A prominent German food chemist is challenging the increasingly popular narrative surrounding ultra-processed foods, arguing for a more nuanced and less alarmist approach to public health messaging. Thomas Henle, a researcher at Dresden University of Technology, contends that current fears regarding the general unhealthiness of processed foods lack robust scientific backing.
In an interview with “Der Spiegel”, Henle expressed concern that much of the existing research relies heavily on observational data rather than conclusive evidence. He advocates for a more targeted examination, focusing on identifying specific, problematic products within the broad category of “ultra-processed” foods – such as sugar-laden beverages or highly fatty, salty meat products – rather than condemning the entire sector. “It’s crucial to pinpoint which items, when consumed excessively, are genuinely detrimental” he stated.
Henle’s critique extends to the widely adopted NOVA food classification system, which categorizes foods based on the degree of processing they undergo. He characterized the system as “ideologically motivated” accusing it of promising a supposedly pristine scientific methodology, supposedly free from industrial influence, yet lacking sound, verifiable methods. This, he warns, has societal consequences, potentially fostering a resurgence of traditional gender roles and reinforcing expectations surrounding female domestic care, all under the guise of scientific health advice. “It can even lead to women feeling guilty if they don’t prepare everything themselves” he observed, highlighting the negative impact on gender equality.
The professor’s reservations underscore a broader debate within the scientific community – one questioning the rush to demonize processed foods while potentially overlooking the complexities of overall lifestyle factors. He stresses that in many cases, illness is more attributable to broader lifestyle choices, such as excessive calorie intake and insufficient physical activity, than to the consumption of a single food category. Ultimately, Henle calls for a more considered and scientifically rigorous dialogue, moving beyond simplistic narratives to promote truly sustainable and equitable public health strategies.