Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

ajph.aphapublications.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 304 posts

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#91

Post by margalabargala »

breezybottom wrote: post #35
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this objection a lot, even from folks I respect. Its ubiquity makes me wonder it is astroturfed. The definition I have heard is "food made with ingredients or processes not commonly used in ghome Unfortunately, when I looked to leading scientific orgs, they are dithering on releasing formal definitions, but all say something like what I'd heard. Conflicting information doesn't mean an abysmal situation. I'…

Yes, you got me, I get paid $50 Soros bucks for every snarky post. It couldn't possibly be that "not commonly used in the home" is a vague and unhelpful definition, which varies across time and cultures. Or that these researchers still haven't explained the theoretical basis linking all these wildly different "UPF"s to the negative health consequences they're supposed to explain.

Soros bucks? You're spouting a right wing position, not a progressive one.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#92

Post by breezybottom »

smallerfish wrote: post #83
breezybottom wrote: post #6

Ultra-processed is a meaningless word used to get media attention. The state of nutrition science is abysmal.

It's not meaningless. "Processed" means that ingredients had to be manipulated to produce the food (e.g. most recipes). Most of what you make at home is "processed". "Ultra-processed" means food produced using industrial processing, using additives (perhaps not typically considered "food" in an of themselves) for emulsifying, flavor, shelf stability & preservation, color, etc. That's a clear distinction. Whether or n…

That's not a clear distinction at all, since now you have to define "industrial". Why would mixing with an industrial blender lead to unhealthier food than a kitchen blender? Why would flour made with a gristmill be less healthy than a mortar and pestle? There's no theoretical basis.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#93

Post by picofarad »

newaccountman2 wrote: post #86
red-iron-pine wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he's a comedian; his entire job is standing up in front of people and saying shit and having a message. thats... the point. it's not nameless widgets or whitelabel switches where you can just ignore it.

> having a message I don't think most comedians really have any cogent "message", nor do I think that's part of the job

Yes, people who have worked with Paul Feig are not comedians, that's possibly where you're having contextual issues.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#94

Post by toasty228 »

nubinetwork wrote: post #32
breezybottom wrote: post #6

Ultra-processed is a meaningless word used to get media attention. The state of nutrition science is abysmal.

I've heard people say that even bread is ultra processed... I guess we're supposed to go back to eating twigs and berries.

Supermarket breads are trash, the first thing I found in wallmart's website:

> Unbleached Enriched Flour (Wheat Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid), Water, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Contains 2% or Less of Each of the Following: Yeast, Wheat Gluten, Salt, Soybean Oil, Dough Conditioners (Contains One or More of the Following: Sodium Stearoyl Lactylate, Calcium Stearoyl Lactylate, Monoglycerides, Mono- and Diglycerides, Distilled Monoglycerides, Calcium Peroxide, Calcium Iodate, DATEM, Ethoxylated Mono- and Diglycerides, Enzymes, Ascorbic Acid), Monocalcium Phosphate, Soy Lecithin, Calcium Propionate (to Retard Spoilage).

A good rule of thumb is that if your grandpa would have needed a PhD in chemistry to identify 80% of the ingredients it probably is ultra processed.

The same type of bread in France:

> Wheat flour 63%, water, sugar, rapeseed oil, salt, vinegar, yeast, broad bean flour, WHEAT gluten, flavouring (contains alcohol), acerola extract.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#95

Post by nashashmi »

Hmm. So when a large corporation comes to buy your company with a significantly higher price, they obviously have figured out something about how to make money that you didn’t, and probably never would agree to in the first place. But when seeing the $$$, who would care to ask such a silly question?

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#97

Post by embedding-shape »

seethishat wrote: post #53

The newer synthetic nicotine pouches (Zyn, On, Velo) are everywhere in the USA and are being used by kids as young as 13. They are ruining the gut health of an entire generation of kids. Edit: Both boys and girls are dependent on these things now and they seem socially acceptable (no smoke, no spit, just swallow the chemical nicotine). Get ready for a huge wave of GI problems due to this.

Is your problem with them that they're synthetic, or that it's nicotine? Pouched tobacco like that been used for decades in some places in the world, or even without pouches, just making your own ball and sticking the tobacco under your lip. I'm not sure these countries have a higher rate of GI/gut problems than other places, which kind of would invalidate your entire argument here.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#98

Post by breezybottom »

margalabargala wrote: post #91
breezybottom wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you got me, I get paid $50 Soros bucks for every snarky post. It couldn't possibly be that "not commonly used in the home" is a vague and unhelpful definition, which varies across time and cultures. Or that these researchers still haven't explained the theoretical basis linking all these wildly different "UPF"s to the negative health consequences they're supposed to explain.

Soros bucks? You're spouting a right wing position, not a progressive one.

I didn't know right-wing means rejecting bad science and progressive means accepting it.

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#99

Post by xg15 »

cm2012 wrote: post #61
toasty228 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah right... so obesity, diabetes, etc. skyrocketed in the US from the mid 80s because before the 80s americans were calorie constrained ? Really ? We're talking 1980s, not 1880s by the way

Yes not gonna pull it but there's data that shows calories got meaningfully cheaper and easier to access in the United States and more plentiful from the 1980s to the 2020s.

That shift might have been plausible if it happened in the 40s or 50s when the economy switched from war to consumption - but in the 80s? What kind of massive breakthrough in food production happened there that we mysteriously never heard of?

Re: Ultra-processed foods in the global food system: The role of tobacco companies

#100

Post by Aurornis »

nubinetwork wrote: post #32
breezybottom wrote: post #6

Ultra-processed is a meaningless word used to get media attention. The state of nutrition science is abysmal.

I've heard people say that even bread is ultra processed... I guess we're supposed to go back to eating twigs and berries.

> I've heard people say

These terms have actual definitions.

Bread can be ultra-processed depending on how it’s prepared.

Better question is why you don’t think a packaged bread product with HFCS and preservatives designed for a long shelf life would be considered ultra-processed.

Post reply on HN