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

California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

gov.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 278 posts

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#31

Post by contrarian1234 »

frereubu wrote: post #3

I'll be very interested to see the definition of "ultra-processed" in this legislation. I couldn't find one at a first glance - it seems to mandate that someone defines it, but doesn't contain a definition itself from what I could see. Edit: Found it. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... (thanks to @crummy for the correction). Seems like a reasonable start. Amusing to see that alcoholic dri…

Seems like a typical blanket baseless unscientific attack of everything deemed "unnatural". Lots of the typical insane stuff, sugar is okay, but "Nonnutritive sweeteners" are not. Spices are okay, but MSG is not. Just a laundrylist of the typical alternative medicine mumbo jumbo. Kind of pathetic, but not unexpected from the state legislature

I'm sure they extensively deliberated the health effect of Luo Han Fruit Concentrate and Maltitol

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#32

Post by donatj »

kome wrote: post #15
comrade1234 wrote: post #11

What's ultra-processed vs processed? If I make my own sausage by grinding the meat by hand, mixing it with salt and spices, then filling natural casings, I would consider that processed food. What makes it ultra-processed? When Hormel does it instead?

That's an annoying question. When you add industrial chemicals, yes, it's ultra processed. If you buy a fresh hamburger at the butcher, made by him with salt and pepper, it's processed food. But if you add sodium nitrite/nitrate, monosodium glutamate, phosphates, high-fructose corn syrup, artificial flavors, sodium erythorbate, carrageenan, bha/bht, propyl gallate, tbhq, soy protein isolate, modified food starch, dex…

So things with scientific names are "ultra processed", and things with common names are not? That's just childish fear mongering.

Everything is a chemical. Salt is sodium chloride. Ingredients should be assessed individually and scientifically for their safety. Not just scary name equals unsafe. That's childish.

The war on monosodium glutamate is based racism and not science. It's as safe as table salt. There is no real science showing that it's anything but delicious.

Dextrose is just a simple sugar. It's essentially glucose chemically. Nothing to worry about. Your body produces glucose itself. You are not ultra processed because of that fact.

High fructose corn syrup is just fructose, another simple sugar [1], and there's no real science to back up all the fear mongering around it. It's no worse for you than any other sugar. All things in moderation.

1. https://skeptoid.com/episodes/157

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#33

Post by Hikikomori »

michaelsshaw wrote: post #7

If you've never worked in food before, you may be unaware that borderline half of the foods you eat, in restaurants, hospitals, prisons, even schools, are just the same frozen foods from Sysco. Their products are sold nationally and are lower quality than the frozen foods you get at the grocery stores, sold at ridiculous markups at restaurants. Sysco UPFs are at best "mid" and usually worse. They also involve a lot o…

Video about Sysco https://youtu.be/rXXQTzQXRFc

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#34

Post by mschuster91 »

kome wrote: post #15
comrade1234 wrote: post #11

What's ultra-processed vs processed? If I make my own sausage by grinding the meat by hand, mixing it with salt and spices, then filling natural casings, I would consider that processed food. What makes it ultra-processed? When Hormel does it instead?

That's an annoying question. When you add industrial chemicals, yes, it's ultra processed. If you buy a fresh hamburger at the butcher, made by him with salt and pepper, it's processed food. But if you add sodium nitrite/nitrate, monosodium glutamate, phosphates, high-fructose corn syrup, artificial flavors, sodium erythorbate, carrageenan, bha/bht, propyl gallate, tbhq, soy protein isolate, modified food starch, dex…

Just two quick corrections:

1. sodium nitrite/nitrate salts have been used in Europe at the very least from the 19th century to cure meat, the earliest regulations in (of course) Germany date back to 1916 [1].

2. MSG has been a part of traditional Japanese dishes, it naturally occurs in soy and fermented fish sauce.

So for these two substances, I'd say their presence in food doesn't make it "ultra processed" all on its own - they and their usage in cuisine date back to times when there was no food industry to speak of.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%B6keln

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#35

Post by OJFord »

hellotheretoday wrote: post #21
kome wrote: post #10

Americans need to get their act together, about food, but not only. 40.3% of American adults are obese (not overweight), against the 17% in the EU. Sport won't fix that, food will.

