I'm glad we are finally getting some good, solid guidance around UPFs. Hey everyone, just buy "good stuff"!

while it is quite funny how you turned around my "just spend way more money" advice as an actual suggestion, it really isn't particularly helpful because UPFs are a much, much broader category than "flavor-blasted" type products. A huge number of low/no-prep options are UPF, you just don't think so because they don't scan as unhealthy. It gets us back to the main problem that it's all basically just vibes, which is why you don't see the issue that your honest-to-god advice was to just buy good stuff instead of buying bad stuff. Why not just cut to the chase and have an Ultra-Bad Foods categorization?

▲

the__alchemist 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You cast doubt on using categorization because it has ambiguity. I think this is misleading and dishonest, which is why I am being direct. It is FUD.

	▲	enragedcacti an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Ambiguity is inevitable in something as complicated as nutrition. I'm casting doubt on this specific categorization for being a poor proxy for healthiness and for completely ignoring salient factors that drive nutrition choices. Many single parents would love the opportunity to buy and cook raw ingredients for their kids every night, but cost and time makes that not an option for many. A good categorization system would accommodate this by e.g. distinguishing between whole grain bread with preservatives and wonder bread. UPF is an all or nothing categorization that is only helpful if you already have a conception of whats healthy and filter your choices through that while calling it UPF. > I think this is misleading and dishonest, which is why I am being direct. Good save, everyone reading this totally thinks that's what you were doing and not just showing your whole ass while making my point for me.