Over the past three decades, rapid globalization, urbanization, and technological advancements have profoundly transformed dietary behaviors worldwide. 

Processed and ultra-processed foods have emerged as dominant components of the global food system, largely due to their convenience, affordability, and extended shelf life. These foods include sugary beverages, packaged snacks, fast foods, and ready-to-eat meals, which are often marketed aggressively, particularly to children and adolescents (1). While these products are engineered for taste and accessibility, their nutrient composition raises significant concerns. They are typically high in calories, added sugars, unhealthy fats, and sodium, but lack critical nutrients like dietary fiber, vitamins, and minerals (2).

Youth nutrition is a cornerstone of health, as it directly impacts growth, cognitive development, and disease prevention. However, dietary shifts driven by increased reliance on processed foods have coincided with alarming global trends in childhood obesity, which has tripled since 1975 (3). In 2020, an estimated 340 million children and adolescents aged 5–19 years were classified as overweight or obese (4). Beyond obesity, processed foods have been implicated in the early onset of metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular diseases, cognitive impairments, and behavioral disorders such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (5, 6). These conditions often extend into adulthood, placing a significant burden on healthcare systems and economies (7).

This systematic review synthesizes evidence on the long-term health impacts of processed food consumption among youth, examining physiological, cognitive, and socio-behavioral consequences. It also evaluates strategies to reduce processed food consumption through public health interventions, policy reforms, and educational programs.

Literature Search

This review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to ensure methodological rigor. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases was performed for studies published between January 2000 and September 2023. Keywords included “youth nutrition,” “processed foods,” “childhood obesity,” “adolescent health,” “cognitive development,” “non-communicable diseases,” and “public health interventions.” Boolean operators (AND, OR) were applied to refine the searches, and manual screening of reference lists from relevant articles was conducted to identify additional studies (8).

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

The following criteria were applied to select studies for this systematic review:

1. Population:
• Studies focusing on children and adolescents aged 5–18 years.
• Research examining subgroups within this age range, such as early childhood (5–10 years), pre-adolescents (11–13 years), and adolescents (14–18 years).
2. Exposure:
• Studies evaluating the consumption of processed and ultra-processed foods.
• Foods categorized as processed include sugary beverages, fast foods, packaged snacks, baked goods, ready-to-eat meals, and other industrially prepared products.
• Exposure assessments based on validated dietary recall methods, food frequency questionnaires, or national nutrition surveys.
3. Outcomes:
• Studies reporting measurable health outcomes, including:
• Physical Health: Obesity, metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes, nutrient deficiencies, and growth disturbances.
• Cognitive and Behavioral Health: Academic performance, memory, attention, and conditions like ADHD.
• Biochemical Markers: Alterations in lipid profiles, blood pressure, insulin resistance, or inflammatory markers.
4. Study Design:
• Peer-reviewed research articles employing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, longitudinal studies, or cross-sectional studies.
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses focusing on processed food consumption and its health impacts.
5. Language and Publication:
• Articles published in English to ensure accessibility.
• Research published between January 2000 and September 2023 to capture recent evidence and trends.

Exclusion Criteria

The following criteria were applied to exclude studies that did not align with the objectives of this review:

1. Population:
• Studies exclusively involving adult populations or non-human subjects, as they do not reflect the nutritional needs and health outcomes specific to children and adolescents.
2. Exposure:
• Research lacking a clear definition of processed or ultra-processed foods.
• Studies focusing exclusively on whole food diets, organic food consumption, or interventions unrelated to processed foods.
3. Outcomes:
• Articles not reporting measurable health outcomes, such as reviews, commentaries, or opinion pieces without empirical data.
• Research focusing solely on short-term effects, such as immediate satiety or taste preference, without consideration of long-term health impacts.
4. Study Design:
• Non-empirical studies, such as editorials, letters to the editor, or conference abstracts.
• Research with small or non-representative sample sizes that limit generalizability.
• Studies with high risk of bias, as determined through quality assessment tools (e.g., Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool).
5. Language and Publication:
• Studies published in languages other than English.
• Articles published before January 2000 to focus on recent evidence and avoid outdated dietary trends.
6. Methodological Limitations:
• Research with inadequate data collection methods, such as unvalidated dietary recall instruments or reliance on anecdotal evidence.
• Studies lacking control groups, comparative analyses, or appropriate statistical adjustments for confounders.

