We Are All Ultra-Processed

 

It is depressing to read about the destructive effects of a great deal of the food we eat! I just reread Ultra-Processed People by Chris Van Tulleken (reviewed it here last January), and read The Dorito Effect by Mark Schatzker. Both books clearly define the topic of ultra-processing — a term that denotes a type of food processing that is recent, growingand demonstrably dangerous. Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are the subject of many other books and articles, but these two present a very large part of the facts that are currently known.

The major characteristic of UPFs is the presence of industrial additives that have been developed in the last century, mainly quite recently. The first of these was saccharine, the artificial sweetener. Now there are thousands of them, with an incredible variety of effects on the taste, texture, shelf-life, and nutritional content of foods. Van Tulleken offers a list of such additives that might be listed on a package. If you see them, you know the product is ultra-processed. The list includes: monosodium glutamate, MSG, disodium guanlyate, disodium inosinate, torula, hydrolyzed protein, autolyzed yeast, saccharin (Sweet Twin, Sweet’N Low, Necta Sweet), aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal, Sugar Twin), acesulfame potassium (Ace-K, Sunett, Sweet One), sucralose (Splenda), neotame (Newtame), advantame, and stevia.

A huge percent of food consumption is made up of UPFs, especially in the US and the UK, but also inmany other countries, including a growing segment of the poorest third-world countries. UPFs are much more difficult to resist eating in large quantities than foods without such additives: the food manufacturers view this as an advantage because (obviously) if you eat more they make more money. As Van Tulleken says:

“Sometimes entirely novel products and textures are created – things like gummy sweets or lentil-foam crisps – but usually the aim of UPF is to replace the ingredients of a traditional and much loved food with cheaper alternatives and additives that extend shelf life, facilitate centralised distribution and, it turns out, drive excess consumption. Pies, fried chicken, pizza, butter, pancake mix, pastries, gravies, mayonnaise – all these began as real food. But the non-UPF versions are expensive, so their traditional ingredients are often replaced with cheap, sometimes entirely synthetic, alternatives.” (Van Tulleken, p. 20)

The key here is that food manufacturers and retailers care primarily about making money, not about promoting health or about quality. Schatzker’s view is that agricultural development of larger yields from plants like corn and tomatoes and animals like cattle and chickens have resulted in a loss of flavor, which makes the additives even more necessary. He writes:

“The real reason food companies keep jacking spices and taking aim at specific receptors is that we need them to. Chicken is different now. Tomatoes are different now. Corn, pork, wheat, strawberries, broccoli, collard greens, melons, barley, celery, lettuce, and radishes are different now. All food is different. It’s been diluted. It’s gotten worse. It needs help.” (Schatzker, p. 63)

A vicious circle results. The evidence (which I’m not even trying to summarize) is enormous. In other words: the objection to UPFs is not merely about taste, overeating, or nutrition. Scientific studies have repeatedly shown that UPFs do substantial harm to their consumers. They cause many diseases, and they promote obesity at a very dangerous level. The studies have been validated many times, and results correspond to statistical observations about current human populations. It’s both sad and terrifying. 

For a summary of the unhappy truth about processing and food additives, see this article by Bee Wilson: “How ultra-processed food took over your shopping basket” (link) Though published in 2020, it has an excellent summary of the issues discussed at greater length in the two books and also in many other places. Here is her useful explanation:

“Why should food processing matter for our health? ‘Processed food’ is a blurry term and for years, the food industry has exploited these blurred lines as a way to defend its additive-laden products. Unless you grow, forage or catch all your own food, almost everything you consume has been processed to some extent. A pint of milk is pasteurised, a pea may be frozen. Cooking is a process. Fermentation is a process. Artisanal, organic kimchi is a processed food, and so is the finest French goat’s cheese. No big deal.

“But UPFs are different. They are processed in ways that go far beyond cooking or fermentation, and they may also come plastered with health claims. Even a sugary multi-coloured breakfast cereal may state that it is ‘a good source of fiber’ and ‘made with whole grains.’ Bettina Elias Siegel, the author of Kid Food: The Challenge of Feeding Children in a Highly Processed World, says that in the US, people tend to categorise food in a binary way. There is ‘junk food’ and then there is everything else. For Siegel, ‘ultra-processed’ is a helpful tool for showing new parents that ‘there’s a huge difference between a cooked carrot and a bag of industrially produced, carrot-flavoured veggie puffs’ aimed at toddlers, even if those veggie puffs are cynically marketed as ‘natural.’”

What’s in my pantry? What’s in your pantry? Are we doomed to eat this way? I don’t know.

Review © 2024 mae sander