The western world needs to reintroduce “home economics” back into the curriculum, nobody knows how to cook their own food anymore, managing a kitchen is half of it not just putting stuff onto a stove.
The problem is not new. Just that the stuff is more expensive than just steaming vegetables and meats then put them through the blender, and in some developing countries, for poor families it’s rice or wheat gruel.
I think it is not only issue with the price but also with the time to prepare it. They do not survive using one salary to have more time to care of the children. Or lets say two salaries but 1/2 work time both.
Actually, there is no place on earth nowadays to have possibility like that, with one salary.
And people are wondering why young generations do not make children.
Gen Silent with one salary had 5 boomer children. I would love to have one salary and 2.5 children working half time
Americentrism at it again.
4/5, in the USA, the rest of the world have such a thing as Government Mandated Food Standards that ban or discourage this shite.
Ultra processed food isn’t just an american thimg. It’s normalised to take cgildren to a McDonalds and feed them garbage has also become normalized all over the place. Ever seen a menue in a average restaurant? The kids menu isn’t just a smaller version of a normal menu, it’s chicken nuggets and fries, hamburger and fries and something else that has been tortured and processed
The kids menu is cheap sisco crap. I’ve had the same exact kids menu chicken tenders in 10 different states, which was the same chicken tenders as on some bar menus.
It’s normalised to take cgildren to a McDonalds and feed them garbage has also become normalized all over the place.
I didn’t know going to McDonald’s once in a blue moon was killing children.
The kids menu thing drives me fucking nuts. I’ll be at a Mexican restaurant and the kids options are hamburger, hot dog, buttered noodles or quesadilla. My kid eats everything because I always just shared my food with him, at least have some flipping tacos on the kids menu.
Let’s be honest: this does not end with a cultural change or miracle: this ends when so many of us start dying, that civilization collapses, and people have to start over
In. The. States.
Someone tell RFK. It might be this instead of tylenol or circumcision that causes autism. /s
Yes, as we all know, infants should be fed a steady diet of raw milk and steak. All the better if the steak is from road kill. And eat it directly from a toilet seat. Germs can only hurt you if you’re afraid of them!
I just read the exact same headline about prison food. Assuming that’s because 80% of food in Magastan is ultra-processed, I guess we’re gonna get the same headline for every possible institution now over the coming days.
… in the United States
This is the internet. Please consider the audience to be worldwide.
Unless your country has specific laws to the contrary or is too poor/civilized to have this sort of “lazy parent” food, presume that any of the factory-made shelf-stable food in your grocery aisle is as bad as the equivalent sold in the USA.
(And find out of your country’s food laws are actually better than the USA, or just “feel” better because the same exact product can just list fewer ingredients )
The former. In about 75% of the world.
American unable to imagine a part of the world where things are better, typical
They’re legally mandated to have a table for every type of nutrient ( fats, trans fats, carbohydrates - split into subcategories of carbohydrate and carbohydrate sugars, salts, etc) in every packet of things sold as a Edible Product in which it has 2 rows - in a serving, v daily recommendation. In all of EU, and also in the UK. Asia is if anything even more stringent about it then we are and culturally prefer things as unprocessed as possible.
We don’t ban unhealthy foods as long as they’re not literally toxic, but this makes it so everyone makes informed decisions, and over time it has effected sales for unhealthy food, they have worse sales than healthier options
They’re legally mandated to have a table for every type of nutrient ( fats, trans fats, carbohydrates - split into subcategories of carbohydrate and carbohydrate sugars, salts, etc) in every packet of things sold as a Edible Product in which it has 2 rows - in a serving, v daily recommendation.
Ww have all of that in America as well. I had a great deal of confusion on this subject until the specific definition of one of the words involved was given to me. The problem in discussion here isn’t labelling, or even ingredients, the problem is what’s DONE to the ingredients before they get in the food. While some degree of processing happens to most food (Chickens are deboned, corn is nixtamalized, tomatoes are stewed) the issue here is the extreme level of processing rhe ingredients go through. Corn and Cardboard are both high in carbohydrates and fiber, after all, cardboard is mostly plant matter rendered down and cooked/shaped, but one is food and the other has been processed so thoroughly that it’s not.
Many companies are rendering their ingredients so thoroughly before reassembling them that they’re resembling “food” less and less and not doing great things for us nutritionally even though they still measure at certain levels on the packaging. Maybe Jaffa Cakes retain more of the base nutrtion level of the flour in them than twinkies do, but it’s the same base processes occurring to both of their ingredients, just at different levels.
Consumer protection laws are really alien to folks from the states it seems.
You really don’t know what you’re talking about.
I bet you’d also argue that there is “free speech” in the UK, where a billionaire can still literally sue someone into poverty for accurately describing them. Or the same in Germany, where an advocate against the Palestinian genocide was arrested for “denying Israel”
I’m not from either of those countries, are you a person that likes to put words in other people’s mouths? 'Cause it sure as fuck sounds like you do.
I tend to speculate negatively when people hurl unfounded insults without disclosing the reason for their perspective.
