Food Choice Reality Check

As real people, we have choices to make for ourselves and our families, and we all see realities that don’t always make food choices easy. Equally, as food producers, food scientists, retailers, restaurateurs, communicators, and food stakeholders, we have opportunities to encourage and provide nutritious and convenient healthful choices, and to help inform those choices.

Working together to support better food decisions seems the way forward, rather than overly complex food classification schemes and agendas, which can be distracting and unhelpful for meaningful, evidence-based healthful eating and personal health goals.

Real Life, Real Choices

I recently came back from Belgium, where I probably ate too many chocolates. Am I asking the chocolatiers to make the chocolates less tasty, so I eat only one instead of three? No. It’s an experience and not everyday consumption. I like to try different things, and treats can add up. Being mindful on indulgences would help.

Back in New Jersey, I order two large pizzas so there’s plenty for everyone in the family. I eat three slices instead of two. Am I blaming the pizza restaurant because I ate a slice too many? No. Maybe next time I should order just one large pizza or two smaller pizzas for topping variety. But what is the responsibility of the pizza outlet? Should it use thinner dough to reduce the carbs and sodium, fewer oily ingredients, more veggie toppings? Mindful options on the menu are helpful.

In the grocery store, I choose a fruit-flavored yogurt instead of a plain yogurt. Am I blaming the yogurt manufacturer for adding fruit, which means the product may be designated under some schemes as an ultra-processed food (UPF)? No. It was my choice. And processing can help deliver a product many consumers will choose—maybe for less sugar or fat—while maintaining desired nutrients like protein, calcium, and maybe bacteria associated with a healthy gut.

If my whole grain bread uses flour fortified with vitamins that are known shortfall nutrients in diets, am I complaining that this is bad for my family, simply because some schemes consider it a UPF? No. Where is the credible evidence to suggest any real problem for my diet?

At a fast-food outlet, I order a meal deal: a cheeseburger, large fries, and large full-sugar soda. I drink the soda and refill it from the self-serve fountain. Did the salt and fat nudge me toward more soda? Were the meal choices over bundled, refillable, and easy to over consume? If I enjoyed it and don’t eat it too often, what’s the problem? Are there enough tasty, healthful options with wider positive nutrition? A focus on free refills of water and lower-calorie options might be helpful.

At a restaurant, I choose a pasta dish, a huge bowl for one person. I was brought up to finish my plate. Without a to-go box, I would feel bad about food waste and would eat too much. Value for money might better focus on quality and taste, not the sheer volume of food. Perhaps realistic-sized portions and proportionally lower prices at restaurants would help consumers balance consumption?

Improving Diet Decisions

Today’s food landscape sees active groups focused on the complex framing of food processing rather than nutritional balance. This can downplay the fundamental importance of the inherent nutrition value in food. After all, it’s what’s in the food as consumed that matters, how much we are eating, and what nutrients might be missing. Distractions by subjective narratives and loud voices, lacking relevant food expertise or credible science, overcomplicate and confuse consumers. Shouldn’t we correct this with better listening and working together?

Perhaps the pertinent questions aren’t, “Who is to blame?” or “Is this product too processed?” Instead, let’s think realistically about the current food environment and how we can help people with better-informed food choices for tangible, positive impact on diet-related health. How about we consider the following ideas?

1. Recognize the need for change. Acknowledge that some form of disruption is needed to improve dietary behaviors.
   
   
2. Avoid amplifying confusion and require credible evidence. Subjective agendas and ideologies create confusion and division. Misleading information on social media amplifies distracting messages. Wouldn’t it make the most sense to communicate unambiguously, leverage balanced science, and solve for dietary health outcomes, based on nutrition and the qualities of food as consumed?
   
   Credible science is the best marker we have on which to base meaningful food policy, guidance, and standards. Embrace key expertise on food science and food production at the policy table for positive solutions.
   
   
3. Acknowledge personal responsibility. We all need to make our own personal food choices. Reliable information to inform healthful consumer choices is an opportunity, ensuring accessibility to our choices. We need to account for the realities of delivering these foods, whether fresh, prepared, or packaged for convenience and freshness. We need to factor in affordability and the needs of different demographic groups, as well as wider factors necessary for a sustainable food supply.
   
   
4. Keep it practical. Realistic solutions help consumers improve access to healthful food choices; focus on food content as consumed, regardless of subjective uncertainties on processing categorization; support shelf-stable options that deliver nutrition; provide more nutrient density; and encourage shortfall nutrients.

It is critical to align across sectors on realistic, more consistent, well-informed guidance, such as avoiding excesses; eating more varied foods; adding more fiber; choosing whole grains; consuming varied protein, including plant-based protein; and eating more vegetables, fruit and pulses—fresh, frozen, canned, packaged, and prepared. In general consumer guidance, it’s important to avoid bias to specific diet types that might be a trend and not widely aligned.

Guidance should encourage everyone to consume balanced portions; to reduce excess saturated fat, sugar, and sodium; to eat more slowly; and to choose more textured foods and chew more, thus contributing to satiety before overconsumption.

In short, we need a grounded, simpler, and more realistic and practical focus for healthful choices and dietary behaviors. We need better collaboration across sectors and interest groups, with objectivity and clarity, thus earning public trust and making choices easier for consumers.

The opinions expressed are those of the author.

More Perspectives on Diet and Health

• Check out what leading ultra-processed foods researcher Kevin Hall has to say about nutrition and metabolic health.
• Read IFT’s comments on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030.
• Learn about the ways that food ethnographer June Jo Lee decodes consumers’ eating patterns.