A legally accepted definition of ultra-processed foods in the US is years away

It’s called the “California Effect.”

When it comes to agricultural law, regulation and policy the state has often set trends that other states and the feds closely follow. For an eyeful of how it works, you need to look no further than California’s Proposition 12, a regulation requiring out-of-state pork producers wanting to do business in the Golden State to house their sows in a minimum of 24 square feet of living space.

After the U.S. Supreme Court validated the constitutionality of Prop 12, two things are happening. Yes, opponents are still trying to kill the law. But many farmers have also gotten on board.

USDA reported in July that 27% of pork producers have either complied or soon will be in compliance with Prop 12.

That’s the California Effect in action. And it could soon apply to attempts to craft a statutory definition of ultra-processed foods.

Some researchers believe there’s a link between ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

And right now, the feds are trying to come up with a working definition for ultra-processed foods, which Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says “are driving our chronic disease epidemic.”

But California and Gov. Gavin Newsom, just jumped that shark. Last month, California became the first state in the nation to approve a definition for ultra-processed foods with a goal of ridding them from school meals by 2035.

Before Newsom signed the Real Food, Healthy Kids Act into law, it cleared the California Assembly by 65-to-1 and it passed unanimously in the California Senate.

A landslide.

The new law does a few things. It identifies food ingredients — namely artificial flavors and colors, thickeners and emulsifiers, non-nutritive sweeteners, and high levels of saturated fat, sodium or sugar — that characterize ultra-processed foods.

Specifically the law says ultra-processed foods or beverages are those that contain:

a substance included in FDA’s Substances Added to Food database that has an FDA-defined technical effect, and
Either 1) high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar, or 2) a non-nutritive sweetener.

The law also requires public health officials and scientists to determine exactly which ultra-processed foods are more harmful to human health:

“This bill would define ‘ultra-processed food’ for certain school-related purposes and would require the State Department of Public Health to adopt regulations, on or before June 1, 2028, to define ‘ultra-processed foods of concern’ and ‘restricted school foods,’ as specified. The bill would require the department, when defining ultra-processed foods of concern and restricted school foods, to consider specified factors, including, among others, whether, based on reputable peer-reviewed scientific evidence, a substance or group of substances are linked to health harms or adverse health consequences, as specified.”

A number of foods are given a pass in the California law, including raw agricultural commodities, unprocessed locally grown or raised agricultural products, minimally processed prepared foods, class 1 milk, alcoholic beverages, medical foods, infant formula, and commodity foods specifically made available by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

I bet other states are already taking a hard look at California’s new statutory definition of ultra-processed foods.

After all, more than half the nation began working on food dye bans after California passed one in 2024.

There’s that California Effect thing again.

It may not be all that long before there’s a patchwork of ultra-processed foods definitions across the country.

All of which puts the feds behind the eight ball. HHS will be forced to navigate around the Real Food, Healthy Kids Act. And, the federal government — not known for speed in crafting legislation — could easily fall behind food manufacturers deciding to adopt California’s rules.

Additionally, expect the federal government’s ultra-processed foods rule-making process to become highly politicized. I doubt the White House will take kindly to blue state California’s new regulations.

It will be messy. And herky-jerky. And without much bi-partnership. Of course, eventually there will be lawsuits.

Which means the nation’s ultra-processed foods aren’t going away anywhere, anytime soon.