Walk into a grocery store, 90% of it is ultra processed
What does “ultra processed” mean? I can’t get the article to load.
Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods.
The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be “hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fiber and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats,” the CDC report saidI really appreciate that, thank you!
I would say this is almost certainly skewed by income, with the poorest Americans getting almost all of their calories from ultra processed foods, and the share decreasing with income. I would be curious to see that spread because one of the more fucked up things about this is that there are a lot of people who eat this stuff exclusively, and this number kind of hides that.
Probably also skewed by the fact that ultra processed foods are by default more calorie dense, therefore most of a day’s calories might come from that.
I mean maybe this used to be true, but it is most definitely not anymore, not even close. It is waaay cheaper to eat healthier.
It is, but that doesn’t mean that poor people don’t still eat more highly processed foods. Not smoking or using drugs is also way cheaper than doing those things, but both are more prevalent among poor people in the US.
Then you need to reframe your point. If heating healthy is cheaper, then it isn’t about income, it’s about something else. Your whole argument is about how it is more expensive to eat healthy, which is not true at all.
You’re imagining an argument and getting mad that I’m not making points in favor of said imaginary argument. .
A tiny bag of chips is over $5 these days, and has less than 200 calories. Potatoes at fancy grocery stores are about $1/pound, and you can get them much cheaper if you go to “poor people” stores.
You can’t get a double cheeseburger for $1 anymore.
It used to be true, they got people hooked on junk and fast food in the early 2000s, but those days are gone, people spend WAY TOO MUCH on junk food.
It’s absolutely cheaper to buy fresh and eat healthy. It won’t feel as good in your brain as good because it won’t have all the addictive shit that makes junk food bad, but if you learn to cook it’ll taste better.
Even lower income people have time to cook, but people would rather feed another addiction (spend hours on TV and TikTok, but one hour cooking is too much) and ordering delivery. Uber Eats sure doesn’t profit off rich people only…
people would rather feed another addiction (spend hours on TV and TikTok, but one hour cooking is too much)
I’d argue that people engage in these activities because people are tired from working too hard for too little for too long
I have children and my wife and I are active present parents. we’re not rich, we end my work day and begin my kids duty, when we put the kids to sleep we sometimes finish work that we couldn’t because we spent time with the kids instead.
We cook their every meal, and we wake up early to pack them healthy snacks for school. And you know what we do to wind down? We watch some TV!
We also clean the house daily, clean laundry, shower the kids daily, and somehow I still have time to argue with people who can’t find two hours a week to cook!
Cooking is not more exhausting than any other chore, and we’ve turned it into an enjoyable routine. You do what’s important first, then you rest.
The vast majority of Americans you’re referring to are not working construction 18 hours a day, they’re working in an air conditioned building for 9 hours.
deleted by creator
I don’t think Americans eat healthy, but “ultra processed” not defined by any metric is in favor of the manufacturer. Something can be unprocessed and unhealthy and vice versa. Better regulation would help.
The article claims instant oatmeal is bad because it’s sugary, salty, and has other additives then goes on to recommend eating oatmeal and adding sugar yourself. I’m not sure I understand why it’s much better for you.
but “ultra processed” not defined by any metric
This is the shit that grinds me. You have the world’s information at your finger tips and you’re making a wild claim that there isn’t a definition for something and basing your argument around that. You have gone this far in your life with the belief that there is no definition “but any metric” for Ultra Process foods?
Don’t you think that’s a little absurd to think this? I mean, it’s literally in the word. Not processed – ultra processed; meaning, roughly, that the food or ingredients in that food are processed again after initial processing.
What I will grant you is that this word is sometimes thrown around inappropriately. You (and us all) have every right to be upset by this confusion and misrepresentation.
https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/what-know-about-processed-and-ultra-processed-food
Category 4: Ultra-processed foods are industrial formulations made from food components. They include additives that are rare or nonexistent in culinary use, like emulsifiers, hydrogenated oils, synthetic colors, texture improvers or flavor enhancers. Think chips, soda, instant soup, pastries and mass-produced breads.
