Operationally Defining and Targeting Ultraprocessed Foods: Insights From US Policy Proposals.

Objectives. To examine operational ultraprocessed food (UPF) definitions and policy scope in existing US policy proposals. Methods. We conducted a search for federal and state policy proposals targeting UPFs through December 2025. Results. We identified 43 proposals targeting UPFs between 2021 and 2...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:American Journal of Public Health Vol. 116; no. 7; pp. 1025 - 1030
Autores principales: D'Angelo Campos, Aline, Krieger, James W., Prestemon, Carmen E., Hollingsworth, Bridget A., Taillie, Lindsey Smith
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: American Public Health Association Jul2026
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=194643728&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 194643728
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00900036
        APH
      jtl: American Journal of Public Health
      issn: 00900036
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2026
      vid: 116
      iid: 7
      pid: 44
      pub: American Public Health Association
    artinfo:
      ui:
        194643728
        10.2105/AJPH.2026.308464
      ppf: 1025
      ppct: 5
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Operationally Defining and Targeting Ultraprocessed Foods: Insights From US Policy Proposals.
      aug:
        au:
          D'Angelo Campos, Aline
          Krieger, James W.
          Prestemon, Carmen E.
          Hollingsworth, Bridget A.
          Taillie, Lindsey Smith
        affil:
          Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
          Department of Health Systems and Population Health, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
          Healthy Food America, Seattle, Washington,
          Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.,
          Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
          Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina,
      su:
        United States
        Health policy
        State governments
        Marketing
        Federal government
        Food industry
        Food supply
        Health promotion
        School health services
        Packaged foods
        Food additives
        Food labeling
      sug:
        subj:
          Health policy
          State governments
          Marketing
          Federal government
          Food industry
          Food supply
          Health promotion
          School health services
          United States
          Packaging and Labeling Services
          Chemical (except agricultural) and allied product merchant wholesalers
          All Other Miscellaneous Food Manufacturing
          Perishable Prepared Food Manufacturing
          Marketing Consulting Services
          Administration of Public Health Programs
          Packaged Frozen Food Merchant Wholesalers
          Packaged foods
          Food additives
          Food labeling
      ab: Objectives. To examine operational ultraprocessed food (UPF) definitions and policy scope in existing US policy proposals. Methods. We conducted a search for federal and state policy proposals targeting UPFs through December 2025. Results. We identified 43 proposals targeting UPFs between 2021 and 2025. Most (93%) hailed from states. About a third (35%) defined UPFs by listing narrow sets of specific food additives. Some provided definitions more closely related to Nova's: 9% referenced classes of additives considered "cosmetic" by Nova, whereas 21% directly referenced or paraphrased Nova but lacked comprehensive lists of targeted ingredients. A final third (35%) did not provide any definition. Most targeted foods served or sold in schools (58%). Others proposed UPF warning labels (12%) and marketing restrictions (5%). Conclusions. Proposals mostly targeted school foods and frequently defined UPFs using narrow lists of additives that lack evidence as reliable UPF indicators. Public Health Implications. Informing policymakers about existing and emerging operational UPF definitions consistent with science-based approaches is urgent. (Am J Public Health. 2026;116(7):1025–1029. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2026.308464)
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N