Proccessed Foods
Options
Replies
-
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@ksharma2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
778 words.
Well, at least she's contributed something useful.
17 -
Thanks! Through your quoting me I noticed I had messed up @kshama2001's user name.2
-
It was worth the read, great post.Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@ksharma2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
778 words.
7 -
What comes to mind when I hear "processed food"?
Modern life. Unavoidable. Normal.
I loved the irony of a fairly recent thread where someone was criticising meal-kit delivery boxes...
I had those boxes for years. Mine frequently contained things as processed as a still-dirty carrot, a leek with its top still on, meat with its Red Tractor seal, and things like that. Just nicely portioned and with a handy recipe card.
...he then went on to recommend a tin of tuna and a bag of salad as a better, less processed alternative
I love gin, I love cheese, I love chocolate. Safe to say, I have made my peace with many levels of processing!6 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@ksharma2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
778 words.
Every one of them was needed.
Most of the thinking around this issue is knee-jerk, and @lemurcat12 is attempting to open dialog around what's historically been a polarizing issue on these boards.8 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I live with an anti processed person, and in all fairness he does walk the walk. When he cooks, he cooks from scratch, I have never seen my husband cook a meal made up from convenience/packet foods, and he's bloody good at it.
I told him we're having Chicken kiev (from the deli section) and protein gratin (packet from Aldi) plus fresh veggies for dinner tonight. His response was "so we're having a packet food dinner"... My usual response would be F you, you cook then! BUT, when he cooks he uses copious amounts of butter, oil, cheese,mayo etc aka massively calorific and i never have any idea how to log it as i have no idea of the amounts he uses, which makes me antsy!! So he can either eat what I'm cooking or he can make his own concoction.
He does love the meal I'm cooking tonight, and it's not as if i use convenience/processed foods regularly, it just irks him. He would make the kiev and gratin himself from scratch, but it would be literally hundreds and hundreds more calories than what I'm making, he also watching his weight, so he usually shuts up when i bring up this point!
I understand what you are saying, but it is kind of sad, not eating homemade food, because you cannot log it. I am not judging, I understand the feeling.
I get what you're saying, I do eat what hubby cooks but i know that the calories i logged could be far off, and if he cooks multiple days they'd be way off at the end of the week.
I make home made food too the majority of the time
Convenience foods aren't a staple here, it's just when i cook I weigh all of my ingredients so i know exactly how many calories I'm eating. 0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@ksharma2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
778 words.
At least your cut and paste to check the word count is solid.5 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
Tell us please what the heck the difference is? It's circular reasoning. Added chemicals = bad because added and mother nature = good chemicals cause nature, except ignore those obvious cases where mother nature doesn't give a crap about us and puts poisonous chemicals in things.9 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@ksharma2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
778 words.
Yep, 778 terrific, reasonable, intelligent words. Not wanting to read and understand words is what leads people to be terrified of "chemicals" or "processing," instead of reading labels and comprehending ingredient lists.14 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@kshama2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
I really appreciate you taking the time to explain your viewpoint in such a nice way. I really haven't heard the term 'ultra processed food' used before. I suppose this is the type of food I like to avoid...I just didn't know the right word. Thank you for your explanation.
I realize that most of the food I eat are processed in some way (milk, meat, yogurt, oats, etc) but these are not the foods I avoid. I like to try and avoid foods that are (apparently) ultra processed...food with a lot of man-made chemicals, preservatives and colorings (most of these man-made chemicals are relatively 'difficult to pronounce'...hence why I said it in my previous posts. I realize that not all of them are hard to pronounce...I was saying it as a generalization). I try and eat foods with few ingredients and 'natural' ingredients (yes I also realize natural is subjective and not all natural is healthy...again a generalization. I use my own research and discretion before buying products).
The OP asked "when you hear processed food what comes to mind." She didn't ask what processed food was...I believe she was asking for opinions which is exactly what I gave. I stated what I consider procesed food for me in my life.
I buy romaine lettuce, kale, potatoes, yogurt etc. Are these processed? Technically yes, but I don't consider them processed when I say I'm limiting my processed food intake.4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Yes, sodium benzoate is easy to pronounce...that one came to mind because I knew if off hand and didn't have to look it up to spell it.
Think of the old Bryers ice cream commercial with the little girl reading the ingredients. She reads the competition and can't pronounce the chemical names....she reads Bryers and reads "milk, cream, sugar..." This was my point.
How about those evil, evil fresh strawberries, then?:
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion and taking things way to far (the chemical breakdown of a strawberry?....really?) I was saying from the beginning was that I view processed foods as those which have a lot of chemical additives and preservatives .
I do not expect you to have to agree with me. It would be nice if you could respect my opinion...not agree with it, but understand that people view terms differently.
I expect this in every single processed foods thread. Sometimes it's an apple, sometimes a blueberry. I know you're talking about chemicals added by food manufacturers, not Mother Nature.
(Cue posts about arsenic or hemlock.)
@kshama2001 --
I think you are a really reasonable poster, as I noted above, and I also can tell from your posts in these threads that something about the comments on processed foods NOT being limited to ultra processed foods seems to bug you.
But wouldn't you agree that as the term is used it's (a) not correct (cheese is unquestionably processed, as is Breyer's ice cream, commercial aside), and (b) not all that helpful?
I find it confusing that some seem to promote eating NO processed foods without really knowing what they are (I even recall posts such as "are canned beans processed?" -- as if that's the question when deciding whether to eat them). It seems to be a proxy for "is this food good for me," when it's not.
I find it reasonable to avoid certain ingredients (although I'm sure there'd be debates on what they should be -- I'm not all that interested in getting into those, as I respect avoiding whatever you choose, including aspartame which I think is harmless, and mostly have never eaten foods that even have these unrecognizable ingredients that people claim to be worried about).
What I don't find reasonable is the fear that merely being "processed" in some way has bad effects beyond what one could see if one read the ingredients and nutrition facts (and looked stuff up if confused about what, say, sodium bicarbonate is).
Thus, I'm wondering if rather than being annoyed by the other side, maybe we could try to have a real discussion about this.
To begin: as I said above, I think often people use "processed" as a proxy for "not nutritious" and it's not that. Nor does it always have any kinds of arguably problematic ingredients or lots of sodium or fat or salt or soy or whatever. Read labels, I would say. I don't eat frozen meals because they don't appeal to me and my "in a crunch" thing is different, but I've looked at different ones from time to time (and bought them occasionally), and even with those -- or even with restaurant meals -- there are obviously huge variations, you cannot generalize.
Therefore, I think it is both better and more accurate (it's indisputably the latter) to use "processed" to mean what it means, and then focus on the specifics. As I keep saying, is what makes a pint of Talenti a bad thing to eat in one sitting (for most people) that it's "processed"? Or is it that that much gelato is high cal, and the exact same would be true with some ice cream I made at home and proceeded to consume in similar amounts?
Second point: I see talk about the evils of processed foods mainly from two groups. The first are people who until yesterday (or last week) ate lots and lots of basically junk food or fast food or high cal convenience foods that they are thinking of when they say they are giving up processed foods. That's great, but they should know that others who consume "processed" foods are not necessarily eating those foods or in those amounts anyway or unhealthy diets. Eating processed foods does not mean eating an unhealthy diet, and it's a much broader category than some (who had pretty limited diets often) seem to assume.
The second group are those who (somewhat like me, maybe) naturally tend to not eat a lot of ultra processed foods, to enjoy cooking, to already like lots of vegetables and so called healthy whole foods. We are lucky, often we have had access to things not everyone does (nice gardens, available affordable produce). But how we like to do it is a preference and as I said, to some extent a privilege. To apparently look down on other ways of doing it, to call other ways of eating inferior or not clean and so on really rubs me the wrong way and to some extent (from what I see around me) can even be very much a class thing (although I know lots of people who eat lots of home cooked whole foods are less economically advantaged and some who eat lots of ultra processed foods are more so, there's still a cultural and class element in the discussion in the US from what I see).
For these reasons I do think not just agreeing "yeah, processed foods are bad, yuck, they should be avoided" IS an important conversation to have, as is discussing why one can eat them in a healthful way and the many things the word covers.
