RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.

Insights

Current Nutrition Trends: Fact, Fiction, and Half-Truths

A woman inspects a label while shopping at a grocery store.

Key Takeaways

  • Not every nutrition trend is supported by science. Consumers should evaluate health claims critically and rely on evidence rather than social media headlines. 

  • Protein needs vary by individual. While many people benefit from increased protein intake, consuming more than necessary is not always better and should fit within an overall balanced diet. 

  • Gut health remains an important area of nutrition research. Prebiotic fibers and certain probiotics can support a healthy gut microbiome, though research continues to evolve.

  • Ultra-processed foods are more nuanced than many headlines suggest. Overall dietary patterns matter more than eliminating individual foods or ingredients.

  • Moderation and dietary diversity remain foundational principles. Healthy eating is best approached through long-term habits rather than chasing the latest nutrition trend.

These days, it feels like no matter where you look, there’s a new trend in nutrition and wellness filling our news and social media feeds. From “hacks” to debunking to “here’s what your doctor isn’t telling you,” some are based on sound science, and some have been framed specifically to feed our fears.

With all this information coming at us from multiple directions, how can consumers determine what’s real, what’s not, and what advice to follow for physical health, mental health, and overall wellbeing?

RTI’s Micaela Cox is a nutrition and food science expert who advises private sector partners to help them make sound decisions. We asked her to weigh in on some of the top food trends we’re seeing lately.

What’s driving today’s surge in nutrition trends?

Nutrition trends aren’t new—they just feel ever-present, propagate more quickly, and evolve faster than in pre-internet, pre-social media times.

For example, if you go back to the 1990s, the main trend was low-fat and light foods. Along with that heightened media attention and consumer desire, we started to see the industry respond with revised ingredients or new labeling showcasing foods as “low fat.”

In more recent years, we’ve seen increased public scrutiny around specific ingredients. As consumers gain access to more information, they show more interest in nutrition, along with a desire for more transparency about and control over the ingredients they consume. 

Are we now overemphasizing protein, and is it possible to consume too much of it?

From coffee to breakfast pastries, protein is being touted and even augmented in products. When I was in school getting my first degree in nutrition, we learned that a healthy individual needs 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. 

However, recent literature suggests that that number should be considered the baseline. And while that amount of protein consumption should be sufficient, some people may want to consume up to about 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight if their aim is to optimize protein intake. This may make sense for individuals who are trying to improve lean muscle mass, improve weight management and satiety, or support recovery, performance, or healthy aging. Specifically, individuals taking glucagon-like peptide-1s (GLP-1s) are encouraged to ensure they are consuming adequate protein to preserve their lean muscle mass as they lose weight. 

And yes, it is possible to overdo it on protein. Too much protein may not provide additional benefit and may not be advised for people with kidney disease. If an individual is solely focused on consuming enough protein, there is a chance they may be neglecting other parts of a healthy diet. 

What does the science say about gut health, including prebiotics and probiotics?

Gut health has really taken center stage in recent years. We have learned so much about the gut microbiome—the tiny but vast universe of microorganisms living in our digestive tracts—and its importance for our overall wellbeing. A balanced microbiome plays a positive role in metabolism, immunity, and nervous system regulation; gut microbiome dysbiosis (or an imbalance) has been correlated to various diseases.

I’m pleased to see the more recent trend focusing on fiber consumption because some fiber is prebiotic, and prebiotics are what feed our gut microbiome. Fiber is a complex carbohydrate that our body does not have enzymes to break down. So, instead of being absorbed into the small intestine, fiber proceeds into the large intestine, where it feeds the microbiome, producing short-chain fatty acids and metabolites that appear to play a role in immune, metabolic, and gut–brain signaling pathways.

We’re still learning so much about the gut microbiome because it’s extremely complex. But from what we know, prebiotics are critically important. Probiotics also play a role in gut health by introducing new microbes. These live microorganisms are a bit more nuanced; their effects tend to be strain-specific and depend heavily on the individual, the desired health outcome(s), and consistency of intake. Some strains have demonstrated benefits for digestive health and certain clinical conditions, but those results are not universal across individuals. Emerging research is exploring new targeted strains for areas such as metabolic, immune, and even mental health support.

Which trending ingredients have real evidence behind them?

There are several ingredients or supplements my friends and family have been asking me about lately. Creatine is one of the most scientifically supported supplements. It’s been proven to support muscle building and more recent research is investigating its role in brain health and cognition. 

Adaptogens—a class of plants and mushrooms that helps your body adapt to stress—have been emerging for a while, and some combine many interesting ingredients. However, as a scientist, I can’t point to much research supporting many of these ingredients in the scientific evidence base. A lot of these ingredients were used in traditional medicine or have anecdotal evidence that has not yet been studied. In this case, I’d say it’s not that these products or ingredients don’t work—it’s that the science to back them up just isn’t there yet. 

How should people think about ultra-processed foods in practical terms?

The definition of ultra-processed foods is complex, as I wrote in another recent blog on this topic. While there are some classification systems, such as Nova, used in the market, we are waiting on a formal federal definition. While some observational evidence links high consumption of certain ultra-processed foods to adverse health outcomes, some ultra-processed (based on the Nova classification) also meet the criteria for FDA's "healthy" claim. It is therefore important to recognize the heterogeneity of ultra-processed foods.

Concerns about ultra-processed foods tend to be centered on the non-culinary and cosmetic ingredients used in these foods. These concerns and desire for more transparency are well within every individual’s rights to make the food purchase decisions that make them feel most comfortable. 

The European Food Safety Authority has been re-evaluating all of their food additives permitted for use since 2009. Based on that review, they removed some ingredients prevalent in ultra-processed foods, such as titanium dioxide, and in some cases, they actually increased the allowable limits of an ingredient, such as acesulfame K. 

It’s important to focus on your diet in its entirety; consuming these ingredients in small amounts, or every once in a while, should not affect your overall health or dietary picture. Consumers don’t need to be fearful of ultra-processed foods, and they should think about them in the context of their overall diet and health.

What’s your advice to consumers about diet and nutrition?

There's a lot of conflicting information out there. It's helpful to think about nutrition as your overall dietary pattern, and there are a wide range of food products and ingredients that can fit into a healthy dietary pattern. Even things you might consider unhealthy, like desserts, can fit into an overall healthy dietary pattern when consumed in moderation. Thinking about your individual dietary big picture, in coordination with your health care team, is critical.

I recommend that consumers be critical of the information they see. Some headlines can be exaggerated, leading to fear or misunderstanding. A family member recently told me they saw a report that spinach and peanut butter are “bad for you.” This was a classic case of complex nutrition science being somewhat misrepresented by a short, snappy headline. While products have the potential to be exposed to contamination during agricultural production stages, our food safety and regulatory system does a good job of monitoring for that. I urge all consumers to be cautious, but not fearful, when they hear or read such reports. 

At the end of the day, based on what the science can tell us, I recommend living by the old adages: 

  1. Focus on overall consumption
  2. Strive for dietary diversity
  3. Everything in moderation

Keeping these in mind should help most people live an optimally healthy life. 

Connect with Our Food and Nutrition Scientists

Micaela and our team of food and nutrition scientists specialize in understanding consumer preferences, helping food and beverage organizations respond to market trends. 

Sign up for The Growth Brief Newsletter to get insights in your inbox.

Turn nutrition trends into science-backed business decisions. Contact us today to get started.

Disclaimer: This piece was written by Micaela Cox (Innovation Advisor) to share perspectives on a topic of interest. Expression of opinions within are those of the author or authors.