The Fuzzy World of Ultra-Processed Foods

You might think you know what's in your food, but the truth is, the government has a hard time defining what's really in it. Take tomatoes, for example. Is it a fruit or a vegetable? The Supreme Court decided it's a vegetable for tax purposes, but that's not the end of the story. Milk is another tricky one - the FDA says it's the 'lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows.' But what about ultra-processed foods? These creations are everywhere, and they're making people sick, but no one can agree on what they are or how to define them.

The government is trying to change that. After months of promising a definition, the secretary of Health and Human Services announced that the department is finalizing one. But the exact text is still being reviewed by the White House. This effort could be a game-changer. Having a clear definition of ultra-processed foods could help researchers understand the harm they're causing. But can the government really define a problem before scientists know its true cause?

The science around ultra-processed foods is fuzzy. There are different definitions, and they're not all the same. Some say it's any food with industrial ingredients, while others say it's any food that's been processed beyond recognition. And then there's the French system, which looks at things like salt, sugar, and fat content. The problem is, these definitions don't always agree. Flavored yogurt, for example, is an ultra-processed food under one system and a moderately processed food under another.

So, what's the big deal? Ultra-processed foods are linked to all sorts of health problems, including cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. But researchers don't know what's causing the problems or how to fix them. They suspect it's the additives, but there are so many of them that it's hard to know which ones to blame. The government is trying to fix this problem, but it's a tough one to crack.