“Precision Wellness” is one of the current top trends, according to Innova Market Insights. The focus is on healthy nutrition, including gut health, ideally personalized to the individual needs of consumers. But what is “healthy nutrition”? By what criteria are foods classified as healthy?
Health organizations like the German Nutrition Society, the World Health Organization, and America’s FDA derive their nutrition recommendations first and foremost from the content of macro- and micronutrients, sugar, and salt in foods. Another classification scheme currently being widely discussed is the NOVA system, which categorizes foods exclusively based on their degree of processing. This four-stage system differentiates between unprocessed or minimally processed foods, foods with processed ingredients, processed foods, and ultra-processed foods or UPFs.
According to nutrition experts this last category needs to be addressed with more nuance, especially since the classification was based on processing methods used mostly in Brazil.
A recent whitepaper by Planteneers gives an overview of UPFs and their role in modern nutrition, particularly in the selection of plant-based foods. Rebecca Bohlmann, Planteneers Product Manager and co-author of the whitepaper, discusses the content and background.
Why did Planteneers create this whitepaper?
The whitepaper analyses the NOVA classification system, with a special focus on its use for ultra-processed foods that, according to the NOVA system, should not be consumed at all. Given the growing importance of plant-based alternatives, the question arises as to whether a classification based exclusively on levels of processing, but ignoring parameters like nutrition or product composition, is appropriate today.
For example, the NOVA system classifies freshly-baked bread as a Group III “processed food”, regardless of whether it is made of white or full-grain flour. But this distinction is very significant from a health perspective. Organic soy drink consisting only of water and soybeans likewise falls in Group III. If enriched with vitamin B12, per the NOVA system it counts as ultra-processed and therefore falls in Group IV.
Who is the whitepaper’s intended audience?
The target group comprises important stakeholders like industry and science, as well as nutrition organizations and consumer associations. We want to stimulate a discussion so that, ideally, there are more studies on plant-based foods.
Can you briefly describe how the NOVA system came about?
The NOVA classification system with the UPF concept was first developed in 2009 by researchers at the University of São Paulo under the direction of Carlos A. Monteiro. The goal was to address changing eating habits in Brazil, specifically as a reaction to the increase in civilization diseases like adiposity, cardiovascular disease, cancer etc. The system focused on the role of food processing in health, and not that of individual nutrients or foods.
What are the specific criticisms of the system?
The NOVA system ignores nutrient content and is instead based on categories that are too broad and equate any kind of processing with unhealthy properties. It simplifies the health effects by failing to take into account the complexity of processed ingredients like hydrolyzed proteins. In addition, important health factors are not considered, leading to a predisposition against new types of ingredients. The lack of consensus on the definition of UPFs and the broad-brush classifications of the system make it difficult to categorize products, in turn making it more difficult to use it as a starting point for studies.
But UPFs are criticized by many nutrition specialists and health organizations due to their effects on health. Rightly so?
That is correct. Multiple studies have demonstrated a link between the consumption of UPFs and the heightened risk of health issues. However, in view of the broad and heterogeneous nature of UPFs, more recent research is moving towards examining specific subgroups within this classification. For example, one study found that UPF-related health risks were associated more strongly with animal products and sugar-sweetened beverages, while ultra-processed bread, grain, and plant-based alternatives did not show any association with risks of negative health consequences.
In other words, not all UPFs are created equal?
Precisely. Many plant-based alternatives to meat, fish, and dairy products like cheese do not fit into the UPF category. These plant-based products generally contain much more fiber, which is often seriously lacking in Western diets. In the EU and US people get only about 40-60 percent of the recommended daily amount on average. Another plus point of plant-based alternatives is that they contain no cholesterol, few saturated fats, but high amounts of protein.
What adjustments should be made to the NOVA system? Where is there room for improvement?
The NOVA concept proceeds from the assumption that unprocessed foods are healthier by nature. But this generalization is not always true. An excellent example of this is red meat, which WHO classified as “probably carcinogenic” ten years ago. Therefore, it is essential to refine the categorization framework to focus on nutritional value and evidence-based health outcomes, instead of looking only at the degree of processing of a food.
That means the processing techniques need to be reassessed, right?
Definitely. For example, it must be recognized that certain methods like enrichment and fermentation improve both the safety and nutritional content of foods. Targeted evaluation of the individual additives is also indispensable. These adjustments would create a more accurate framework that better addresses actual health effects and provides clearer, evidence-based guidelines for consumers and political decision-makers.
What does this mean in practical terms for plant-based alternatives?
Plant-based alternatives have great promise. Yet reaching the full functionality of certain animal ingredients remains a technological challenge. In order to boost consumer confidence, it is essential to introduce clean label solutions that guarantee transparency in ingredient lists, and educate consumers about the various ingredients.
Can you give a specific example?
One big opportunity lies in reducing salt content, especially of meat and cheese alternatives. Unlike with traditional animal products, with plant-based alternatives, a high salt content is often not necessary from a technical point of view. This does not change the UPF classification, but salt reduction contributes to a more positive perception by consumers. Replacing coconut oil with alternatives like rapeseed oil is another measure that is already being implemented.
What about the enrichment of plant-based foods?
One approach that offers nutritional and functional advantages is the integration of wholefoods like vegetables and legumes in plant-based products. The demand for innovative products of this nature continues to grow. Another approach is the upgrading of products by enriching them with essential minerals, vitamins, and fatty acids. By combining these approaches with transparent education, plant-based alternatives can be improved from a nutritional point of view.
In this way, all market actors can support a sustained and successful switch to new sources of protein. However, this requires a new food classification system, especially for plant-based alternatives. Food composition and nutritional content are key parameters that are indispensable for the optimum health categorization of food products.
Does the ongoing UPF discussion perhaps even open up new opportunities for plant-based alternatives?
That is indeed the case in our opinion. The UPF discussion offers an excellent opportunity to do some real consumer education, as well as improve products so that more consumers choose plant-based alternatives. One possibility would be to push clean label solutions, since the ingredients play a central role in the context of the NOVA system. In our estimation, the discussion around this topic will help the entire plant-based sector move forward and achieve new milestones.