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

Data were extracted using a standardized form to capture study design, sample size, demographic information, type of processed food consumed, and health outcomes. Two independent reviewers assessed study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus (9).

PRISMA Flow Diagram

Nutritional Deficits Linked to Processed Foods

Processed foods are nutrient-poor but calorie-dense, contributing to widespread nutritional deficiencies among children and adolescents. Studies reveal that processed food consumption displaces healthier dietary options, leading to insufficient intake of vitamins A, D, and C, as well as minerals like calcium, iron, and magnesium. A cohort study of 20,000 adolescents found that ultra-processed foods accounted for over 50% of daily caloric intake, significantly reducing the consumption of nutrient-rich fruits and vegetables (10, 11).

Obesity and Metabolic Syndrome

Processed food consumption is a leading driver of childhood obesity, with sugary beverages and high-fat snacks being significant contributors. A meta-analysis of 20 cohort studies revealed that each additional serving of sugary beverages increased the risk of obesity by 21% (12). Obese children are more likely to develop metabolic syndrome, a cluster of conditions including central obesity, insulin resistance, and hypertension, which significantly elevates the risk of cardiovascular diseases in adulthood (13, 14).

Cognitive and Behavioral Outcomes

High consumption of processed foods is associated with impaired cognitive development and behavioral issues, including ADHD. Refined sugars and artificial additives in processed foods have been linked to poorer academic performance, memory deficits, and mood instability. A study involving 2,000 adolescents found that diets high in sugar disrupted neurotransmitter function, leading to concentration difficulties and emotional dysregulation (15, 16).

The pervasive consumption of processed foods among youth poses significant challenges to public health. Nutritional deficits resulting from processed diets not only compromise physical growth but also impair cognitive and emotional well-being. Socioeconomic factors exacerbate these issues, as low-income families often rely on processed foods due to affordability and accessibility. Aggressive marketing of processed products further normalizes unhealthy eating behaviors among children, perpetuating the cycle of poor nutrition (17, 18).

Public Health Implications:

1. Policy Reforms: Governments should implement taxes on sugary beverages and high-fat snacks, alongside clear front-of-pack labeling to inform consumers about the health risks of processed foods (19, 20).
2. Educational Interventions: Schools should integrate nutrition education into curricula and promote healthier dietary habits among children and their families (21).
3. Industry Innovations: Food manufacturers must reformulate products to reduce unhealthy ingredients and fortify them with essential nutrients like fiber, vitamins, and minerals (22).

The widespread consumption of processed foods among children and adolescents poses a significant threat to their immediate and long-term health. This review highlights the critical role processed foods play in contributing to obesity, metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular diseases, and cognitive impairments. These foods, while convenient and appealing, are nutrient-poor and calorie-dense, displacing healthier dietary options and leading to nutritional deficiencies.

Addressing this issue requires a multi-faceted approach. Governments must implement policies such as taxation on sugary drinks, clear food labeling, and subsidies for fresh produce to encourage healthier choices. Schools can serve as critical environments for nutritional education, promoting awareness of the risks associated with processed foods and fostering healthier eating habits. Simultaneously, the food industry should take responsibility by reformulating products to reduce harmful ingredients and increase nutrient content.

While the challenges are complex, collaborative efforts can make a significant impact. Educating children and families, reforming food environments, and implementing supportive policies can reduce the prevalence of diet-related diseases and improve overall public health. By prioritizing youth nutrition, we can ensure healthier futures for upcoming generations and mitigate the growing burden on healthcare systems.

