People who do keto or Atkins have long used crushed pork rinds as breading.
I didn’t respond directly to this. The problem is that we don’t know if it’s just a specific set of certain ingredients, or all of them together. Many researchers seem to think it’s a bunch of tiny effects that when put together start moving the needle a bit more noticeably. Maltodextrin has a tiny effect on gut bacteria in some. Not enough to remove it from the marketplace, but absolutely measurable. We also know that sugars, fats, and salt (which are typically more abundant in group 4) can have negative impacts when over-consumed. Nitrites and nitrates are actually beneficial in moderation, but can increase the risk for rectal cancer in higher consumption levels.
Again, at this time, the evidence is mostly (but not completely) by association, not causation, as noted in the numerous papers I’ve already linked.
Unfortunately, it’s very difficult to cleanse a well once it’s been poisoned.
That’s true, but I did ask for others, including you specifically, to share their wells without success. I also don’t share the opinion that an incomplete definition that was corrected thoroughly and quickly once it was called out falls under “poisoning the well”, but apparently you and I differ in that area. C’est la vie!
Part of the problem was the “everyone knows” tone of the answer, at least as I perceived it. “Everyone knows” is, of course, a quite dangerous concept.
But actually, that “improved” definition isn’t much better:
The culinary use of high-fructose corn syrup is, of course, to sweeten foods, and that’s an extremely common culinary use of it. That dandelion that my family eats, meanwhile, genuinely is of rare culinary use. To which the answer is, presumably, “but that’s not what we mean”, which just highlights that they need to be clearer about what they do mean.
This is the exact definition that I gave (which was copied and pasted from the internet, not of my own devising).
A pretty common definition for ultra-processed includes:
They contain ingredients you wouldn’t find in a typical kitchen — things like emulsifiers, colorings, flavor enhancers, bulking agents, gels.
I’d be interested where the “everyone knows” tone can be found. In the post summarizing the research I actually said that basically “no one knows”, but that there is a strong association.
Okay, but again, that’s not my definition. That one is the one that is used in the vast majority of the research. Research that no one in this thread has countered with any other research. Hell, I’m pretty sure that it’s available. There are almost always conflicting scientific reports on novel research.
Back to my actual beef, I can give you an example of poisoning the well. Hell, it’s even in this thread, but it wasn’t me doing the poisoning. You didn’t seem to take issue with that one.
That is pretty much a textbook definition of poisoning the well.
I was referring more to things like this:
The “examples which are nothing like dandelions” are unlike them in what way? In that they’re clearly scary chemicals, as opposed to nice natural products? That just brings us back to having to define which chemicals are scary, which was the whole point of the exercise.
One, that was after bump poisoned the well, which I found annoying as fuck. (You still haven’t chimed in on that one). I absolutely took a bit of a snarky tone due to that shit post.
As for the actual “Naw…” that came after I responded to you with:
Your dandelion salad is full of emulsifiers, colorings, flavor enhancers, bulking agents, and gels?
Okay, what definition would you like to use?
I couldn’t imagine you meant them that way, since that text above was descriptors for the first half of the (since acknowledged as poor) definition. I have also asked for alternate definitions, without success, and followed up with the most commonly used definition that seems to be almost universal in this area of research. So no, I really didn’t think you were somehow incorrect. I thought you were just fucking around.
I really, really, really don’t know what is up, but you sure seem hyper focused with finding fault in a post that I was happy to change/amend/flesh out while ignoring actual shit posts from another poster. I don’t believe that I have EVER had an issue with you, so if this is some grudge, please let me know what I did.
I used dandelions as an example because I didn’t think that the people who complain about “ultra-processed foods” would consider them to be in that category. But it doesn’t make any sense to define the category of things we’re supposed to be afraid of as “those things that a lot of people are afraid of”.
I certainly don’t consider them ultra-processed, nor does the second definition that I posted when people started finding fault with the first one. In that definition they are group 1, which is as far from ultra-processed, group 4, as possible.
If I said that anywhere, then I’ll happily retract it, as I don’t agree with that statement. Can you point to where I said that?
PS you still haven’t spoken to the actual poisoning of the well in the thread. Is there something that you want me to infer from that or have we just not gotten to it yet?
Look… my point wasn’t with you, it’s with the way they categorized ultraprocessed foods. I think it’s stupid and kind of unintuitive.
First of all, they use words that describe it in a hyperbolic way, and that imply that some excessive degree of processing is done to it. Yet, when you read the ingredients and think about how some of these things are done, it’s neither excessively processed or nearly as negative as the descriptor makes it sound.
For example, I noticed that a container of heavy cream that I have in the fridge, which you’d think is a Category 1 ingredient based on that NOVA categorization, apparently has gellan gum in it. That’s a polysaccharide produced through bacterial fermentation that’s used in this case as a thickener, likely to even out batch-to-batch variations in texture.
So what’s that make that cream? Ultraprocessed? I say that’s stupid- there’s one additional ingredient that’s made the same way vinegar is, and it’s literally stirred in. Hardly “Ultraprocessed” as the words would imply. Why would vinegar be considered ok, but gellan gum not? Because the ignorant are afraid of it? And why “ultraprocessed” when all that’s done is to stir it in?
That’s what I’m getting at- this seems to have an agenda based on how it’s defined and how it’s described. And I’m skeptical of that as a result.
I don’t know about the chips you buy. Generically, the salt and other flavorings are often mixed with starch, as a coating, and the starch itself has a flavour and texture effect.
I often look at the contents, because I have a limited acceptance of flavour 621. I mostly restrict myself to plain unflavoured chips, which are as you describe.