Labelling all ultra-processed foods as ‘bad’ confusing for consumers, say experts

New research suggests there is a ‘clear overlap’ between the healthiness of food, front of pack labelling and the level of food processing. However, not all ultra-processed foods are unhealthy.

Dr Adrian Brown, the lead author of the study and a specialist dietitian from UCL Division of Medicine, says at the moment, there is not enough research to confirm whether all ultra-processed foods are unhealthy or ‘bad’ for us.

While many ultra-processed foods are clearly unhealthy, some staple foods, such as sliced bread, are technically ultra-processed, but Dr Brown says labelling all ultra-processed foods as bad risks confusing people about what is healthy to eat.

What makes a food ultra-processed?

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) typically have five or more ingredients and include additives, preservatives and other ingredients that are not typically used in home cooking.

In recent years, more research has been conducted into UPFs, with one study finding these highly processed foods are associated with an increased risk of health issues such as obesity, chronic diseases like type-2 diabetes, and depression.

Now, researchers from UCL have investigated whether food processing information could be a useful indicator of what is healthy to eat.

Ultra-processed foods vs the UK’s traffic light system

The NOVA scale divides foods into four groups: unprocessed or minimally processed foods, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods, and ultra-processed foods.

But processing information is not currently included in labelling system commonly used in the UK, known as the traffic light system. Red indicates a high level of energy, fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt, while amber indicates a moderate level and green indicates low levels.

The researchers therefore wanted to look at how well the NOVA scale aligns with the traffic light system.

Including processing information on food packages wouldn’t necessarily help people make healthy choices

The researchers found that UPFs contain more calories, fat, saturated fat, sugar and salt than minimally-processed foods. Processed foods also scored badly on front of pack labelling but were not as high in energy or sugar as UPFs.

However, not all ultra-processed foods are unhealthy, according to the UK’s ‘traffic light’ labelling system. For example, some meat-free mince products classed as a UPFs were green for fat, saturated fat and sugar, and amber for salt.

The researchers say causative data linking UPFs to health issues is now needed to confirm whether the negative health implications associated with UPFs are due to the effect of processing or other factors.

Samuel Dicken, first author of the study from UCL Division of Medicine, said: “There is a clear overlap between the healthiness of food, front of pack labelling and the level of food processing.

“This has implications for understanding what we eat and drink in the UK. What is clear from the types of food and drinks captured by red ‘traffic lights’ on front of pack labels and wide availability of UPF, is the need to change the food environment to support individuals to consume a healthy, balanced diet.

“Updating package labelling with processing information at the moment wouldn’t necessarily help individuals make an informed, healthy choice.”

Not enough evidence to say all ultra-processed foods are bad

Dr Brown agrees that adding the level of processing to the front of a food packet may make it more confusing for the consumer.

He said: said: “Having worked with patients for nearly two decades, one of the biggest challenges for people is to identify what’s healthy and what’s not in a supermarket environment. On the face of it, a low-fat yoghurt may look healthy for, example, but it may also be high in sugar. Adding that it’s also ultra-processed will only make these decisions harder.

“At the moment, things aren’t so clear cut as to say all UPFs are bad and there is a risk of confusing people about what is healthy to eat.”

UCL researchers are now assessing whether it is possible to eat healthily on a UPF-only diet compared to a minimally-processed food diet. They are also looking at whether providing guidance on healthy eating can change what people choose to eat.