Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition • Hacker News Board

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#121

Post by tsdlts » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 8:56 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #104

Just by comparing photos and videos from the 1980s to the situation in the streets now, it is painfully obvious that we (and by "we" I mean at least half of humanity) have a serious obesity and metabolic syndrome problem. It is breathtaking how civilized nations silently accept such an enormous slide in quality of life, when other, much smaller problems lead to civic unrest, political discussions and overhaul of old…

More than 100 million Americans have diabetes or are prediabetic[1]. The current scientific literature in cardiology suggests that insulin resistance is a key driver of cardiovascular disease[2]. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the U.S.(outside of COVID for this year). You're right, the fact that there's no outcry about any of this is a shame, and really any effort to regulate this here is going to be met with a lot of resistance.

1. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-d...

2. https://cardiab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12933-01...

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#122

Post by ummonk » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #50

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #12

This statistic from the article is mind-boggling: > Ultra-processed products now account for nearly half of the average dietary intake of some high income countries, with consumption rising rapidly in most other countries. Note that they aren't just referring to processed foods. They classify ultra-processed foods as a step beyond what we typically think of as processed foods: > Ultra-processed foods and beverages ca…

>, but in my experience most people prefer these foods because they think it's more convenient. [...] Everyone should learn how to cook some boring, staple meals using basic ingredients from the store. It's amazing how many people don't know how easy and cheap it can be to prepare simple crock pot or stir-fry meals that are healthy and delicious. I'm a strict health food eater but I have to be realistic and concede t…

That's why I love Trader Joe's. It has the convenience of junk food but the ingredient lists actually look like something I'd prepare myself.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#123

Post by jimktrains2 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #106

dcolkitt wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its not like "processing" makes something more or less poisonous I completely agree with this. There's nothing inherent to processing food that makes it less healthy. In fact it could potentially make it even more healthy, e.g. adding fiber or protein to a starch. Heck, even just like at the original processing technique. Cooked vegetables are more nutritious than raw vegetables. But the reality is that 99% of proc…

My issue with this "processing" designation is that its meaningless once we enter practice. > But the reality is that 99% of processing is directed at making foods hyper-palatable, calorically dense, and easy to digest. Because that's what consumers crave. Yes, people want unhealthy foods. You can buy a perfectly organic, fully unprocessed meal from Panda Express. Its called rice stir-fry, and as long as you hold bac…

I'm vegetarian and have never understood the "going vegetarian because it's healthier" concept. It's actually not healthier at all, especially if, as you said, you get the bulk of your calories from starches (e.g. chips or pasta); which is easy to do because they're easy and obvious options until you have a larger stock of recipies in your head. It's also easy to not get enough protein that way. (In general getting enough protein as a vegetarian, especially an ovo-lacto one isn't difficult, but it can require being aware.)

Anyway, it's perfectly healthy to eat meat; vegetarianism isn't healthier. What's healthier is being deliberate and thinking about the food you consume.

(For reference, I became vegetarian because I ha concerns about factory farming's environmental impact and slowly just started to dislike the idea of having to sacrifice another animal for my benefit when it became clear to me that not doing so isn't actually that difficult.)

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#124

Post by vram22 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #120

jasode wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>, but in my experience most people prefer these foods because they think it's more convenient. [...] Everyone should learn how to cook some boring, staple meals using basic ingredients from the store. It's amazing how many people don't know how easy and cheap it can be to prepare simple crock pot or stir-fry meals that are healthy and delicious. I'm a strict health food eater but I have to be realistic and concede t…

I wonder what is the effect of the widespread loneliness on the willingness and ability to cook. If you are two or a family, cooking for the others to enjoy is a pleasure. If someone lives alone, I can see why they rather eat something quick-and-dirty.

The effect is sure to be high.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#125

Post by blix » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:05 PM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #84

watwut wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can actually eat pork belly without it having bad effect on your health. You just have to avoid to do it too much. Is grain berry in the amount that satiate you actually good for you to be eaten every day for breakfast? It is puzzling to me why low-fat cereal would be some kind of win or automatically should be considered great thing. You get energy from fat, sugar and proteins. Healthy human can and should eat a…

> It is puzzling to me why low-fat cereal would be some kind of win or automatically should be considered great thing. You get energy from fat, sugar and proteins. Healthy human can and should eat all three, but I really dont understand why specifically amount of low-fatness of some cereal box would be advantage. Dietary fiber is a huge part of nutrition and you're ignoring it in your above analysis. In particular, d…

You shouldn't need "stomach filler" to feel satiated. If the food you are eating has enough nutrients, you should not feel hungry. Nutrition-derived satiety is not the same thing as fullness, which should probably be considered a negative consequence of overeating.

Unfortunately many people are so used to eating nutritionally bankrupt food that the connection between satiety and nutrition is broken, and many people exist in such a constant state of hunger that only fullness can temporarily stop them from eating more. The people I've met who overeat fiber to keep themselves from overeating caloric food have typically not been very healthy.

This "psychology of a full stomach" is not a requirement to live. In moderation, fiber is fine, but so is lard. You don't have to eat until you are full, you can simply stop eating when you have consumed enough nutrients. The body can give good feedback if one chooses to listen. Unfortunately this innate animalian skill is easy to forget in a world of soda and cheetos.

