Exercise Science and Nutrition, St. Catherine University, 2004 Randolph Ave. St. Paul, MN 55105, USA.
Proc Nutr Soc. 2019 Feb;78(1):4-18. doi: 10.1017/S0029665118002513. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
The NOVA food categorisation recommends 'avoiding processed foods (PF), especially ultra-processed foods (UPF)' and selecting minimally PF to address obesity and chronic disease. However, NOVA categories are drawn using non-traditional views of food processing with additional criteria including a number of ingredients, added sugars, and additives. Comparison of NOVA's definition and categorisation of PF with codified and published ones shows limited congruence with respect to either definition or food placement into categories. While NOVA studies associate PF with decreased nutrient density, other classifications find nutrient-dense foods at all levels of processing. Analyses of food intake data using NOVA show UPF provide much added sugars. Since added sugars are one criterion for designation as UPF, such a proof demonstrates a tautology. Avoidance of foods deemed as UPF, such as wholegrain/enriched bread and cereals or flavoured milk, may not address obesity but could decrease intakes of folate, calcium and dietary fibre. Consumer understanding and implementation of NOVA have not been tested. Neither have outcomes been compared with vetted patterns, such as Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension, which base food selection on food groups and nutrient contribution. NOVA fails to demonstrate the criteria required for dietary guidance: understandability, affordability, workability and practicality. Consumers' confusion about definitions and food categorisations, inadequate cooking and meal planning skills and scarcity of resources (time, money), may impede adoption and success of NOVA. Research documenting that NOVA can be implemented by consumers and has nutrition and health outcomes equal to vetted patterns is needed.
NOVA 食物分类建议“避免加工食品（PF），尤其是超加工食品（UPF）”，并选择最少加工的 PF 来解决肥胖和慢性病问题。然而，NOVA 分类是使用非传统的食品加工观点绘制的，额外的标准包括多种成分、添加糖和添加剂。NOVA 对 PF 的定义和分类与编纂和公布的定义和分类进行比较，结果表明在定义或食品分类方面一致性有限。虽然 NOVA 研究将 PF 与营养密度降低相关联，但其他分类法在所有加工水平上都发现了营养丰富的食品。使用 NOVA 分析食物摄入量数据表明，UPF 提供了大量的添加糖。由于添加糖是被指定为 UPF 的标准之一，因此这样的证明证明了一个同义反复。避免被认为是 UPF 的食物，如全麦/强化面包和谷物或调味牛奶，可能无法解决肥胖问题，但可能会减少叶酸、钙和膳食纤维的摄入量。消费者对 NOVA 的理解和实施尚未经过测试。也没有将结果与经过验证的模式（如停止高血压的饮食方法）进行比较，后者根据食物组和营养贡献来选择食物。NOVA 未能证明饮食指导所需的标准：可理解性、可负担性、可行性和实用性。消费者对定义和食物分类的混淆、烹饪和膳食计划技能不足以及资源（时间、金钱）匮乏，可能会阻碍 NOVA 的采用和成功。需要有研究记录表明 NOVA 可以被消费者实施，并具有与经过验证的模式相同的营养和健康结果。
