Proccessed Foods
Replies
-
kshama2001 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
She probably couldn't read or understand Shakespeare either. Should we avoid his plays?
You guys really are insultive...very mature. I have beyond a college education so I am well educated. Can I actually pronounce the names, yes. Most educated people can differentiate between a chemical name and quinoa. You guys can continue to eat FDA chemicals because they cause no harm. I will continue to avoid them and that is my choice.
Maybe I should have said difficult to pronounce for a 10 year old...but now you're going to complain with that analogy...there is no winning or common understanding with you guys so I'll stop trying.
@megpie41 When I first read the post I thought the "she" referred to you and was offended on your behalf, but when I reread it understood the "she" to mean the little girl in the Breyers commercial and in that case thought it was relatively appropriate, although unfortunately unclear.
Of course I was talking about the little girl in the commercial! Surely I would have said "you" instead of "she" if i was referring to megpie?5 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
She probably couldn't read or understand Shakespeare either. Should we avoid his plays?
You guys really are insultive...very mature. I have beyond a college education so I am well educated. Can I actually pronounce the names, yes. Most educated people can differentiate between a chemical name and quinoa. You guys can continue to eat FDA chemicals because they cause no harm. I will continue to avoid them and that is my choice.
Maybe I should have said difficult to pronounce for a 10 year old...but now you're going to complain with that analogy...there is no winning or common understanding with you guys so I'll stop trying.
@megpie41 When I first read the post I thought the "she" referred to you and was offended on your behalf, but when I reread it understood the "she" to mean the little girl in the Breyers commercial and in that case thought it was relatively appropriate, although unfortunately unclear.
Of course I was talking about the little girl in the commercial! Surely I would have said "you" instead of "she" if i was referring to megpie?
Especially since you quoted her, that would definitely be a reasonable expectation. I had no problem understanding that you were referring to the child in your post. Didn't even have to read it twice.
6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »when I hear "processed food", I think of processing that adds a ton of preservatives to extend the food lifetime way beyond what more natural ways would achieve, or artificial flavouring and colouring to mask/alter significantly the taste, or using substitutes for other ingredients, either to make them more "trendy" or usually to cut the costs.
I find this interesting, because I simply would not assume the word is used in such a limited way, it makes no sense to me. And as I said above, I think to the types of processed foods I eat or use, which are mostly more lightly processed or about preparation vs. addition of preservatives (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with preservatives, and traditionally it's such things as salt, plus smoking, canning, pickling and related ingredients).
I wonder when the popular usage started shifting so that some people think "processed" refers to a much smaller portion of foods than it does.
I find this usage really frustrating, because if someone asked me if I avoid processed foods I'd say of course not, because I eat yogurt, etc. But then people insist that they do when they have protein powder and packaged bacon and so on in their diaries. If I said I did not eat processed foods (even though I do eat a mostly whole foods diet just because of personal preference), I'd feel like a liar, so people who eat lots of processed (in my mind) stuff insisting they gave up processed foods because they stopped going to McDonalds (well, more than once a week) or
buying lots of frozen pot pies or whatever is confusing and makes communication so much harder, IMO.
I'm not trying to be critical, but more to understand. I don't find that people in my life have some clear meaning of "processed" that is different than what I think of as processed. They's probably say something like "I'm avoiding foods with additives" if that's what they meant (which is problematic too, as what additives, just salt is an additive, but still not the odd meaning of "processed" I see here).
I have always found the popular usage to mean Ultra Processed Foods.
And I have not. If I told someone I knew I didn't eat processed foods while eating a homemade pasta dish with some cheese on it (also veg and lean meat), I imagine they'd poke a bit of fun.
This is despite the fact that neither the dried pasta I used nor the cheese would be "processed" in the weird sense it gets used by some.
So I'd feel like a liar to claim I do not eat processed foods and it causes me dissonance when people who clearly do insist they do not (especially when they usually ate, until last week, ultra processed foods I never ever ate and are specifically referring to cutting out those things).
I am confused by this in part because I did go through a stage where I tried to avoid all foods not processed by me, and it was HARD and made things pointlessly hard for me, and I absolutely did worry about things like cheese and flour.