I encouraged people to not assume that their local regulation’s are “better than the USA” because the same greed that causes so much waste in the USA is also present in literally every human country. And you decided that this meant my country doesn’t have consumer protection of any kind.
If it makes you feel better, tell me what country you are from and I’ll take the time to look for an appropriate example of your country fucking up in a way that wouldn’t happen in the USA.
Belgium, good luck. I don’t need to know what country you’re from. Your ignorance is telling (but it’s also bliss, so lucky you).
You’re right, it’s hard to find distinct history for a middle European country that was a footnote for most of your small and young country’s history.
But the internet provides.
Even if we exclude both your country’s precursor states and the various wrongs attributsble to the European Union you were substantially responsible for, Belgium:
- has a literal king
- didnt ban slavery until decades after the USA
- lagged similarly in gay rights (albeit you’re easily on par with the bluest stars in the USA)
- let your king annex part of a foreign continent as a subservient colony (and kept that colony until the 1960s!)
And, while I’m neither a lawyer nor sufficiently fluent in French or German to read your laws directly, it sure as fuck looks like you’ve got the same sort of repressive defamation laws that let JK Rowling bully Amnesry UK into apolgizjng for accuratky describing her.
http://legaldb.freemedia.at/legal-database/belgium/
Based on your country’s recent “hard-right” swing, you might acthally see your own neo-autocrat soon, who would absolutely weaponize those laws if they haven’t already started.
If truth and honesty are not both separately prefect defenses to accusations of defamation, you don’t have free speech in the ways that actually matter.
Holy shit, the propaganda has really done a number on your perspective and I’m tired to pretend it didnt.
It’s you, not the rest of the world, that is different.
Lmao. Ameribrain at work.
It isn’t.
That is not to say that the shelf stable food here in Europe is as good for you as a home cooked meal, but America allows ingredients which are literally illegal over here because they’re known to cause cancer or other health related issues.
It took the US until two years ago to finally ban titanium oxide as a food additive. You still use horrible foaming agents in your bread, and ingredients derived from processed petroleum byproducts are allowed in your food.
Same here in New Zealand. We have very tight restrictions on food additives, particularly with baby food.
Your junk and nutritionally empty food is not a better option to feed to children just because it doesn’t have a certain yellow die.
If that certain yellow die is linked to health issues in children, yes I’d rather not have that in food.
You can keep that in America.
It objectively is, as the former has no nutritional value, and the latter is actively trying to kill you.
way to miss the point
Let me see if I can translate this article to a less trendy version:
.About 80% of the packaged foods marketed for children between 6 and 30 months include ingredients only used when creating packaged food at scale. Half of these either contained more fat, sugar, and salt than the WHO recommends or did not abide by the WHO’s advice to eliminate food coloring.
Those packaged toddler foods are expensive as well. I’d wager most parents are simply giving their toddlers portions of foods they eat themselves over buying this crap.
That’s how we fed kids before corporations convinced us that kids need packets of pureed veggies in a single use plastics
Baby food jars are typically glass
Most of the baby food in my area is plastic pouches
They certainly used to be. And probably fancier brands may still use glass.
Ideally yes. However some meals aren’t suitable for toddlers, others that simply don’t like. Particularly for exhausted parents, having a healthy, tasty fallback can be a sanity saver. Doubly so when on trips.
Treat them like the toddler equivalent of a McDonald’s. OK for 1 off meals, a problem when they become the default diet.
When they’re that age, you don’t have time to make good financial decisions unless you’re killing it or one of you gets to be stay at home. Even then it’s rough.
I understand, my kid isn’t that many years from when he was a toddler. These particular processed meals aren’t any easier to prep than some cheese and crackers or portioning some from the parent’s plate of food.
I disagree. I went back to work when my baby was 5 months old.
I have always, always been poor. However, my sister had gotten me a blender for christmas the year prior. I made, all my sons food. His diet was maybe 15% baby food pouches, over estimating this I think.
An example is, a sweet potato, a carrot and an apple, peeled, cooked and blended. There it is. I would see the pouches and what blends they were labled as, and just buy the whole produce and make my own. I was a single mom, worked 40, nursing on top of this, and I dont remember this being difficult, even poor and working full time. Its all about the parents’ priorities.
To be more modern, those little mesh sucker things were great. I would freeze grapes or other fruit, and stick them in that mesh contraption for my baby. frozen fruit makes teething lil ones happy, the mesh part kept the choking hazards at bay, he could hold it himself and chew on frozen fruit. bloody magical tool.
I would agree that far too many take the “easy” path of just buying premade foods, but I take issue with the last comment:
I dont remember this being difficult, even poor and working full time. Its all about the parents’ priorities.
“Poor” can often mean more than one full time job for a single person. The framing you’re putting on this suggests that any parent has this kind of time, and it just isn’t true. Its also especially worth mentioning that a person’s income can change wildly at any time - someone doing well enough to be the stay at home parent while the other works could suddenly become a single parent. A single parent that would need to work multiple jobs just to afford to keep living in their home.
