A new study demonstrated how public health and regulatory initiatives targeting “ultra-processed foods” (UPFs) may have unintended consequences if definitions for the category and mechanistic understandings of processing are not refined.
This episode of Food Safety Five discusses research on Listeria biofilms, including sanitizer efficacy and evolutionary insights, and on a persisting Escherichia coli strain in leafy greens. It also covers regulatory developments in the UK, Canada, and the UAE, as well as a potential U.S. ultra-processed foods (UPFs) definition.
Food industry representatives and consumer advocacy groups have shared their comments, which are varied in opinion, submitted in response to FDA and USDA’s joint request for information to support a federal definition for ultra-processed foods (UPFs).
Although elevated levels of some PFAS were found in the blood of people who ate more highly processed foods, people who ate minimally process foods showed elevated levels of other PFAS compounds—suggesting that dietary choices cannot protect people from “forever chemicals,” and that systemic solutions are needed.
Assembly Bill (AB) 1264, titled, the Real Food, Healthy Kids Act, establishes a legal definition for ultra-processed foods, and tasks the state Department of Public Health with identifying and banning particularly harmful ultra-processed foods from California schools.
California Assembly Bill (AB) 1264 has passed the Senate, and now awaits final approval before being sent to the Governor. AB 1264 would define “ultra-processed foods” (UPFs), and would require “UPFs of concern” to be identified and phased out of schools.
FDA and USDA are issuing a joint Request for Information (RFI) to gather information and data to help establish a federally recognized, uniform definition for ultra-processed foods.
The fiscal 2026 budget request from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services touches on infant formula, ultra-processed foods, and other HHS priorities that Food Safety Magazine has reported on.
