Slashdot Mirror
Ultra-Processed Foods May Be Linked To Cancer, Says Study (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Ultra-processed" foods, made in factories with ingredients unknown to the domestic kitchen, may be linked to cancer, according to a large and groundbreaking study. Ultra-processed foods include pot noodles, shelf-stable ready meals, cakes and confectionery which contain long lists of additives, preservatives, flavorings and colorings -- as well as often high levels of sugar, fat and salt. They now account for half of all the food bought by families eating at home in the UK, as the Guardian recently revealed. A team, led by researchers based at the Sorbonne in Paris, looked at the medical records and eating habits of nearly 105,000 adults who are part of the French NutriNet-Sante cohort study, registering their usual intake of 3,300 different food items. They found that a 10% increase in the amount of ultra-processed foods in the diet was linked to a 12% increase in cancers of some kind. The researchers also looked to see whether there were increases in specific types of cancer and found a rise of 11% in breast cancer, although no significant upturn in colorectal or prostate cancer. "If confirmed in other populations and settings, these results suggest that the rapidly increasing consumption of ultra-processed foods may drive an increasing burden of cancer in the next decades," says the paper in the British Medical Journal.
I liked that the article talked about the term "ultra-processed" and the pros and cons of using it. On the one hand, it's fairly well established that many forms of processing are harmful, and having degrees of processing as a broad category might be useful. By using an umbrella term like that, you can avoid many of the problems with bullshit statistical studies: "Green M&M's are 95% likely to cause cancer."
On the other hand...this is basically a "common knowledge" study which serves no purpose and tells me nothing at all. Gee, "Hungry Man Salisbury Steak" dinners are bad for me? Shocking. I'm fucking stunned by your scientific revelation. Which parts of the processing are most harmful? Should I skip that damned brownie that never cooks properly? Are ensure or soylent "ultra processed?" Oh, you don't know? Thanks for nothing.
https://xkcd.com/882/
They're talking about ultra-processed foods, not ultra-pasteurized. Crap like all the different preservatives and emulsifiers they put in just about everything nowadays. Pasteurization is nothing more than heating to a specific temperature for a specific amount of time, something that kills both harmful and beneficial bacteria.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
The constitution isn't like the laws of thermodynamics; it was created by people it can be changed by people.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
US eggs don't last longer.
The e-coli outside on the shells have absolutely nothing to do with the life period of eggs.
If at all, e-coli or other bacteria that get into the egg are the problem. And inn this regard then american way of washing is counter productive as it encourages migration of microbes through the shell.
On the other hand, the white of the egg is alkaline, bacteria usually don't survive this. Only in rare cases they manage to reach the yolk. In the yolk they strife so quickly that an "rotten egg" is immediately recognized.
Eggs last easy half a year or longer, in stable conditions. However they dry out.
Since the EU doesn't want to regulate to that level ($$),
Sorry, you are completely mistaken: we have the exact same regulation, with the exact opposite wording: it is forbidden to wash eggs because of the automated washing processes that would rub the bacteria into the shell. And using hot water and even detergents on the outside would reduce the shelf life of the eggs.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Beyond nutritional composition, neoformed contaminants, some of which have carcinogenic properties (such as acrylamide, heterocyclic amines, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), are present in heat treated processed food products as a result of the Maillard reaction
The Maillard reaction is what gives ALL browned foods their distinctive flavors. This implies that ALL foods that have been browned, say a chicken breast in a skillet, will have those same "neoformed contaminants".
Participants were invited to complete a series of three non-consecutive, validated, web based 24 hour dietary records every six months (to vary the season of completion), randomly assigned over a two week period (two weekdays and one weekend day). To be included in the nutrition component of the NutriNet-Santé cohort, only two dietary records were mandatory. We did not exclude participants if they did not complete all optional questionnaires. We averaged mean dietary intakes from all the 24 hour dietary records available during the first two years of each participant’s follow-up and considered these as baseline usual dietary intakes in this prospective analysis.
This is pretty sloppy research methodology. It contains a form of self-selection and has two few data points. In order to be included in the study only two data points are required over two years and the participants chose when and whether to provide information.
How did this pass peer review? Get back to me when you have some real science.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.