Slashdot Mirror
Eating Processed Foods Tied To Shorter Life, Study Suggests (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: The study, in JAMA Internal Medicine, tracked diet and health over eight years in more than 44,000 French men and women. Their average age was 58 at the start. About 29 percent of their energy intake was ultraprocessed foods. Such foods include instant noodles and soups, breakfast cereals, energy bars and drinks, chicken nuggets and many other ready-made meals and packaged snacks containing numerous ingredients and manufactured using industrial processes. There were 602 deaths over the course of the study, mostly from cancer and cardiovascular disease. Even after adjusting for many health, socioeconomic and behavioral characteristics, including scores on a scale of compliance with a healthy diet, the study found that for every 10 percent increase in ultraprocessed food consumption, there was a 14 percent increase in the risk of death (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source). The authors suggest that high-temperature processing may form contaminants, that additives may be carcinogenic, and that the packaging of prepared foods can lead to contamination.
Pass me another can of pasteurized processed spray cheese food product so I can take myself out before it gets any worse.
Raw milk is better for you. Listeria is fake news created by the dairy industrial complex to keep consumers on profitable processed food.
You even wonder how processed foods last so long?
They do it by consuming the life energy of the future consumers to keep themselves looking youthful!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Nobody really knows why "processed foods" cause harm. Studies on salt itself say too much salt affects some people negatively, but not all. Salt sensitivity can usually be detected with specific tests. And lower-processed foods are often also salty. Being heavily processed by itself doesn't mean it automatically has more salt.
As the intro hinted, the exact cause is only speculation at this point. Further studies would be needed to isolate the offending trait(s). Candidate factors include but are not limited to:
* More alleged salt
* More MSG
* More alleged oil/fat
* Less fiber and "roughage"
* Longer cooking period
* More preservatives and "odd" chemicals
* More frying
* On the shelf longer
* Less of certain vitamins and minerals
Table-ized A.I.
Nitrates in processed meat are heavily linked to bowel cancer.
the only way to combat "common sense" is with education & hard science. For centuries the excuse for abandoning the poor has been "they're just of low moral character". Science is gradually eliminating that excuse and education means folks can't pretend not to know it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
>Socioeconomic factors can't be "controlled for" because they are all encompassing.
Dude you really have no fucking clue how this shit works.
Studies on salt itself say too much salt affects some people negatively, but not all.
This is race related. East Asians tend to be the least sensitive to salt, sub-Saharan Africans the most sensitive, and Caucasians in between. This correlates with the historical availability of salt. In much of Asia it has been available and affordable for millennia. In Africa, it was historically difficult to obtain. So Asians evolved to excrete salt, while Africans evolved to retain it.
... directly correlates with my current diet. When I force myself / see to it that I cook myself and eat healthy and ad in an amount of fresh veggies and similar foods and reduce sugar (the only substance I'm addicted to) I am more "awake" than usual. That effect kicks in noticably after a week or so.
The more processed foods are, the more unhealthy you're living. To me that's evident in quite a few ways.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Back in the 90's, rBST was given to cows en masse', and while it increased milk yields, it also made the cows sick and would result in milk that sometimes had a double digit percentage of pus, blood and other nastyness. Suffice to say, during this time a bunch of people began getting sick from Dairy-related foods and wierdly enough, you started seeing studies correlating dairy products to every ailment from Cancer to Diabetis. I used to get hemmoroids and diahrhea from drinking milk and when I cut dairy I felt a lot better. I cut it for about 6 or 7 years then found out the organic products didn't give me issues.
Apparently enough people found enough problems with the milk they were drinking they did the same, hence organic foods were born.
In the 00's, the same thing was repeated with corn syrup. Monsanto released their roundup product which was used on corn for ethanol production, companies moved to corn syrup from sugar because it was less expensive, and the refined syrup had a concentration of pesticides. People got sick from corn syrup, studies began linking it to cancer and diabetis and all sorts of things, and people began eliminating it from their diets. Some people went "gluten free". In my case I never had corn syrup in my diet so I never had issues, but lots of people did.
The lessons to be learned is, it isn't cooks or chefs or scientists that run food companies.
It's accountants.
And to them, you and your health is just a number, and they will fight tooth and nail and everything inbetween to force food down your throat that will make you fat, mentally ill, and sick because they think they have a right, not the privelage, of a market share.
Go look on a milk carton sometime. They'll have "No rBST" and then a legal disclaimer.
These people are nuts.
Personally, I am losing faith in the entire food industry and going back to basics. It really takes a hell of a lot of effort to mess up fruits and vegitables.
