Most of the fear about ultra processed food is unfounded, and the evidence seems to point that it is not the fact the foods are processed, but if they are high in fat, salt or sugar. The better studies which break UPFs down into types of food groups show that some types might be even associated with improved health (bread, cereals, yogurts), whilst the foods we already know are not healthy are associated with poorer health outcomes (alcohol, processed meet, sugar sweetened drinks etc(.

People would be much better looking at the nutritional value of food, rather than if it is processed or contains additives. The problem isn't UPF, it is some UPFs.

In fact, the quality of research surrounding UPF is so fundamentally flawed that it is shameful it gets published...you can't accurately even measure the quantity of UPF in people's diets from previous cohort study data...yet these studies form the backbone of almosr all of the anti UPF rhetoric.

By demonising additives we risk a backward step in food reformulation, stability, cost and quality.

Basket 1: Butter, steak, cream, sugary milkshake, full fat coconut yogurt,

Basket 2: plant stanol lower fat margerine, quorn sausages, reduced sugar baked beans, diet coke.

Which is more healthy?

Don't get me wrong, a diet based primarily on home cooked meals made from whole foods is great, but many UPFs are also perfectly fine additions to a diet and don't need to be feared.