A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
What is considered an ultra-processed food? Like... Cheese is processed (all cheese; it isn't just found, it's made by processing milk). Is it ultra processed? What about a hot dog?
How is milk processed? It's pasteurized, which means it's heated to kill bacteria. Nothing is added to the milk ... so no, it is NOT considered a 'pprocessed' food.
It is highly processed.
It is grass that has gone through a cow.
I feel like we’ve known this for a very long time
The NOVA classifications are difficult to work with, and I think the trend of certain nutrition scientists (and the media that reports on those scientists' work) have completely over-weighted the value of the "ultra processed" category.
The typical whole grain, multigrain bread sold at the store qualifies as ultra-processed, in large part because whole grain flour is harder to shape into loaves than white flour, and manufacturers add things like gluten to the dough. Gluten, of course, already "naturally" exists in any wheat bread, so it's not exactly a harmful ingredient. But that additive tips the loaf of bread into ultra processed (or UPF or NOVA category 4), same as Doritos.
But whole grain bread isn't as bad for you as Doritos or Coca Cola. So why do these studies treat them as the same? And whole grain factory bread is almost certainly better for you than the local bakery's white bread (merely processed food or NOVA category 3), made from industrially produced white flour, with the germ and bran removed during milling. Or industrially produced potato chips, which are usually considered simply processed foods in category 3 when not flavored with anything other than salt, which certainly aren't more nutritious or healthier than that whole wheat bread or pasta.
If specific ingredients are a problem, we should study those ingredients. If specific combinations or characteristics are a problem, we should study those combinations. Don't throw out the baby (healthy ultra processed foods) with the bathwater (unhealthy ultra processed foods).
And I'm not even going to get into how the system is fundamentally unsuited for evaluating fermented, aged, or pickled foods, especially dairy.
The fuck does "ultra processed food" mean? Isnt upf defined by it harming you? Its like saying weapons harm you when weapon is the name for something that is used to harm others.
Generally, something you can't make at home.
Not even. The NOVA system has been tested and doesn't function as a system of classification. Experts cannot consistently classify things into UPF/not UPF. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41430-022-01099-1
So it's more like "there's this food and it's bad for you but idk what it is :/"
The infuriating thing is that I believe that nutrition is more than just a linear addition of all the constituent ingredients (kinda the default view of nutrition science up through the 90's), but addressing the shortcomings of that overly simple model shouldn't mean making an even more simple model.
NOVA classification is the wrong answer to a legitimate problem.
Ultra pasteurized milk that prevents bacteria growth is UPF.
A processed food would be like roasted nuts, a loaf of real bread, cheese, etc. an ultra processed food is anything that's been broken down into individual constituents like corn syrup, maltodextrin, sugar, white flour, etc then amalgamated back together again. But I certainly see what you mean.
"Real bread" meets that definition of ultra-processed. It's a bunch of individual constituents (flour, water, yeast, etc.) that are mixed together.
The difference between doritos and bread is merely the cooking temperature and the flavoring content... One is supposed to be cheesy and salty the other sweet and greasy/moist.
Where do you live that bread is sweet and greasy?
Doughnuts are sweet and greasy. They are literally cooked in boiling oil.
Okay, but if I told the bf to get bread on the way home, and he got donuts instead, we're breaking up
Fine. I'll call the bf department of purchases and let them know this is just a stretched truth and not a true truth.
Yep, a homemade loaf of bread is totally comparable to Doritos.
Thanks man I love the sincerity.
It should be more appropriately labeled Junk Food. Everyone's trying to make it sound official and it just ends up more vague.
If we were eating Seafood, Chicken, Beef, Vegatables, Salads and Whole Grains, we'd live longer.
In the end, we need to stay away from non-naturally occurring carbs and refrain from mixing naturally occurring carbs with tons of fat/salt to make them more palatable.
Muffins, Doughnuts, French Toast, Submarine Sandwiches, Pizza, Pasta, all have to be super portion controlled, we we just don't seem to have that kind of willpower.
It's astonishing to me that scientists are using such unscientific terms like "ultra processed food". What is it about these foods that is unhealthy?
It's like saying "sports are dangerous" while including football and golf in your definition.
Scientists only use terms like ultra processed food after defining them in their scientific papers. The problem here is that the media find it difficult to write a short article for the general audience if they have to define things scientifically.
What specifically is bad about UPF foods is still being researched. A few leading ideas are:
Low fibre, emulsifiers and preservatives, while lacking variety of phytochemicals found in fresh food is known to change your gut health. People on UPF diets tend to eat more and have higher blood glucose spikes leading to heart disease and diabetes.
Altogether this is a recipe for a shorter, less healthy life
Those are shit definitions that come from pop-science not real science. They're so broad as to be functionally useless.
Use of emulsifiers.
Frequently have a lot of oil
Oh no, not my mayo!
...is aioli ok or do saponins count as emulsifier, here?
I think there's a bit of a political drive to try to label chronic conditions as "lifestyle" diseases tbh, hence the loose definitions.
There is no single definition of ultra-processed foods, but in general they contain ingredients not used in home cooking.