Honestly. In the real world, I find people don't consider cheese, milk, butter etc to be processed. Processed is a word with negative connotations when applied to food. And I know some pretty intelligent reasonable people. It's just a modern vernacular to explain some foods we're supposed to consider bad for us.
Which is why I prefer to use the term "convenience foods". Most people know what I am talking about (and yes, I do incorporate them in my diet because they are not bad for me).
I find this a much more sensible approach to the language question, since usually this IS what is meant on MFP.
Correct. Most people wouldn't have a problem with a bowl of oatmeal made from Steel Cut or Old Fashioned Rolled Oats (both technically processed since they are not in the original grain form), but "process" it to make it instantly edible with some boiling water and you have a convenient food that some would prefer not to eat because of the things added to it.
But plain instant oats are the same as plain oats, just more chopped/processed. I'm confused. The GI is slightly higher I think due to the extra chopping, but they don't necessarily have stuff added to them...1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »when I hear "processed food", I think of processing that adds a ton of preservatives to extend the food lifetime way beyond what more natural ways would achieve, or artificial flavouring and colouring to mask/alter significantly the taste, or using substitutes for other ingredients, either to make them more "trendy" or usually to cut the costs.
I find this interesting, because I simply would not assume the word is used in such a limited way, it makes no sense to me. And as I said above, I think to the types of processed foods I eat or use, which are mostly more lightly processed or about preparation vs. addition of preservatives (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with preservatives, and traditionally it's such things as salt, plus smoking, canning, pickling and related ingredients).
I wonder when the popular usage started shifting so that some people think "processed" refers to a much smaller portion of foods than it does.
I find this usage really frustrating, because if someone asked me if I avoid processed foods I'd say of course not, because I eat yogurt, etc. But then people insist that they do when they have protein powder and packaged bacon and so on in their diaries. If I said I did not eat processed foods (even though I do eat a mostly whole foods diet just because of personal preference), I'd feel like a liar, so people who eat lots of processed (in my mind) stuff insisting they gave up processed foods because they stopped going to McDonalds (well, more than once a week) or
buying lots of frozen pot pies or whatever is confusing and makes communication so much harder, IMO.
I'm not trying to be critical, but more to understand. I don't find that people in my life have some clear meaning of "processed" that is different than what I think of as processed. They's probably say something like "I'm avoiding foods with additives" if that's what they meant (which is problematic too, as what additives, just salt is an additive, but still not the odd meaning of "processed" I see here).
I have always found the popular usage to mean Ultra Processed Foods.
I haven't. I've always found it to be a nebulous, confusing term that is sometimes very widely applied to anything in a package and sometimes not (what @earlnabby referred to as convenience foods). There are people who won't eat frozen vegetables or canned tomatoes because they're "processed". The usage of the word exists on a continuum.
My first exposure to it was from people who were ultra broad with its application, so I tend to still think of it that way (not that I personally hold to any such thinking myself).4 -
I agree 100%. I also love how people assume that something being just "weird" or trendy or not tasting that good means it must be good for themMy biggest confusion is the idea that protein powder is not processed, which I've seen over and over on MFP. People seem to use "processed" for "things I don't think are good for me."
3 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
She probably couldn't read or understand Shakespeare either. Should we avoid his plays?
You guys really are insultive...very mature. I have beyond a college education so I am well educated. Can I actually pronounce the names, yes. Most educated people can differentiate between a chemical name and quinoa. You guys can continue to eat FDA chemicals because they cause no harm. I will continue to avoid them and that is my choice.
Maybe I should have said difficult to pronounce for a 10 year old...but now you're going to complain with that analogy...there is no winning or common understanding with you guys so I'll stop trying.
You have no idea what or how I eat. You were the one who made the comment about not eating foods with unpronounceable ingredients. Have you seen the chemicals in the makeup of fresh produce? You'd be avoiding those too.
I've been wondering when the obligatory "but produce has chemicals" comment would appear. I should start a Processed Foods Thread Bingo...
