The validity and utility of Nova and the concept of ultra-processed foods for science and policy
Policymakers often dismiss the health risks associated with the intake of ultra-processed foods, alleging conceptual imprecision and limited evidence. This Perspective offers responses to four such criticisms common in the public discourse.
As with other aggregated constructs, the concept of ultra-processed foods is multidimensional, encompassing variation in nutritional composition, ingredients, processing methods and additive profiles. Here we argue that this complexity does not diminish the construct’s analytic or predictive utility for science or policy. We do so by addressing four critiques of ultra-processed foods and the Nova classification system common in the public discourse, drawing parallels with other dietary exposures and their evidence base. In responding to these critiques, our aim is to underscore the conceptual clarity, validity and utility of Nova and ultra-processed foods, encouraging continued scientific engagement and scrutiny.