4 ms·

I finally learned about the proportional relationship between time/effort required to prepare a meal, and its health benefits. Processed and shelf-stable food i

I finally learned about the proportional relationship between time/effort required to prepare a meal, and its health benefits. Processed and shelf-stable food is basically chewed for you already, so eat up, baby birds! The process of digestion itself is important for the body, and so the more you cook or process food, the less happens in your GI tract. I started shopping in farmers markets, and while this is a net positive, it's not a silver bullet. The store is still packed with unhealthy foods, loaded with sugar and preservatives, full of empty calories, including brands which developed organic cred, and then sold out to agribusiness, like Annie's Homegrown. My PCP said that the organic food movement is a gimmick, and she's partly right. Organic labeling is also not a silver bullet, but it's a step in the right direction. And yes, it costs $$$.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Organic labeling is also not a silver bullet, but it's a step in the right direction It’s correlated at best. The health benefits are mixed, carbon footprint atrocious and costs high. Eat food, mostly plants, not too much. An industrial tomato is healthier than a McMuffin.
- cma 3y ago
  > carbon footprint atrocious Instead of herbicides they apparently often burn the weeds off with giant mechanized propane torches.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Stubble burning in grain fields is routine, yearly, and doesn't increase atmospheric C02 (when smoothed over a year). https://agriculture.vic.gov.au/crops-and-horticulture/grains-pulses-and-cereals/crop-production/general-agronomy/stubble-burning https://agriculture.vic.gov.au/crops-and-horticulture/grains... Giant flamethrowers aren't required - the stubble will burn in any case if struck by lightening - it's a fire hazard and burning off increases district safety, promotes nutrient recycling, kills weeds. Swings, roundabouts - see the link for cons. As for carbon; crops capture carbon, burning releases the carbon captured. This is the literal 'natural' carbon cycle. The issue we have with climate and CO2 stems from a century of bringing to the surface millions of years worth of captured and sequested carbon from all the plants that went towards the billions and billions of tonnes of fossil fuel we've been burning through lately (past 50+ years).
    - dredmorbius 3y ago
      This is true. Though ag burning can be a major pollution hazard, most especially of fine particulate matter, as some in the US and Canada may be becoming more familiar with from wildfire. Which is to say that all methods, practices, and techniques involve trade-offs.
- DarkNova6 3y ago
  > It’s correlated at best. The health benefits are mixed, carbon footprint atrocious and costs high. Carbon footprint only seems large if carbon sequestration is not taken into account. The source of feed is the primary factor here: Is it created locally and sustainably, or do you need large cargo shipments of Amazon soy which burnt down parts of the rainforest?
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Is it created locally and sustainably Ocean shipping is cheap in carbon. Local means lots of redundant last-mile delivery. (You still need the other transport infrastructure.) The carbon impact of local/organic is largely in its excess transportion. I eat a lot of local produce. But I don’t kid myself—it’s for the taste and nutrition, and comes at the expense of the planet. That it’s expensive limits that environmental impact.
  - tekla 3y ago
    People burn down rain forests and forests because their farming techniques generate piss poor yields versus modern techniques forcing the use of larger plots of land to generate enough product. Modern farming techniques would cause much less loss of rainforest.
    - galleywest200 3y ago
      You are speaking of animal farming. I believe ranching is a huge portion of the deforestation.
- j-bos 3y ago
  > An industrial tomato is healthier than a McMuffin. But is it healthier than a home made McMuffin equivalent?
  - tekla 3y ago
    Yes. It mostly water.
    - Spivak 3y ago
      Which is why "stop obsessing over what you're eating and just eat less" is the baseline that most people don't reach to even start worrying about the content.
      - alemanek 3y ago
        Eh, cutting out sugar and high fructose corn syrup makes eating less so much easier. A good portion of the US is so addicted to sugar that their body doesn’t tell them they are full. Once you cut that out then I agree with you. It’s hard to tackle portion control when your body is lying to you about being hungry.
orev 3y ago
This is a pretty good example of the false dichotomy that most people perceive about food—it’s either highly processed garbage or you need to get everything organic from a farmers market. It doesn’t help fix the problem and people who don’t want to bother with all that hassle could be dissuaded from trying to be more healthy. It’s true that the more you pay attention, the more you realize a lot of stuff in a typical US grocery store is just bad for you, but the solution is easy and doesn’t have to be extreme: just don’t buy those things. The healthy stuff is sitting right in the next aisle. Going organic is only a way to signal consumer support for a specific type of production, and has very little to do with being more healthy. Is an organic cookie significantly more healthy than a regular one? No, it isn’t. It’s far more healthy to choose the factory-farmed broccoli or raw chicken from the local grocery store.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  From the farmers market, I purchase frozen foods, ready-made microwave dinners from the fridge, and sandwiches which are deli day-olds. They may begin with wholesome ingredients, but they've got the same preservatives, processing, and unwholesome stuff, because you can't make or sell those types of food without resorting to all of that. It would be ugly and spoiled before any customer laid eyes on it.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> Organic labeling is also not a silver bullet, but it's a step in the right direction It’s correlated at best. The health benefits are mixed, carbon footprint atrocious and costs high. Eat food, mostly plants, not too much. An industrial tomato is healthier than a McMuffin.