Everything has chemicals. The point is, whether they're in whole foods, processed foods, unpronounceable or unknown, they don't mean the food is bad or something to be avoided.
Some of the chemical used as preservatives are even synthetic versions of naturally occurring chemicals. Potassium sorbate comes to mind.1 -
Arguably, any food we buy in the grocery store has been processed in some way, but when I hear the term in the context of avoiding processed foods I think of foods that have had a good many ingredients added to them, ingredients you would not want to eat a bowl of. Food manufacturers work hard to create foods with a taste and mouth feel that encourages us to purchase and eat more. A very cheap way to do this is through the use of salts, sweeteners, and emulsifiers.
Basic bread, for instance, is simply flour, water, salt and yeast. The ingredient list for Wonder Bread, a fluffy, white, sandwich bread is: unbleached enriched flour (wheat flour, malted barley flour, niacin, reduced iron, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid), water, high fructose corn syrup, yeast, contains 2% or less of each of the following: calcium carbonate, soybean oil, wheat gluten, salt, dough conditioners (contains one or more of the following: sodium stearoyl lactylate, calcium stearoyl lactylate, monoglycerides, mono- and diglycerides, azodicarbonamide, enzymes, ascorbic acid), vinegar, monocalcium phosphate, yeast extract, modified corn starch, sucrose, sugar, soy lecithin, cholecalciferol (vitamin d3), soy flour, ammonium sulfate, calcium sulfate, calcium propionate (to retard spoilage).
I consider Wonder Bread a processed food to avoid whereas basic bread does not fit that category for me. Dividing things into classes is a uniquely personal activity when it comes to squishy concepts like this.4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »when I hear "processed food", I think of processing that adds a ton of preservatives to extend the food lifetime way beyond what more natural ways would achieve, or artificial flavouring and colouring to mask/alter significantly the taste, or using substitutes for other ingredients, either to make them more "trendy" or usually to cut the costs.
I find this interesting, because I simply would not assume the word is used in such a limited way, it makes no sense to me. And as I said above, I think to the types of processed foods I eat or use, which are mostly more lightly processed or about preparation vs. addition of preservatives (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with preservatives, and traditionally it's such things as salt, plus smoking, canning, pickling and related ingredients).
I wonder when the popular usage started shifting so that some people think "processed" refers to a much smaller portion of foods than it does.
I find this usage really frustrating, because if someone asked me if I avoid processed foods I'd say of course not, because I eat yogurt, etc. But then people insist that they do when they have protein powder and packaged bacon and so on in their diaries. If I said I did not eat processed foods (even though I do eat a mostly whole foods diet just because of personal preference), I'd feel like a liar, so people who eat lots of processed (in my mind) stuff insisting they gave up processed foods because they stopped going to McDonalds (well, more than once a week) or
buying lots of frozen pot pies or whatever is confusing and makes communication so much harder, IMO.
I'm not trying to be critical, but more to understand. I don't find that people in my life have some clear meaning of "processed" that is different than what I think of as processed. They's probably say something like "I'm avoiding foods with additives" if that's what they meant (which is problematic too, as what additives, just salt is an additive, but still not the odd meaning of "processed" I see here).
I think it has more to with everything being processed in some way, so it being pointless to discuss whether we eat processed food in the technically correct context, since obviously yes, all of us eat mostly processed food (unless someone is eating only raw vegetables and fruit, I think it is impossible not to). So I always considered the term "processed" mostly as a way to describe ultra processed food, and this is what most people IRL seem to mean with it.
It's entirely possible I am too much of a literalist.
If someone acknowledges that everyone (mostly) is processed and they are using it as a shorthand for ultra processed, that's cool. Maybe I'll start by asking that.
I'm not sure there's a common usage for ultra processed, as I get the feeling any prepared bread that is purchased is considered such, but there's obviously a huge variety there: bakery bread is probably the same as what I would make at home, for example.
Bacon is another example, it's generally considered processed, no, even though what I buy from a farm doesn't have much in the way of added ingredients (beyond what is necessary to cure) and same with some storebought brands (not saying this makes a difference for health, just part of why I find it puzzling).