Nobody really knows why "processed foods" cause harm. Studies on salt itself say too much salt affects some people negatively, but not all. Salt sensitivity can usually be detected with specific tests. And lower-processed foods are often also salty. Being heavily processed by itself doesn't mean it automatically has more salt.
As the intro hinted, the exact cause is only speculation at this point. Further studies would be needed to isolate the offending trait(s). Candidate factors include but are not limited to:
* More alleged salt
* More MSG
* More alleged oil/fat
* Less fiber and "roughage"
* Longer cooking period
* More preservatives and "odd" chemicals
* More frying
* On the shelf longer
* Less of certain vitamins and minerals
There are well researched mechanisms:
1) The increased GIP/GLP-1 ratio from finely processed foods (as in chopped up or pureed) promoting insulin resistance.
2) The low F/N ratio fats (aka seed oils) used in western food preparation, impairing satiety signaling by impairing RET.
3) The absence of DHA and EPA, so the body keeps up the hunger till it gets enough. Eat that fatty fishy to feel full quicker.
The strawmen you list are the domain of uninformed speculation.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
sugars are the devil.
Sucrose certainly is. Avoid it.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Oh - and sugar.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Most processed foods are engineered to be hyper palatable and include added sucrose. They also commonly contain zero, or nearly zero fiber. Highly refined starches can also present a challenge to the human metabolic system.
... it is the way and procedure food is processed. Foodprocessing factories put way too much sugar and salt in their products, and of course other substitutes that are just not right in food (cellulose, fibers etc.). Proper, wealthy processed food is possible, think of things like greatgrandmothers used to preserve food.
Bach says it all.
I really wonder how many of the maladies of old age are actually deficiency disorders.
Vitamins were discovered when someone figured out that people going months without eating Vitamin C got sick. Someone empirically figured out that eating citrus fruit staved off scurvy and that led to the discovery of Vitamin C. Other vitamins are also important but take longer before a deficiency makes you sick.
Natural food has all kinds of stuff in it and I wonder if some of it is healthy in really subtle ways that take a very long time to show up.
Also, processed foods lack fiber, and you need some in your diet, to help your body control cholesterols.
Finally, omega 3: I read a book called Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill that claims that omega 3 fatty acids are essential to health but at least 95% of people in North America don't get enough of it. Omega 3 is not found in processed foods, because omega 3 oils go rancid very quickly. Before processed foods, everyone got omega 3 naturally (for example, by eating fish or eating meat from grass-fed cattle) but these days people get very little, and get other kinds of oils instead. Since your body is made from what you eat, if you don't eat enough omega 3, your body has to use the other oils and it doesn't work as well. The book claims that while our bodies can't make omega 3, our bodies can convert it from one form to another; so it would suffice to eat only fish oil or only flax oil or whatever and trust the body to convert DHA to GLA or whatever.
My wife and I buy flax oil blend and use it to make salad dressing; it's a painless way to add omega 3 to your diet.
Simple salad dressing recipe:
3-4 tablespoons of oil (flax oil, or olive oil)
1 tablespoon of balsamic vinegar (or any other vinegar you like)
sea salt to taste
black pepper to taste
We measure into a convenient cup, then whisk with a small wire whisk. It's fast and easy. We have figured out how many cranks of the pepper mill or how many twists of the sea salt grinder measure out the amount we like so it's a quick grind-and-count, no need to use measuring spoons for the salt and pepper.
Sometimes we put in some tomato paste; you can buy tomato paste in a tube, and it's a handy way to add just a little bit when making just enough dressing for a couple of salads. Or garlic powder or any other spice that suits your taste. It's easy to tweak the recipe. We don't bother buying pre-made salad dressing anymore.
We used to buy omega-3 chocolate truffles. They were expensive but were a tasty way to add omega-3 to our diets. Sadly the manufacturer no longer makes them... I think they were too expensive and didn't sell fast enough.
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
It is in Glasgow.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You are so, so arrogant...
They are not stupid. They are aware of those correlations, and accounted for them. From the abstract:
"Ultraprocessed foods consumption was associated with younger age (45-64 years, mean [SE] proportion of food in weight, 14.50% [0.04%]; P.001), lower income (€1200/mo, 15.58% [0.11%]; P.001), lower educational level (no diploma or primary school, 15.50% [0.16%]; P.001), living alone (15.02% [0.07%]; P.001), higher body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; 30, 15.98% [0.11%]; P.001), and lower physical activity level (15.56% [0.08%]; P.001). A total of 602 deaths (1.4%) occurred during follow-up. After adjustment for a range of confounding factors, an increase in the proportion of ultraprocessed foods consumed was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality"
They know that, and took it into account. From the abstract:
"Ultraprocessed foods consumption was associated with younger age (45-64 years, mean [SE] proportion of food in weight, 14.50% [0.04%]; P.001), lower income (€1200/mo, 15.58% [0.11%]; P.001), lower educational level (no diploma or primary school, 15.50% [0.16%]; P.001), living alone (15.02% [0.07%]; P.001), higher body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; 30, 15.98% [0.11%]; P.001), and lower physical activity level (15.56% [0.08%]; P.001). A total of 602 deaths (1.4%) occurred during follow-up. After adjustment for a range of confounding factors, an increase in the proportion of ultraprocessed foods consumed was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality"
* On the shelf longer
* Less of certain vitamins and minerals
I think that eventually it is a combination of factors. That said, nutrition is about more than just the 3 food groups (carbs, fats, protein) with some vitamins and minerals tossed in.
