Live data from Hacker News

Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

alprofoundation.org

71–80 of 86 posts

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize that Nestlé and Unilever play both ends, owning both high and low-processed food brands, both factory and organic produce? The same way pharma companies are the ones making homeopathic "remedies". Food processing isn't evil, it's to a large degree a necessity. The alternative to processed food isn't everyone eating the mythical, health and happiness-granting fresh produce - it's population dropping to lev…

I think the disconnect here is that people don't consider that almost any action (process) applied to food post-harvest is 'processing' and it is difficult to draw meaningful distinctions between healthy and unhealthy foods based on the 'processed' description. If you buy pre-cooked chicken breast, for instance, that's 'processed' in at least three ways: it was cut up, it was seasoned (including with salt, which is a…

The definitions you've provided are part of a regulatory framework, but they may not fully capture the nuances of dietary recommendations and public health concerns regarding food consumption.

In common dietary discussions, 'ultra-processed' foods are often understood as products that not only undergo extensive processing but also tend to have a low nutritional value and are associated with health concerns. While canning tomatoes with minimal salt and basil involves processing, it typically wouldn't be categorized as 'ultra-processed' because these additives are relatively simple and not intended to enhance the taste or shelf life to the same degree as many highly processed products.

>I think the disconnect here is that people don't consider that almost any action (process) applied to food post-harvest is 'processing' and it is difficult to draw meaningful distinctions between healthy and unhealthy foods based on the 'processed' description.

What often distinguishes healthier foods from less healthy ones is the presence of certain ingredients and additives. For instance, excessive salt, sugars, unhealthy fats, and artificial additives in processed foods can be detrimental to health when consumed in excess. A little bit of salt added to a can of tomatoes isn't that unhealthy. Adding flavour enhancer, thickeners and stabilisers, color additives, texturizers etc would make it a ultra processed food.

Which is also the NOVA definition. If you would have spent a minute looking at the sources in your document, it should be clear that a can of tomatoes with some salt and basil is not classified as ultra processed food.

>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10260459

>Generally, the practical way to identify if a product is ultra-processed is to check to see if its list of ingredients contains at least one item characteristic of the ultra-processed food group, which is to say, either food substances never or rarely used in kitchens, or classes of additives whose function is to make the final product palatable or more appealing (‘cosmetic additives’).

>The issue is not processing. It is ultra-processed foods, the fourth group in the NOVA system of food classification.

>Ultra-processed foods are not ‘real food’. As stated, they are formulations of food substances often modified by chemical processes and then assembled into ready-to-consume hyper-palatable food and drink products using flavours, colours, emulsifiers and a myriad of other cosmetic additives. Most are made and promoted by transnational and other giant corporations. Their ultra-processing makes them highly profitable, intensely appealing and intrinsically unhealthy.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#72
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the disconnect here is that people don't consider that almost any action (process) applied to food post-harvest is 'processing' and it is difficult to draw meaningful distinctions between healthy and unhealthy foods based on the 'processed' description. If you buy pre-cooked chicken breast, for instance, that's 'processed' in at least three ways: it was cut up, it was seasoned (including with salt, which is a…

The definitions you've provided are part of a regulatory framework, but they may not fully capture the nuances of dietary recommendations and public health concerns regarding food consumption. In common dietary discussions, 'ultra-processed' foods are often understood as products that not only undergo extensive processing but also tend to have a low nutritional value and are associated with health concerns. While can…

Thank you for WELLL ACKSHUALLYING that for me. I did read my source documents, and I stand by what I wrote: the phrase ‘processed food’ is absolutely meaningless. That you can find a bunch of different, vague, and conflicting definitions of the same terms in common use is part of the problem.

The stuff you quoted is, for the most part, absolute nonsense. Ultra processed foods are characterized by the involvement of “transnational” companies? Some ingredients in processed foods can be detrimental to health when consumed in excess? Really? Water is detrimental to health when consumed in excess. What about ingredients in non- and minimally-processed foods? I can think of several you should only eat in minimal quantities. The USDA definition is “regulatory” in nature, but NOVA’s is — what, exactly? You didn’t really say, but I’m guessing something like “health-based.” Their “group 4” definition includes all pre-prepared frozen meals. How is that useful? A prepackaged meal could be unhealthy to eat, or it could be quite healthy. You’d have to look at the ingredients to know for sure.

That’s the thing - the only sensible thing to do is ignore the phrase and focus on individual ingredients and overall macro/micro nutritive content. Anti processed food advocates have rendered the phrase useless.

And, by the way, the only reasons to add salt to canned tomatoes are to a) enhance the flavor and b) increase shelf life of said tomatoes.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#73
post #13

I think this is great example that all big industries do marketing. It is just not the "evil" big tobacco, meat, dairy, oil and so on... Clearly also the alternatives go for it. Maybe the whole processed food labelling is unhelpful also in other products? Or maybe there is point in targeting some use of things like soya in certain ways...

I mean, obviously.

Narratives are how markets work. Money itself is a simple narrative with complex dynamics.

