People are far too concerned about feelings. There are serious industry considerations concerning scale and modern manufacturing processes that have scientific backing about their implementation. Industry scientists with PhDs in food safety are responsible for your food. The human obsession with well being is disgusting actually. Trust the science people, please.

The scientists with phds who study nutrition science are pretty clear on what a good diet for healthy living and longevity is.

A mostly plant based Whole Foods diet with small amounts of fish.

There’s a whole lot of nonsense that food industry scientists will try and spread to confuse the issue but the science is pretty clear on this.

Lately we also have a whole class of “influencers” who jump onto the latest trend because they can make hundreds of millions selling supplements.

Finally, there’s also a class of doctors, who are driven heavily by anecdotes and ignore the actual science. Doctors are not scientists people. For one thing, doctors, almost by definition in the minds of most people, deal with people who are sick. For another they deal almost entirely with anecdotes. Unfortunately a lot of doctors let these anecdotes and a few cases of possible genuine anomalies due to allergies, etc drive their opinions about nutrition which isn’t based on actual science.

You need to look at the real incentives in a system, not pick out what you would like to happen.

Large multi-national profit-focused companies are responsible for your food. (To be more precise, something like 60% of calories consumed by western nations is produced by a small number of international companies... I think my point is clear enough.)

Their overriding goal is to make money. It is not to make healthy food.

They do not comprehensively test new ultra-processed ingredients before using them in foods. This is partly why there is a cycle of "oh no, X is bad for you" and "don't worry, we can fix all of this by using Y" and "oh no, Y is bad for you". The test is live, on everyone, happening right now.

There are no general regulations preventing them to do whatever it takes to reduce the cost of "food", so long as they are not obviously killing people. There are many "slightly bad" side effects of this that will pass unnoticed until investigated with great effort and cost.

That's what this review is.

You are finding out now, after the fact.

Don't misjudge the cause though. It's not the ingredients. It's the system that underpins the entire (food) industry.

This sort of thinking risks putting doubt in the medical industry that we rely on for our safety. This is exactly the sort of thinking that leads to abysmal Covid booster numbers.

When did McDonalds and General Mills become part of the medical industry?

They both follow safety standards we as a democracy have voted are best for our health via non partisan and objective health authorities.

You are making a hasty generalisation. Foods are not nearly as well controlled as medications, and even then vaccines only represent a subset of medications. Where food is sold, known human carcinogens are freely accessible on the open market and are very popular. Processed meats like bacon, ham, etc. are listed known human carcinogens but persist despite health concerns because of their popularity.

Some medications are also human carcinogens but tend to only be accessible through a doctor where the benefits are thought to outweigh the risks in a professional capacity. It's not like you can just go out and buy a box of azathioprine because you feel like your immune system is being a bit overdramatic lately.

According to the WHO, there is increasing evidence that aspartame may be carcinogenic, a sweetener which has been on the market for decades at this point. Here in the UK even, government interventions to reduce sugar in products have even encouraged manufacturers to include this in even more products.

The real problem is that discovering health risks is a hard problem which often don't appear for decades.

I think you mean that the motives of the food industry isn't in the health of the consumers, but rather the profit of the stock holders and the practitioners of food science.

As opposed to the medical industry which has the health of the consumers at it's heart. Which is manifest that so few medical companies have been issued multimillion fines for malpractice. Like we see so few companies like GlaxoSmithKline and Phizer having record breaking fines levied against them. I mean GSK didn't get a whopping 3 billion fine or something. Hmm, you know what. I think you have convinced me. Thank you.

Processes for safely and hygienically injecting vast quantities of sugar, salt and fat into "food" != good nutrition.

They are but they aren't necessarily concerned with long term effects or how it makes you feel. The priorities are different. Making things shelf stable for longer or taste better doesn't go hand in hand with the healthiest possible option.

I was with you until you said it’s disgusting, how is it disgusting to put an extreme emphasis on health, when it’s been neglected for like all of human history.

Like sure, maybe it doesn’t make sense for most people to put so much focus on something they have little control over, but disgusting? Nah.

Also trusting science is a complete misunderstanding of science. That’s how religion operates.

Edit: Also also, I have some faith in the scientific process, as soon as business and money enters the picture though all trust goes out the window. Corporations do not care what poison they give you, as long as it does not affect their bottom line. Have no doubt that they will ignore their scientists if they can get away with it.

> too concerned about feelings

> it’s disgusting

Massive contradiction here.

Yeah. I was being sarcastic. The contradiction is when people trust scientists and when they don't. I find it amusing. It's a bit of a social contagion.

that's not how it works.

there is good science and bad science. there is also bad or malicious application of good science.

i trust independent scientists and a scientific consensus. but that does not imply that all use of that science is good. what's happening in the industry is often not good as they use science to further their own goals and not in the interest of society

Science is one lens to view reality. So is personal experience. So is emotion.

In my experience bread makes me feel tired and anxious. Do I really need science to tell me that I should or shouldn’t eat bread? I hypothesized that bread is making me feel like crap and have confirmed it many times. I don’t believe there is a local bread scientist in my small town so I’m just going to go with my gut on this one.

It's exactly this sort of thinking that results in the dismal booster uptake numbers in the general population. Too many people "doing their own research".

You are dragging the discussion towards to a potently ideological topic with a very tenuous connection. Evidently you feel very strongly about such topic - I am wondering if you are unaware of just how much your own emotions are actually at play here.

That could be multiple things. Fasting in general will improve mood. I noticed the same thing and began intermittent fasting. Felt great until I ate. Then I learned part of the reason was because I was switching into keto mode while fasting, which also improves mood. So then I switched to the keto diet to try and capture that feeling full time and not just when I'm fasting. In general I feel a lot better. But even though I do keto and intermittent, eating very little processed foods, I still feel best while fasting. There's a lot going on but I think everyone should experiment with fasting. It isn't for everyone definitely, but some people naturally feel better managing their food intake in that way.