Ultra-processed foods, such as soft drinks, sweet or savoury packaged snacks, reconstituted meat products and pre-prepared frozen dishes, are not modified foods but formulations made mostly or entirely from substances derived from foods and additives, with little if any intact Group 1 food.
Ingredients of these formulations usually include those also used in processed foods, such as sugars, oils, fats or salt. But ultra-processed products also include other sources of energy and nutrients not normally used in culinary preparations. Some of these are directly extracted from foods, such as casein, lactose, whey and gluten. Many are derived from further processing of food constituents, such as hydrogenated or interesterified oils, hydrolysed proteins, soya protein isolate, maltodextrin, invert sugar and high-fructose corn syrup.
Additives in ultra-processed foods include some also used in processed foods, such as preservatives, antioxidants and stabilizers. Classes of additives found only in ultra-processed products include those used to imitate or enhance the sensory qualities of foods or to disguise unpalatable aspects of the final product. These additives include dyes and other colours, colour stabilizers; flavours, flavour enhancers, non-sugar sweeteners; and processing aids such as carbonating, firming, bulking and anti-bulking, de-foaming, anti-caking and glazing agents, emulsifiers, sequestrants and humectants.
A multitude of sequences of processes is used to combine the usually many ingredients and to create the final product (hence ‘ultra-processed’). The processes include several with no domestic equivalents, such as hydrogenation and hydrolysation, extrusion and moulding, and pre-processing for frying.
The overall purpose of ultra-processing is to create branded, convenient (durable, ready to consume), attractive (hyper-palatable) and highly profitable (low-cost ingredients) food products designed to displace all other food groups. Ultra-processed food products are usually packaged attractively and marketed intensively.
Is there much uniform agreement on it? Is the classification objectively precise & reliable?
The Harvard School of Public Health acknowledges problems with definition & attempted standards
the definition of processed food varies widely depending on the source
The NOVA system is recognized by the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, and the Pan American Health Organization, but not currently in the U.S. by the Food and Drug Administration or USDA. NOVA has been criticized for being too general in classifying certain foods, causing confusion.
Ultra-Processed Foods: Definitions and Policy Issues pointed out that difficulty & inconsistent examples the definers offered to clarify.
Because of the difficulty of interpretation of the primary definition, the NOVA group and others have set out lists of examples of foods that fall under the category of ultra-processed foods. The present manuscript demonstrates that since the inception of the NOVA classification of foods, these examples of foods to which this category applies have varied considerably. Thus, there is little consistency either in the definition of ultra-processed foods or in examples of foods within this category.
Other scholarly review articles criticize the classification as unclear even among researchers.
Processed food classification: Conceptualisation and challenges regarding classifications:
There is no consensus on what determines the level of food processing.
Classification systems that categorise foods according to their “level of processing” have been used to predict diet quality and health outcomes and inform dietary guidelines and product development. However, the classification criteria used are ambiguous, inconsistent and often give less weight to existing scientific evidence on nutrition and food processing effects; critical analysis of these criteria creates conflict amongst researchers.
The classification systems embody socio-cultural elements and subjective terms, including home cooking and naturalness. Hence, “processing” is a chaotic conception, not only concerned with technical processes.
The concept of “whole food” and the role of the food matrix in relation to healthy diets needs further clarification; the risk assessment/management of food additives also needs debate.
Ultra-Processed Foods: Definitions and Policy Issues regarding a single classification system (NOVA):
The present paper explores the definition of ultra-processed foods since its inception and clearly shows that the definition of such foods has varied considerably.
Thus, there is little consistency either in the definition of ultra-processed foods or in examples of foods within this category.
