Brokkr

You can Google those ingredients, they have specific names which makes them sound scary, but they are all pretty common in normal fruits and vegetables. There’s no need to fearmonger.

Sorry that you had GI issues.

BTW, cellulose is just fiber, it is the cell walls of plants.

Also, look up the ingredients of a banana. It has several E numbers.

That article indicates that phytosterols may have a range of benefits. What exactly is your concern?

Not quite, a few quick notes:

• white bread is fine, it is no better or worse than other sources of carbs. Whole grain bread is preferred because of the additional fiber and other nutrients, but so long as those are obtained by other parts of the diet it’s not a problem.

• margerine used to have lots of trans-fats, but thanks to improved regulations it may actually be better than butter for some health conditions. Most margerine is oil and water. It is still fat so should be consumed in moderation. Flavor wise, butter tastes better to most people.

• frozen food quality depends on the ingredients, not the freezing or place where it was made. Frozen fruits and vegetables are great. Frozen chicken has lots of protein, just like chicken.

• emulsifiers may be good or bad. Eggs and mustard are both emulsifiers. Those may or may not belong in an individuals diets. Emulsifiers by themselves are not universally bad for people.

• seed oils are typically lower in saturated fats, cholesterol, and are generally recommended as healthier options compared to saturated or animal derived fats. Seed oils are good.

• many common commercial preservatives are salt, acid, and sugar. The amount in the fodds and the amount consumed are the what needs to be considered.

So then say that those ingredients are your concerns.

It would also be reasonable to acknowledge that salt and sugar are excellent preservatives often found in freshly homemade items. As is the case with all these ingredients, the amount makes that difference between a healthy or unhealthy diet.

Ahh yes, the pseudo-science group. I’m familiar, it’s fun to watch until someone takes them seriously and puts them in power. Then it’s scary and hurtful. Please don’t hurt people.

Maybe you didn’t mean water specifically, but the water from your faucet is likely more “processed” than a jar of pickles that you make yourself from cucumbers grown by you. Neither of those things are unhealthy and both can be part of a healthy diet. But the pickles are less processed (and loaded with preservatives).

The point is the “amount of processing” is meaningless and impossible to quantify. What processes are involved, the ingredients, and how much of them are present all matter more.

Most of what you’re describing are the nuances, which can be confusing. Unfortunately, for food in particular there is a lot of bad information available as well due to traditions, culture, and capitalism. However, there are good sources of information that can simplify nutrition if you want them.

Do you drink water? What about coffee or tea? All of those are highly processed (or at least they should be to be safe).

Science by its nature is designed to discover new ideas, new knowledge, and new information. When those discoveries happen, the understanding of humanity on a topic changes and improves. It’s why we don’t dump feces into our drinking water and why our drinking water is highly processed, all thanks to John Snow’s (not the character) scientific discovery.

So yes, the recommendations of food science changes because it should. But the basics have been known for a while (protein, carbs, fiber, fats, moderation, etc). The details are still being worked out, but fundamentals are known.

When they refer the mainstream information, they are referring to non peer reviewed literature. Based on your last paragraph, it seems that you would also prefer to use peer reviewed studies to make conclusions.

I’m not going to entertain the idea that a person’s country of origin precludes them from doing meaningful research on a topic. Instead, we should critique the methods and the sources that they used.

You also brought up soybean oil as a concern. I looked that one up too: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900721002057

This article shows that replacing saturated fats in a person’s diet with soybean oil leads to the same results as if they had used another unsaturated fat. This is the expected result from such a dietary change. Do you have more information about the health concerns of soybean oil that you could share?

The misleading advertising aside (seems bad, but it’s not what I want to focus on), you claim that palm oil is bad for a person’s health.

This article claims with evidence that it is likely no worse than other saturated fats and may in fact be better for overall health than other sources of saturated fat: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4365303/

I am truly interested to know if palm oil is much worse than other saturated fats, so if you have additional source worth reviewing it would be appreciated.

The authors do not note any conflicts of interest either, hopefully they were honest.

Other facts about palm oil which are commonly raised are the sustainability. I did not look into this aspect and further research may be needed.

Not a lawyer, but if they overturned this decision, the court would lose nearly all of their power. It was this decision that gave the Supreme Court the power to interpret constitutionality.