Public health policy should be grounded in established evidence that acknowledges uncertainty: a response to The Lancet series on ultra-processed foods - Takeaways - MDSpire
Coming Soon: Introducing MDSpire News. Learn more
Conexiant’s news site is now MDSpire News. Learn more

Public health strategies must be based on solid evidence that recognizes uncertainty: a commentary on The Lancet's series regarding ultra-processed foods

  • By

  • Daniel B. Ibsen

  • Michael Fridén

  • Georgia D. Tomova

  • Natalia Ortega

  • Peter W.G. Tennant

  • September 28, 2026

Share

  • 1

    The Lancet's series on ultra-processed foods (UPFs) highlights their association with deteriorating diet quality and increased chronic disease risks.

  • 2

    Monteiro et al. claim that public health action should not wait for more evidence, but the importance of established evidence and uncertainty must be recognized.

  • 3

    The Nova classification of UPFs lacks biochemical coherence, grouping diverse foods with varying health effects, complicating causal investigations.

  • 4

    Research shows that many mechanisms linking UPFs to health risks are not unique to them, as similar effects can arise from minimally processed foods.

  • 5

    Limited studies comparing UPFs with non-UPF alternatives show no consistent evidence that UPFs are worse for health, challenging their assumed inferiority.

Original Source(s)

Related Content