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

Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

openmindmag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 112 posts

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#91

Post by throwawaycities »

Eisenstein wrote: post #63
throwawaycities wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but even among those there is some deception. Take Yoplait, it is made with pasteurized milk, so it doesn’t have the naturally occurring cultures. Like the added sugar they just add cultures/probiotics in, what’s important in this is that there are 1000s of species of probiotics and “added probiotics” is not the same as naturally occurring probiotics, which are generally limited to just a few species. In other w…

Where are you getting unpasteurized milk that you could make yogurt with it? I don't know anyone who has eaten yogurt made from raw cow's milk and wouldn't know where to get it.

That’s the point, the yogurt purchased in stores is processed to the point it loses the very benefits that make yogurt “healthy.”

To answer your specific question, farmers that have dairy cows. It’s not so common these days, but neither is healthy yogurt. Another example of a probiotic food would be kimchi, which in the US most people probably purchase in stores (pasteurized), but in SKorea many make at home so it’s raw with naturally occurring cultures and enzymes.

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#94

Post by jacknews »

There's always some food boogyman, but UPF is about as indistinct as you can get.

Food-processing itself is quite unlikely to the problem, it'll be some common additive, or the general balance of fats (and fat types), proteins, carbs, micronutrients, etc.

For my money, the big problem, after sugar, is vegetable oil.

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#95

Post by koolba »

Eisenstein wrote: post #63
throwawaycities wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but even among those there is some deception. Take Yoplait, it is made with pasteurized milk, so it doesn’t have the naturally occurring cultures. Like the added sugar they just add cultures/probiotics in, what’s important in this is that there are 1000s of species of probiotics and “added probiotics” is not the same as naturally occurring probiotics, which are generally limited to just a few species. In other w…

Where are you getting unpasteurized milk that you could make yogurt with it? I don't know anyone who has eaten yogurt made from raw cow's milk and wouldn't know where to get it.

Yogurt from “raw milk” doesn’t even make any sense. The pasteurization step during yogurt production isn’t to make the milk safe for consumption. It’s to kill the other bacteria so the one that is deliberately introduced can thrive.

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#97

Post by m463 »

balfirevic wrote: post #71
m463 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think one of the main healthy ingredient lost to processing is fiber. It is good for moving food through your digestive system, plus it moderates harmful glucose spikes which is very unhealthy. Potatoes have a lot of fiber in the skin, but fries remove all that. (I've also been told, eating potatoes are like eating a plate of sugar)

So, peeled boiled potatoes are ultra-processed food then?

Maybe not powdered potatoes in a box processed, but the peeled boiled potatoes might not be too different to your body.

It's even been shown that just freezing and thawing vegetables can significantly break down the fiber and vitamins so your body doesn't get the benefits.

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#98

Post by jdougan »

chimprich wrote: post #58
hilux wrote: post #39

What I've observed is that nutrition, including nutrition research, has become as religious - meaning, following faith rather than data - as religion itself. A few things I notice: - "Processed foods" are lumped together as if they're all the same. But they're not. Specifically, processed foods with high carbs and artificial sweeteners have a very different effect on insulin than no-carb processed meats like most lun…

> What I've observed is that nutrition, including nutrition research, has become as religious - meaning, following faith rather than data Most of the people who make comments like this sound more religious than most. > Maybe bacon is bad for you. I don't think so. It's well established that processed meats containing nitrates, like bacon, are carcinogens. > A lot, and I mean a LOT, of nutrition research is done by ve…

7th Day Adventists

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#99

Post by throwawaycities »

koolba wrote: post #95
Eisenstein wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting unpasteurized milk that you could make yogurt with it? I don't know anyone who has eaten yogurt made from raw cow's milk and wouldn't know where to get it.

Yogurt from “raw milk” doesn’t even make any sense. The pasteurization step during yogurt production isn’t to make the milk safe for consumption. It’s to kill the other bacteria so the one that is deliberately introduced can thrive.

Yogurt has been around for thousands of years, pasteurized milk for less than 200.

And yes the pasteurization of milk is to make it safe and it’s required by law in the US (if the milk/yogurt crosses state lines, interstate commerce).

You are right in that yogurt made with raw milk, the bacteria of the raw milk will typically overtake the bacteria introduced for the fermentation. Now we have come full circle to the point that modern store bought yogurt doesn’t have the same health benefits.

This may all sound counterintuitive that milk is pasteurized for health/safety reasons but pasteurized milk/yogurt doesn’t contain the health benefits of raw milk, or yogurt made from raw milk, but it’s rather straight forward: it contains health benefits but simultaneously potential risks.

Re: Are Ultra-Processed Foods All That Unhealthy?

#100

Post by bobthepanda »

Eisenstein wrote: post #62
bobthepanda wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's interesting that the definitions are so varied. what i've seen, is that UPF is usually defined as "a high proportion of the ingredients do not exist naturally in that form." so for example, the ingredients of an Oreo > INGREDIENTS: UNBLEACHED ENRICHED FLOUR (WHEAT FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMINE MONONITRATE [VITAMIN B1], RIBOFLAVIN [VITAMIN B2], FOLIC ACID), SUGAR, PALM OIL, SOYBEAN AND/OR CANOLA OIL, COCO…

Are you counting ingredients by proportion of weight or by total number of them in the list?

At least in the US the ingredients must be ordered in order of amount, where the first is used the most.
Post reply on HN