Lancet experts warn ultra-processed foods pose major global health threat

A worldwide surge in ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption poses a global health threat, demanding immediate policy reform, according to a three-paper Series in The Lancet authored by 43 international experts.

The researchers warn that multinational food corporations are using aggressive marketing and political influence to derail public health policy and drive diets linked to chronic disease.

Professor Carlos Monteiro of the University of São Paulo, Brazil, said: “The growing consumption of ultra-processed foods is reshaping diets worldwide, displacing fresh and minimally processed foods and meals. This change in what people eat is fuelled by powerful global corporations who generate huge profits by prioritising ultra-processed products, supported by extensive marketing and political lobbying to stop effective public health policies to support healthy eating.”

Strong evidence now supports urgent regulation

UPFs, defined under the Nova classification developed in 2009, are industrially formulated products that use substances such as hydrogenated oils, protein isolates and sweeteners, along with cosmetic additives like dyes, emulsifiers and artificial flavours. The Series says manufacturers deliberately design these foods “to displace fresh and minimally processed foods and traditional meals, while maximising corporate profits.”

The first paper reviews international research and finds consistent evidence that high UPF intake is linked to overeating, poor nutrition quality and significant increases in chronic disease risk. A systematic review of 104 studies showed that 92 reported greater risks of one or more conditions, including obesity, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, depression and early death.

National dietary surveys cited in the Series reveal rapid increases in UPF intake over recent decades. UPFs now account for more than half of daily calorie intake in the UK and US, while levels in China and Spain have more than doubled.

Professor Mathilde Touvier of Inserm, France, cautioned against efforts to undermine this research, stating: “While healthy debate about UPFs within the scientific community is welcomed, this should be distinguished from attempts by vested interests to undermine the current evidence. The growing body of research suggests diets high in ultra-processed foods are harming health globally and justifies the need for policy action.”

Calls for front-of-pack warnings, marketing restrictions and taxes

The Series’ second paper proposes coordinated national and international policies to reduce UPF production, marketing and consumption. Measures include adding UPF markers to front-of-pack labels, stricter marketing rules, particularly for children and digital media, and bans on UPFs in schools and hospitals.

Professor Barry Popkin of the University of North Carolina urged governments to reform labelling rules to stop companies reformulating products to meet HFSS targets while retaining artificial additives. “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 authors also propose taxes on UPFs to fund subsidies that improve access to fresh food. They highlight Brazil’s school feeding programme, which has eliminated most UPFs and will require 90% of food served to be fresh or minimally processed by 2026.

Professor Marion Nestle of New York University said, “Improving diets worldwide requires policies tailored to each country’s unique situation and how entrenched UPFs have become in people’s daily eating habits. While priorities may differ, urgent action is needed everywhere to regulate ultra-processed foods alongside existing efforts to reduce high fat, salt, and sugar content.”

Food industry accused of using tobacco-style tactics

The Series’ third paper argues that rising UPF consumption is driven less by consumer choice than by the political and commercial power of global food manufacturers. With annual sales of $1.9 trillion, the UPF sector is now the most profitable in the global food industry.

Researchers state that companies’ profits allow them to influence scientific research, lobby governments, fund political campaigns and delay public health regulations through litigation.

Professor Simon Barquera of the National Institute of Public Health of Mexico said: “Powerful corporations – not individuals’ choices – are behind the global rise of ultra-processed foods. Through interest groups, these corporations often position themselves as part of the solution, but their actions tell a different story – one focused on protecting profits and resisting effective regulation.”

The authors call for protections to stop industry influence in policymaking, as well as an international advocacy coalition to mirror the global public health response to tobacco.

Professor Karen Hoffman of the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, argued: “Just as we confronted the tobacco industry decades ago, we need a bold, coordinated global response now to curb the overproportionate power of UPF corporations and build food systems that prioritise people’s health and wellbeing.”

A different food system is possible, experts insist

The Series concludes by urging governments to support healthier, culturally diverse food systems that empower local producers and make minimally processed foods both accessible and convenient.

Summing up the Series’ message, Dr Phillip Baker of the University of Sydney said: “We are currently living in a world where our food options are increasingly dominated by UPFs, contributing to rising global levels of obesity, diabetes and mental ill-health. Our Series highlights that a different path is possible – one where governments regulate effectively, communities mobilise, and healthier diets are accessible and affordable for all.”