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

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

#151

Post by x87678r » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:20 PM UTC

01100011 wrote: post #139

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…

45 here. Here's what I've noticed since the 80s: - More wealth and more choices now. - More eating out now. Meals are bigger, sweeter, richer, etc. - Less activity now. When I was a kid, video games were just getting started and most folks didn't own computers. TV & media was less engaging. Food addiction seems more... refined these days. There is a lot less fat shaming too, although I'm not suggesting we bring it ba…

I kinda feel if kids had a 20 inch black and white tube tv with no streaming/dvr/games they'd be a lot more active too. Fast food is way too cheap, when I was growing up it was a special treat when you were on vacation, now its just a regular meal or even a snack.

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

#152

Post by hogFeast » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:20 PM UTC

icandoit wrote: post #38

I like what this guy has to say about nutrition (take it with a grain of salt, he is an epistemologist) https://meaningness.com/nutrition-resigns "Your job is to wear white lab coats while saying that food ingredients are healthy and unhealthy, and to wave charts around. That makes the ingredients authoritatively healthy and unhealthy, which covers our asses. ... "Signed, [The governments of every country in the worl…

Yes, according to the article that kind of science (i.e. the basic logic of energy usage) was invented by Coca-Cola. This is what happens when you combine weak knowledge of science with a credulous mind (you think everything is a conspiracy theory invented by group of people you dislike).

Maybe "processed food" (whatever that means, according to the article it is everything not produced in an "artisinal restaurant") is good, maybe it is bad but it is slightly hard to tell given that lots of people in the US are obese: which is a function of greed and laziness, not whether food is "processed" or not.

You can lose weight drinking nothing but soda. You can can lose weight eating nothing but chocolate. I have done it (and no, Coca-Cola didn't pay me). As you say, the issue of obesity is a fairly simple one of: how much energy do you use and how much energy do you put in.

What is actually remarkable to me is how many people are obese given the high basal metabolic rate of humans (at my normal weight, it was remarkably hard and time-consuming to cram enough calories in to gain weight consistently). I have gained and lost 20-40% of my bodyweight multiple times, it isn't hard, it isn't about "good" or "bad" foods (the "you never see a skinny person drinking a diet soda" phenomenom, every obese person I have ever met thought this way), and doesn't look at what their actual calories-in/calories-out is (in my experience, most people regard tracking calories this as a form of mental illness...I live somewhere that has life expectancy under 70 because of obesity...so, go figure). This isn't to say micronutrients aren't important, they clearly are...you don't have enough iron, you are going to feel very bad...but the issue for most countries in the West is excessive calorie consumption, and a failure to speak about this bluntly with people (pretty much all my older relatives have health issues caused by weight, it is frustrating when a doctor tries to be kind first rather than help them stay alive).

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

#153

Post by watwut » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:21 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #88

watwut wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apples are not processed at all. Coincidently, they have tons of fiber and you wont actually get fat from eating apples. Unless you eat them dried, in the form of juice or in other "processed" form.

You eat the apple the way it comes from the tree, but trees today make very different apples from those 5000 years ago. We have changed most fruit substantially.

I was still taking about contemporary apples. What makes you think I reference 5000 years old one? I don't even think people 5000 live healthier lifes on average.

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

#154

Post by milesvp » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:21 PM UTC

acuozzo wrote: post #130

inglor_cz wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ob…

You may know this, but, white rice has one of the highest glycemic indexes (along with white bread). High GI foods tend to be addictive, in that spikes in blood sugar are sort of a double whammy, the sharp rise help cultivate future cravings (the body produces dopamine in anticipation of big “positive” effects in the body, in this case to help encourage finding similar high calorie food stores in the future), while the almost immediate drop in blood sugar is a signal that we’re hungry, despite possibly having a too full belly, and already having a high baseline blood sugar level.

As to the rest of your comment, yeah, associative memories are a bitch when it comes to compulsive behaviors. I personally have to keep things out of the house otherwise I too would always eat popcorn and candy with every movie...

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

#155

Post by whatshisface » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:25 PM UTC

curryst wrote: post #149

inglor_cz wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> The question is whether some foods are inherently addictive, at least for some people who are more predisposed to food addiction. In some sense, yes, because to get to extremely high weights, you need to consume extremely high amounts of food. Your stomach will grow, but I would imagine a person would struggle to eat enough carrots to weigh 500 pounds. Quick napkin math says some obese people eat 6700 calories a da…

>Honestly, I think the best way to tackle it is not to outright ban the foods, but just add an excise tax. If we added a 10% tax to soft drinks, fries and pizza, it probably wouldn't make a huge difference to the average citizen's spending. It would be a 10% increase in your food budget if that's all you eat though. If you want to go crazy, add a program that lets you earn that back by doing healthy things, like riding a bike. We should probably do that anyways. If we want to reduce the amount of driving people do, paying them walk/bike places instead of driving isn't a bad system either.

