9 ms·

The complete lack of rigor and the use of shock-headlines around "ultra-processed" foods drives me nuts. It conveys very little useful information. Pharmaceuti

• dataflow 5y ago
  > Pharmaceuticals are ultra-processed and completely unnatural, yet many of them are life-saving. Clearly then, mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you. I have to admit though, I'm not aware of any food that would be considered "ultra-processed" yet known to be good for people.
  • JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > I'm not aware of any food that would be considered "ultra-processed" yet known to be good for people What does "ultra processed" mean? Cheese, bread, olive oil and most vegetables require processing to be made or nutritionally useful. Freeze-dried vegetables are quite processed and quite good for you.
    • dataflow 5y ago
      > What does "ultra processed" mean? Cheese, bread, olive oil and most vegetables require processing to be made or nutritionally useful. I don't have a scientific definition for you. Just use your common sense to figure out what average people would intuitively call ultra-processed, whatever it means to them. I'm pretty darn sure you would not arrive at the conclusion that ordinary people consider bread and most vegetables "ultra-processed foods".
      • itake 5y ago
        Why is bread not considered ultra-processed? I am trying to use my common sense here. To create it, you must apply mechanical processing to grind wheat. Chemical processing for the yeast to reacting to the sugars. thermal processing to cook the bread. There is evaporation of the liquid in the bread. This seems like a lot of processes required to create this.
        • artimaeis 5y ago
          Bread could be classified as either processed or ultra-processed depending on ingredients and manufacturing techniques. Ultra-processed bread would probably be made to have a longer shelf life and likely have more additives and preservatives.
        • fancifalmanima 5y ago
          if you buy (from a bakery, probably not from the grocery store) or make bread made from minimally processed to processed flour, water, salt and yeast it would probably be considered minimally processed or processed. When I make homemade bread, those are literally all the ingredients. It has a very different texture, chewiness, and taste from something storebought. They're basically different things. And it doesn't last more than a day or two after cutting it open. If you buy bread made from bleached white flour, sugar (in pretty much any white bread you buy from the supermarket), bread conditioners, preservatives, etc, it's probably considered ultraprocessed. It can also sit in your pantry for weeks.
        • slothtrop 5y ago
          Bread can be ultra-processed. It can also be made with ground wheat grains that don't remove the germ or get bleached.
        • chithanh 5y ago
          > Why is bread not considered ulta-processed? Even traditional bread is certainly highly processed, undergoing mechanical (milling), biochemical (fermentation), and thermal (baking) processing. It doesn't quite meet the definition of ultra-processed though as all these technologies are readily available to unsophisticated producers. I think ultra-processed is some sort of proxy for hyperpalatable here.
    • pixl97 5y ago
      For me it is the grinding and removal of fiber. This is a very important distinction as it changes the glycemic index and will cause blood sugars to rise much faster on consumption than an unground food with its entire fiber content. The fiber commonly becomes animal feed.
    • Symbiote 5y ago
      In my opinion, ultra-processing requiring equipment, procedures or chemicals found only in a laboratory or factory, not a typical home kitchen from the past century or so. That's overly simple though, the definition is here: https://world.openfoodfacts.org/nova https://world.openfoodfacts.org/nova (this seems to be a summary of the definition in FAO document linked above).
      • panzagl 5y ago
        The guy who invented Fritos made them at home- does that mean they're not ultra-processed?
        • dehrmann 5y ago
          Potato chips are another example. They can be made at home from ingredients that could otherwise be considered healthy. It's just that when you combine them in the right proportions, it can be hard to control how much you eat. The other misnomer is labeling chips as "not nutritious." They're loaded in macronutrients. They often don't have many micro nutrients, but most people aren't actually short on those. The main problem with some of these foods is they're calorically dense, but not filling.
          • LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
            And Kellogs now owns Pringles.
    • endisneigh 5y ago
      One definition of processed would be the amount of "steps" required to take from the base ingredient. So if you make falafel for example, it's only two steps removed from chickpeas, as it's just mildly grinded and fried. That being said it's an exercise to the reader in determining if each "step" is equally bad. In general steps involving the destruction or heating of the food are worse than the "separation" (e.g. peeling or cutting vs frying or blending).
    • artimaeis 5y ago
      Ultra processed is defined by the FAO (The UN Food and Agriculture Organization) thusly: > Formulations of ingredients, mostly of exclusive industrial use, made by a series of industrial processes, many requiring sophisticated equipment and technology (hence ‘ultra-processed’). Processes used to make ultra-processed foods include the fractioning of whole foods into substances, chemical modifications of these substances, assembly of unmodified and modified food substances using industrial techniques such as extrusion, moulding and pre-frying; use of additives at various stages of manufacture whose functions include making the final product palatable or hyper-palatable; and sophisticated packaging, usually with plastic and other synthetic materials. Source: http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf I believe this is the widest standard used to define "ultra-processed", though there are more sentences and paragraphs in that doc explaining the definition more thoroughly.
      • JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        Thanks! It seems like a two- or three-prong test: (1) cannot be made at home using commonly-available tools and ingredients, (2) uses "industrial techniques" and "additives" and (3) is packaged. The second prong seems ambiguous to the point of uselessness. "Industrial techniques" are covered by (1); "additives" seemingly impossible to define within this context.
        • jfengel 5y ago
          They also have a definition of "additive" (a) food additive means any substance not normally consumed as a food by itself and not normally used as a typical ingredient of the food, whether or not it has nutritive value, the intentional addition of which to food for a technological (including organoleptic) purpose in the manufacture, processing, preparation, treatment, packing, packaging, transport or holding of such food results, or may be reasonably expected to result, (directly or indirectly) in it or its by-products becoming a component of or otherwise affecting the characteristics of such foods. The term does not include contaminants, or substances added to food for maintaining or improving nutritional qualities, or sodium chloride; http://www.fao.org/3/Y2770E/y2770e03.htm http://www.fao.org/3/Y2770E/y2770e03.htm The FAO has a standards body that will give you tons of detail to back up their papers. http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/en/ http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/en/
    • slumdev 5y ago
      And yet: - Cold-pressed, extra virgin olive oil is considered to be the healthiest due to its fat and polyphenol content. - Traditional cheeses are more nutritious than Kraft singles. - Whole grain is more nutritious than Wonderbread. - Freezing, cooking, and the passage of time all destroy vitamins and other micronutrients.
  • mywittyname 5y ago
    Protein powder? Ensure / Boost? (important for people who can't chew food) Canned or similarly preserved foods? (important for people without access to reliable refrigeration) Even staple grains (wheat, rice, corn) are pretty highly processed. One can't exactly eat these raw, they need some machinery and sometimes chemistry to really get at the nutrients. I guess this all depends on your definition of "ultra-processed" and "good for people." But the processing of food is a discovery that allowed for the civilizations to appear. Feeding people on fresh meat and veg doesn't scale.
  • CarelessExpert 5y ago
    > I'm not aware of any food that would be considered "ultra-processed" yet known to be good for people. So, no meat substitutes for you, then? Because if Beyond Meat burgers aren't "ultra-processed", I don't know what is.
    • dataflow 5y ago
      > So, no meat substitutes for you, then? Is there something on my profile that indicates I only eat things that are good for me?
      • CarelessExpert 5y ago
        Yup, that was poorly phrased. My bad. Let me try that again: I'd say a lot of people view meat substitutes as a healthier choice. But the Beyond Meat burger is, to me, the very definition of an "ultra-processed" food.
        • dataflow 5y ago
          "Ultra-processed => not good" does not imply "not ultra-processed => good". And I'm pretty sure people who believe Beyond is healthier are wrong regardless of how we classify Beyond Meat. (Though I'm not even sure the majority of Beyond Meat eaters believe it's healthier in the first place.)
          • CarelessExpert 5y ago
            > Though I'm not even sure the majority of Beyond Meat eaters believe it's healthier in the first place. I disagree. I suspect a lot of people believe Beyond's products are healthier simply by virtue of not being meat. Heck, they might be right, though I tend to agree with you and suspect it's at best a wash. Also, thanks for the refresher on modus ponens and the fallacy of the inverse. ;) It's been a long time since formal logic... not that I miss it...
  • dolni 5y ago
    Milk is ultra-processed. Lots of folks consider milk to be a healthy beverage option (in moderation, like everything else). Vinegar is ultra-processed and is believed to have some health benefits. [1] Coffee, same deal. Ultra-processed, believed to have health benefits. [2] [1]: https://www.webmd.com/diet/vinegar-good-for-you#1 https://www.webmd.com/diet/vinegar-good-for-you#1 [2]: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/well/eat/coffee-health-benefits.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/well/eat/coffee-health-be...
• cameronh90 5y ago
  "Clearly then, mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you." It bothers me too, but I think the problem right now is they don't exactly know what part of the "ultra processed" foods is harmful yet.