I rather like https://www.epsilontheory.com/ for exploring markets from this perspective.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#74
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so manufacturers and restaurants can't lie about what they are selling. Think about a canned coffee drink with 'milk' added, but then in very small letters on the side of the can it says *soy milk as an example

No, it's because the meat and dairy industry wants to maintain the status quo. If it were for the reasons you listed, they'd require labeling it as "cow's milk" instead of just "milk".

Redefining the meaning of words to be less specific, rather than more specific, about what you are selling people is what people have a problem with. Every kind of loophole is exploited, when allowed.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#75
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's because the meat and dairy industry wants to maintain the status quo. If it were for the reasons you listed, they'd require labeling it as "cow's milk" instead of just "milk".

Redefining the meaning of words to be less specific, rather than more specific, about what you are selling people is what people have a problem with. Every kind of loophole is exploited, when allowed.

Agreed on clarity, but we can't overlook industry influence. With their environmental footprint under scrutiny, they might be pushing these laws to divert attention and prevent future regulations.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#76
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soy only tastes like shit if you don't know wtf to do with it. Plenty of great food made with tofu but I doubt that soy salami is any good.

> Soy only tastes like shit if you don't know wtf to do with it. In other words, if it's not highly processed ...

I actually had to google to find that tofu is "processed" but not "ultra-processed". I think the asian-style soy milk I buy for cooking might also not be "ultra-processed" since I don't think it has emusifiers or things that western soy milk has, but googling for this doesn't give much info.

I guess I just assumed they were considered to be ultra processed since they're produced industrially.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#77
post #14
post #6

My son is allergic to soya - that was a catalyst for us looking into the supply chain of what we buy and eat and if there is one profound change above all is the fact soy is in -everything- and if not in the product itself then certain in the bulk of the food stuffs own food chain. Can’t even buy bread now without it being bulked out with soya flour …

I'm guessing american. Move out from US ? (Only half joking)

We did move out of the US and funnily enough food (bread especially - we lived in the south) was part of the reason. However since our return to the UK the over processing of what were simple foods has occurred also. It seems to have dramatically accelerated post pandemic/brexit. We eventually moved somewhere where there’s a traditional baker walking distance away but if we have to go to a supermarket Sainsbury’s carry just two specialty brands soy free now the major brands hocks and warburtons and Sainsbury’s own branded bread all have soya flour.

I think in breads case it does improve the softness and protein content but it’s really unnecessary and mainly in there as it shaves cost.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#78
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t matter where you buy soy milk. If it’s 100% national it’s disgusting. Most of what you buy in the super markets have added sugar. Tofu has flavour. You have to remember soy milk is basically the left over shit from making tofu. All the healthy shit is left in the pulp including the flavour.

> You have to remember soy milk is basically the left over shit from making tofu. All the healthy shit is left in the pulp including the flavour. Not true. First, you make soy milk by rehydrating soybeans, blending them with water, cooking the mixture, and then straining it. The remains are called okara. If you add a coagulant to the milk and cook it further, you'll get tofu curds, from which tofu is made. The remain…

> Not all 100% natural soy milk is considered distasteful by everyone; taste is subjective.

Obviously or they wouldn’t sell it. Doesn’t change the fact majority of it has added sugar and is unhealthy and worse than full cream milk.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#79
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but here in France a law was passed to forbid the term "milk" for plant based milk. Soya "milk" isn't allowed on labels anymore for instance. Even though all across Asia everyone knows what it is, us French are apparently too dumb and would be confused. Good. I'm all for such laws. Soya "milk" isn't "milk" as the term has been culturally understood for millennia. It's not that people are dumb, but rather that words…

> It's not that people are dumb Are you sure? - Almond Milk - Over 1,000 years (Middle Ages) - Soy Milk - Over 2,000 years (China) - Rice Milk - Centuries (Asia) - Coconut Milk - Millennia (Southeast Asia) - Oat Milk - Centuries (Nordic countries) - Hemp Milk - Late 20th and 21st century - Cashew Milk - Late 20th century onwards - Poppy Seed Milk - Centuries (Eastern Europe) - Tigernut Milk - Ancient Egypt to present…

Ha, thanks for this list. It's crazy to me how many people assume that things that are new in supermarkets are new, period.

Re: Labelling soya foods as ultra-processed is unhelpful

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but here in France a law was passed to forbid the term "milk" for plant based milk. Soya "milk" isn't allowed on labels anymore for instance. Even though all across Asia everyone knows what it is, us French are apparently too dumb and would be confused. Good. I'm all for such laws. Soya "milk" isn't "milk" as the term has been culturally understood for millennia. It's not that people are dumb, but rather that words…

> Good. I'm all for such laws. Soya "milk" isn't "milk" as the term has been culturally understood for millennia. TLDR; You have it upside down. Any white liquid would usually be called "X milk" or "milk of X". In English and other languages. Provably so since centuries (see below). Quoting from [1]: "Recipes from the 13th-century Levant exist describing almond milk Soy was a plant milk used in China during the 14th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN