The World Health Organization has told governments they should consider regulating foods that use added colours, flavours or sweeteners to make them more appealing, in new draft guidance that takes the agency into the contested debate over ultra-processed food for the first time.
The draft food-profiling model, published last week, is designed to help governments decide which foods should be eaten only in moderation and which could face measures such as warning labels or taxes, depending on national priorities. Until now, the WHO’s guidance has focused on nutritional content alone, such as fat and salt. This is the first time it has also weighed the ingredients added to make products more attractive to consumers.
“This draft goes beyond traditional nutrient profiling by recognising that foods may need to be considered not only for their nutrient content, but also for other aspects of their formulation” in order to prevent diet-related disease, Katrin Engelhardt, a technical officer in the WHO’s department of nutrition and food safety, said.
Around 11 million deaths a year are linked to unhealthy diets, according to the agency, drawing on data from a global study.
The model is the WHO’s attempt to give member states a framework for the polarised debate over ultra-processed foods — products made with industrial techniques, additives and ingredients that often contain little whole food. Carbonated soft drinks and instant noodles are among the examples cited. Many food scientists say such products carry numerous health risks, while others, including the food industry, argue the category is defined too widely and risks demonising healthy products.
The food industry has pushed back quickly. The International Food and Beverage Alliance, which represents major multinational food and drink companies, said it was concerned the approach shifts attention away from nutritional quality and could bring more products within the scope of potential regulation.
“Of particular concern is the potential to undermine established nutrition priorities and reformulation efforts,” said Rocco Renaldi, the alliance’s secretary general. Companies also fear higher costs from reformulating products or meeting stricter labelling rules, the risk of class-action lawsuits as seen in the United States, and higher taxes on processed food.
Kraft Heinz chief executive Steve Cahillane told Reuters last week that industry players should have a say in the process. “We’re in the food business and we care about consumers deeply,” he said. “And so we ought to have a seat at the table as these discussions evolve.”
Supporters of the model say combining nutrients and processing is the point. Lindsey Smith Taillie, co-director of the Global Food Research Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said the model was designed to target unhealthy foods on both counts. “These two frameworks have never been mutually exclusive and can and should be used by policymakers as the starting place,” she said, adding that healthiness is measured by multiple criteria.
The WHO said the model covers “industrially-produced foods to be consumed in moderation” and is intended as a bridge between its healthy-diet recommendations and government policy on individual products. The proposal is out for consultation until 27 November.
Sources: Reuters — “Food industry pushes back on WHO guidance for products with added colour, sweeteners” (https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/food-industry-pushes-back-who-guidance-products-with-added-colour-sweeteners-2026-11-09/)