1. Monteiro CA, Moubarac JC, Cannon G, Ng SW, Popkin BM. Ultra-processed products are becoming dominant in the global food system. Obes Rev. 2013;14(S2):21-28. doi:10.1111/obr.12102.
2. World Health Organization (WHO). Childhood obesity: Causes and consequences. Geneva: WHO; 2021.
3. Ludwig DS. The glycemic index: Physiological mechanisms relating to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2414-2423. doi:10.1001/jama.287.18.2414.
4. Malik VS, Popkin BM, Bray GA, Després JP, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages and risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(11):2477-2483. doi:10.2337/dc10-1079.
5. Popkin BM, Adair LS, Ng SW. Global nutrition transition and the pandemic of obesity in developing countries. Nutr Rev. 2012;70(1):3-21. doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2011.00456.x.
6. Hu FB. Resolved: There is sufficient scientific evidence that decreasing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption will reduce the prevalence of obesity and obesity-related diseases. Obes Rev. 2013;14(8):606-619. doi:10.1111/obr.12040.
7. Kearney J. Food consumption trends and drivers. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010;365(1554):2793-2807. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0149.
8. Hall KD, Ayuketah A, Brychta R, et al. Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: A randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food intake. Cell Metab. 2019;30(1):67-77.e3. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2019.05.008.
9. Smith LP, Ng SW, Popkin BM. Trends in US home food preparation and consumption: Analysis of national nutrition surveys and time use studies from 1965–1966 to 2007–2008. Nutr J. 2013;12:45. doi:10.1186/1475-2891-12-45.
10. Costa CS, Del-Ponte B, Assunção MC, Santos IS. Consumption of ultra-processed foods and body fat during childhood and adolescence: A systematic review. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21(1):148-159. doi:10.1017/S1368980017001331.
11. Drewnowski A, Almiron-Roig E. Human perceptions and preferences for fat-rich foods. In: Montmayeur JP, le Coutre J, editors. Fat Detection: Taste, Texture, and Post Ingestive Effects. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2010. doi:10.1201/EBK1439826703.
12. Micha R, Peñalvo JL, Cudhea F, et al. Association between dietary factors and mortality from heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes in the United States. JAMA. 2017;317(9):912-924. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.0947.
13. Canella DS, Levy RB, Martins APB, Claro RM, Moubarac JC, Baraldi LG, et al. Ultra-processed food products and obesity in Brazilian households (2008–2009). Public Health Nutr. 2014;17(7):1694-1702. doi:10.1017/S1368980013003169.
14. Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2224-2260. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61766-8.
15. Louzada ML, Baraldi LG, Steele EM, et al. Consumption of ultra-processed foods and obesity in Brazilian adolescents and adults. Pediatrics. 2015;135(3):e566. doi:10.1542/peds.2014-2335.
16. Tyrrell J, Richmond RC, Palmer TM, et al. Genetic evidence for causal relationships between maternal obesity-related traits and birth weight. Nat Commun. 2016;7:10482. doi:10.1038/ncomms10482.
17. Cunningham SA, Kramer MR, Narayan KV. Incidence of childhood obesity in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(5):403-411. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1309753.
18. Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall KD, et al. The global obesity pandemic: Shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet. 2011;378(9793):804-814. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60813-1.
19. Vandevijvere S, Chow CC, Hall KD, Umali E, Swinburn BA. Increased food energy supply as a major driver of the obesity epidemic: A global analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2015;93(7):446-456. doi:10.2471/BLT.14.150565.
20. Taillie LS, Rivera JA, Popkin BM, Batis C. Do high vs. low purchasers respond differently to a nonessential energy-dense food tax? Two-year evaluation of Mexico's 8% nonessential food tax. Prev Med. 2017;105:S37-S42. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.07.009.
21. Fardet A. Minimally processed foods are more satiating and less hyperglycemic than ultra-processed foods: A preliminary study with 98 ready-to-eat foods. Food Funct. 2016;7(5):2338-2346. doi:10.1039/C6FO00107F.
22. Hawkes C. Marketing food to children: Changes in the global regulatory environment 2004–2006. World Health Organization; 2007.