If you want a more thorough exposition of this idea, consider the book "Why Diets Make us Fat" by Sandra Aamodt, especially if you are interested in the psychology of eating. Please stop hating on pork belly. It is fine in moderation.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#126

Post by sjg007 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:05 PM UTC

jpindar wrote: post #56

detaro wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but also contain ingredients and additives not commonly used in home kitchens and artisanal restaurants That is incredibly broad though? Not sure what "processed foods" would be then.

That eliminates anything with preservatives or anything that's vitamin enriched. I've been baking cornbread from scratch a lot recently. Is that bad because the cornmeal has thiamin, riboflavin, and folic acid added and the milk has vitamin D added?

No.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#127

Post by sjg007 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:06 PM UTC

mike00632 wrote: post #35

silicon2401 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really what you ate like on a day to day basis? Not snarky or anything, just genuinely shocked and curious

Yes. It was actually even worse than that on most days. The portions were bigger and I didn't include snacks and desserts. My whole family was overweight and most of us were obese (myself included). This is the majority of Americans. I'm sure that this style of eating is extremely common.

Portion creep is a thing.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#128

Post by vram22 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:07 PM UTC

jriot wrote: post #79

jasode wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>, but in my experience most people prefer these foods because they think it's more convenient. [...] Everyone should learn how to cook some boring, staple meals using basic ingredients from the store. It's amazing how many people don't know how easy and cheap it can be to prepare simple crock pot or stir-fry meals that are healthy and delicious. I'm a strict health food eater but I have to be realistic and concede t…

Cooking in general is time consuming. You and I appear to eat vastly differently, yet we both make our own food from scratch. For breakfast I eat 10oz whole milk, 2 - 3 strips of bacon, 2 - 3 eggs, and grits with butter (at time I'll have potatoes or toast depending). Our other other meals will include roasted vegetables, potatoes and meat. Preparing each meal everyday is time consuming but I view as the best investm…

You seem to have missed some words in your second paragraph. What were they? One, I guess, is doctor.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#129

Post by Spearchucker » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:10 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #50

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #12

This statistic from the article is mind-boggling: > Ultra-processed products now account for nearly half of the average dietary intake of some high income countries, with consumption rising rapidly in most other countries. Note that they aren't just referring to processed foods. They classify ultra-processed foods as a step beyond what we typically think of as processed foods: > Ultra-processed foods and beverages ca…

>, but in my experience most people prefer these foods because they think it's more convenient. [...] Everyone should learn how to cook some boring, staple meals using basic ingredients from the store. It's amazing how many people don't know how easy and cheap it can be to prepare simple crock pot or stir-fry meals that are healthy and delicious. I'm a strict health food eater but I have to be realistic and concede t…

If being healthy is too much work then I guess obesity wins. I cannot imagine eating fast foods. Cooking is cheaper, besides the healthy thing. It's also FUN.

I mostly cook German stuff, some French, a little Chinese and a fair few BBQs in the summer. I have quick and easy things I make, and more elaborate stuff that tastes unlike anything you can buy ready-made.

I shop at local markets where you get to know the farmers, smallholders who sell what they grow. Food is way too important to me to not put the effort into it that I do.

Lastly, I'm not a health nut. I don't go to the gym. I see my GP once a year and age usually tells me to try get more sunlight in the winter but otherwise gives me a clean bill of health. I'm approaching 50 and sleep 8 hours most nights.

Re: Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition

#130

Post by acuozzo » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:13 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #119

acuozzo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Please forgive the scattered reply. I'm tired and I've mostly pieced this together from other discussions I've had on this topic.) I firmly believe that the problem stems from a mass unspoken refusal to address obesity as a symptom of food addiction. Food addiction is among the hardest to kick because humans not only need food to survive, but also need glucose (and/or ketone bodies) in order to have sufficient menta…

I am just watching the British "Supersize Vs Superskinny" series. The heavy articipants have serious addiction problem, obviously. The question is whether some foods are inherently addictive, at least for some people who are more predisposed to food addiction. There are some obvious commonalities in the diets of the superfatties: pretty much every one of them consumes a lot of pizza, fries, soft drinks and various fa…

I'm sure some foods are inherently addictive, but I hesitate to put the blame on specific foods because I gained most of my weight from eating sushi rice… a pot at a time.

My experience suggests to me that food addiction is primarily psychological in nature and is often the result of a history of "experience coupling" (examples to follow) and a genuine misunderstanding of what feeling "full" truly feels like.

Most obese people I know have no idea when they've eaten enough food and often don't stop eating until they're in pain. I'm not sure if this problem is physical, but as a formerly-obese person I can state with confidence that I still don't quite know when I've eaten enough. There is no feeling of "full" for me; just pain vs. no pain.

"Experience coupling" examples…

* Feeling the need to eat popcorn while watching a movie

* Feeling the need to eat peanuts, hot dogs, and beer at a baseball game

* Feeling the need to meet with friends at restaurants, coffee shops, etc.

* Feeling the need to eat cereal by the fistful when trying to work through a tough algorithm (* Feeling the need to snack on road-trips