Skip to content

When do we get to shoot them?

An analysis of 281 studies from 36 different countries, published in the BMJ, found that “ultra-processed food addiction” was estimated to occur in 14% of adults and 12% of children.

The academics said that if some foods high in carbohydrates and fats were to be officially categorised as “addictive”, it could help improve health through changes to social, clinical and political policies.

Before or after they succeed in banning tasty food?

16 thoughts on “When do we get to shoot them?”

  1. There is converging and consistent support for the validity and clinical relevance of food addiction,” said Ashley Gearhardt, the article’s corresponding author and a psychology professor at the University of Michigan in the US.

    This is like taking seriously the scholarly pretentions of the ‘University’ of East Anglia.

    Classically educated lions with mortar boards.

  2. “some foods”. Well, there’s their prejudices showing right there. When you categorise something you either categorise *ALL* members that match the category or none, not some. It either is high in carbohydrates and fats or it isn’t.

  3. “ultra-processed food” seems to have no scientific definition. Anyway, remember that these are the same sort of twats who told you to eat margarine not butter.

    If marg isn’t “ultra-processed food” then nothing is.

  4. When the grauniad campaigns for tofu to be banned, maybe I’ll think about considering taking notice of what they say about “ultra-processed foods”.

  5. I confess to being addicted to food. You should see my withdrawal symptoms after a few days without.
    The only cure is a course of the country’s finest restaurants, and a grant to allow me to examine my behaviour.

  6. I can only agree with you philip.

    Indeed since I went to the dentist today, I actually treated myself to a bar of chocolate when I came home.

    But I’m not too sure I’d like to shoot the BMJ. I think they’d taste awful!!

    Though maybe your lions’d like them, Steve?

  7. So, there is no agreed definition of ultra-processed food but we can declare that 14% of adults are addicted to them?

    The academics said that if some foods high in carbohydrates and fats were to be officially categorised as “addictive”, it could help improve health

    Hang on, 2 second ago they were blathering about ‘ultra-processed’ – what has high fat or high carbs got to do with ultra-processed? A banana is high carbs, nuts are high fat.

  8. I thought meat (minimal processing, especially if quality beef) was BAD while tofu was GOOD.
    Must remember to criticise all such veganfodder as ‘ultraprocessed’ poison.

  9. “addictive foods”?

    Reminds me of Immortan Joe from Mad Max: Fury Road preaching to the people…
    “Do not, my friends, become addicted to water…”

    Life imitating art…

  10. BlokeinPictland

    ““ultra-processed food” seems to have no scientific definition.”

    They do have a definition, that lots of processing happens, which means that lard isn’t a “processed food” but a loaf of supermarket bread or a veggie burger is “ultraprocessed food”.

    What’s really behind this is just food snobbery. The Eloi looking down on the Morlocks who buy factory food instead of making their own bread or going to some artisan producer. But they don’t exactly want to say that, so they wrap it up in a load of pseudoscience bollocks.

    Look, a lot of processed foods add a bit more fat or sugar to preserve it, or cheapen it, but it doesn’t make that much difference. Most “processed foods” are just a factory doing the job you’d do. It’s automation. Pataks just have robots doing what you do.

    But it does rather reveal who are actually scientists and who are priests, doesn’t it? The BMJ have just put themselves in the priests camp (and they have prior on this). The British Heart Foundation, the American Medical Association, The Lancet. Why would you trust these fuckers to advise you about your health after that?

  11. WB

    Interesting! My causation equation worked the other way. After all the lying crap of years gone by, why now would I trust anything …

    Re adding a bit of sugar or salt or whatever – if that was all, I would agree. But often I can read down a packet’s ingredients and there’s all sorts of shit in there (and that’s what they’re fessing to), and certainly not anything that I would add to a stir fry or some raw meat/fish.

  12. When the grauniad campaigns for tofu to be banned

    One of the boasts that my local power station (still coal powered thank you) is that one of the by-products of their clean chimney exhaust schemes is used to make tofu.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *