The current boogeyman of the month when it comes to unhealthy food is "ultra-processed foods". The
BMJ has two research articles and
an editorial about it.
The issue I have is with the definition. They use the
NOVA food classification system, which defines ultra-processed foods as:
Ultra-processed foods are industrial formulations made entirely or mostly from substances extracted from foods (oils, fats, sugar, starch, and proteins), derived from food constituents (hydrogenated fats and modified starch), or synthesized in laboratories from food substrates or other organic sources (flavor enhancers, colors, and several food additives used to make the product hyper-palatable).
The BMJ says:
This food group includes soft drinks; packaged snacks; commercial breads, cakes, and biscuits; confectionery; sweetened breakfast “cereals”; sugared milk based and “fruit” drinks; margarine; and pre-processed ready-to-eat or heat products such as burgers, pastas, and pizzas.
How can this really be a useful classification for the healthyness of food? When you are grouping Coca-Cola in the same class as spaghetti is this actually a useful system?
My personal opinion, which is
somewhat examined by this article, is that there are basically two things going on: Any processing, or just food being dead for extended periods of time, reduces certain nutrients, particularly the anti-oxidants such as vitamins C and E; and that some particular added ingredients, particularly nitrates, are particularly bad. Trying to merge these two concepts, that can be addressed seperatly, into a broad category of "ultra-processed foods" that includes such a wide range of foodstuffs does not help anyone. When you then use that category as the primary independant variable in a population study I am far for certain that you can get any useful information out.