cma 3y ago
> carbon footprint atrocious Instead of herbicides they apparently often burn the weeds off with giant mechanized propane torches.
- defrost 3y ago
  Stubble burning in grain fields is routine, yearly, and doesn't increase atmospheric C02 (when smoothed over a year). https://agriculture.vic.gov.au/crops-and-horticulture/grains-pulses-and-cereals/crop-production/general-agronomy/stubble-burning https://agriculture.vic.gov.au/crops-and-horticulture/grains... Giant flamethrowers aren't required - the stubble will burn in any case if struck by lightening - it's a fire hazard and burning off increases district safety, promotes nutrient recycling, kills weeds. Swings, roundabouts - see the link for cons. As for carbon; crops capture carbon, burning releases the carbon captured. This is the literal 'natural' carbon cycle. The issue we have with climate and CO2 stems from a century of bringing to the surface millions of years worth of captured and sequested carbon from all the plants that went towards the billions and billions of tonnes of fossil fuel we've been burning through lately (past 50+ years).
  - dredmorbius 3y ago
    This is true. Though ag burning can be a major pollution hazard, most especially of fine particulate matter, as some in the US and Canada may be becoming more familiar with from wildfire. Which is to say that all methods, practices, and techniques involve trade-offs.
DarkNova6 3y ago
> It’s correlated at best. The health benefits are mixed, carbon footprint atrocious and costs high. Carbon footprint only seems large if carbon sequestration is not taken into account. The source of feed is the primary factor here: Is it created locally and sustainably, or do you need large cargo shipments of Amazon soy which burnt down parts of the rainforest?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Is it created locally and sustainably Ocean shipping is cheap in carbon. Local means lots of redundant last-mile delivery. (You still need the other transport infrastructure.) The carbon impact of local/organic is largely in its excess transportion. I eat a lot of local produce. But I don’t kid myself—it’s for the taste and nutrition, and comes at the expense of the planet. That it’s expensive limits that environmental impact.
- tekla 3y ago
  People burn down rain forests and forests because their farming techniques generate piss poor yields versus modern techniques forcing the use of larger plots of land to generate enough product. Modern farming techniques would cause much less loss of rainforest.
  - galleywest200 3y ago
    You are speaking of animal farming. I believe ranching is a huge portion of the deforestation.
j-bos 3y ago
> An industrial tomato is healthier than a McMuffin. But is it healthier than a home made McMuffin equivalent?
- tekla 3y ago
  Yes. It mostly water.
  - Spivak 3y ago
    Which is why "stop obsessing over what you're eating and just eat less" is the baseline that most people don't reach to even start worrying about the content.
    - alemanek 3y ago
      Eh, cutting out sugar and high fructose corn syrup makes eating less so much easier. A good portion of the US is so addicted to sugar that their body doesn’t tell them they are full. Once you cut that out then I agree with you. It’s hard to tackle portion control when your body is lying to you about being hungry.

orev 3y ago

This is a pretty good example of the false dichotomy that most people perceive about food—it’s either highly processed garbage or you need to get everything organic from a farmers market. It doesn’t help fix the problem and people who don’t want to bother with all that hassle could be dissuaded from trying to be more healthy. It’s true that the more you pay attention, the more you realize a lot of stuff in a typical US grocery store is just bad for you, but the solution is easy and doesn’t have to be extreme: just don’t buy those things. The healthy stuff is sitting right in the next aisle. Going organic is only a way to signal consumer support for a specific type of production, and has very little to do with being more healthy. Is an organic cookie significantly more healthy than a regular one? No, it isn’t. It’s far more healthy to choose the factory-farmed broccoli or raw chicken from the local grocery store.

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
From the farmers market, I purchase frozen foods, ready-made microwave dinners from the fridge, and sandwiches which are deli day-olds. They may begin with wholesome ingredients, but they've got the same preservatives, processing, and unwholesome stuff, because you can't make or sell those types of food without resorting to all of that. It would be ugly and spoiled before any customer laid eyes on it.