Analysis: rethinking ultra-processed foods – Danish experts urge shift from process to nutritional value

At this year’s “Food of the Future” conference hosted by the Danish Technological Institute, leading researchers and industry stakeholders called for a recalibration of how ultra-processed foods are assessed — urging the food sector to move beyond reductive classifications and focus instead on nutritional quality, consumer needs, and product transparency.

The debate around ultra-processed foods has gained momentum across Europe, driven by growing consumer concern over ingredient complexity, shelf life, and perceived unnaturalness. But according to experts at the conference, the prevailing framework — the NOVA classification system — may be steering the conversation in the wrong direction.

“The risk is that we label all processed foods as problematic, even though we should distinguish between good and bad products to a greater extent,” said Lars Hinrichsen, business director at the Danish Technological Institute.

NOVA’s blind spot: nutrition versus process
Professor Lars Ove Dragsted of the University of Copenhagen challenged the NOVA system’s foundational premise — that the degree and site of processing determines a food’s health impact. He argued that this approach overlooks nutritional science and creates misleading paradoxes.

For example, industrially baked rye bread, whole grain muesli, marinated herring, and tofu — all staples of a balanced Nordic diet — are classified as “ultra-processed” under NOVA. Meanwhile, homemade white bread, sugary cakes, and pizzas laden with cheese and salt escape the label, despite their questionable nutritional profiles.

“If we made a classification based on nutritional science instead of processing site, it would look completely different,” Dragsted said. “The best we can do is to ignore NOVA and focus on dietary advice based on real nutritional knowledge.”

Safety, shelf life, and functionality
The conference also addressed the practical realities of food production. While long ingredient lists and unfamiliar additives can trigger consumer skepticism, experts emphasized that processing often plays a vital role in ensuring food safety, reducing waste, and enhancing shelf stability.

“We must not forget that enrichment and process are sometimes precisely what protect us as consumers — against bacteria, against food waste, and poor food safety,” Hinrichsen noted.

This perspective is especially relevant for manufacturers navigating increasingly complex regulatory environments and evolving consumer expectations. The challenge lies in balancing technical functionality with transparent communication and nutritional integrity.

Understanding consumer trade-offs
Consumer sociologist Nina Preus of the Agriculture and Food Council presented insights into Danish eating habits, highlighting the tension between convenience and health. Rye bread sandwiches, chicken, and pizza top the list of preferred dinner options — reflecting a strong demand for fast, familiar meals.

But Preus warned that in times of economic uncertainty and global instability, consumers often default to habitual choices and bargain hunting, even when they aspire to healthier diets.

“Consumers want to do well,” she said. “But often the need for easy, familiar, and tasty food overshadows all the good intentions to change habits.”

For food producers, this underscores the importance of making nutritious options accessible, affordable, and clearly communicated — especially in the convenience category.

A call for quality
The conference concluded with a unified message: the debate on ultra-processing should serve as a springboard for innovation, not alarmism. Processing, when applied thoughtfully, can elevate food quality — just as poor processing can degrade it.

“It is time to collaborate on greater transparency and innovation in products that are both easy, tasty, and nutritious,” Hinrichsen urged.

For food and drink manufacturers, this means embracing a more nuanced approach — one that prioritises nutritional outcomes, consumer trust, and product integrity over simplistic labels. As the conversation around ultra-processed foods continues to evolve, the industry has an opportunity to lead with science, clarity, and purpose.