ULTRA-PROCESSED FOODS: THE LINK BETWEEN HEALTH AND CLIMATE ACCORDING TO THE LANCET
The new Lancet Series on ultra-processed foods, published in November 2025, analyses the role of these foods in public health and the environment. In high-income countries, ultra-processed foods account for around 50% of the domestic diet, while in low- and middle-income countries, consumption is growing rapidly. The sector is dominated by a few large transnational corporations, including Nestlé, PepsiCo, Unilever and Coca-Cola, which process commodities such as corn, wheat, soy and palm oil on a large scale to transform them into a wide range of food substances and additives.
Climate and environmental impact of processed foods
The production of ultra-processed foods is based on a supply chain that ranges from intensive cultivation to industrial processing and global transport, with significant use of fossil fuels at every stage. The EAT-Lancet Commission 2025 examined the relationship between the food system and planetary boundaries, finding that the sector is responsible for violating five of the seven planetary boundaries that have already been exceeded. Data show that nearly 70% of the planet’s ecoregions have lost more than 50% of their natural areas, largely due to intensive agriculture that supplies raw materials for the ultra-processed food industry. In Italy, according to FAO data, the food sector as a whole is responsible for about 32% of climate-changing emissions.
Projections indicate that with the current trajectory – based on the constant increase in agricultural production and the conversion of forests into agricultural land, with an expected 33% growth in emissions from the sector – environmental impacts will continue to increase. Added to this is the impact of plastic packaging, which is widespread in ultra-processed products and contributes to the pollution of oceans, soils and food chains.
The EAT-Lancet Commission has calculated that a transformation of the global food system could reduce projected emissions by 60% compared to 2020 levels.
Adopting the so-called planetary diet, which reduces the consumption of ultra-processed products in favour of fresh and minimally processed foods, could halve greenhouse gas emissions from the food sector.
Direct and indirect health impacts of processed foods
Scientific literature documents an association between high consumption of ultra-processed foods and certain chronic diseases, such as obesity, cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. The Lancet points out that the consumption of these foods is often part of an overall dietary pattern in which fresh and minimally processed foods are replaced by industrial alternatives which, together with the interaction between multiple additives, have negative effects on health. As the analysis reports, “these products are aggressively marketed and engineered to be hyperpalatable, stimulating repeated consumption and often replacing traditional nutrient-rich foods”.
Ultra-processed foods are characterised by the presence of sensory additives that modify texture, flavour and appearance. These additives, combined with high concentrations of sugars, salt and fats, create products that stimulate repeated consumption. The industry generates considerable revenues that support expansion and finance lobbying activities to counter attempts at regulation.
The EAT-Lancet Commission 2025 has quantified the potential benefits of a change in the food model: global adoption of the planetary diet could prevent 15 million premature deaths each year. In the United States alone, 31% of premature deaths in adulthood could be avoided. Cohort studies show that following the planetary diet reduces all-cause mortality by 28%, with a decrease in the incidence of diabetes, heart disease, obesity and several types of cancer. The model has also shown protective effects on cognitive decline and ageing.
Furthermore, there is a dimension of social inequality in the health impact. Consumption of ultra-processed products tends to be higher among people in difficult economic circumstances, for whom the industry guarantees very affordable prices. Unfortunately, citizens with fewer resources face greater difficulties in accessing nutritious, healthy and high-quality food. The EAT-Lancet Commission 2025 notes that about one-third of the population is responsible for more than 70% of the environmental impact of food.
The planetary diet and the benefits for the planet
The planetary diet, as defined by the EAT-Lancet Commission 2025, is a framework that can be adapted to local cultural traditions and food systems. The model is characterised by a high content of whole grains, legumes, fruit, vegetables and nuts, with moderate amounts of fish, dairy products and eggs, and low amounts of red meat. The goal is to feed 9.6 billion people by 2050 while reducing the environmental impact of the food system.
According to the Commission’s calculations, this transformation could bring numerous environmental benefits, halving greenhouse gas emissions from the food sector and reducing the carbon footprint of food. The positive effects would also extend to protecting ecosystems under pressure from intensive agriculture, reducing deforestation linked to commodity demand and preserving biodiversity. The Commission also estimates economic benefits of $5 trillion per year through ecosystem restoration, reduced healthcare costs and climate crisis mitigation.