The behavioral epidemic is defined by being irrational and not in the self-interest of the sufferers. How would a slight change in food prices lead to any change in behavior?

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

#156

Post by watwut » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:27 PM UTC

Junk_Collector wrote: post #85

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's only useful it it allows you to reason correctly about stuff in contemporary stores. The argument is that the label does not supply information that is actually relevant to crafting a healthy diet.

But that argument is kind of weak when it comes packed with example that claims fat is bad and sugar+fiber is good.

That is just not how nutrition works either. And honestly, the processed/unprocessed distinction will end up with better result then "fat is bad".

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

#157

Post by seltzered_ » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:28 PM UTC

"Corporate food and beverage companies such as Coca Cola have engaged in what I will refer to as “corporate scientific activities.” These activities are designed to produce and influence the scientific knowledge used to evaluate, promote, legitimise, and regulate their products"

Years ago, I remember listening to a podcast and while I can't find it the host was excerpting a study he was critical of on and noting it was sponsored by coca-cola (this might be it: http://www.latestinpaleo.com/paleo-podcast/2013/11/15/latest... )

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

#158

Post by hogFeast » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:30 PM UTC

mike00632 wrote: post #23

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the best way to stop consuming highly processed foods is to write down your calories consumption. No limits, no shame, no pressure - just write it down. To me it was a revelation.

A friend of mine had a personal trainer that would make him send a photo of everything he ate. I thought that was a good idea.

That doesn't work. Doing that basically encourages people to lie to you, and poisons the relationship. Everyone trying to lose weight will cheat, and it is often the response to that cheating that determines your ability to continue. By making cheating shameful, you are basically guaranteeing failure (this is a corollary of the idea that places that don't have obesity shame fat people...naturally appealing to places with a history of Puritarinism, but largely ineffective).

You can only lose weight once you have the motivation and knowledge that you can apply to do it yourself (the stuff about processed food, for example, is utter psuedo-science nonsense that significantly confuses the issue into "good" and "bad" foods...again, Puritarinism).

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

#159

Post by dragontamer » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:31 PM UTC

chubot wrote: post #143

dragontamer wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first ingredient of Lard is... Lard. Which is "non-processed" by this strange designation. Would you say that Lard is more, or less healthy than a high-fiber cereal?

It seems like you think that Lard is axiomatically unhealthy, which may have been a common view 20 years ago, but no longer is. Lard doesn't contain trans fats, which is what fast food is full of. Lard is a time-tested animal product that has been used by many long-lived civilizations. "trans fats" wasn't a thing until ~20 years ago, so basically science is catching up with the implicit knowledge people have had for…

> It seems like you think that Lard is axiomatically unhealthy

Nope. Just less healthy than a high-fiber, low sugar, low-fat breakfast cereal.

If you disagree: explain to me how 1-bowl of lard is possibly any healthier than 1-bowl of Grain Berry breakfast cereal.

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

#160

Post by program_whiz » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 10:31 PM UTC

mike00632 wrote: post #17

notdang wrote: post #13

The article states that : 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. I've never lived for more than 1-2 months in any of these "high income countries". What does it mean to consume "ultra-processed" food? Can someone give an example how the daily dietary intake can be 50% processed foods? Wh…

Breakfast: Cereal and milk. My favorite cereal is Trix. Lunch: Sandwich made of bread, bologna, cheese, mustard. Coca-cola or chocolate milk to drink. Dinner: TV dinner, perhaps a Lean Cuisine or Pizza rolls. Mountain Dew or Kool Aid to drink. This was a typical day of food for me as a child and through being a teenager.

I feel this 100%. This type of thing is totally pushed by the food industry, marketed directly to kids and tired / busy parents. Lets not pretend that people who aren't obese are somehow more enlightened or virtuous, this is clearly a matter of food production, marketing, and environment (otherwise there wouldn't have been a sharp rise in obesity right around the time all this came online).

I feel your story because I had a similar upbringing and even though I eat relatively healthy now, losing weight is INCREDIBLY difficult due to what I assume is a host of metabolic issues from all those years of poor eating as a kid.

Threads like this kill me because its a lot of lecturing about "simple calories in calories out", and "just don't eat so much junk food" like some kid who is 8 and getting served corn dogs and fruit rollups has any idea. Everyone at school is eating that stuff, the cafeteria is serving hamburgers, chips, choc milk and chicken nuggets. There are soda and candy machines in the hallways for snacks, and everything you watch on TV is blanketed with advertising for junk food.