Does this help you understand at all why I feel strongly about this conversation?
I really appreciate you taking the time to explain your viewpoint in such a nice way. I really haven't heard the term 'ultra processed food' used before. I suppose this is the type of food I like to avoid...I just didn't know the right word. Thank you for your explanation.
I realize that most of the food I eat are processed in some way (milk, meat, yogurt, oats, etc) but these are not the foods I avoid. I like to try and avoid foods that are (apparently) ultra processed...food with a lot of man-made chemicals, preservatives and colorings (most of these man-made chemicals are relatively 'difficult to pronounce'...hence why I said it in my previous posts. I realize that not all of them are hard to pronounce...I was saying it as a generalization). I try and eat foods with few ingredients and 'natural' ingredients (yes I also realize natural is subjective and not all natural is healthy...again a generalization. I use my own research and discretion before buying products).
The OP asked "when you hear processed food what comes to mind." She didn't ask what processed food was...I believe she was asking for opinions which is exactly what I gave. I stated what I consider procesed food for me in my life.
I buy romaine lettuce, kale, potatoes, yogurt etc. Are these processed? Technically yes, but I don't consider them processed when I say I'm limiting my processed food intake.
Thanks for being willing to enter into a discussion!
I am curious: you say "what I consider processed food for me in my life." But isn't processed just processed? I suspect that in your head processed = bad, or unhealthy, so you are translating the question "what do I think of as processed" into "what do I think of as unhealthy." Is that right?
I'm kind of the opposite. I don't equate "processed" with unhealthy. Even though I don't really eat ultra processed foods, I don't think they are invariably unhealthy (some don't have good nutrition profiles, but some do). So if someone asked me what I think of when I think of processed foods, I specifically will think of the particular foods in that category that I eat: cottage cheese, greek yogurt, canned beans, dried pasta, etc. I don't really think of the foods I don't eat, because I don't think of them. I don't specifically avoid them, I just don't eat that way.
I can imagine finding some ultra processed foods to be convenient, though -- some find it useful to have a frozen meal on hand for a quick dinner or rely on a quick to prepare rice and beans option (I used to live on those, actually, although I would add vegetables and sometimes goat or feta cheese) or to bring those for lunches. I don't think there's something wrong with that, or that the fact they are processed adds much to the analysis (and I do fear it can become a snob thing or a way to pit the perfect against the good and make people feel bad when they are actually doing really well at eating a good diet overall).
I understand avoiding some specific ingredients (I do, although my reasons might be different), but the particular ingredients in different processed or ultra processed foods vary a lot.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I am curious: you say "what I consider processed food for me in my life." But isn't processed just processed? I suspect that in your head processed = bad, or unhealthy, so you are translating the question "what do I think of as processed" into "what do I think of as unhealthy." Is that right?
I'm kind of the opposite. I don't equate "processed" with unhealthy. Even though I don't really eat ultra processed foods, I don't think they are invariably unhealthy (some don't have good nutrition profiles, but some do). So if someone asked me what I think of when I think of processed foods, I specifically will think of the particular foods in that category that I eat: cottage cheese, greek yogurt, canned beans, dried pasta, etc. I don't really think of the foods I don't eat, because I don't think of them. I don't specifically avoid them, I just don't eat that way.
I can imagine finding some ultra processed foods to be convenient, though -- some find it useful to have a frozen meal on hand for a quick dinner or rely on a quick to prepare rice and beans option (I used to live on those, actually, although I would add vegetables and sometimes goat or feta cheese) or to bring those for lunches. I don't think there's something wrong with that, or that the fact they are processed adds much to the analysis (and I do fear it can become a snob thing or a way to pit the perfect against the good and make people feel bad when they are actually doing really well at eating a good diet overall).
I understand avoiding some specific ingredients (I do, although my reasons might be different), but the particular ingredients in different processed or ultra processed foods vary a lot.
I suppose in my head I do consider SOME procesed food to be bad. I say 'some' because some are not full of preservatives etc (cottage cheese, yogurt, oats, beans, cheese,to name a few).