The public health nutrition advice of NOVA is that ultra-processed foods should be avoided to achieve improvements in nutrient intakes with an emphasis on fat, sugar, and salt. The present manuscript demonstrates that the published data for the United States, United Kingdom, France, Brazil, and Canada all show that across quintiles of intake of ultra-processed foods, nutritionally meaningful changes are seen for sugars and fiber but not for total fat, saturated fat, and sodium. Moreover, 2 national surveys in the United Kingdom and France fail to show any link between body mass index and consumption of ultra-processed foods.
Some research articles find the leading definition unreliable: low consistency between nutrition specialists following the same definition.
Although assignments were more consistent for some foods than others, overall consistency among evaluators was low, even when ingredient information was available. These results suggest current NOVA criteria do not allow for robust and functional food assignments.
If experts aren’t able to classify “ultraprocessed” items consistently, then what chance has anyone? At the moment, “processed food” seems more buzz & connotation than substance.
It might make more sense to classify food by something clearer like nutritional content.
Is it wrong for me to want my own extruder to make puffed starchy treats? I have a hankering for chile lime ginger corn puffs but no one makes them.
I also want a solar powered freeze drier/sublimator.
Imagine doing all that and not reading the article.
You’re making the same “the science isn’t settled” argument that right wing media relies on to stoke climate change denial.
In reality, science is never settled, and there is a huge amount of rigorous scientific debate around the definition of UPFs that is narrowing in on it; it is just flat out not the case that the term means nothing. That is something that manufacturers of UPFs want you to accept.
Edit:
deleted by creator
Well said!
Agreed. Early on, the article points to burgers as a main culprit. I just happened to make myself a burger yesterday. Other than coarsely grinding the cut of beef (chuck), what was so ultra processed here? Was the beef so very different than the steak I could have made instead? I would imagine that the authors had envisioned a more heavily processed, meat from a tube sort of burger than mine, but that’s the problem with communicating information like this. The imprecision of the language is killing the messaging and undermining the research.
The bun, any pickle and your sauces and relishes would be the places to look for ultra processed food ingredients.
Pickle: cucumber (or other vegetable), salt, vinegar, seasonings.
“seasonings” has a lot of wiggle room to it.
The cheese and the bread are almost certainly ultra-processed, as would be the condiments.
Again, though, burgers vary. Yesterday, mine included sliced red onion, arugula, and a slice of swiss. No ketchup, no mustard, etc. I did put dab of olive oil based herb sauce (that I had made prior to this) on it. Yes, I’d say that the bread was by far the most processed part of the meal. I’m just not convinced that this burger was worlds away from a steak and a side salad.
I know not all burgers are the same, but that is the point isn’t it? I found my meal hyperpalatable, but should it be considered ultra processed? If it should, then how should we distinguish it in discussion from even more processed versions? I don’t have an easy answer for this.
I don’t know if you’re intentionally being contrarian or you legit aren’t comprehending the story.
Are you taking offense that your home made meal is being called out in this one line, “The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks.”?
Are you not comprehending that this is referring specifically to the total calories coming from ultra processed foods and that these foods include burgers? It is not saying that all burgers are ultra processed. It’s saying that the category of highly caloric ultra processed foods includes, among many other things, burgers.
The same could be said for pizza. If I make a pizza at home - flour, yeast, tomatoes, mozz, oil - it’s not going to have any ultra processed ingredients. If I go to Pizza Hut and get a meat lovers pizza with a stuffed crust and ranch dressing, that’s going to be ultra processed.
These are simple words used to broadly define categories of foods with the assumption that people understand they’re not going to list out every fast food and restaurant burger in the United States sorted by calories and ultra processed ingredients.
These are simple words used to broadly define categories of foods with the assumption that people understand they’re not going to list out every fast food and restaurant burger in the United States sorted by calories and ultra processed ingredients.