However, realising this scenario requires substantial changes to the food system. The Commission suggests redirecting agricultural subsidies towards diversified producers who create minimally processed, locally sourced and affordable foods. Taxation on ultra-processed foods could help finance the production and accessibility of whole and minimally processed foods, supporting low-income families. The Commission stresses that the transition must take equity into account: it must not increase gender inequalities in meal preparation or food insecurity among those who depend on cheap options.
The Lancet Series identifies the necessary policies: adding ultra-processed markers such as colourings, flavourings and sweeteners to nutritional profiling models, introducing mandatory warning labels, restricting marketing to children, restricting these foods in public institutions and applying higher taxes on ultra-processed foods. The document also recommends addressing market concentration in the sector with more effective antitrust policies, replacing self-regulation with mandatory regulation, and countering interference in decision-making processes.
The Lancet concludes that “the ultra-processed food industry is emblematic of a food system increasingly controlled by transnational corporations that prioritise corporate profit over public health”. The document calls for “a coordinated global response, with comprehensive and mutually reinforcing policies” to transform global food systems. But transforming the food system raises issues that go beyond public policy and touch on the heart of our economic model.
The true cost of food: beyond the price on the shelf
In this regard, further food for thought is provided in the book Il cibo è politica (Food is Politics) by Fabio Ciconte, an expert writer on food supply chains, published in 2025. The author invites us to reflect on the real cost that food should have and what it actually has. As appealing as they may be, the low prices often promoted by supermarkets, various discounts and offers do not take into account the real costs – health, environmental and social – of food production.
The amount we pay at the checkout will probably cover the cost of food production, processing, marketing and distribution, but it certainly does not include the health costs associated with food production. According to ISPRA data, industrial livestock farming in the European Union alone is responsible for around 90% of ammonia emissions, one of the main atmospheric pollutants that cause thousands of deaths every year. High consumption of ultra-processed foods also has an impact on public health costs, as it is associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease, obesity and diabetes: all expenses that are not reflected in the final price of a food product.
Then there are the costs associated with the loss of plant biodiversity due to the industrialisation of agriculture, which today favours monocultures consisting of a few economically advantageous varieties. To this we must add the effects of pesticide use on pollinating insects and wildlife in general. Finally, with regard to the social cost of food production, we should consider the remuneration of labour, which, especially in southern Italy, is often inadequate.
Considering all these costs, what should the real price of food be? Some research suggests that it could even double. This raises another question: what percentage of the population could actually afford fairer and more sustainable food? According to the writer, this is the most complex challenge facing the current food system. To be truly sustainable, food should be healthy and have a low environmental and social impact, but it should also maintain a final price that makes it accessible to everyone. Are the conditions in place today to combine these two elements? The lack of time due to the pace of everyday life and the economic difficulties of many families make it difficult to systematically purchase sustainable products.
Yet how often do we read articles or watch television programmes that provide advice on how to pollute less, eat healthier, reduce waste and use less plastic packaging? These are all useful suggestions that should be taken into account in our daily behaviour. But in the face of the environmental issues we face today, focusing responsibility on the lifestyle of individual citizens seems like a partial solution. One figure cited in the book is emblematic: 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions are produced by just a hundred companies. Individual choices matter, but transforming the food system requires structural interventions that only politics and market regulation can achieve.
Alessandro Franceschini’s new book Non è cibo. L’invasione degli ultra-processati. Come l’industria ha rimpiazzato il cibo autentico (It’s not food. The invasion of ultra-processed foods. How industry has replaced authentic food) is also dedicated to ultra-processed foods and their environmental impact. E come possiamo riprendercelo (It’s Not Food: The Invasion of Ultra-Processed Foods. How Industry Has Replaced Authentic Food. And How We Can Get It Back), published by Altreconomia. His book offers numerous ideas for increasing awareness of what we put on our tables and illustrates how it is possible to free ourselves from ultra-processed foods, regaining our health without sacrificing taste.
Article by Marta Abbà and Rossella De Poi, volunteers at Italian Climate Network.