Many are chemicals, colourings and sweeteners, used to improve the food's appearance, taste or texture.
Fizzy drinks, sweets and chicken nuggets are all examples. However, they can also include less obvious foods, including some breads, breakfast cereals and yoghurts.
A product containing more than five ingredients is likely to be ultra-processed, according to public health expert Prof Maira Bes-Rastrollo of the University of Navarra in Spain.
Ultra-processed foods are often high in salt, sugar and saturated fats. In the UK, look out for a "traffic light" label on the packaging.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/what_is_ultra-processed_food
Thank you for the details - as you point out this is a functionally useless definition.
It reeks of "You know what I mean - that bad stuff". And that's not a good scientific definition.
A product containing more than five ingredients is likely to be ultra-processed
Curry is "ultra-processed" - you heard it hear first.
Like I said - "Sports are dangerous" is a very bad way to try to categorize risky activity. Golf and football are very different as are Curry and Twizzlers.
In this reply you you talked about "some breads", the OP Post only talks about bread - and that for sure had only ingredients in using at home.
Same for French fries: potato, salt, fat .
I'm with the poor downvoted fellow, I don't understand where the risk comes from when it's described this vague.
Are home made burgers better? Is it the freezing process and I should lower my meal prep? Is it additives?
A product containing more than five ingredients is likely to be ultra-processed
Ugh. No. That amounts to saying "anything that contains five spice is ultra-processed". Why do you hate Chinese cuisine.
The "not used in home cooking" rule of thumb is way better though you can certainly make absolutely filthy dishes at home. Home cooking also uses "chemicals, colouring and sweeteners", and also home cooks care about appearance, taste, and texture.
What I'd actually be interested in is comparing EU vs. US standards UPC. EU products use colourings such as red beet extract, beta-carotene, stabilisers, gelling agents etc. like guar gum or arrowroot, when they use fully synthetic stuff then it's generally something actually found in nature. Companies add ascorbic acid as antioxidant, grandma added a splash of lemon juice, same difference really.
A EU strawberry yoghurt which says "natural aroma" is shoddy, yes, you're getting fewer strawberries and more strawberry aroma produced by fungi, but I'm rather sceptical when it comes to claims that it's less healthy.
We know
Each 10% extra intake of UPF, such as bread, cakes and ready meals, increases someone’s risk of dying before they reach 75 by 3%, according to research in countries including the US and England.
Was a bit surprised to see bread there, as it's been a staple of many cultures' cuisines for millennia. Did a quick search, and got some clarity in this list - "mass-produced packaged bread" is UPF, not the stuff you make from scratch or perhaps pick up from the local bakery.
A relief, actually, as I just took a loaf of sourdough out of the oven and was waiting for it to be cool enough to slice into. This article took the shine off the experience for a moment there 😅
I'm sure the actual paper defines this better, but without a definition of what puts something in this category, it's not useful.
Even for bread, is it all bread? Is it added gluten? Is it a specific preservative? Is it only bread with bleached flour?
Even so, mass produced and packaged is not the actual contributor...
Same with prepared food... Costco makes prepared food that is equivalent to what you'd make at home. It's that still bad? If not, what other prepared food is fine?
Yeah the typical American stuff is like 10% sugar, packed with additives like emulsifiers and preservatives, and anything that makes the production processes cheaper and faster, made from bleached flour and has most of the fibre stripped out.
If your bread is made from flour, water, salt and yeast its processed food not UPF.
The supermarket bread that looks and feels like a squeaky toy. Best to avoid that one.
But I like the sound it makes when I eat it :(
The long game suicide, baby.
For example, US research published last year in the BMJ found that people who consume the most UPF have a 4% higher risk of death overall and a 9% greater risk of dying from something other than cancer or heart disease.
If you don't want to die of cancer and heart disease, UPF may be be a good choice.
The 4% greater risk of dying... Does that mean if I have a 10% chance of dying by age 70 it becomes a 14% chance or a 10.4% chance? I believe the latter. But that's a correlation for the people who eat the most UPF. Would have to see how that's controlled for socioeconomic class and access to healthcare.
Bread is UPF???
A bread with only flour, water, salt would be a processed food only as flour is processed.
A bread with 23 items listed in it's ingredients, half of which sound like something you'd hear in chemistry class, is ultra-processed.
A bread with only flour, water, salt would be a processed food only as flour is processed.
Would be as hard as stone and not bread at all.
This is the correct answer.
Another way to distinguish the good from the bad: Good bread goes stale in a few days, it also is harder to chew. UPF bread will sit in your breadbin for 7 days without noticeable changes and is fluffy and relatively light.
The reason for the fluffiness and the shelf life is all the chemical additives.
You can see why the corporations love UPF bread - and why (if you didn't know the health impact) you might want to buy UPF bread on your weekly shop.
you can keep bread goods soft for a week without ultra processing using the Tangzhong method! It's delicious and easy I recommend it to all my bread lovers!
Yeah, but it's delicious and makes me feel good and I don't want to be 90 anyway. Wait, smokers say that. Shit.
The food industry is going to go through the same rebuke that the tobacco industry went through only bigger.