Yes, and these are the words that most likely appear in the retrospective survey results on which these studies are undoubtedly based. My point was that equating a set of words that describe end products (like ‘burgers’, or ‘chicken soup’) with a set of words that describe preparation (‘ultra processed’, or ‘minimally processed’) is not at all straightforward. Any word (or at least many) in one set could be mapped to almost any in the second set. I just chose ‘burger’ out of convenience. If you told me you had chicken soup for lunch, could I automatically know if it was ultra processed or not? Would a researcher know?
If you told me you had chicken soup for lunch, could I automatically know if it was ultra processed or not?
I have a feeling people can tell the difference between home made chicken soup and Campbell’s if they really try hard.
Sure, the person eating it can probably tell. But often that information isn’t collected in the survey being used in a study. Standardized questionnaires don’t necessarily capture this information. Some of these studies are built on old datasets because they are looking for long term affects. Sometimes all you have is ‘burger’, or ‘chicken soup’. Sometimes you have even less than that. Sometimes all you have are the answers to questions like, “In the past six months, how many times per week did you eat red or processed meat?”.
Now, sure, some studies are based on surveys that collect information about the level of processing, but these have issues too, ranging from moving the interpretation of what processed is over to the subjects of the study, to protocols that include verbose food diaries that no participant could be expected to adhere to for long.
If you buy arugula, that’s an unprocessed ingredient. If you buy ready-made pickles, that’s a processed product.
From my short visit to north America, I was shocked how little people made from ingredients and how much from ready-to-eat instant stuff.
From my short visit to north America, I was shocked how little people made from ingredients and how much from ready-to-eat instant stuff.
Yup we eat a lot of ultra processed nonsense because we waste hours a day everyday just getting around the country and then even more time listening to pointy headed bosses. Our lives kinda suck it and most of it revolves around our jobs. The US is basically an industry-run dystopia.
My wife and I try to be better and buy real ingredients to make food, but after a long day at a shitty job it’s hard to find the energy to make a real meal instead of throwing some frozen rubbish into the oven for a few minutes.
Eating vegetables raw and plain is an acquired taste in today’s world. I got tired of steaming them a while ago.
Other than coarsely grinding the cut of beef (chuck), what was so ultra processed here?
Lol
Are you really this ignorant of meat production in the United States, or are you just playing dumb?
There’s a world of difference between a ground, pre-made frozen burger patty, ground beef, and even a run of the mill steak in the US.
Take a look at the fucking package on the product you’re buying. Frozen burger patties come with ingredient lists a mile fucking long, and ground beef packages usually come with an origin marker saying how the cattle in the package might have originated from three different continents.
At one point, I gave enough of a shit about this stuff to bother going to a butcher and getting them to give me a stink eye while they ground up a low quality steak so I could at least be reasonably assured that it came from one cow. Ultimately, I mostly just gave up on beef burgers.
Nearly every even partially processed product in the United States is like this. For example, pre-cut romaine lettuce is much more likely to make you sick, because it’s like sampling lettuce from twenty area factory farms downstream from the meat factory.
Perhaps you should start buying your meat from somewhere else.
I’m not gonna bother going to a butcher regularly so I can have a slightly less dangerous but still unhealthy meal. I’d rather just (and have) changed my diet.
But yeah, you’re right, the state of the US meat industry is a me problem. 🙄🥱😆
Ya, agreed.This is the same thing as “natural” foods. Just doesn’t make much sense in any context that matters from a health perspective.
Ideally, the food consists exclusively of the ingredients you intend to consume. “Ultra processed” as I understand it means the ingredients list contains many things that “have” to be there due to the intermediate steps to get it into your mouth (including marketing/presentation).
The most obvious ones are things that make it shelf-stable for months or years, but the less obvious ones are additives that mask flavors that were inadvertently added by the machines responsible for cooking, cutting, and packaging the food. Apparently they figured out decades ago that salt is good at hiding the taste of metal…
So if you instead just buy some oats and sugar and put it together yourself, you circumvent all of that tomfoolery.
