Robert Shewfelt

Robert Shewfelt

July 2021

Volume 75, No. 6

Group Discussion
Join the Discussion right arrow

To join an online discussion on this topic, IFT members can visit IFT Connect at iftconnect.org/processed-foods. Share your thoughts and see what others have to say!

Earlier this year, I was volunteering at my church with a food drop-off. While chatting with a fellow volunteer, I mentioned that I wrote a blog on processed foods. She responded, “Oh, about how bad they are for you?” I pointed out that we were collecting only processed foods.

Sadly, this encounter was not an isolated incident.

How can we best communicate food science to the general public? It is a question that has haunted me. We have a message to tell. We adhere to basic principles that largely contradict much of what we read about food in the media. Major decisions face our society. They will affect production, processing, distribution, and consumption of foods. Input from food activists, nutritionists, the food industry, and others will shape these policies.

"As food scientists we make one of two mistakes: We are either too forceful or too defensive."

- Robert Shewfelt, PhD, Professor Emeritus , University of Georgia
Robert Shewfelt

Let’s End the Blame Game
Food scientists need a place at the table. Yet, at present, nobody listens to us, and we have devolved into a circular blame game. Society blames increases in obesity and chronic diseases on consumption of processed foods. We blame the person for putting on weight or blame the food for making us overeat.

Meanwhile, writers with limited backgrounds in nutrition dispense dietary advice in print, on air, and online. For consumers, these advocates project much more credibility than physicians, dietitians, or nutritionists. Some trained professionals have jumped on the anti-processed-food bandwagon, but many freelance critics of processed foods reject basic nutrition.

At the University of Georgia, I taught a class in food processing. One day, a student brought me a small, paper table tent displayed in all cafeterias on campus. It advocated eating fresh, whole foods and avoiding processed ones. Among the processed foods listed was whole milk. Reduced-fat (2%) milk appeared on the list of whole foods. The incident gave me a mission.

Upon retirement, I decided to write a book to defend processed food. My editor suggested that I write a blog to publicize the book. Initially, I had no interest, but the bad press on processed foods kept coming. My retired soul could not rest. I took up blogging to promote my ideas.

It is clear we are not effectively communicating our perspective. As food scientists we make one of two mistakes: We are either too forceful or too defensive. Our scientific side screams, “We are right, and you are wrong!” Our reflective side whispers, “Food additives are not as bad as you think!” Somehow, we need to find a middle road.

My reading led me to two great books: Future Foods, and Molecules, Microbes, and Meals. Neither Julian McClements nor Alan Kelly was arrogant. Neither author was defensive. They found that happy medium that represents a reasoned approach with an appeal to logic. Make no mistake: We will not reach those who openly reject processed food. But there is a constituency out there who will listen to our message.

Finding Middle Ground
I plead guilty to being too arrogant at times and too defensive at others. I seek that middle ground. As I continued my blog, I expanded my reading selections. I read books by our critics. Some were painful to read and strengthened my convictions. Others caused me to rethink my positions. My views on sustainability, dieting, and food deserts saw significant changes. I stopped defending artificial colors, or foods with high levels of salt or sugar whether processed or homemade.

Meanwhile, I’ve developed relationships with former critics. We will not reach those who adamantly reject processed foods. But there are many we can reach on a middle road if we respectfully and honestly play to our strengths and acknowledge our weaknesses. A recent report by the PR firm Edelman suggests that trust in the food and beverage industry is rising. At the same time, trust in science and journalism is falling. A defense of processed food requires increased visibility and engagement with those outside our field.

We need to start discussions with dietitians and nutritionists. Can we establish common ground on nutritional value of foods and food additives? Is the discussion in the media becoming elitist? Not everyone can afford the “healthy diet” prescribed by self-trained nutritionists on the web. It is time that food professionals come together to seek agreement on food issues. At times we will agree to disagree, but we must make progress. Otherwise, we will lose that seat at the table when government reforms the food system.


To join an online discussion on this topic, IFT members can visit IFT Connect at iftconnect.org/processed-foods. Share your thoughts and see what others have to say!

In This Article

  1. Food Processing & Packaging

About the Author

Robert Shewfelt, PhD, is a professor emeritus at the University of Georgia, and author of In Defense of Processed Foods.
Robert Shewfelt

Digital Exclusives right arrow

Embracing the Accidental Food Scientist

Julie Emsing Mann discusses her career path and the importance of educating students about careers in food science.

The White House Conference Was Only the First Step

The National Strategy’s whole-of-government approach is a first step at breaking silos and was seen on the day of the conference, from USDA, FDA, and White House staff and others leading discussion sessions to current and former members of Congress presenting and hosting.

When Career Paths Get Bumpy: Black, Gay, and Female Professionals Share Their Stories

IFT Career Path Survey respondents offer candid commentary on the impact of race, sexual orientation, and gender on career progression.

Of Meritocracy and Mediocrity: Why DEI Matters

Debunking the myth that compulsory diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace leads to mediocrity rather than meritocracy.

Food Technology Articles right arrow

Engaging the Science of Food’s Next Generation

IFT President Chris Downs and IFTSA President Cameron Wicks reflect on the value of multigenerational perspectives in the science of food.

Give Back, Gain More

Use description for summary or first sentence from article or author provided IFT President Chris Downs reflects on the value of volunteering.

Impact & Influence

Meet five changemakers who have inspired their peers and retooled the food system.

Change Agent

From the laboratory to the C-suite, food safety scientist Theo Morille has aspired to change and has inspired change throughout her 35-year career.

Can We Future-Proof the Food System?

IFT President Chris Downs reflects on megatrends identified by CSIRO and the 2023 IFT FIRST programming.

Recent Brain Food right arrow

A New Day at the FDA

IFT weighs in on the agency’s future in the wake of the Reagan-Udall Report and FDA Commissioner Califf’s response.

Members Say IFT Offers Everything You Need to Prepare for an Uncertain Future

Learn how IFT boosts connections, efficiencies, and inspiration for its members.

More on the FDA's Food Traceability Final Rule

In a new white paper, our experts examine the FDA’s Food Traceability Final Rule implications—and its novel concepts first proposed by IFT.