One of the things needed for proper digestion and absorption of nutrients is enzymes. Lots are available especially in raw foods, but they are quite heat sensitive and temperatures of 60 or 70 degrees Celsius destroy them. Which is good if you want long shelf life, since they (by definition) help with the breakdown/rotting process.
Another factor that allegedly, according to some dieticians' writings, is present in raw produce is termed "hydrophilic colloids". I'm not sure about the accuracy of the term, but these are claimed to be substances that enhance the water solubility of other nutrients, also improving absorption of nutrients. Also destroyed by heat and thus not present in processed foods.
Then there's the whole intestinal population of flora, also playing a role in digestion. Many raw vegetables carry with them lactobacillus and other species which is part of the plant's natural defenses. Hence the traditional ability to pickle foods via fermentation of their own microbes, without the addition of other cultures. Plus the prebiotic substances that these microorganisms consume as food.
In short, you can't really get around adding fresh veggies and fruit to your meals.
It is difficult to sift through all the health hype and scientifically quantify each factor, but I think it is safe to say that having a diet of which around half (or more) consists of raw produce (which corresponds with the advice of a dietician I once consulted) would be close to optimal. The traditional way of preserving foods (before cooling, preservative chemicals and industrial processing became available) - in other words fermented foods, would probably also add some small measure to proper nutrition, with the provision that these foods are prepared via traditional/homemade methods, and not industrial shortcuts.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
From TFA:
Self-reported data were collected at baseline, including sociodemographic, lifestyle, physical activity, weight and height, and anthropometrics.
Unfortunately the paper is paywalled but I think we can safely assume that they collected that data in order to control for it.
No need to set yourself on fire though.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Here's a list of different foods and their analysis of various kinds of nitrosamines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
You'll find them in fruits and vegetables, sauces, fish, vegetable oils. The meats don't particulary stick out, except for salted fish (which I think it rarely mentioned when people talk about danger of processed meats).
Unfortunately the paper is paywalled but I think we can safely assume that they collected that data in order to control for it.
No, we cannot. What happens is the researchers collect a bunch of potentially confounding data, and then run it through a standard statistical package, typically the Cox proportional hazards model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The problem is that the Cox model only works if the confounders are linear, time-invariant, and independent. In practice, none of these requirements are met. In addition, not all possible confounders are collected, and they are also not measured accurately. People lie and they have bad memories.
Of course, the statistical calculations don't care if the input is bad, they just churn out some numbers. If the numbers say what the researcher (or their sponsor) wants to hear, they'll publish the results. Otherwise they can easily tweak some parameters and try again, or just throw away the whole study, and try a new one.
If you heat it up in the microwave, you get very little nitrosamines.
Yeah but then you've got a whole different set of problems, chiefly being what the fuck happened to me that I think it's acceptable to microwave bacon? Fucking philistines man.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
If the study was done in India, that would be relevant. it was done in France. And you gave no study confirming your claim, so you are basically repeating anecdotal rumor.
Last common ancestor is a scientific sounding but irrelevant argument. If you had at least mentioned genetic similarity (92%, vs chimp at 98%), it would have SOUNDED relevant. But when it comes to the digestive tract, rats are more than sufficiently similar genetically to humans for this kind of testing. They eat the same things and like the same things as we do. That 8% difference is almost all about size, fur, tail, brain, and lifespan. The internal organs are remarkably similar to humans. Some estimates put them at 99% identical to humans.
Rats are used for three basic reasons:
1) genetic consistency (their is little difference between two rats if both were from the same scientific animal testing source)
2) Short lifespan (so we don't have to wait for natural deaths)
3) Cheap
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Bullshit. If you could afford enough spices to do that, you could afford food that wasn't off.
And no amount of spices will remove botulism or salmonella pathogens.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You've got it backwards. Eating poor quality foods makes you sick and stupid, and those things in turn make you poor.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The last common ancestor of sheep and Wales is quite recent.
-- it's a joke.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate