'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#2Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#3Literally everyone I know understands that processed foods are less healthy than whole foods.
Some, indeed many, choose to eat them anyway. But this isn't like smoking in the 40's with adverts claiming it's good for you.
It seems a priori obvious to me, even. Does anyone actually think that chicken nuggets and chips are as healthy as a whole roast chicken with potatoes and butter? Anyone?
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#4Is this just a class thing or what? Literally everyone I know understands that processed foods are less healthy than whole foods. Some, indeed many, choose to eat them anyway. But this isn't like smoking in the 40's with adverts claiming it's good for you. It seems a priori obvious to me, even. Does anyone actually think that chicken nuggets and chips are as healthy as a whole roast chicken with potatoes and butter?…
If consumers don't have it spelled out to them as obviously as possible, they won't realize. People way under estimate how calorically dense modern processed food is. It's one part of why there's an obesity epidemic basically everywhere.
Considering Heart Disease is the #1 killer in the US right now, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to start treating these foods more like how we treat cigarettes.
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#5Is this just a class thing or what? Literally everyone I know understands that processed foods are less healthy than whole foods. Some, indeed many, choose to eat them anyway. But this isn't like smoking in the 40's with adverts claiming it's good for you. It seems a priori obvious to me, even. Does anyone actually think that chicken nuggets and chips are as healthy as a whole roast chicken with potatoes and butter?…
We need to get past the denial to start the actual conversation.
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#6Is this just a class thing or what? Literally everyone I know understands that processed foods are less healthy than whole foods. Some, indeed many, choose to eat them anyway. But this isn't like smoking in the 40's with adverts claiming it's good for you. It seems a priori obvious to me, even. Does anyone actually think that chicken nuggets and chips are as healthy as a whole roast chicken with potatoes and butter?…
The problem is that normal seeming things like bread classify as ultra processed. Almond milk, sugar. We need to get past the denial to start the actual conversation.
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#7Is this just a class thing or what? Literally everyone I know understands that processed foods are less healthy than whole foods. Some, indeed many, choose to eat them anyway. But this isn't like smoking in the 40's with adverts claiming it's good for you. It seems a priori obvious to me, even. Does anyone actually think that chicken nuggets and chips are as healthy as a whole roast chicken with potatoes and butter?…
The problem is that normal seeming things like bread classify as ultra processed. Almond milk, sugar. We need to get past the denial to start the actual conversation.
American bread is obviously weird. It has a ridiculous shelf life.
Almond milk and all "milks" are political bullshit, it's prole feed.
And sugar, well...
I don't know. Grandma's home cooking, you know? Cake was a rare treat.
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#8Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#9I'm skeptical about a lot of the research that purports to be studying "ultra-processed foods" because as far as I can tell, nobody can actually give a coherent definition of "ultra-processed", and I think that should probably be something that you need to do before you start to study ultra-processed foods to make sure that any effect that is observed is actually a result of the food being "ultra-processed".
There are quite a few definitions [1]. That said, they are consistently inconsistent and subjective [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-processed_food#Definitio...
[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422442...
Re: 'Deny, denounce, delay': the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods
#10I'm skeptical about a lot of the research that purports to be studying "ultra-processed foods" because as far as I can tell, nobody can actually give a coherent definition of "ultra-processed", and I think that should probably be something that you need to do before you start to study ultra-processed foods to make sure that any effect that is observed is actually a result of the food being "ultra-processed".
> as far as I can tell, nobody can actually give a coherent definition of "ultra-processed" There are quite a few definitions [1]. That said, they are consistently inconsistent and subjective [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-processed_food#Definitio... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422442...