What Are Ultra-Processed Foods (UPF)?
UPF are industrial formulations that contain ingredients (i.e.,high-fructose corn syrup, modified starches) and/or additives (i.e., flavors, colors, artificial sweeteners) not commonly found in your kitchen.
UPF contributes approximately 67% of total energy intake for U.S. youth aged 2 to 19 and about 57% for U.S adults.¹⁻³
Why This Matters to Your Health
A growing body of evidence links higher ultra-processed food intake with adverse health outcomes affecting the brain, mental health, metabolism, cardiovascular health, and healthy aging.
Brain and Cognitive Health
In a study of 10,775 adults followed for eight years, those consuming the most ultra-processed food experienced a 28% faster rate of global cognitive decline and a 25% faster rate of decline in executive function.
Mental Health
A large umbrella review associated higher ultra-processed food intake with a 48% higher risk of anxiety and a 53% higher risk of common mental health disorders. Higher intake was also linked with a 22% higher risk of depression.
Healthy Aging
Higher ultra-processed food intake has been associated with shorter telomeres, a marker linked with cellular aging, even after researchers accounted for overall diet quality.
How UPF are Identified
Scientists use the Nova classification system to categorize foods by how much they’ve been processed and place them in four groups:
Nova Group 1: Unprocessed/minimally processed
Nova Group 2: Processed culinary ingredients
Nova Group 3: Processed foods
Nova Group 4: Ultra-processed foods
Ultra-processed foods are linked to weight gain and chronic diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, depression, cancer, and cognitive decline.
Learn More with our UPF Guides
Choose your path below. Are you a….
Why We Must Decrease Ultra-Processed Foods
The American Medical Association published a viewpoint, April 1, 2025 titled: The 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines—Time for Real Progress by Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH
“If we were a hale and hearty populace, enjoying and thriving on the fruits of the earth, it would be reasonable to wait for more research. But when 3 of 4 adults have overweight or obesity, 1 of 2 adults and 1 of 4 teenagers have diabetes or prediabetes, and only 7% of adults are metabolically healthy, we face a national nutrition crisis requiring urgent action. Diet-related diseases further drive enormous burdens of health care spending, lost productivity, military unpreparedness, reduced economic competitiveness, and health disparities—with the latter well highlighted in the DGAC report.
Based on the current evidence and high levels of consumption, it is time to recommend that people in the US eat fewer UPFs.”
The Non-UPF program defines UPF as Nova Group 4 foods. Therefore, any food that falls into Nova groups 1 through 3 is considered a non-ultra-processed food.
The Nova classification system helps identify Ultra-processed foods.
It is widely used by researchers as a standardized framework to ensure consistency in studying and understanding the impact of ultra-processed food consumption.
It categorizes foods based on the extent and degree to which they have been industrially processed.
UPF research is evolving, and new food substances deemed edible are entering the market, expanding Nova Group 4 foods.
To learn more about leading theories on how ultra-processed foods harm health and the public policies aimed at reducing those harms, explore our advocacy partner, the Consumer Federation of America's report, Ultra-processed Foods: Why They Matter and What to Do About It.
-
Wang L, Martínez Steele E, Du M, et al. Trends in Consumption of Ultraprocessed Foods Among US Youths Aged 2-19 Years, 1999-2018. JAMA. 2021;326(6):519-530. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.10238
Juul F, Parekh N, Martinez-Steele E, Monteiro CA, Chang VW. Ultra-processed food consumption among US adults from 2001 to 2018. Am J Clin Nutr. 2022;115(1):211-221. doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqab305
Juul F, Martinez-Steele E, Parekh N, Monteiro CA, Chang VW. Ultra-processed food consumption and excess weight among US adults. Br J Nutr. 2018;120(1):90-100. doi:10.1017/S0007114518001046