Nova was never built for the populations it claims to protect

The Nova classification system has achieved remarkable global traction as the primary instrument for identifying ultra-processed foods in research and dietary policy. Yet the populations Nova purports to protect, those most exposed to food-industry expansion, least able to access alternatives and most burdened by diet-related disease, may be those for whom the framework is least suitable. Nova’s Group 4 designation relies on culturally specific and operationally imprecise criteria that elevate the culinary norms of high-income, food-secure populations into a framework presented as universally applicable. The resulting classification cannot be applied consistently, produces regulatory proposals that cannot be consistently enforced, and generates guidance that is often difficult to implement in the populations most affected by diet-related disease. This Perspective argues that Nova, as currently constituted, is best suited to populations with the resources to act on its recommendations and that progress will require either a more rigorous and reproducible successor framework or clearer recognition of the limits of the current one.