Imagine a world where your favorite snacks could be the culprits behind chronic diseases, and the government is finally stepping in to redefine what’s really on your plate.

At a Glance

• Federal agencies launched a joint initiative to define ultra-processed foods (UPFs).
• The initiative aims to combat the chronic disease epidemic linked to UPFs.
• A public Request for Information (RFI) seeks input on defining UPFs.
• Potential changes in dietary guidelines and food labeling are expected.

The Rise of Ultra-Processed Foods

Ultra-processed foods, or UPFs, have become the fast food of the pantry, bursting with ingredients you need a PhD to pronounce. The NOVA classification system, birthed by Brazilian researchers, made these culinary Frankensteins famous by categorizing foods by processing instead of nutrients. Over the past decade, a slew of studies have fingered UPFs as accomplices in obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. These foods have stealthily crept into our diets, making the U.S. a battleground for the diet-related chronic disease epidemic.

The U.S. government, long focused on sugar and sodium, is now eyeing the processing levels of food. States like California have even flirted with their own UPF regulations. The 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee made waves, hinting at curbing UPF intake. With over 70% of adults in America overweight or obese, and chronic diseases on the rise, the food industry’s love affair with UPFs, which are cost-effective and long-lasting, has met its match.

HHS, FDA and USDA Address the Health Risks of Ultra-Processed Foods

The Joint Effort to Define UPFs

On July 23, 2025, a trio of federal agencies—the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—united to launch a Request for Information (RFI) to define UPFs. This is the first federal attempt to create a unified definition, aiming to shape future policies, labeling, and dietary advice. USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins called for “common-sense ways” to guide healthier choices, ensuring the definition is rooted in science, not just processing methods.

The RFI, open until September 23, 2025, seeks public opinions on how to define UPFs, considering ingredients, processing methods, and the relevance of existing systems like NOVA. The agencies also want feedback on terminology preferences and how the definition might affect regulations. The aim is transparency and consistency, offering consumers clear guidance and holding the food industry accountable.

The Implications of Defining UPFs

The food industry, notorious for wielding lobbying power like a superhero’s cape, is working hard to influence this definition. Manufacturers fear sweeping categorizations that might jeopardize their product lines. However, public awareness of UPFs and their health impacts is growing, potentially leading to new labeling rules and marketing restrictions. The next edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans is expected to spotlight UPFs, impacting school meals and nutrition programs like SNAP.

Standardized definitions could revolutionize nutrition research and public health surveillance. Consumers, especially low-income and minority groups who consume more UPFs, could benefit from reduced chronic disease risks. However, food manufacturers might face reformulation costs and marketing headaches. The initiative could also ignite public debates about food choices, health equity, and the role of government in our diets.