It's not clear that "ultraprocessed" is the issue. The article says "they are usually very high in sugar, salt and fat". Too much salt and sugar are known to be problems. That has nothing to do with processing. Although it does have to do with what will sell. The author has a "natural" bias.
What this should all build down to is the nutritional content of the food. Just because I go to a local farmers market and buy the greatest "organic" or "non-gmo" (or insert some other mostly meaningless thing that has been turned into a way to scare consumers to spend more money) and buy the greatest looking apples I can find.
That isn't going to do a damn thing if I turn around and try to replicate the McDonalds (or I guess Popeyes now?) fried apple pie. It is still horrible for me and I highly doubt there is much if any difference in the little bit of vitamins I would get from the apples still in the pie.
Meanwhile I can go for about as processed as you can get, and do Soylent or Huel and have a pretty damn balanced diet if I could somehow sustain myself entirely on that (more of a willpower thing and not an issue with the food itself).
This also ignores the major clasism that has made its way into how people eat and what food they have access to. There is a reason it tends to be urban well off white people going on and on about this stuff.
I cringe anytime I hear the words "real" or "whole" food as if that has any real meaning outside of a marketing term.
If anything this tells me that we need to do better with how we process food, not that processed food itself is the issue.