“Ultra-processed food” is a meaningless phrase. The definitions for it are so broad as to cover everything from kimchi to Snickers.
Define the ingredients that are bad ffs. Stop with this ridiculous bs.
I love kimchi, some of my best cubicle-clearing work starts with kimchi.
I agree with you in general and recognize the validity of your point, but in this particular case we all know they mean a combination of ‘meat, brain and bone slurry’, ‘HFCS-infused everything’ and ‘chlorine bleached <8% protein wheat flour’.
No, the study cited in the article doesn’t share your definition.
we all know they mean
This is my point. No, “we” don’t.
combination of ‘meat, brain and bone slurry’, ‘HFCS-infused everything’ and ‘chlorine bleached <8% protein wheat flour’.
Thanks for proving my point. You just described everything from toast to sausages and even laced in some unscientific thoughts on HFCS (hint: it’s sugar, sugar is bad but HFCS is no worse than sugar).
“You know - stuff I hear on Tik Tok is bad for you” is not a scientific conclusion.
I think you’re myopically focusing on my humorous hyperbole and missing my point. Purely scientifically speaking you might well be able to subsist on SCoP, casein powder in water, a dry pack of chow mein noodles and a daily multi-vitamin pill and be perfectly fine. Hell, you can probably scientifically design some sort of nutritionally perfect human kibble that the peons can wash down with Real Water ™, but is that desirable?
Now if you will excuse me, I have a sourdough bread to shove in the oven.
I think you’re myopically focusing on my humorous hyperbole and missing my point.
Ah - it seems I may have been.
It feels like your null hypothesis is to keep eating it, though. Your argument is, “you’ve indicated it’s bad for me, but you aren’t saying why, therefore I’m going to keep eating it.”
But if you’re interested in the scientific result here, your null hypothesis should be to stay away from it until you have enough data. Maybe you’re not aware of the overwhelming amount of data that shows ultra processed foods are linked to all kinds of health disorders?
It’s like someone in the 50s telling you that smoking is linked to cancer, and you’re saying “yeah, but WHY? Until you tell me specifically what ingredient is harmful, there’s no reason for me to stop smoking!”
Your argument is, “you’ve indicated it’s bad for me, but you aren’t saying why, therefore I’m going to keep eating it.”
That’s not my argument at all.
I have issues with sensitivity to unhealthy foods and even some vegetables set me off. Beans, potatoes, rice, sweet peas, anything spicy like onions, garlic, ginger, or peppers. Honey as well, due to being made up mostly of simple carbohydrates. A box of granola bars would spoil my day, a few slices of pizza would kick up arrhythmia, and a shot of vodka would put me in the hospital.
If it’s not a plain fruit, vegetable, nut, or meat like fish or chicken, it’s probably bad to at least some degree.
If it’s not a plain fruit, vegetable, nut, or meat like fish or chicken, it’s probably bad to at least some degree.
That sounds like stience to me.
Scientifically speaking, I am basically a walking index on junk food.
If you didn’t cook it with your own hands - don’t trust it. My mom was an old school Italian who made everything from scratch - including sauces. I was lucky enough to be raised in that environment. Bless that lady - she didn’t teach me but I watched. Today I love to cook but it’s difficult and yeah expensive… it’s not that much more if you do wise things. Today the wife and I will buy 2 whole chickens from Sams club ( 18 to 20 $ ) and carve them up ourselves into 7 or 8 bags of breasts… wings, etc ( 35 to 45 $ if you buy it individually ) . The remains will be saved for stock or broth and put in bags in the freezer. We’ve re- taken up pressure canning. Every veg we use, all the trimmings we would have thrown out is saved and used in the stocks. We got some 2.5 foot long pork tenderloins from the same place - like my forearm thick for maybe 22 $ and I cut chops and made packs of 4. I got maybe 24 chops which would have cost well over 100 $ just for the hassle of spending some time in the kitchen with some tunes and a knife. You can stretch a budget quite a ways if you don’t rely on purely convenience.
