I wish every article that talks about "ultra-processed" foods would just link to the NOVA system or some other reference. Otherwise it just makes their statements seem so empty.

The NOVA system is bad science, in my opinion.

When asked to classify centuries-old staples like cheese or jam or bread or pickles, the experts struggle to find a consensus on which category any given food is. And so the classification system itself is so imprecisely defined that studies based on the system will rest on a shaky foundation.

It's better to identify what specific foods and what specific cooking techniques are bad and how they might be bad, rather than trying to say that the act of chopping, blending, mixing, cooking, or fermentation automatically makes a food less healthy.

If certain additives are bad, say that those are bad. Don't try to lump in the other processing techniques into one basket.

Great link, thanks.

That probably captures many such things but it's not fool proof. I like to make bread with 2-4 different kinds of flour, 4-8 different kinds of seeds, a teaspoon or two of sugar to get the yeast going, sometimes milk or olive oil or another fat source. At it's most complex it could get pretty close to 20 ingredients but I don't feel that should be classified as ultra-processed. The kinds of ingredients used and the actual process also matters.