New Study Highlights Prevalence of Ultra-Processed Foods in U.S. Household Purchases
A recent study has found that ultra-processed foods (UPFs) make up nearly half of grocery purchases in U.S. households, disproportionately affecting lower-income and less-educated families—emphasizing the urgent need for national policy changes. The findings, published in Public Health Nutrition, shed light on purchasing patterns across various socioeconomic groups by examining differences in education, income, race, and ethnicity.
Researchers analyzed purchasing data from 59,939 households, totaling over 33 million food and beverage products bought in 2020. Their results revealed that almost 50% of packaged food purchases and over one-third of beverages were classified as UPFs. Snacks, soft drinks, and mixed dishes represented the largest share of these highly processed products.
Households with lower incomes, lower education levels, and non-Hispanic white families were more likely to purchase UPFs. The study utilized a significance threshold of p < 0.0001 to assess differences between demographic groups.
Background on Ultra-Processed Foods
Ultra-processed foods, made with additives and highly engineered ingredients, are becoming a dominant part of American diets. Unlike traditional nutrition research focusing on nutrients, recent studies apply the NOVA classification system to categorize foods by processing levels. This approach highlights products designed for overconsumption and often linked to chronic conditions such as heart disease, obesity, cancer, depression, and even premature death.
Estimates indicate that nearly half of all U.S. food and beverage purchases fall into the ultra-processed category. Additionally, nutrition-related health disparities persist across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines, with previous research (2007–2012) showing that individuals with higher education levels consume fewer UPFs, while white and Black adolescents consume more. Income and age have also shown inverse relationships with UPF intake.
Earlier findings suggested that Black households purchased more processed drinks but fewer processed foods, though dietary surveys were limited compared to the purchase data used in this study.
Study Overview and Methods
In response to a rapidly evolving food landscape, the study sought to update previous research on UPF purchasing patterns. The analysis considered intersections between race, income, education, and family composition using a nationally representative consumer panel from 2020.
Households scanned their packaged food and beverage purchases while reporting demographic details such as race/ethnicity, education, income, and household structure. Ethnic categories included non-Hispanic, Hispanic, non-Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic Black. Income was categorized using Federal Poverty Level (FPL) benchmarks (<185%, 185–350%, and >350%), while education levels ranged from high school or less to college graduates and above. Households were also classified by whether children were present.
Using commercial databases, products were matched with ingredient lists and nutritional information. Items lacking barcodes or nutrition labels—such as fresh produce and meats—were excluded. Foods and beverages were sorted into nine and eleven categories, respectively, and classified by processing level (minimally processed, processed ingredients, processed foods, and UPFs) using NOVA criteria. Products initially labeled as UPFs without any NOVA-specific markers were reclassified as processed foods.
Statistical tests with Bonferroni adjustments were applied to account for multiple comparisons when analyzing purchase volumes across different demographic groups.
Key Findings
In 2020, among nearly 60,000 households and more than 33 million products analyzed, UPFs accounted for 48% of packaged foods and 38% of beverages, totaling 43% of all purchases.
The highest UPF categories were:
-
Carbonated beverages (90% UPFs)
-
Soups and mixed dishes (81% UPFs)
-
Snacks and sweets (71% UPFs)
Conversely, items like fruits, vegetables, nuts, oils, and fats had almost no UPFs but represented just 12% of total purchases. In contrast, carbonated soft drinks, sweets/snacks, and mixed dishes/soups made up 36% of all purchases.
Non-Hispanic white households had the highest proportion of UPF purchases at 49%, followed by non-Hispanic Black (47%), Hispanic (46%), and other ethnic groups (43%). Households with lower incomes and lower educational attainment purchased greater proportions of UPFs compared to their higher-income, higher-educated counterparts.
These trends persisted across racial and ethnic groups even when accounting for income differences. Non-Hispanic white households were more likely to purchase carbonated UPF beverages, while non-Hispanic Black households bought more UPF dairy beverages and fruit juices. Other ethnic groups consistently had the lowest UPF purchases, except in dairy beverages. Grain products and fruit/vegetable juices exhibited the greatest variability, with at least a 10% difference between the highest and lowest UPF purchasing rates.
It’s important to note that this study only captured in-home purchases. Previous research has shown that non-Hispanic Black households are more likely to purchase sugar-sweetened beverages outside the home—an area not included in this analysis. As a result, lower in-home beverage UPF purchases among non-Hispanic Black households may not fully reflect total consumption.
