"Food faddists and pseudoscientists!": Reflections on the history of resistance to ultra-processed foods.

• Currently, there is significant global interest in the harms associated with ultra-processed foods. • The term 'ultra-processed food' is not a new term; it has been in use for nearly half a century. • As evidenced by Food Day 1975 and other events, concern over ultra-processed foods was part of the holistic and environmental health movements of the 1970–80 s. • Nutrition advocates concerned about the harms of ultra-processed foods were often labeled as 'food faddists' and 'pseudoscientists.'. • Historical omission and marginalization of persons and groups engaging in determined advocacy and clinical work has served to mask harms and allow multinational purveyors of ultra-processed products to influence global policy. The term 'ultra-processed food' emerged in the 1980s, mostly used in reference to highly-processed convenience foods and snacks, often energy-dense, poor in nutrients, and inclusive of various synthetic additives such as emulsifiers, colors, artificial sweeteners, and/or flavor enhancers. Concern over such foods was part of the growing holistic and environmental health movements of the 1970–80s; yet, those who raised alarm about the encroachment of ultra-processed foods were often labeled, especially by industry and their powerful allies, as 'food faddists' and 'pseudoscientists'. Today, the topic of ultra-processed foods is generating massive personal, public, and planetary health interest. However, other than discussing the history of the NOVA food classification system, a useful tool that has allowed researchers to more accurately separate foods based on processing, most lay media and academic articles are ahistorical. That is, there is a tendency to present the term ultra-processed food(s) as a relatively new entrance into the lexicon, and by default, the idea that health-related pushback on ultra-processed foods is a relatively new phenomenon. This omission overlooks decades of determined advocacy and clinical work, much of it by pioneers within the holistic medicine (now integrative, functional, and lifestyle medicine) movement. Here in this reflection paper, the authors will use historical research and reporting to fill in the historical gap and articulate the saliency of why it matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Explore: The Journal of Science & Healing is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)