Guest column: In praise of ‘ultra-processed’ foods

Article content

By: Sylvain Charlebois

The resurgence of rhetoric around the food industry “feeding us poison” — spurred by figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the return later this month of Donald Trump —signals a renewed politicization of ultra-processed foods (UPFs).

This narrative is neither new nor entirely grounded in fact. For years, various groups have demonized the role of UPFs in modern diets, focusing on their negative health implications while often ignoring the broader context and benefits of food processing.

Article content

Ultra-processed foods are industrially produced food products, typically made through extensive processing. They often contain additives such as flavourings, colourings, emulsifiers, and preservatives to enhance taste, appearance, and shelf life.

These foods are commonly high in sugar, unhealthy fats, sodium, and calories, with minimal fibre, vitamins, or minerals. Excessive consumption of UPFs has been linked to obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and certain cancers, as numerous studies have highlighted.

However, the narrative against UPFs frequently oversimplifies the complexities of food processing, neglecting its critical contributions to public health, food security, and societal progress.

Food processing has played a transformative role in human development, offering a range of benefits often overlooked in public discourse. Many processed foods are fortified with essential vitamins and minerals, addressing nutrient deficiencies that were once widespread. For example, fortified cereals and bread have helped combat conditions such as rickets and goitre by providing populations with vital nutrients like Vitamin D and iodine.

Article content

Processing significantly enhances food safety by reducing the risk of food-borne illnesses and extending shelf life. This ensures that perishable items can be transported over long distances and remain available in various regions, contributing to food security and reducing waste.

The modern food industry has created quick, affordable meal options that are essential for individuals with limited time or resources. For many, UPFs provide a lifeline, enabling them to balance demanding schedules without sacrificing access to meals.

One of the most profound, albeit less acknowledged, contributions of food processing has been its role in promoting gender equality. By reducing the time required for food preparation, processing has enabled women to participate more fully in the workforce and pursue opportunities beyond domestic responsibilities.

In Canada, for instance, the time women spend on cooking has declined markedly over the decades. In the 1960s, women spent approximately 60 per cent of their household labour time on tasks like cooking, cleaning, and laundry. By the 2020s, this had dropped to around 35 per cent.

Article content

This shift reflects broader societal changes, including increased workforce participation by women, advancements in food technology, and a more equitable distribution of household responsibilities.

Focusing specifically on food preparation, Canadian women’s time spent cooking decreased by roughly 35 per cent between the 1960s and 2020s. While cooking remains an important cultural and personal activity, modern conveniences have allowed individuals to achieve a better work-life balance, enabling them to pursue careers and other aspirations while maintaining their households.

Critics of food processing often fail to appreciate its role in modern society. Demonizing UPFs as inherently harmful ignores the historical and ongoing benefits of food processing.

It is essential to recognize that processing itself is not the enemy; rather, it is excessive consumption of certain products that poses risks. By focusing on responsible consumption and innovation, the food industry can continue to meet the evolving needs of society.

As for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his anticipated role in a Trump administration (as secretary of health and human services), the rhetoric around UPFs will likely intensify in 2025. However, undermining the food processing industry would be a short-sighted approach with potentially devastating consequences for the agri-food sector.

Article content

A thriving food economy relies on a robust processing infrastructure to ensure food security, affordability, and access. Should RFK Jr. choose to politicize food processing further, his ability to contribute meaningfully to the agri-food economy will be seriously tested.

Growing the sector without leveraging the benefits of food processing would be an impossible task. If history is any guide, such an approach would likely prove unsustainable.

Sylvain Charlebois is a professor and senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor podcast.

Article content