Diet is part of the problem but a big part of the issue is the inherent sedentary lifestyle associated with American infrastructure and suburban development. If you design tons of housing in a way that encourages people to utilize cars as much as possible, invest as little as possible into infrastructure like public sidewalks and bike lanes, etc then don’t be shocked when your populace becomes fat and lazy, especiall…

Big difference in carbs like sugar and say bread, though. Certainly not an expert on Japanese diet, but I don't think they consume a lot of sugar. Their deserts are famously rather savoury.

(And by bread I mean non-American bread that does not contain sugar, or relatively little (mostly low-end commercial stuff for shelf-life).)

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#36

Post by OJFord »

michaelsshaw wrote: post #7

If you've never worked in food before, you may be unaware that borderline half of the foods you eat, in restaurants, hospitals, prisons, even schools, are just the same frozen foods from Sysco. Their products are sold nationally and are lower quality than the frozen foods you get at the grocery stores, sold at ridiculous markups at restaurants. Sysco UPFs are at best "mid" and usually worse. They also involve a lot o…

'restaurants'

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#37

Post by mschuster91 »

donatj wrote: post #32
kome wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an annoying question. When you add industrial chemicals, yes, it's ultra processed. If you buy a fresh hamburger at the butcher, made by him with salt and pepper, it's processed food. But if you add sodium nitrite/nitrate, monosodium glutamate, phosphates, high-fructose corn syrup, artificial flavors, sodium erythorbate, carrageenan, bha/bht, propyl gallate, tbhq, soy protein isolate, modified food starch, dex…

So things with scientific names are "ultra processed", and things with common names are not? That's just childish fear mongering. Everything is a chemical. Salt is sodium chloride. Ingredients should be assessed individually and scientifically for their safety. Not just scary name equals unsafe. That's childish. The war on monosodium glutamate is based racism and not science. It's as safe as table salt. There is no r…

Their idea is to point out curing agents, flavor enhancers and similar stuff you would not need if using fresh food made from high quality ingredients - basically if you see food with these ingredients, chances are high that corners were cut along the path for whatever reason.

And colorants/"food dyes" are even worse. A bunch of them are under strong suspicion of being carcinogenic, and often are used to mask the ingredients being cured for longer shelf lives or being of sub-par quality.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#38

Post by littlecranky67 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #22
littlecranky67 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure it is NOT the definition of that law, but my own definition is: You make a meal only of basic ingredients. A basic ingredient is something that does not have an ingredient list on its packaging. I.e. Fruit, vegetables, eggs, meat and fish does not come with an ingredient list. There are some exceptions like dairy products (butter, yoghurt, cheese) which are okay to use.

> basic ingredient is something that does not have an ingredient list on its packaging These are unprocessed foods [1]. From them you get processed culinary ingredients, like olive oil, vinegar, honey and butter. As long as you’re minimally vigilant with these, you should be fine, though some production methods may still add preservatives or use solvents in their manufacture. After that one has processed foods, which…

Thanks for that Link to the Nova classification. TIL there is even a database that lets you lookup the Nova level: openfoodfacts.org

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#40

Post by londons_explore »

contrarian1234 wrote: post #31
frereubu wrote: post #3

I'll be very interested to see the definition of "ultra-processed" in this legislation. I couldn't find one at a first glance - it seems to mandate that someone defines it, but doesn't contain a definition itself from what I could see. Edit: Found it. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... (thanks to @crummy for the correction). Seems like a reasonable start. Amusing to see that alcoholic dri…

Seems like a typical blanket baseless unscientific attack of everything deemed "unnatural". Lots of the typical insane stuff, sugar is okay, but "Nonnutritive sweeteners" are not. Spices are okay, but MSG is not. Just a laundrylist of the typical alternative medicine mumbo jumbo. Kind of pathetic, but not unexpected from the state legislature I'm sure they extensively deliberated the health effect of Luo Han Fruit Co…

I think it points to a failure of the scientific community to identify better criteria.

There is plenty of data showing diet has a big impact on health and other outcomes, yet far less data on specifics.

Since science doesn't give specific things to ban, legislation is pretty much headed towards "let's have everyone eat what they eat in the south of France where people are really healthy".

Post reply on HN