The complete lack of rigor and the use of shock-headlines around "ultra-processed" foods drives me nuts. It conveys very little useful information.
Pharmaceuticals are ultra-processed and completely unnatural, yet many of them are life-saving. Clearly then, mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you.
It shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody that constantly horking down Mountain Dew, Little Debbie snack cakes, and Doritos isn't good for you. We all know this, we don't need a headline for it.
Give me some useful information. What are reasonable thresholds for these junk foods? How about for specific ingredients?
Ranting and raving out of the way, do yourself a favor and skip to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization classification document [1] linked in the article. It actually answers some of the questions I posed.
Pharmaceuticals are ultra-processed and completely unnatural, yet many of them are life-saving. Clearly then, mere act of processing something doesn't make the thing bad for you.
It shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody that constantly horking down Mountain Dew, Little Debbie snack cakes, and Doritos isn't good for you. We all know this, we don't need a headline for it.
Give me some useful information. What are reasonable thresholds for these junk foods? How about for specific ingredients?
Ranting and raving out of the way, do yourself a favor and skip to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization classification document [1] linked in the article. It actually answers some of the questions I posed.
[1]: http://www.fao.org/3/ca5644en/ca5644en.pdf