Experts have linked high UPF consumption to higher risk of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, and early death.
The rise in consuming ultra-processed foods (UPFs) such as packaged snacks, ready meals, and sugary drinks is a serious public health threat that is fuelling chronic diseases worldwide, and deepening health inequalities, a new report has found.
A major new body of research from 43 global specialists has pulled together the strongest evidence yet that diets high in UPFs are replacing traditional meals, worsening nutrition and increasing the risk of multiple chronic diseases.
The findings, published in The Lancet, warn that UPFs are often designed for convenience and profit rather than health - and that the companies behind them use aggressive marketing and political influence to keep regulations at bay.
What are UPFs?
UPFs are made using cheap industrial ingredients, cosmetic additives and heavy processing techniques that make them long-lasting, hyper-palatable and easy to over-consume.
Common examples include supermarket ready meals, frozen pizzas, sweetened breakfast cereals, biscuits, sausages, ice cream, chicken nuggets, fish fingers and instant noodles.
In countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States, more than half of the average person’s daily calories now come from UPFs.
Other nations are catching up quickly. Over the last 30 years, UPF consumption has tripled in Spain (11 per cent to 32 per cent) and China (4 per cent to 10 per cent).
How bad are they for you?
The new analysis brings together more than 100 long-term studies on UPFs and health. 92 of them found that higher consumption of UPFs was linked to an increased risk of one or more chronic health conditions.
These include obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, depression, and a higher risk of early death. UPFs are also associated with overeating, too much sugar and unhealthy fats, and low levels of fibre and protein.
The research also highlights mounting evidence that the way these foods are manufactured and packaged can expose people to a range of potentially harmful substances.
High-temperature manufacturing can create compounds like acrylamide, furans and industrial trans fats - chemicals linked in other research to inflammation and cancer risk.
And UPFs often come in long-life packaging, which can leach "endocrine disruptors" such as phthalates, bisphenols and PFAS “forever chemicals" - and in turn have the potential to interfere with the hormones in your body.
What do the health experts say?
Mathilde Touvier, a leading epidemiologist at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Inserm), said the research "justifies the need for policy action".
She noted that while debate within nutritional science is normal, this should not be confused with attempts by industry to undermine the evidence.
“The growing body of research suggests diets high in ultra-processed foods are harming health globally and justifies the need for policy action,” she said.
Camila Corvalan, a Chilean public health specialist known for shaping some of the world’s strongest food labelling laws, argued that governments must step in.
“Addressing this challenge requires governments to step up and introduce bold, coordinated policy action - from including markers of UPFs in front-of-package labels to restricting marketing and implementing taxes on these products to fund greater access to affordable, nutritious foods," she said.
Nutrition epidemiologist, Barry Popkin, added that labels should highlight signs of heavy processing - not just sugar or fat levels.
“We call for including ingredients that are markers of UPFs (eg, colours, flavours, and sweeteners) in front-of-package labels, alongside excessive saturated fat, sugar, and salt, to prevent unhealthy ingredient substitutions, and enable more effective regulation," he said.
The experts also suggest banning UPFs in hospitals and schools, lowering their prominence on supermarket shelves, and using taxes on selected UPFs to subsidise fruit, vegetables and fresh staples for low-income households.
'Protecting profits and resisting effective regulation'
Beyond the negative health effects, the analysis warns about the political power of UPF manufacturers - a sector which worldwide rakes in nearly $2 trillion (€1.7 trillion) annually.
Simon Barquera, a leading Mexican expert on obesity and diabetes, said the rise of UPFs isn’t a matter of personal choice so much as political pressure.
“Powerful corporations – not individuals’ choices – are behind the global rise of ultra-processed foods,” he said.
He added that while companies often present themselves as partners in improving nutrition, “their actions tell a different story - one focused on protecting profits and resisting effective regulation”.
The researchers describe similar strategies to those used by tobacco companies: lobbying, shaping scientific debate, funding interest groups and delaying regulations.
A note of caution from independent experts
However, some experts not involved in the study caution that the recently published three-part review should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Jordan Beaumont, a senior lecturer in food and nutrition at Sheffield Hallam University, argued that the concept of UPFs and their health impact is “highly contentious”.
“There is little convincing, high-quality evidence that 'ultra-processed' foods are inherently unhealthy. Indeed, the authors of this paper base their claims on relatively weak evidence, such as observational studies and narrative reviews.
"To understand the true impacts 'ultra-processed' foods have on health, we need numerous large-scale and robust randomised controlled trials," he said.
Kevin McConway, a professor of applied statistics at the Open University, said that while the evidence is compelling in parts, “there remain holes in what has been established."
"Further research using better dietary measurement might well not lead to different conclusions – but actually we don’t know whether that’s the case until and unless the research is carried out using the new measures".
