Hacker News Reader

Comment by Overtonwindow | Hacker News Reader

I think it goes beyond not eating cereal and doing our best to avoid eating highly processed foods in general. I think it’s as simple as reading the label, and if you don’t understand the label, you shouldn’t be eating it.

Box foods, most canned foods, dare I say, most of the foods in a grocery store are highly processed, chemically engineered, with little nutrition value. I’m not a food scientist, but I think we can do better making our own meals, than depending on highly processed boxed/packaged foods from the grocery store.

View on HN

There is nothing inherently wrong with highly-processed food. For one, the term "highly-processed" is often loosely used and subjectively defined. This is apparent in the fact you think canned foods are unhealthy, whereas the commenter responding to you sees nothing wrong with pasteurizing food in cans.

For two, highly-processed foods can contain nutritional value, the two aren't mutually exclusive. If the battle is against foods with little nutritional value then then just say that. "Highly-processed" is such a red herring in the nutrition industry.

You not a food scientist but definitely an expert in making assumptions. To make your own meals you need to know how to cook and be able to afford the stuff. If you don't have the fortunate upbringing to learn how to cook you need to find time and be prepared to spend what little money you have on potential straight to the garbage experiments. That's not going to happen for a lot of people just because you don't risk throwing away time AND money. Sure, well cooked budgeted meals are an amazing way to save money and eat well. It just isn't that simple to come by.

I agree, but I think you're overestimating the difficulty of producing something edible. Not good, but edible.

Edible doesn't motivate you to improve when the previous option was actually tasty.

That’s a bit hyperbolic, its trivial to hard boil some eggs, and there are a number of similarly simple dishes that you’re not going to need to retry a bunch.

And still you need better food options if you want to beat tasty processed stuff. After a month on"simple" food, the other stuff will look even better.

If they had to label the ingredients on an apple, you wouldn’t understand all those words either.

We'd be better off as a species if Kelloggs and the rest gets deleted. There are wholegrain cereals that taste great and are healthy. There is no need for this dopamine hacking crap that try to trick people with their marketing schemes.

> canned foods

I would love to understand how food placed into a can and boiled to pasteurize it is highly processed

You’re thinking of canned fruit and vegetables used to preserve them and not products like SPAM and Vienna sausages which are highly processed mystery meats. There are lots of highly processed canned foods you probably don’t even notice unless you know what you’re looking for.

I don't think of that as covering "most canned foods", though. Most canned foods are pretty ordinary canned foods, and aren't highly processed.

I think that depends entirely on your region, diet, culture, etc. here in California the distribution varries a lot between higher end stores like Trader Joes, lower end ones like Aldi or Grocery Outlet and culture specific ones like Ranch 99.

Ok, I see the lack of knowledge here

What is Spam?

https://www.livescience.com/32813-hormel-spam-no-mystery-mea... Ingredients: Pork with ham meat added, salt, water, potato starch, sugar and sodium nitrite. The pork is shoulder meat.

What is in that list that is highly objectionable? Its mixed together, canned and boiled so that its preserved and ready to eat out of the can cold.

Same with Vienna Sausage: MECHANICALLY SEPARATED CHICKEN, WATER, SALT, CORN SYRUP. CONTAINS 2% OR LESS OF: BEEF, PORK, DEXTROSE, NATURAL FLAVORS, SODIUM NITRITE, GARLIC POWDER. BROTH: CHICKEN BROTH.

I dont like the sugar in there but whatever. What is in there that is objectionable?

I'm not saying that these aren't calorie dense and high in salt, but that was the POINT.

What do you think “processed food” is?

Diversion but OK. Processed is anything that requires prep work outside of eating it off a tree or killing a animal and eating it raw.

So I answered your question. Can you answer mine?

What do you think “highly processed” is?

I find the process used to make spam objectionable. You know, as in processed foods? And ham, which is itself a processed ingredient.

It’s fully cured and cooked pork. I don’t understand how that’s not highly processed. The only level below that is ultraprocessed foods like cheetohs and dorritos.

Ham is a processed pork product that is cured using salt or smoking.

I find it strange that you say people should prepare home meals, but are against historically common ways of having food TO eat.

Kimchi, Sauerkraut, Blood Sausages, Hakarl. Pickles, Smoked Fish, Canned Veggies, Yogurt, Cheese, Ham are all processed products, made with lots of chemicals and designed to store for months or years without cold. Are all of these historically important foods objectionable to you?

Would SPAM be OK if it removed the ham? Its literally pork, salt and potato starch. I could make SPAM at home with a 5 minute grocery store run to buy salt, pork and starch, and sodium nitrate (or celery)

So once, again, what is your objection to this processing? Do you consider boiled pork mince, salt, celery juice, and starch excessive processing?

> Kimchi, Sauerkraut, Blood Sausages, Hakarl. Pickles, Smoked Fish, Canned Veggies, Yogurt, Cheese, Ham are all processed products, made with lots of chemicals and designed to store for months or years without cold. Are all of these historically important foods objectionable to you?

You were the one arguing that SPAM isn't highly processed food in a can, that's what my objection was. I consider every one of those foods you listed processed in some way as is most of the food we eat because cooking is processing. Grinding is processing. Chopping is processing. All of them have tradeoffs in nutrition, texture, taste, and preservation.

You seem to have taken it personally, as if I'm making some sort of judgement on your diet. I don't care, I'm done with this nonsense.

The nitrite is probably the most objectionable part? Linked to colon/stomach cancer iirc.

My non-expert impression is that there’s a growing body of research that suggests that preservatives generally aren’t great for your gut microbiome. Which kind of makes sense, they’re meant to kill microbiota that would be eating your food before you do, it seems likely that it’d put selective pressure on those in your gut once you eat it, and maybe the ones that are most adapted to surviving that aren’t the ones you want a lot of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com