The NOVA Classification

Category: Health | Vida Vertical

Summary

Assessing foods only by their macro- and micronutrient composition does not capture every aspect relevant to health. The NOVA classification categorises foods into four groups according to the nature and purpose of processing. Epidemiological studies, including the large NutriNet-Santé cohort, report associations between higher consumption of ultra-processed foods (NOVA Group 4) and several metabolic, cardiovascular and oncological outcomes. This article explains the four groups, discusses possible risks of diets dominated by ultra-processed products and considers how hydroponic and aquaponic home growing can increase access to minimally processed foods.

1. Introduction: the importance of the food matrix

Modern nutritional physiology increasingly considers not onlywhichnutrients—proteins, fats, carbohydrates and vitamins—a food contains, but also the physical and chemical structure in which they are consumed. The food matrix, including cell walls, fibres and nutrient interactions, influences digestion, satiety and microbial fermentation in the gut.

Brazilian nutrition researcher Carlos Augusto Monteiro and colleagues developed NOVA to describe foods by the nature, extent and purpose of industrial processing. It complements rather than literally ignores nutrient composition and is one framework among several used to assess food quality.

2. The NOVA system: four groups of food processing

NOVA divides foods and food products into four broad categories.

2.1 Group 1: unprocessed or minimally processed foods

This group includes edible parts of plants, fungi, algae and animals, together with water. Minimal processes such as drying, cutting, grinding, filtering, roasting, cooking, pasteurisation, freezing and non-alcoholic fermentation primarily preserve, make safe or prepare these foods without adding salt, sugar, oils or other Group 2 ingredients.

2.2 Group 2: processed culinary ingredients

These are substances extracted from Group 1 foods or obtained directly from nature, including oils, butter, sugar, honey and salt. Processes include pressing, refining, grinding and drying. They are generally used in kitchens to prepare, season or cook Group 1 foods rather than consumed alone.

2.3 Group 3: processed foods

These products are generally made by combining Group 1 foods with Group 2 ingredients. Examples include vegetables in brine, canned fish, fruit in syrup, many traditional cheeses and freshly made breads. Processing aims to improve durability or sensory qualities. Products often remain recognisable versions of their original foods, although recipes can vary.

2.4 Group 4: ultra-processed foods

Ultra-processed products are industrial formulations usually made from food-derived substances and additives, often with little intact whole food. Ingredients may include protein isolates, maltodextrin, invert sugar and hydrogenated oils, along with colours, emulsifiers, sweeteners, flavour enhancers and flavourings. Such products are designed for convenience, durability and strong sensory appeal. Examples include many soft drinks, packaged snacks, reconstituted meat products, instant noodles and industrial baked goods. “Hyper-palatable” describes their engineered sensory profile; it should not automatically be equated with addiction.

3. Epidemiological evidence: risks associated with ultra-processing

Diets high in Group 4 products often have high energy density, refined carbohydrates, fats or sodium and lower fibre, although composition varies. Disruption of the food matrix, rapid eating, portion size and sensory design may contribute to excess intake. The biological mechanisms remain under investigation and are not identical for every ultra-processed food.

Large prospective cohorts, including the FrenchNutriNet-Santé study, report associations between higher ultra-processed-food consumption and increased risks of cardiovascular disease, obesity, type 2 diabetes and some cancers. These observational associations do not by themselves establish causality, and classification and residual confounding remain active research issues.

Public-health guidance in several countries reflects these concerns. Brazil’s dietary guidelines recommend avoiding ultra-processed foods, while France has set policy goals to reduce their consumption.

4. Relevance to Vida Vertical: home growing as a Group 1 strategy

As a specialist in aquaponics and hydroponics, I regard NOVA as a useful aid for modern dietary practice. Degree of processing can be considered alongside nutrient quality, dietary pattern, affordability and individual needs. Controlled home cultivation offers several practical advantages:

1. Direct access to Group 1 foodsLeafy vegetables, herbs, microgreens and sprouts harvested from hydroponic or aquaponic systems are generally Group 1 foods when consumed fresh or minimally prepared. They undergo no industrial extraction and can retain their intact food matrix.

2. Transparency and traceabilityHome growers know the water, nutrients and inputs used in their systems. Harvested plants contain no industrially formulated emulsifiers or flavourings unless these are added later. Nevertheless, safe fertiliser use, water quality, hygiene and traceable inputs remain essential.

3. Cultivating microalgaeSome edible microalgae are nutrient-dense and can provide protein, pigments or particular fatty acids, depending on species and production conditions. Growing them for human consumption requires a suitable dedicated process, contamination control and regulatory compliance; an ordinary aquaponic circuit does not automatically yield safe or EPA/DHA-rich biomass.

4. Preserving cellular structureFreshly harvested plant foods retain much of their cellular structure. Their fibres can influence digestion, satiety and colonic fermentation. They may moderate glycaemic responses compared with some refined products, but do not universally “prevent” glucose peaks.

5. Conclusion

NOVA provides a simple and useful way to consider food processing, but it is not a complete measure of nutritional quality. Evidence consistently associates diets high in many ultra-processed products with poorer health outcomes, while causality, mechanisms and differences among products continue to be studied.

A practical response is to base more meals on varied minimally processed foods rather than trying to reformulate every industrial product. Home cultivation in vertical, hydroponic or aquaponic systems can support access and engagement, but it is one option rather than the sole or ultimate form of prevention. Overall dietary pattern, accessibility, food safety and sustainable habits remain decisive.

Note: This article provides general scientific information and does not replace individual medical or dietetic advice.

References:

• Monteiro, C. A., Cannon, G., Levy, R. B., Moubarac, J.-C., Louzada, M. L., & Jaime, P. C. (2016). NOVA. The star shines bright. World Nutrition, 7(1-3), 28–38.
• Fiolet, T., Srour, B., Sellem, L., et al. (2018). Consumption of ultra-processed foods and cancer risk: results from NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort. BMJ, 360, k322.
• UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing. Public Health Nutrition.
• Open Food Facts (NOVA food-processing groups): food-transparency database.

Author: Uwe | Vida Vertical – Health