author with a food industry connection, and more than two-thirds of the authors (68.5%) held some form of industry tie. Notably, 71.1% of these authors' industry relationships went undisclosed within the articles themselves, only being identified through publicly available information.
The review indicated that articles authored by individuals with industry affiliations were more likely to defend or highlight potential benefits of ultra-processed foods compared to those without such ties. LaFata emphasized the importance of transparency in these discussions, stating, "Readers should know who is shaping that debate."
She acknowledged that criticisms of the Nova system can be valid and suggest improvements, but the study highlights the necessity for transparency regarding food industry relationships in nutrition research. This transparency is vital for readers, journals, and policymakers to consider when evaluating discussions surrounding ultra-processed foods and related policies.
The findings were published in the American Journal of Public Health.