I realize that just about everything bought in a grocery store is processed in some way. If it has a bacode, it's pretty much processed...and not everything with barcode is unhealthy. I generally like to stick to the perimeter of the store to avoid much of the "ultra processed" foods in the aisles. So to use the term you mentioned, I prefer to avoid/limit 'ultra processed food.'
Do I eat what I consider to be 'bad' ultra processed foods? Yes I do, but I do try to limit my quantity especially when my goal is to eat healthier. I'm not above going to Trader Joe's when I don't want to cook and buying a frozen dinner or cooking a frozen pizza etc....I just don't make it a frequent or daily habit.
I love to cook and cook 90% of my own meals, but I'm not above buying canned tomatoes (even though I know the can lining has chemicals) or pasta sauce, pasta, beans etc. When shopping Im always reading labels trying to find the healthiest option/ingredients.
It makes sense now when you say you don't think of foods in a category that you don't eat...only foods you do eat which fall into that category. I honestly never thought of it that way.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...Since i am new to the term, I think the term I have been describing would be "ultra processed foods" since these are the ones with the food additives, chemicals, colorings and preservatives...correct?
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss this with me instead of just telling me I'm wrong and uninformed on the subject. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and whatever works for you is what you should go with.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Anything that happens to a food after it is picked or separated in some way from the animal source is processing.
Some processing is good and makes for fine products (think things like cottage cheese, yogurt), and other processing makes food that's fun and enjoyable but isn't super nutrient dense (like Reese's cups).
Avoiding "processed" foods is "in" right now, but I find it's a meaningless metric that unnecessarily demonizes perfectly good foods.
Well said, agree 100%.
Makes you think, though...we have a food processor in our kitchen at home. So if I use that to prepare a meal, does that mean it's now processed food???
O Noes!!!1!1!1
Yes, but it usually makes it taste better and always makes it easier to chew. (full disclosure: my food processor is most often used for turning tomatoes into soup, & making pie crust.)0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I am curious: you say "what I consider processed food for me in my life." But isn't processed just processed? I suspect that in your head processed = bad, or unhealthy, so you are translating the question "what do I think of as processed" into "what do I think of as unhealthy." Is that right?
I'm kind of the opposite. I don't equate "processed" with unhealthy. Even though I don't really eat ultra processed foods, I don't think they are invariably unhealthy (some don't have good nutrition profiles, but some do). So if someone asked me what I think of when I think of processed foods, I specifically will think of the particular foods in that category that I eat: cottage cheese, greek yogurt, canned beans, dried pasta, etc. I don't really think of the foods I don't eat, because I don't think of them. I don't specifically avoid them, I just don't eat that way.
I can imagine finding some ultra processed foods to be convenient, though -- some find it useful to have a frozen meal on hand for a quick dinner or rely on a quick to prepare rice and beans option (I used to live on those, actually, although I would add vegetables and sometimes goat or feta cheese) or to bring those for lunches. I don't think there's something wrong with that, or that the fact they are processed adds much to the analysis (and I do fear it can become a snob thing or a way to pit the perfect against the good and make people feel bad when they are actually doing really well at eating a good diet overall).
I understand avoiding some specific ingredients (I do, although my reasons might be different), but the particular ingredients in different processed or ultra processed foods vary a lot.
I suppose in my head I do consider SOME procesed food to be bad. I say 'some' because some are not full of preservatives etc (cottage cheese, yogurt, oats, beans, cheese,to name a few).
I realize that just about everything bought in a grocery store is processed in some way. If it has a bacode, it's pretty much processed...and not everything with barcode is unhealthy. I generally like to stick to the perimeter of the store to avoid much of the "ultra processed" foods in the aisles. So to use the term you mentioned, I prefer to avoid/limit 'ultra processed food.'
Do I eat what I consider to be 'bad' ultra processed foods? Yes I do, but I do try to limit my quantity especially when my goal is to eat healthier. I'm not above going to Trader Joe's when I don't want to cook and buying a frozen dinner or cooking a frozen pizza etc....I just don't make it a frequent or daily habit.
I love to cook and cook 90% of my own meals, but I'm not above buying canned tomatoes (even though I know the can lining has chemicals) or pasta sauce, pasta, beans etc. When shopping Im always reading labels trying to find the healthiest option/ingredients.
It makes sense now when you say you don't think of foods in a category that you don't eat...only foods you do eat which fall into that category. I honestly never thought of it that way.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...Since i am new to the term, I think the term I have been describing would be "ultra processed foods" since these are the ones with the food additives, chemicals, colorings and preservatives...correct?
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss this with me instead of just telling me I'm wrong and uninformed on the subject. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and whatever works for you is what you should go with.
Can you name some of the chemicals though? This is where I get stuck. A blanket assertion about chemicals and preservatives and their negative impact on the body. What are those and do you have proof/links to studies confirming this?3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I am curious: you say "what I consider processed food for me in my life." But isn't processed just processed? I suspect that in your head processed = bad, or unhealthy, so you are translating the question "what do I think of as processed" into "what do I think of as unhealthy." Is that right?
I'm kind of the opposite. I don't equate "processed" with unhealthy. Even though I don't really eat ultra processed foods, I don't think they are invariably unhealthy (some don't have good nutrition profiles, but some do). So if someone asked me what I think of when I think of processed foods, I specifically will think of the particular foods in that category that I eat: cottage cheese, greek yogurt, canned beans, dried pasta, etc. I don't really think of the foods I don't eat, because I don't think of them. I don't specifically avoid them, I just don't eat that way.
I can imagine finding some ultra processed foods to be convenient, though -- some find it useful to have a frozen meal on hand for a quick dinner or rely on a quick to prepare rice and beans option (I used to live on those, actually, although I would add vegetables and sometimes goat or feta cheese) or to bring those for lunches. I don't think there's something wrong with that, or that the fact they are processed adds much to the analysis (and I do fear it can become a snob thing or a way to pit the perfect against the good and make people feel bad when they are actually doing really well at eating a good diet overall).
I understand avoiding some specific ingredients (I do, although my reasons might be different), but the particular ingredients in different processed or ultra processed foods vary a lot.
I suppose in my head I do consider SOME procesed food to be bad. I say 'some' because some are not full of preservatives etc (cottage cheese, yogurt, oats, beans, cheese,to name a few).
I realize that just about everything bought in a grocery store is processed in some way. If it has a bacode, it's pretty much processed...and not everything with barcode is unhealthy. I generally like to stick to the perimeter of the store to avoid much of the "ultra processed" foods in the aisles. So to use the term you mentioned, I prefer to avoid/limit 'ultra processed food.'
Do I eat what I consider to be 'bad' ultra processed foods? Yes I do, but I do try to limit my quantity especially when my goal is to eat healthier. I'm not above going to Trader Joe's when I don't want to cook and buying a frozen dinner or cooking a frozen pizza etc....I just don't make it a frequent or daily habit.
I love to cook and cook 90% of my own meals, but I'm not above buying canned tomatoes (even though I know the can lining has chemicals) or pasta sauce, pasta, beans etc. When shopping Im always reading labels trying to find the healthiest option/ingredients.
It makes sense now when you say you don't think of foods in a category that you don't eat...only foods you do eat which fall into that category. I honestly never thought of it that way.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...Since i am new to the term, I think the term I have been describing would be "ultra processed foods" since these are the ones with the food additives, chemicals, colorings and preservatives...correct?
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss this with me instead of just telling me I'm wrong and uninformed on the subject. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and whatever works for you is what you should go with.
On ultra processed foods, I find the term a bit confusing in what it is supposed to convey, but this may help both of us (from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092752, about the Brazilian guidelines and reasons for them):In recent years a classification of foodstuffs based on the extent, nature and purpose of food processing has been developed, and results based on the classification have been published. This divides foodstuffs into three groups. These are foods that are either fresh or minimally processed; processed culinary ingredients; and ready-to-consume food products, either processed or ultra-processed. Processed products are whole foods preserved with salt, sugar or oil or by other methods such as smoking or curing. Ultra-processed products are essentially industrial formulations mostly or entirely made from industrial ingredients, typically containing little or no whole foods.
Studies in different countries show that ready-to-consume food products (processed or ultra-processed) taken together as a group, when compared with foods combined with processed culinary ingredients as made into dishes and meals, on average are more energy-dense, are higher in total fat, saturated fats, sugars and salt, and are lower in protein and dietary fiber. Ultra-processed products in particular typically have properties that are conductive to overconsumption: they are often hyper-palatable and sold in large portion sizes; are durable and easy to transport and therefore liable to be consumed as snacks at any time and in almost any place; and are often marketed intensively and persuasively.
There is therefore reason to believe that high consumption of ready-to-consume food products in general, is a cause of weight gain, obesity and associated disorders and diseases....
My bolding, because I want to make a point here. Like I said, I don't really eat these foods at all, as it's just not how I've ever eaten. But how they stack up on calories and added fat and sodium and sugar and the like varies a lot. Way back I gave an example of an Amy's frozen meal and I think that would be considered ultra processed, but it's really not bad nutritionally (or ingredient wise) and wouldn't be the same as some other such meals (and could stack up well against some home cooked meals).
My personal view is the reason eating lots of ultra processed foods correlates with gaining weight is NOT that they have specific ingredients that cause that, but that they are really easy to overeat (high cal, easy availability -- it's way more work to make a pie vs. buying a frozen one, even if the homemade one is no better calorie wise and tastes better), and often are marketed as snack foods (eat them in addition to regular meals).
SOME preservatives (as preservatives include just salt) are in even minimally processed foods, but to finally answer your question, yes, I think what you mean are ultra processed foods.
I do avoid specific ingredients, as I said, one such being palm oil, since I think it's environmentally problematic, any transfats/partially hydrogenated oils (although they are not that common), largely industrial seed oils, I eat soy but generally prefer not to have it added to my food in other ways, same with corn, I think using sugar vs. HFCS usually is a good sign of a sweet that is going to taste better anyway, so on. For me most of this is not health related (I don't eat any of this enough to be too concerned about that, and I do generally think most additives are probably fine -- many of them are just vitamin supplements even -- I just prefer whole foods based meals more often, although I am definitely not 100% on any of this).
I wonder to some extent if these discussions end up more contentious than they should be just because people use words differently. To me (a literalist, as noted above, and an all or nothing type), saying "I avoid eating whatever" means I NEVER eat it, and saying that sort of thing is a good way to make myself feel bad or like I failed if I do. When I cut out added sugar for a month, I obsessively read labels and avoided de minimis amounts, even though logically that made no sense to me, because that was what I was doing, darn it!
To others, I get the sense that "I avoid whatever" means they try not to make it a significant part of their diet, but if they end up having it, eh, no biggie. So perhaps that's why some people tend to read "I think X is fine in moderation" or "I don't avoid it, but consume it in the context of a healthful diet" to mean "I eat that most days!" ;-)
Does that make any sense?
Anyway, I base my diet on whole foods, and read labels and generally if I don't know what something is (which is rare with the labels I read), I look it up and decide it I am interested in consuming it.3 -
There was a study about Ultra-processed foods and obesity in Brazil (link if interested http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092752 )..... The main reason I share is that I like the way they categorized foods, as fresh/minimally processed, processed, and ultra-processed. It seems the OP is good with the first two but not the third.
From the study:
Subsequently, the food items were classified into three groups, according to the nature, extent and purpose of industrial processing used in their manufacture [11], [12]. The first group is of foods, either fresh or minimally processed. Examples are grains (also known as cereals), and roots and tubers; legumes (pulses); fruits and vegetables; nuts and seeds; meat, fish, poultry and eggs; milk and natural yogurt. The second group is of processed culinary ingredients used with foods in the preparation of dishes. These are substances extracted from whole foods. Examples are flours and starches; oils and sugars; and salt (extracted from nature). The third group, the main subject of this study, is of ready-to-consume products. These are either processed or ultra-processed.
Processed products are made from foods with the addition of substances such as salt, sugar or oil, and the use of processes such as smoking or curing. Examples include canned or bottled vegetables and legumes preserved in brine; fruits preserved in syrup; tinned fish preserved in oil or salted and smoked; salted and smoked meats; and cheese.
Ultra-processed products are formulated predominantly or entirely from industrial ingredients, and typically contain little or no whole food. They often contain preservatives and cosmetic and other additives, and may also contain synthetic vitamins and minerals. Examples include: cake mixes, ‘energy’ bars; ‘instant’ packaged soups and noodles; many types of sweetened breads and buns, cakes, biscuits, pastries and desserts; chips (crisps); and very many other types of sweet, fatty or salty snack products; sugared milk and fruit drinks, soft drinks and ‘energy’ drinks; pre-prepared meat, fish, vegetable or cheese dishes, pizza and pasta dishes, burgers, French fries (chips), and poultry and fish ‘nuggets’ or ‘sticks’ (‘fingers’); bread and other cereal products; hot dogs and other products made with scraps or remnants of meat; preserves (jams), sauces, meat, yeast and other extracts; ice-cream, chocolates, cookies (biscuits), candies (confectionery); margarines; canned or dehydrated soups; and infant formulas, follow-on milks and baby products.
Edit: typos0 -
As a personal experiment this month, I've made a couple home-made batches of Soylent.
https://www.completefoods.co/diy/recipes/brets-soylent-oat-rice-complete-low-price
If I mixed it up myself, is it processed?
Since the oats and rice (the main ingredients) are ground fine, heck everything is ground fine, I find the resulting shake to be highly palatable. It also seems to fill me up (fiber content and fat). It also is highly digestible. I feel a bit like chick being fed pre-digested pap. I wonder if I depended on this formulation too much if I might lose my ability to, say, digest a well-done steak.
I think this sort of food would fit the "ultra processed" description in the Brazilian guidelines.1 -
There was a study about Ultra-processed foods and obesity in Brazil (link if interested http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092752 )..... The main reason I share is that I like the way they categorized foods, as fresh/minimally processed, processed, and ultra-processed. It seems the OP is good with the first two but not the third.
That's the same one I was talking about/quoting from in my post just before yours!
(No clue what OP is or is not good with, she doesn't seem to be around.)1 -
Random thought about this, though. After my "I mostly don't eat ultra processed foods anyway" stuff, I had protein powder in my smoothie this morning, and some boxed coconut milk. I'd tend to classify both as ultra processed (although I am not 100% sure about the latter).
But looking at the Brazil thing: "ready-to-consume food products (processed or ultra-processed) taken together as a group, when compared with foods combined with processed culinary ingredients as made into dishes and meals, on average are more energy-dense, are higher in total fat, saturated fats, sugars and salt, and are lower in protein and dietary fiber."
This is not really true with either the whey or the coconut milk.Ultra-processed products in particular typically have properties that are conductive to overconsumption: they are often hyper-palatable and sold in large portion sizes; are durable and easy to transport and therefore liable to be consumed as snacks at any time and in almost any place; and are often marketed intensively and persuasively.
I don't believe any of this is true either, however I classify them.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Random thought about this, though. After my "I mostly don't eat ultra processed foods anyway" stuff, I had protein powder in my smoothie this morning, and some boxed coconut milk. I'd tend to classify both as ultra processed (although I am not 100% sure about the latter).
But looking at the Brazil thing: "ready-to-consume food products (processed or ultra-processed) taken together as a group, when compared with foods combined with processed culinary ingredients as made into dishes and meals, on average are more energy-dense, are higher in total fat, saturated fats, sugars and salt, and are lower in protein and dietary fiber."
This is not really true with either the whey or the coconut milk.Ultra-processed products in particular typically have properties that are conductive to overconsumption: they are often hyper-palatable and sold in large portion sizes; are durable and easy to transport and therefore liable to be consumed as snacks at any time and in almost any place; and are often marketed intensively and persuasively.
I don't believe any of this is true either, however I classify them.
I thought about protein powder when I was reading the Brazilian guidelines. I would think fits ultra-processed going by their initial description, but as you read on, it doesn't fit into the neat little box.
This is the trouble inherent in trying to have a label for everything you do, I think.
I think it's far simpler to say that there are ingredients that for whatever reason, you prefer to avoid, and that you don't eat food with those ingredients. That is a simple, direct statement that doesn't really open itself up to debate. It's also fairly accurate without sounding moralistic.
3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions