Research: 75% of US Baby Foods Are Ultra-Processed

An alarming 71 percent of grocery store baby food products in the United States are classified as ultra-processed foods (UPFs), according to new research published today in the scientific journal Nutrients.1

Researchers at The George Institute for Global Health analyzed data on 651 products from the Institute’s FoodSwitch database, which includes infant and toddler food products sold in the top ten US grocery store chains. The products were assessed using the well-established NOVA classification system.

UPFs are defined as industrially made products created from highly processed ingredients and additives.2 Such products tend to be cheap, convenient and hyper-palatable, but lack the nutrients of whole foods and less processed products.

Dr Elizabeth Dunford, Research Fellow at The George Institute, and Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Nutrition at the University of North Carolina said the results represent a worrying trend.

“Infancy is a critical time for shaping lifelong eating habits – introducing babies to foods that are overly sweet, salty and packed with additives can set the stage for unhealthy preferences that last beyond childhood. We also know that high UPF consumption in children is linked to heart and metabolic conditions later in life, so it’s best to try and avoid introducing them in the first place,” she said.

Additives were the most common ingredient type used in baby foods, found in 71 percent of all products. Flavor enhancers (found in 36 percent of all food products), thickeners (29 percent), emulsifiers (19 percent) and colors (19 percent) were the most commonly used additive classes, with over 105 unique additive ingredients identified in the dataset.

“We’re seeing a growing body of evidence that certain additives may harm health,” said Dr Dunford. “With emulsifiers, thickeners and stabilizers potentially altering gut function, and synthetic colors affecting behavioural outcomes in children, the high use of cosmetic additives found in US baby foods is particularly concerning.”

UPFs contained twice as much sugar as their non-UPF equivalents (14.0g vs 7.3g per 100g), and added sugars were found only in ultra-processed products. The difference in sugar content was greatest for snack and finger foods, with ultra-processed products containing 2.5 times more sugar than their non-UPF counterparts (14.4g vs 5.6g per 100g).

Sodium content was consistently higher among UPFs than non-UPFs (70mg vs 41mg / 100g). UPFs were also typically more calorie dense, in part due to the use of added sugars as well as refined ingredients, which lack essential nutrients like fiber.

Nearly all snack-size packaged products (94 percent) were ultra-processed, with full-size packages (86 percent) and pouches (73 percent) following close behind. With US consumers increasingly shifting towards more convenient infant and toddler foods, sales of pouches have grown nearly 900% since 2010.3

“The baby food aisle is increasingly dominated by ultra-processed products that prioritise convenience over nutrition. While pouches and snacks may seem practical, they are often the most processed and least healthy options,” Dr Dunford added.

The Trump administration recently released updated dietary guidelines for Americans,4 including recommendations to avoid highly processed foods for the first time, along with advice to limit added sugars and refined carbohydrates.

“Clearer labelling and specific regulation for baby foods are urgently needed to help parents make more informed choices. Until then, checking the ingredients list is one of the best ways to spot the highly processed options – if you see an ingredient you don’t recognize, then it’s probably best to put it back on the shelf,” concluded Dr Dunford.

Previous research by The George Institute revealed that two thirds of baby foods on US grocery store shelves are unhealthy according to World Health Organization guidelines, and 19 percent contain synthetic dyes.3,5

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.