On July 25, 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued a joint Request for Information (RFI) seeking “data and information to help develop a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods (UPF or UPFs) for human food products in the U.S. food supply.”
The issuance of the RFI follows an announcement from the agencies published earlier this week about the request, as well as the release of President Trump’s Make America Healthy Again (“MAHA”) Commission’s “Make Our Children Healthy Again: Assessment” in May. That assessment recognized that there is currently no accepted single definition of UPFs, but adopted the following definition: “packaged and ready-to-consume products that are formulated for shelf life and/or palatability but are typically high in added sugars, refined grains, unhealthy fats, and sodium and low in fiber and essential nutrients.” The assessment concluded that UPFs are detrimental to children’s health due to nutrient depletion, increased caloric intake, and use of certain food additives. The agencies’ announcement regarding the RFI states that developing a uniform definition of UPF will promote “consistency in research and policy to pave the way for addressing health concerns associated with the consumption” of such foods.
Key Questions
The RFI poses six key questions, and requests that commenters whose responses rely on a particular existing definition (or part of a definition) of UPF identify that definition.
1. Existing Classification Systems or Policies
- The RFI describes a number of existing classification systems (including the Nova system), and asks: What, if any, existing classification systems or policies should we consider in defining UPFs? What are the advantages and challenges in applying these systems (or aspects of them) to classify a food as ultra-processed? What are characteristics that would or would not make a given system (or aspect of the system) particularly suitable for the U.S. food supply?
2. Ingredient Labeling
- In considering ingredients that appear toward the beginning of an ingredient list (that is, ingredients that likely form most of a finished food by weight), what types of ingredients (e.g., ingredients that may share a similar composition, function, or purpose) might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
- What types of less prominent ingredients might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
- Should the various types of flavors and colors (natural flavors versus artificial flavors, and certified versus non-certified colors) be considered separately when characterizing a food as ultra-processed?
- To what extent, if any, should the relative amount of an ingredient used in a food influence whether the food should be characterized as ultra-processed?
- What, if any, other ingredients or ingredient-related criteria not discussed previously should or should not be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
3. Processing Methods
- What physical processes (e.g., cutting, extracting juice by an application of force, heating, freezing, extrusion, and other physical manipulations) might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
- What biological processes (e.g., non-alcoholic fermentations of the food by microorganisms (for example, bacteria and yeasts), enzymatic treatment, and other biological manipulations) might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
- What chemical processes (e.g., pH adjustment and other chemical manipulations) might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
- What, if any, other processing-related techniques should or should not be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed?
4. Terminology
- Is the term “ultra-processed” the best term to use, or is there other terminology that would better capture the concerns associated with these products? If there is another term to consider, please name and define that term and provide specific scenarios and citations (if available) to support its use.
5. Nutrition/Other Attributes Relating to Health Outcomes Associated with UPFs
- In considering nutritional attributes (such as information presented on the Nutrition Facts label), to what extent, if any, and how, should nutritional composition or the presence of certain nutrients be incorporated in a definition of UPFs?
- What other attributes, such as energy density or palatability, might be used to characterize a food as ultra-processed? If relevant, please also provide suggestions on how these attributes can be measured and/or potentially be incorporated into a definition of UPFs, if they are not readily apparent on the food labeling.
6. Integration of Factors
- How might the factors discussed in the questions above be integrated in the classification of a food as ultra-processed in a way that can be systematically measured and applied to foods sold in the U.S.?
- What considerations should be taken into account in incorporating such a classification in food and nutrition policies and programs?
What Can You Do?
Given the importance of the definition of ultra-processed food to the Administration’s current nutrition agenda, we encourage stakeholders to submit comments (either independently or through trade associations) sharing their thoughts on the agencies’ questions above, as well as on any additional issues they believe the agencies should consider. Stakeholders may submit comments on or before September 23, 2025, electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal by searching FDA-2025-N-1793.
If you have any questions concerning the material discussed in this client alert, please contact the members of our Food, Beverage, and Dietary Supplements practice.
Back
