Nezam El-Tayebat Fact CheckA scientific assessment of the “نظام الطيبات” nutrition system
Choose country

Mostly false Certainty of evidence: moderate provisional C-UPF-12

Implicit in the archive's rule: following the Tayyibat food lists protects against ultra-processed foods.

Conclusion: The allowed list contains several ultra-processed products, which is inconsistent with the archive's UPF warnings.
  1. Original statement
  2. Scientific assessment
  3. In plain language
  4. Studies on this claim
  5. Regional context
  6. What applies in my country?
  7. References

Original statement

شوكولاتة ونوتيلا | عسل ومربى وفواكه مجففة | حلاوة طحينية وطحينة | حلاوة المولد | جيلو (غومي) | بسبوسة (من المحلات فقط) | شيبسي | عصائر معلبة | جبنة مطبوخة (مثلثات)

verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

Implicit in the archive's rule: following the Tayyibat food lists protects against ultra-processed foods.

Origin

Source status
Third-party site (unofficial)
Attribution
Third-party site altayybat.com (unofficial; lowest attribution level)
Origin
https://altayybat.com/ar/
Attribution uncertainty
The site states that it is unofficial. Items may not reflect Elawady's own lists.
Claimed mechanism

Not applicable.

Claimed health effect

Not applicable.

Population concerned

Followers of the system

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Diverging source versions

Source status
Archive food list
Attribution
Archive food guide (archive operators): 'Honey & jam — Allowed; Chocolate — Allowed; Tahini halva & dates — Allowed'
Origin
https://eltayebat.com/foods/
Attribution uncertainty
Food list without source video.
Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
ربنا خلق القمح لية (Open source)
Published
28 March 2024
Timestamp
not available (transcript has no timings)
Attribution uncertainty
Machine/CC transcript; wording may contain transcription errors.

Scientific assessment

Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.

Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.

1. What was claimed?

The system avoids UPF.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

The system excludes white-flour products (many industrial breads, pastries, instant noodles) and soft drinks, which are major UPF sources.

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

At the same time it allows hazelnut-cocoa spreads, packaged crisps, gummy/jelly sweets, processed cheese triangles (emulsifying salts), canned juices, shop-bought basbousa and 'mawlid' sweets, many of which are NOVA-4 products under the archive's own definition. Elawady confirmed allowing chocolate, Nutella and crisps. A Kuwaiti family physician quoted on altayybat.com raised the same point. The archive's UPF evidence (C-UPF-02, C-UPF-03) therefore applies to parts of the allowed list.

4. What remains unclear?

Actual ingredient lists of the specific Egyptian products.

5. Which studies support it?

None.

6. Which studies contradict it?

A-UPF-22 (definition).

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

Similar products sold in Germany (e.g., hazelnut spreads, gummy sweets, processed cheese) are typically NOVA 4.

8. What is known about Egypt?

The listed products are common in Egypt.

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

Readers should not assume that the allowed list is free of ultra-processed foods.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

Based on the published allowed lists: several allowed items typically fall into NOVA group 4 by the archive's own cited definition (A-UPF-22: products containing emulsifiers, flavours, colours, emulsifying salts, gelling agents, etc.). Classification of each item depends on its actual ingredient list, so this is a judgement, not a measurement.

Source quality

Third-party list (unofficial) plus archive food guide plus Elawady's own words: 'انت سابح بالشيكولاته والنوتيلا والشيبسي ... اللي انا شايفه صح'.

Regional transferability

Universal.

Individual exceptions

Some allowed items can be minimally processed (e.g., 100% juice, plain tahini halva without additives).

Regional scope of the claim
not specified
Last reviewed
25 October 2026 provisional

In plain language

The archive warns strongly against ultra-processed foods. Yet the system's lists allow several typical ultra-processed products, such as chocolate spread, crisps, gummy sweets, processed cheese triangles and canned juices. By the archive's own definition, many of these count as ultra-processed. The system's rules and the archive's evidence therefore do not fully match.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (0)

No studies in this group.

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (1)

  • What are ultra-processed foods?

    Monteiro CA et al.. Public Health Nutr 2019 · PMID 30744710 · DOI 10.1017/S1368980018003762
    Narrative reviewcited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked

    NOVA's authors explain that products with industrial ingredients or cosmetic additives (e.g., emulsifiers, flavours, emulsifying salts) are ultra-processed.

    By this definition, several allowed items (spreads with emulsifiers/flavours, processed cheese with emulsifying salts, gummies with gelling agents) are NOVA 4.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    How to define and identify UPF.

    How was the study done?

    Commentary/guide to the NOVA classification.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Not applicable; Not applicable

    What was actually found?

    Defines UPF processes and a practical rule: at least one ingredient characteristic of NOVA group 4 (substances rarely used in kitchens such as HFCS, hydrogenated oils, hydrolysed proteins; or cosmetic additives such as flavours, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners, gelling and glazing agents).

    How large was the observed effect?

    Not applicable

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    A practical label test.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Commentary; reliability not tested here

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports definitional part of C-UPF-01; used to classify allowed items (C-UPF-12) and sugar (C-SUG-05).

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    That the category is precise.

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (0)

No studies in this group.

Regional context

Germany / EU

Similar products sold in Germany (e.g., hazelnut spreads, gummy sweets, processed cheese) are typically NOVA 4.

Egypt

The listed products are common in Egypt.

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly false The allowed list contains several ultra-processed products, which is inconsistent with the archive's UPF warnings.

The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:

  • Additives and processing
  • Controls, imports, recalls, labelling

Choose a country to see the checked information for it.

Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.

Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country

References

  1. Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them.. Monteiro CA et al.. Public Health Nutr 2019 · PMID 30744710 · DOI 10.1017/S1368980018003762

← Back to overview