Reacción a "A series of articles warns about the threat of ultra-processed foods to public health"

The authors conflate a large number of disparate concepts under the umbrella of 'ultra-processed foods'.  The concept of 'ultra-processed' foods, their impact on our health and the adoption of the NOVA classification tool is highly contentious.  There is huge pushback on these concepts from many nutrition experts as the idea that the processing of foods is to blame for dietary impacts on human health is far too basic an approach.  Simply correlating intake of these foods with the incidence of disease does not prove causality.  This also completely ignores the nuances of food in the context of our wider lives.

The authors surmise that 'ultra-processed' foods are inherently unhealthy due to the level and nature of their processing.  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.  We also need to move beyond these simplistic views of 'good' and 'bad' foods and instead truly address the fundamental issues in our food system that limit access and affordability of healthy foods.