You’re spreading misinformation/FUD. At a minimum, Ultra Processed Food means it contains ingredients that are added because they “have” to to get it to your mouth, not because anyone wants you to put those ingredients in your body.
I agree that UPF is not rigorously defined yet, but to claim it is “so broad as to cover everything from kimchi to Snickers” is absurd. If it’s literally just kimchi, it’s not processed. If it’s kimchi that has a shelf-stable additive, and a dye to make it look pleasing, and chemicals to hide the taste of the machines that made it, then it’s processed.
If your FUD stems from your own ignorance about the subject matter, that’s a you problem, quit flaunting it around. If it stems from being a hired shill of General Mills, et al., then I hope you’re getting paid well.
What would make the kimchi ‘ultra processed’?
I agree with the original commenter that these terms are sensationalist bullshit perpetuated by scumbags who don’t mind manipulating useful idiots.
Also, you don’t know what FUD is.
What would make the kimchi ‘ultra processed’?
I was extremely clear about this in my previous comment. If re-reading a few times doesn’t clear things up, I don’t know how to help you.
you don’t know what FUD is
They are doing the same thing that the right does for climate change: they are trying to argue that, because the science isn’t 100% settled, we should reject it all outright. They are casting Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt on the entire concept of being skeptical or critical of UPFs.
The only thing everyone agrees makes a UPF is the fact that it contains ingredients you wouldn’t otherwise seek out to put in your body. So your null hypothesis should be “let’s not put this in our body”, and not the other way around.
bullshit perpetuated by scumbags who don’t mind manipulating useful idiots.
And I better not find out you’re doing it for free.
they are trying to argue that, because the science isn’t 100% settled, we should reject it all outright.
That’s not even close to what I’m arguing - you’re layering in your perception of me as an “opponent” and making things up about me and what I’ve said.
I’m arguing that the phrase “ultra processed foods” is so broad and poorly defined as to be useless and unscientific.
It’s like saying “Animals are dangerous.” While it may be true it’s unhelpful. Tell me which animals are dangerous. Tell me when and how they are dangerous.
I’m arguing that the phrase “ultra processed foods” is so broad and poorly defined as to be useless and unscientific.
And I’m saying that’s an argument from ignorance. Just because a definition isn’t 100% agreed upon by the scientific community doesn’t mean it’s completely useless. It’s much more like arguing “the science isn’t settled on global warming, therefore it’s all a hoax”. But science is never settled, it’s always our best approximation to the truth.
And I’m saying that’s an argument from ignorance. Just because a definition isn’t 100% agreed upon by the scientific community doesn’t mean it’s completely useless.
Read carefully. I’m not saying there is no definition. I’m saying the definition is shit.
Tell me - by what mechanism are ultra-processed foods unhealthy?
You can’t. Nobody can. Because the category of “ultra-processed foods” is ridiculously broad and even covers both plant and animal based products.
The entire approach to trying to define “ultra-processed foods” is working backwards from “things we think are unhealthy for myriad reasons”.
In short - it’s a marketing term they’re trying to create a scientific definition for. It’s a stupid idea.
It is clear to me you didn’t click any of my sources and have no interest in this subject. Cheers.
I was extremely clear about this in my previous comment. If re-reading a few times doesn’t clear things up, I don’t know how to help you.
then it’s processed.
What would make the kimchi ultra-processed?
They are doing the same thing that the right does for climate change: they are trying to argue that, because the science isn’t 100% settled, we should reject it all outright.
I’m guessing you don’t know how to read. This is a discussion about what constitutes ultra-processed food. It has nothing to do with whether ‘UPFs’ (the thing we’re still trying to define) are good or bad.
And I better not find out you’re doing it for free.
Yeah, you’re too far gone. I hope you get the help you need.