My biggest confusion is the idea that protein powder is not processed, which I've seen over and over on MFP. People seem to use "processed" for "things I don't think are good for me."
I'll come sit in the literalist corner with you.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »when I hear "processed food", I think of processing that adds a ton of preservatives to extend the food lifetime way beyond what more natural ways would achieve, or artificial flavouring and colouring to mask/alter significantly the taste, or using substitutes for other ingredients, either to make them more "trendy" or usually to cut the costs.
I find this interesting, because I simply would not assume the word is used in such a limited way, it makes no sense to me. And as I said above, I think to the types of processed foods I eat or use, which are mostly more lightly processed or about preparation vs. addition of preservatives (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with preservatives, and traditionally it's such things as salt, plus smoking, canning, pickling and related ingredients).
I wonder when the popular usage started shifting so that some people think "processed" refers to a much smaller portion of foods than it does.
I find this usage really frustrating, because if someone asked me if I avoid processed foods I'd say of course not, because I eat yogurt, etc. But then people insist that they do when they have protein powder and packaged bacon and so on in their diaries. If I said I did not eat processed foods (even though I do eat a mostly whole foods diet just because of personal preference), I'd feel like a liar, so people who eat lots of processed (in my mind) stuff insisting they gave up processed foods because they stopped going to McDonalds (well, more than once a week) or
buying lots of frozen pot pies or whatever is confusing and makes communication so much harder, IMO.
I'm not trying to be critical, but more to understand. I don't find that people in my life have some clear meaning of "processed" that is different than what I think of as processed. They's probably say something like "I'm avoiding foods with additives" if that's what they meant (which is problematic too, as what additives, just salt is an additive, but still not the odd meaning of "processed" I see here).
I have always found the popular usage to mean Ultra Processed Foods.
I haven't. I've always found it to be a nebulous, confusing term that is sometimes very widely applied to anything in a package and sometimes not (what @earlnabby referred to as convenience foods). There are people who won't eat frozen vegetables or canned tomatoes because they're "processed". The usage of the word exists on a continuum.
My first exposure to it was from people who were ultra broad with its application, so I tend to still think of it that way (not that I personally hold to any such thinking myself).
This is an excellent point, and I've seen it on MFP too. Very recently some poster was insisting that frozen veg are bad, and I see posters insisting on "fresh veg" all the time, including in the winter.3 -
VintageFeline wrote: »I do use convenience foods instead of processed because it is more descriptive of what I am talking about. But really it makes no odds because if I want any of them I'll eat them.
Yup, me too. I doubt I could have continued eating within my targets during my moving house if it hadn't been for a freezer full of Lean Cuisine's and my microwave.
I would not be able to juggle meals for my picky eating family (I have surrendered, it was a losing battle because my husband led with a bad example countering my good example) comprised of two omnivores and two vegetarians wherein the omnivores and one of the vegetarians will only consume salad for a vegetable and I can no longer tolerate raw vegetables without convenience foods.
Frozen vegetables, cottage cheese, yogurt, carton egg whites (frittatas are common menu item), jarred salsa, canned beans, boxed vegetable broth, and even the occasional rotisserie chicken for the two meat eaters all make life easier.2 -
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?:
11 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »when I hear "processed food", I think of processing that adds a ton of preservatives to extend the food lifetime way beyond what more natural ways would achieve, or artificial flavouring and colouring to mask/alter significantly the taste, or using substitutes for other ingredients, either to make them more "trendy" or usually to cut the costs.
I find this interesting, because I simply would not assume the word is used in such a limited way, it makes no sense to me. And as I said above, I think to the types of processed foods I eat or use, which are mostly more lightly processed or about preparation vs. addition of preservatives (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with preservatives, and traditionally it's such things as salt, plus smoking, canning, pickling and related ingredients).
I wonder when the popular usage started shifting so that some people think "processed" refers to a much smaller portion of foods than it does.