• foolfoolz 5y ago
  totally agree. i think there is no baseline at all for “healthy food.” it means different things to different people. even high calorie foods can be healthy for some groups. i think this argument about processed foods tries to simplify it too much when there’s really a lot of different factors. high in calories? no vitamins? known carcinogens? individual allergies or trouble digesting? this one size fits all approach to labeling food good and bad ignores the details. and the real issue is education: do you know what you’re eating? and how much? and what your body needs? i’d rather see answers there than “big soda bad” and “chips bad”
• sosuke 5y ago
  It becomes tougher when pizza or bread can exist in all of the NOVA food classifications. http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf
• tootie 5y ago
  "Ultra-processed" is a pretty meaningless standard. Pasta and Cheerios are very processed but part of the process is being fortified with loads of micronutrients. Cheerios are better for you than something like white rice which is almost pure starch. And high-fructose corn syrup has the same nutritional value as raw honey despite being processed. There's no substitute for just reading labels.
  • MattGaiser 5y ago
    Flour is arguably "ultra processed."
    • artimaeis 5y ago
      Most flour should be classified as minimally processed by the FAO source others are referencing in the thread. > Unprocessed foods altered by industrial processes such as removal of inedible or unwanted parts, drying, powdering, squeezing, crushing, grinding, fractioning, steaming, poaching, boiling, roasting, and pasteurization, chilling, freezing, placing in containers, vacuum packaging, non-alcoholic fermentation, and other methods that do not add salt, sugar, oils or fats or other food substances to the original food. Source: http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf
• Dig1t 5y ago
  This whole argument strikes me as very similar to the "appeal to nature" fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
• johnchristopher 5y ago
  > Pharmaceuticals are ultra-processed and completely unnatural, yet many of them are life-saving. Clearly then, mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you. Is someone suggesting to get 70% of calorie intake from pharmaceuticals though ?
  • dolni 5y ago
    You've extended the analogy beyond its intent or demonstration to show what, exactly? "70% of calorie intake" is not some magic figure. There is nothing inherently important or mythical about that number.
    • johnchristopher 5y ago
      This was not an analogy, it was a flawed comparison. Is OP supporting ultra processed food because pharmaceuticals are ultra processed ?
• jareklupinski 5y ago
  > In other words, no doughnut is a minimally processed food. Will someone please let me try a minimally-processed doughnut?
  • jpindar 5y ago
    My mom used to make homemade doughnuts. That was a long time ago, but I don't think the process (heh) was much different from making other sweet baked goods and other fried food. I've never tried making them because I think muffins or cookies are just as good without the hassle of frying.
• armchairhacker 5y ago
  I assume when people talk about “ultra-processed” they’re talking about foods which 90% would agree are bad for you: foods with a lot of added sugar or oil, or almost everything else taken out. e.g. candy, fried foods, chips, pizza on white bread, fruit juice. Is pasta ultra-processed? What about salami? Mashed potatoes? Cheese? Honestly, no. Actually, high-calorie foods like cheese or wheat pasta are very nutritious. Of course a diet consisting of pasta, salami, and cheese with a side of mashed potatoes is probably bad. But it’s better than the above. I wonder whether kids are really getting fat off of even hot dogs, mac and cheese, steak and cheese subs, and corn. Or if it’s the added sugar and refined carbs - candy, soda, white bread, “snacks”. People say that kids’ diet in the 60s was the former, and they were fine. Honestly “ultra-processed” can be misleading because it isn’t the processing which is bad, it’s the amount of fat and carbs vs. protein, fiber, water, and other nutrients. Maybe we could call it “junk” food but that’s even more ambiguous.
  • CarelessExpert 5y ago
    > I assume when people talk about “ultra-processed” they’re talking about foods which 90% would agree are bad for you So then we should just call it what it is: junk food. "ultra-processed" is no better than "gmo", i.e. a completely meaningless label designed to scare people because of spooky "technology", as opposed to actual information people can use to make informed decisions. > Maybe we could call it “junk” food but that’s even more ambiguous. LOL... damn, okay, I admit it, I didn't read all the way to the end before commenting. I'm leaving this here as it's a good reminder for myself to slow down...
  • AfterShave 5y ago
    Just as an aside. Is it really "added sugar" in candy where the entire point is that it's mainly made out of sugar?
• slothtrop 5y ago
  All this about a headline? What kind of nuance are you demanding with respect to the impact of ultra-processed food on health in a headline? > We all know this, we don't need a headline for it. The headline doesn't communicate that. It communicates that U.S. kids are consuming an abundance of calories from those foods. > mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you. It doesn't communicate that either. That is prior knowledge on your part.
• mbrodersen 5y ago
  Food containing lots of sugar and no fibre is a good example of what people call “ultra-processed” food. Eating fructose without fibre is pretty bad.