You’re Nestlé’s favorite kind of person. To the point that, I defy you to come up with rhetoric that is more favorable to ultra processed foods.
If it stems from being a hired shill of General Mills, et al., then I hope you’re getting paid well.
OMG. 🤣
Hey, don’t work for free, is all I’m sayin 😉
You know how they feed farm animals low grade corn and grains, junk byproduct of all kind of food processing, just what they need so we can get what we want out of them…everything is optimized for extraction.
They used to need us to work their factories, back when we were a manufacturing economy. They’re not bringing back the manufacturing economy, you gotta be a goddamn moron to believe that.
So if you’re not gonna pay up and eat the cheapest, shittiest food possible, and not harass them about education and healthcare and your fucking “happiness”…what the fuck do they need you around for?
The cheapest crap is fed to animals to extract more profit. The cheapest crap is mixed into manufacturing the food to make it more profitable. The cheapest crap is fed to humans to make them more profitable.
Draft pool for WWIII
07
Large portions of the United States don’t have access to grocery stores that carry fresh produce
CDC director bouta get fired
Nope. They’re bucking for a promotion. Ultra-processed foods is something RFK Jr. has been bitching about for a while. He thinks everyone should go back to a more natural diet. Like eating roadkill.
To be fair, I agree with RFK on this one. If we all started eating natural whole foods, instead of all the fast food and shit we eat, it’d fix a lot of problems.
I might be open to debate it if he had any sort of definition or clue of what Ultra-Processed means.
Health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday praised a company that makes $7-a-pop meals that are delivered directly to the homes of Medicaid and Medicare enrollees.
…
But an Associated Press review of Mom’s Meals menu, including the ingredients and nutrition labels, shows that the company’s offerings are the type of heat-and-eat, ultraprocessed foods that Kennedy routinely criticizes for making people sick.
The meals contain chemical additives that would render them impossible to recreate at home in your kitchen, said Marion Nestle, a nutritionist at New York University and food policy expert, who reviewed the menu for The AP. Many menu items are high in sodium, and some are high in sugar or saturated fats, she said.
Marion Nestle
Well that’s an unfortunate name for this discussion.
Everybody needs a brain worm
https://www.buzzsprout.com/1411126/episodes/17271368-ultra-processed-foods.mp3
Maintenance Phase is a dope podcast that covers the bullshit of the diet/wellness world. It’s appropriately scientifically-skeptical.
This episode adds some much needed context to the idea of “processed-food”.
How processed is bread with its chemistry lab of ingredients & process to yield those ingredients? Likewise, cheese?
All the “natural” and “whole grain” type breads still make me short of breath.
My understanding with processed food is that the main problem is much much less about how “healthy” the artificial ingredients are, and more about how the processing is usually designed around making the food more addictive (so you, say, crave a Cheeto more than you crave a carrot), and as a byproduct of the former, making it more calorie-dense, so you can consume more calories before you start to feel full.
Maybe better definitions on specific type of processing or their effects are needed than an unspecific term with a hazy borderline that lacks the precision of science.
Ultra processed food is way more expensive than real food, so it’s a shame if people are using money as an excuse.
Availability may be a larger problem. But with nearly every American (over 90%) living within 15 minutes of a Walmart (at the very least), this seems like an exceedingly rare problem for the majority of people.
I invite you to come shop at my Walmart :) We were one of the first stores in the country to get those little electronic price tags, so you can’t say with any certainty what the price of anything is, anymore.
If the vegetables haven’t already gone bad on the shelves, they will within a day at your place, and make sure to check the expiration date on every single package you pick up, because they’re often past gone. Also, don’t trust the frozen foods, they defrost in the trucks and on open pallets in the middle of the aisles.
THE AVERAGE AMERICAN. I don’t eat that bullshit :P
It shows in their cognitive abilities.
Hey now. Not all of us are dumb as fuck naturally. We defunded our education system for more than a generation too, we’ve been working for it.