I find this usage really frustrating, because if someone asked me if I avoid processed foods I'd say of course not, because I eat yogurt, etc. But then people insist that they do when they have protein powder and packaged bacon and so on in their diaries. If I said I did not eat processed foods (even though I do eat a mostly whole foods diet just because of personal preference), I'd feel like a liar, so people who eat lots of processed (in my mind) stuff insisting they gave up processed foods because they stopped going to McDonalds (well, more than once a week) or
buying lots of frozen pot pies or whatever is confusing and makes communication so much harder, IMO.
I'm not trying to be critical, but more to understand. I don't find that people in my life have some clear meaning of "processed" that is different than what I think of as processed. They's probably say something like "I'm avoiding foods with additives" if that's what they meant (which is problematic too, as what additives, just salt is an additive, but still not the odd meaning of "processed" I see here).
I have always found the popular usage to mean Ultra Processed Foods.
And I have not. If I told someone I knew I didn't eat processed foods while eating a homemade pasta dish with some cheese on it (also veg and lean meat), I imagine they'd poke a bit of fun.
This is despite the fact that neither the dried pasta I used nor the cheese would be "processed" in the weird sense it gets used by some.
So I'd feel like a liar to claim I do not eat processed foods and it causes me dissonance when people who clearly do insist they do not (especially when they usually ate, until last week, ultra processed foods I never ever ate and are specifically referring to cutting out those things).
I am confused by this in part because I did go through a stage where I tried to avoid all foods not processed by me, and it was HARD and made things pointlessly hard for me, and I absolutely did worry about things like cheese and flour.
Honestly. In the real world, I find people don't consider cheese, milk, butter etc to be processed. Processed is a word with negative connotations when applied to food. And I know some pretty intelligent reasonable people. It's just a modern vernacular to explain some foods we're supposed to consider bad for us.
Which is why I prefer to use the term "convenience foods". Most people know what I am talking about (and yes, I do incorporate them in my diet because they are not bad for me).
I find this a much more sensible approach to the language question, since usually this IS what is meant on MFP.
Correct. Most people wouldn't have a problem with a bowl of oatmeal made from Steel Cut or Old Fashioned Rolled Oats (both technically processed since they are not in the original grain form), but "process" it to make it instantly edible with some boiling water and you have a convenient food that some would prefer not to eat because of the things added to it.
But plain instant oats are the same as plain oats, just more chopped/processed. I'm confused. The GI is slightly higher I think due to the extra chopping, but they don't necessarily have stuff added to them...
They usually have sweeteners and flavors added (Maple, Apple, etc). (I'm not talking about the Quick Cook oats that come in the tub but Instant that come in single serve packets).0 -
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.4 -
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!5 -
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.
It's not a matter of different opinions to be respected and disagreed with or not. It's about the meaning of words and communications. "Processed" just is not limited to foods with lots of chemical additives and preservatives, so if you want to communicate that you are referring to those foods, using a term other than (or in addition to) "processed" is needed.
I really do think the problem is that people think "oh, processed is bad" so when asked about processed foods think "what do I think I should avoid."
The absolute classic first processed foods to come into mass use were things like canned foods, which often do not have lots of additives, and canning can be done at home. I always use canned tomatoes out of season, because they taste better than tomatoes grow out of season and transported far in a chilled compartment (tasteless). And they don't have additives if you choose to avoid them. Other common early processed foods are, of course, butter, olive oil, smoked and cured meats, and pickled vegetables. Oh, and alcohol, like wine, of course.
I tried to open a conversation (nicely, I think) above, and am still interested if you choose to respond.3 -
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 think the issue comes when there's no clarification as to what "chemicals" we should be avoiding and why. I have never seen things named and proof offered of its negative impact on health. I'm happy to be proven wrong but I can't recall a time.
Sweeteners are a common one but there is absolutely no research to prove any negative health consequences and there's a brilliant thread here by a scientist explaining exactly what aspartame is, how it is metabolised and its impact on the human body.
You're allowed your opinions but if you express them publicly you have to be prepared to be challenged. I know I certainly am and I understand it's not personal or an attack on my character. I have learned a lot from shutting my mouth (fingers) and just reading and drawing my own conclusions. I have changed my opinions on a lot and i am always happy to have more changed.6 -
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.)7 -
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.0 -
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?19 -
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 -
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
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions