Is the amount of easy access processed food harming dieters health?

I guess I'm a bit confused as to why canned chicken is being called out here. For people who eat chicken, it can be an easy way to have a high protein food. It can be purchased in low sodium or even no salt added versions for people who are watching their sodium.

It's just . . . meat in a can. I can't see how it would harm someone's organs in a way that uncanned chicken wouldn't.

clhoward6 wrote: »

Well choose any other processed food. I don't mind I'm just interested.

You're the one theorizing that a processed food could be harming our organs. In order to discuss it, I think we need to talk about what specific harm is being done, which means we need to consider specific foods.

Canned chicken was the example you provided. I don't think canned chicken *would* harm organs.

I think this thread is pretty similar to this one: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10350519/ultra-processed-foods-study#latest

My opinion is expressed in that one.

I don't think ultraprocessed foods are different in their effects, but I think they are more easily available.

Easy access to food has prevented a lot of deaths.....from starvation. Malnutrition is a close second. The modern food supply network allows us to access a wide variety of foodstuffs year-round, generally free from bacterial contamination (the big killer).

Fear of processed food, IMO, is a first-world problem.

That being said, home-made food where we control the salt and sugar content, can be of a great benefit. And not to mention economical.

There are some processed foods where I trust the modern food network to provide me cheap and safe alternatives, far better than I can. I include in this yogurt, cheeses, cereal grains like flaked oatmeal, juices, tap water, cookies, butter, and breadmaker's yeast.

Also:

I had literally never heard of canned chicken before today (its not used widely in the UK).

I doubt it's widely used in the US either, it's not common in my cohort, but I doubt it or canned tuna would count as "ultraprocessed" or is actually a bad thing to include in your diet unless you dislike them. (I hate canned tuna and have never tried canned chicken.)

Not sure canned meat is a good example, the welfare issues around tuna don't depend if it's in a can or not.

My problem with tinned meats would be the origin and quality of the meat, if you get a piece of chicken it's clearly off one bird whereas there could be all manner of ground up "interesting bits" from multiple birds in a canned product.

Salt isn't that big a deal for healthy people with working kidneys and normal blood pressure. You would have to consider their whole diet not individual foods.

I did manage to find one example of canned chicken on the Tesco website, which is probably representative of my view of the concept :

I think you have to be way more specific than "processed food".

This could encompass everything from organic chicken stock in a carton to potato chips to jelly beans.

I don't think processing a food product automatically makes it "harmful"' to our bodies.

I do think that easy access to highly processed foods that contain alot of calories and salt per serving can lead people who aren't paying attention and taking responsibility for their choices to eat too many calories, too much salt, and too much sugar, leading to obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes. The cure is for people to read labels and monitor their diets.

While there have been plenty of hit-or-miss, poorly run studies that suggest links between "processed" foods, additives, preservatives, artificial sweeteners, etc to a whole litany of seemingly random health concerns, there is nowhere near a consensus that any of that is even remotely true.

As @jgnatca said, easy access to processed foods has made it possible for many people to have access to the food they need to live. The flip side is that those of us who are fortunate enough to not have to worry about going hungry, need to be careful not to over-consume ANY food, not just the processed kind.

I think if you want opinions on something harming our organs, you will need to give examples of specific ingredients, but I don't think there is anything to be concerned about in canned chicken.

Here in Canada we have the example of the 1845 failed Franklin expedition, the deaths linked to mercury poisoning from canned foods. We don't use mercury in modern canning.

http://www.historytoday.com/sheila-rowbotham/canned-food-sealed-icemens-fate

clhoward6 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

If someone is harmed by a diet that is high in sodium (and it's not clear that all people are), that's an issue with sodium. Not processing. There are lots of less processed foods that are high in sodium and some processed foods that are low in sodium.

I don't know if conflating the two is helpful.

What's wrong with rib meat?

I didn't say anything was wrong with rib meat it was just one of the ingredients.

Are you aware that your responses sound like you're jumping down my throat or is that the intended response to my enquiry?

I apologize. That wasn't my intention -- my intention was to understand your posts. To me, a debate must begin with understanding the other person's position. I was trying to understand yours.