The push to identify ultra-processed foods (UPF) is gaining ground in grocery aisles and state government, even as the industry argues there is still no widely accepted definition of what makes a food ultra-processed.
The Non-GMO Project announced more than 300 products from 23 brands have now earned the company’s Non-UPF Verified label, a significant increase since the certification program launched about nine months ago.
Verified products now span 15 food and beverage categories and include products from brands such as Simple Mills, Chomps and Blue Diamond. Another 41 brands are seeking verification, according to the organization.
The program is also expanding its efforts to reach consumers through an app that lets shoppers scan a barcode on packaged food to determine whether it is Non-UPF Verified.
The growth comes as California moves toward its own certification program. State lawmakers unanimously passed Assembly Bill 2244, which would establish a voluntary Non-Ultraprocessed Certified seal administered by the California Department of Public Health.
Under the bill, foods meeting the state’s standards could carry a “Non-UPF Certified” seal. Products considered ultra-processed foods of concern or restricted school foods would not qualify. Certification agents would have to be state-accredited by June 1, 2029.
The bill is awaiting a decision by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) by Sept. 30.
At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and USDA are also working to establish the government’s first definition of ultra-processed foods. HHS announced Aug. 10 that it had submitted the proposed definition for final review after receiving input from thousands of researchers, consumers, industry representatives and other stakeholders.
HHS said studies have linked high consumption of ultra-processed foods with chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes and heart disease, but acknowledged that the lack of a standardized federal definition has made research more difficult to compare.
That lack of agreement is central to concerns raised by the Meat Institute.
In a statement, the organization argued that no single, science-based definition of ultra-processed food exists and that existing approaches can place foods with very different nutritional profiles in the same category.
The Meat Institute also noted that meat and poultry products containing more than one ingredient already fall under USDA requirements, including federal standards governing how certain products are defined and labeled.
The organization warned that another labeling requirement could add compliance, packaging and legal costs without necessarily giving consumers clearer information about a food’s nutritional value.
With private certification expanding, California developing its own seal and federal agencies working on a definition, the debate over ultra-processed foods is increasingly moving toward how those foods are identified at the grocery store. — Charles Wallace, WLJ contributing editor
