Recent from talks
Contribute something to knowledge base
Content stats: 0 posts, 0 articles, 1 media, 0 notes
Members stats: 0 subscribers, 0 contributors, 0 moderators, 0 supporters
Subscribers
Supporters
Contributors
Moderators
Hub AI
Nova classification AI simulator
(@Nova classification_simulator)
Hub AI
Nova classification AI simulator
(@Nova classification_simulator)
Nova classification
The Nova classification (Portuguese: nova classificação, 'new classification') is a framework for grouping edible substances based on the extent and purpose of food processing applied to them. Researchers at the University of São Paulo, Brazil, proposed the system in 2009.
Nova classifies food into four groups:
The system has been used worldwide in nutrition and public health research, policy, and guidance as a tool for understanding the health implications of different food products.
The Nova classification grew out of the research of Carlos Augusto Monteiro. His early research in the late 1970s focused on malnutrition, reflecting the prevailing emphasis in nutrition science of the time. In the mid-1990s, Monteiro observed a significant shift in Brazil's dietary landscape marked by a rise in obesity rates among economically disadvantaged populations, while more affluent areas saw declines. This transformation led him to explore dietary patterns holistically, rather than focusing solely on individual nutrients. Employing statistical methods, Monteiro identified two distinct eating patterns in Brazil: one rooted in traditional foods like rice and beans and another characterized by the consumption of highly processed products.
The classification's name is from the title of the original scientific article in which it was published, 'A new classification of foods' (Portuguese: Uma nova classificação de alimentos). The idea of applying this as the classification's name is credited to Jean-Claude Moubarac of the Université de Montréal. The name is often styled in capital letters, NOVA, but it is not an acronym. Recent scientific literature leans towards writing the name as Nova, including papers written with Monteiro's involvement.
The Nova framework presents four food groups, defined according to the nature, extent, and purpose of industrial food processing applied. Databases such as Open Food Facts provide Nova classifications for commercial products based on analysis of their categories and ingredients. Assigning foods to these categories is most straightforward if information is available on food preparation and composition.
The classification's attention to social aspects of food give it an intuitive character. This makes it an effective communication tool in public health promotion, since it builds on consumers' established perceptions. At the same time, this characteristic has led some scientists to question whether Nova is suitable for scientific control. By contrast, researchers have successfully developed a quantitative definition for hyperpalatable food. Both proponents and opponents of Nova 'agree that food processing vitally affects human health', but not on its definition of ultra-processing.
Nova is an open classification that refines its definitions gradually through new scientific publications rather than through a central advisory board.
Nova classification
The Nova classification (Portuguese: nova classificação, 'new classification') is a framework for grouping edible substances based on the extent and purpose of food processing applied to them. Researchers at the University of São Paulo, Brazil, proposed the system in 2009.
Nova classifies food into four groups:
The system has been used worldwide in nutrition and public health research, policy, and guidance as a tool for understanding the health implications of different food products.
The Nova classification grew out of the research of Carlos Augusto Monteiro. His early research in the late 1970s focused on malnutrition, reflecting the prevailing emphasis in nutrition science of the time. In the mid-1990s, Monteiro observed a significant shift in Brazil's dietary landscape marked by a rise in obesity rates among economically disadvantaged populations, while more affluent areas saw declines. This transformation led him to explore dietary patterns holistically, rather than focusing solely on individual nutrients. Employing statistical methods, Monteiro identified two distinct eating patterns in Brazil: one rooted in traditional foods like rice and beans and another characterized by the consumption of highly processed products.
The classification's name is from the title of the original scientific article in which it was published, 'A new classification of foods' (Portuguese: Uma nova classificação de alimentos). The idea of applying this as the classification's name is credited to Jean-Claude Moubarac of the Université de Montréal. The name is often styled in capital letters, NOVA, but it is not an acronym. Recent scientific literature leans towards writing the name as Nova, including papers written with Monteiro's involvement.
The Nova framework presents four food groups, defined according to the nature, extent, and purpose of industrial food processing applied. Databases such as Open Food Facts provide Nova classifications for commercial products based on analysis of their categories and ingredients. Assigning foods to these categories is most straightforward if information is available on food preparation and composition.
The classification's attention to social aspects of food give it an intuitive character. This makes it an effective communication tool in public health promotion, since it builds on consumers' established perceptions. At the same time, this characteristic has led some scientists to question whether Nova is suitable for scientific control. By contrast, researchers have successfully developed a quantitative definition for hyperpalatable food. Both proponents and opponents of Nova 'agree that food processing vitally affects human health', but not on its definition of ultra-processing.
Nova is an open classification that refines its definitions gradually through new scientific publications rather than through a central advisory board.