Try eating a totally 100% unprocessed diet (except you cooking or combining unprocessed ingredients into a meal) and see what happens. We would have maybe 2% obviously overweight people.
Combine that with a minimal physical exercise, compared to sitting all day, driving to work, even driving in stores, and you would put that percentage at <1%.
By definition:
A processed food is any food that has been altered in some way during preparation.
Food processing can be as basic as: freezing. canning.
In fact, I think we shouldn't even distinguish between processed/non-processed, but instead judge foods on their relevant aspects. An example of this is battery-farmed vs free-range cornfed chicken are both non-processed.
If it has more than 2g of sugar per 100g serving, it’ll make you fatter.
Again, it's more on the actual details of the food (e.g sugar density) rather than labels like "fresh".
> Meat is ok but not processed like sausages
Why, what's wrong with sausages? Does mincing a steak and putting it in a case make a difference?
Is there anything I can look for on the label that will lead me to a healthy sausage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curing_(food_preservation)#Nit...
Still, the added risk is not massive and unless you eat bacon and sausage every day, there are probably other and more important carcinogenic factors in your life that you need to care more about. The calories and saturated fats in most cured red meats are more likely to adversely affect your health.
And people pretend like they don't know what we mean by "processed food". You need like one hour of education about food, or really common sense to distinguish which kind of processing is bad in almost all cases.
We eat processed sugar more than ever before. We eat processed fat more than ever before. We eat processed protein more than ever before. Hell, we eat anything more than ever before. And we move less. And then we nitpick on what "processed" actually means?
Is it that hard to figure out that packaged broccoli is better than breakfast cherios? Or that farmed chicken cooked in your house is better than deep fryed minced with who knows what fast food one? That raw cacao bean is better than sweets in the store? That raw nuts are better than hydrogenated palm oil? That strawbery is better than strawberry icecream?
Most of us know even only by intuition what type of processing is bad, but we overeat almost everything and then blame particular food group or item or macronutrient.
It sounds like a fairly poor, even progress adverse, distinction. You may as well judge foods by the character count of their ingredients & additives.
> people pretend like they don't know what we mean by "processed food"
Does it differ from the dictionary definition I just quoted?
> We eat processed sugar more ... And then we nitpick on what "processed" actually means?
Maybe if we where clearer on terminology, we'd eat less of these things?
like distinguish between medium, high and very-high sugar density foods to avoid binary thinking (healthy vs unhealthy).
> Is it that hard to figure out that packaged broccoli is better than breakfast cherios?
No, but you're cherry picking a low-sugar vegetable and a high sugar cereal. Grey areas still exist; I don't know who this rant is directed at.
> Most of us know even only by intuition what type of processing is bad
Nonsense, there are lots of unhealthy foods that mislead in packaging.
It's not very helpful in finding out why people are actually unhealthy
Which one of these is unhealthy? Eh, doesn't matter, it's processed therefore it's bad.
I don't think we do. What criteria exactly determine if a food is "processed"? It's a vague word that leaves a lot open to interpretation
Other additives make the food last longer, which might be OK, so long as they don't have other harmful side effects.
The main negative about processed food is added sugar.
The reason food manufacturers add sugar to products is that it makes them addictive, so people finish the box, can or bottle and buy another one. Manufacturers test products to get the level of sugar just below the maximum before it makes products taste sickly sweet. At this threshold, the sugar makes the product addictive.
The main reasons sugar is a negative for consumers is that when metabolised, sugar goes straight to body fat. Wham. Pow. Fat. Just like that. Sugar is like nothing else for body fat.
Another reason sugar is a negative is that it makes you feel unbalanced. At first it gives you a rush of energy. When your body detects the excess sugar in your bloodstream, your pancreas secretes insulin to absorb the glucose. Your glucose levels spike up then down, and with it, your mood and energy level.