Assessment of quality and safety aspects of homemade and commercial baby foods.

Dietary Guidelines in some countries recommend avoiding commercially processed baby food, while others encourage the consultation of ingredients and nutritional information. Therefore, the objective of this study was to systematically analyze different baby foods obtained from commercial market and "homemade" produced, in order to verify whether comercial products have low nutritional and unsafety attributes. The samples were analyzed for chemical composition, physicochemical aspects, texture, microbiological and mycotoxin contamination, and pesticide residues. Results showed that, in general, commercial samples have a higher energy density and better ratio of macronutrients. The sodium, pH, and texture of both products were in accordance with the recommendations. None of the baby foods evaluated were contaminated with yeast and molds, total coliforms, or Escherichia coli; however, Salmonella sp. was confirmed in one homemade sample. Pesticide residues were detected in all analyzed baby food samples; however, at lower levels than the limit of quantification. Ochratoxin A was detected in one homemade baby food sample (5.76 µg /kg). Considering the samples evaluated, commercial baby food samples appeared to be safer in relation to microbiological, pesticide residue standards, and mycotoxin contamination. Therefore, it could be concluded that the quality of commercial and homemade baby foods still needs to be improved, as well as more studies related to a critical analyses of both types of processes used.

Consumers' Understanding of Ultra-Processed Foods.

Food classification systems have been proposed to improve food quality criteria. Among these systems, "processing level" has been used as a criterion. NOVA classification, as the denotation "ultra-processed" food (UPF), has been widely used in different countries. However, even though some studies have pointed out some controversial aspects, no study has evaluated its comprehension by the population where it is used as reference. Therefore, this study explored the understanding of the term UPF for Brazilian consumers, where this denotation has been used in the last 8 years. A questionnaire was used, with questions referring to different aspects of self-assessment of knowledge about UPF. Altogether, 939 valid participants completed the questionnaire, and 81.9% of them declared to know the term UPF. For 78.2%, a better definition for UPF should be "foods that have gone through many processes in industry". Finally, it was concluded that the term UPF is still confusing for most Brazilians, indicating the risk of use and the urgent necessity to improve the classifications systems and consequently consumer understanding. Only when all parties interested in healthy food work together could this problem be solved.