Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are typically described as products made from a formulation ingredients (mainly substances extracted from foods or derived from food components) and produced through industrial techniques and processes.
Some nutrition professionals describe them as being foods made from ingredients that you generally can’t find in your pantry, or foods you can’t easily make in the home.
The term gained traction with the publication of the NOVA classification system, which groups foods according to the level of their processing.
What is important to note is that UPFs are not necessarily all foods that have been processed. Many foods go through a degree of ‘processing’ before we eat them, for example simply washing and preparing fruits and vegetables for packaging them is a form of processing. NOVA recognises the fact that there are different degrees of processing in the food sector.
Estimates now suggest that in some countries UPFs make up significant proportions of the population’s diet. In the UK and USA, UPFs may make up 50% of daily calories consumed. These estimates highlight the growing presence of UPFs in our diets and explain the growing interest in understanding more about their role in health.
Research exploring the health effects of consuming UPFs suggest UPF consumption is associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes such as chronic disease and poor mental health.
Mixed messages
However, like many aspects of nutritional science, the story is not entirely clear cut. There is some debate within the profession around overly simplistic messages about ultra-processed foods and the exact usefulness of the NOVA classification system, considering it does not consider the nutrient value of the foods. For example, according to the NOVA system, some foods traditionally regarded as ‘healthy’, such as some supermarket fortified breads and yogurts, can be deemed to be UPFs. They may technically be classified as ultra-processed, but many believe these foods can still offer nutritional value and benefits to health.
Some research suggests UPFs may exist on a spectrum, with some products carrying more risk to health than others. However, more research is needed to understand this many fully.
While there continues to be questions about the term ultra-processed foods, there isn’t much debate about the importance of basing our eating patterns around wholefoods and reducing our intake of ‘junk-style foods’, many of which are considered UPFs.
Pressure cooking
Food service and hospitality industries, including the airline industry, face significant pressures from growing costs, reduced budgets and global supply chain challenges, and as a result, UPFs can be seen as a quick, convenient solutions.
The airline industry has a significant food service and hospitality footprint, producing millions of meals a year for passengers. That means it needs to understand the UPF debate and be well informed when using UPFs onboard and in lounges, especially as their passengers are becoming increasingly aware of the potential impacts on health.
While flying recently I was served a hot roll with a chicken filling. The ingredient list indicated the chicken breast itself was made up of more than 15 ingredients. These included ‘tasty’ additions such as thickeners, gelling agents, dextrose, hydrolysed maize protein and maltodextrin. Note, this was not the contents for any sauce or other ingredients in the filling.
Similarly, the bread alone also comprised of more than 15 ingredients.
The growing presence of UPFs in the food supply highlights the need for food development teams to continuously evaluate the presence of ultra-processed ingredients and foods in their onboard offerings (and lounges) and explore how to reduce reliance on UPFs while still meeting business objectives.
With more research being conducted into UPFs, there is an increasing public discourse and consumer awareness. The public’s appetite for these foods may evolve fast as more research and education becomes influences the debate.