And I say this as a parent lucky enough to work from home, and my partner being able to dedicate full time to parenting before going back to part time work.
Yes, we made all of their food at home. Even baking the bread they eat during the week. Not everyone is lucky enough to make that happen, especially now.
To be factually mean, even if the single parent had two jobs, its still true that making thier own food is less of a priority because of this.
To me, this, two job single parent, is the exception. Ive met so many more folks in my life who had less stress, and better living situations than I, stay at home moms even, who dont put a second thought in handing a bag of puffs (and im sorry) but a tablet to the kid, and sending them off to sit.
I very well intended to use cloth diapers, but, my living arrangement changed, and I ended up using disposables mostly. I get it. But im not talking about the execption. The rule, is most people (that ive seen, so its whatever, Im in the sates, but ive met so many other parents over the last decade) who have young children, and feed them “kid foods” and skip whole foods.
My son’s room didnt have that “kid smell”. My house, didnt have the “kid smell”. It was said to me a few times. “Kid smell” some folks houses get, you cannot unconvince me, is due to thier diet of high sugar from these “kid foods” literally almost all parents I know buy.
I am an asshole about this for the record. I know. Its one my hills as a child who was raised on gushers and fruit roll ups, and ended up with disordered eating and obese as a youth. Ive seen moms (I should say parents, but really I talk with other moms) give candy out like a regualr snack, children who dont drink water (is free, why?)… like. I met a ten year old who couldnt run, at all. Im not pulling this out my ass. And it really makes me sad for these children who are estsblishing poor eating habits so early in life. I was homless with a newborn until that 5th month. You cant change my mind that more (not all) people could attempt to be better, they just dont.
You cant change my mind that more (not all) people could attempt to be better, they just dont.
I wouldn’t try to - I agree.
I would also say many don’t have any interest in being better, which is why they don’t even make the attempt.
thank you for removing these meaningless buzz words
So packaged foods contained emulsifiers and mould inhibitors like salt and sugar required to make them safe. Well yeah…
I probably wouldn’t mind the ubiquitous use of the “new system” from the University of São Paulo if I didn’t keep seeing it used incorrectly, with its added category treated as causal of poor health instead of correlated with poor health.
Americans aren’t overweight because of the “ultra-processed” portion of our high-calorie high-salt diet. Americans are overweight because our diet is high-calorie and high-salt!
It’s entirely possible to have a healthy diet that consists only of “Nova” category 4 foods. And entirely possible to have an unhealthy diet that consists only of “unprocessed” category 1 and “ingredient” category 2 foods.
(And unless it’s a damn acronym, “nova” should not be capitalized!)
Americans aren’t overweight because of the “ultra-processed” portion of our high-calorie high-salt diet. Americans are overweight because our diet is high-calorie and high-salt!
And with so much entertainment comes increasingly larger sedentary lifestyles.
Americans aren’t overweight because of the “ultra-processed” portion of our high-calorie high-salt diet. Americans are overweight because our diet is high-calorie and high-salt!
Oh, I’d argue strongly that the former is also a factor. For one thing, the whole idea of calories in-calories out is a highly flawed concept that whiffs a lot on how the body actually processes foods. Things like resistant starches and slow-digesting grains are key in absorbing food in a consistent manner that avoids glycogen spikes and delivers a smoother energy experience that helps cut down cravings and vicious junk-food circles, so to speak.
Also, the more processed a food is, typically the less vitamins, minerals, fibre, phytochemicals and so forth it contains, all things the body needs and even craves. And there’s a natural tendency to eat when one feels a lack of something, which can be some or all of those things above.
deleted by creator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_classification
“New classification”, not “new system”. The rest of your inference agrees with my understanding.
Is this information available to the public or is it kept secret?
In the United States anything meant for human consumption either has a health department regularly inspecting the kitchen where it is prepared for immediate consumption or is sold with labelling that conveys a nutritional profile and ingredient list.
The label is clearer now than it was when I was a child, and there is movement now to put the most relevant information on the front of the package.
Just looking at the first four packages in my dining room,.without getting the glasses I need for vision, I can tell you that “Stewart’s black cherry soda” is 160 calories for bottle, "Vernors black cherry* is 150 per can and a “hostess cup cake” is 170. All of which are high calorie treats I don’t mind since the kids are away.
So, no, not a secret. Provided for you at point of sale, in fact. (And for many chain restaurants and eaters, the same top-line numbers are available from their website.)
Now, I don’t want to give the impression that calorie counts by themselves are the key to health. Excess.fats, too many bad fats, too much sodium, and too little protein or vitamins will also lead to poor health.
But 170 calories with 2.5 grams of saturated fat and 19 grams of sugar wouldn’t suddenly be healthier if it came from a home-made honey and butter cake instead of a factory. Although the later might be more satisfying and thus encourage me to eat only one instead of two.
I think this is state dependent. I’ve seen industrialized bread that lacked labeling and ingredient list.
most baby food instore is either gerber or similar foods, or those fruit/veggie pouches, and baby junk food.
Why he eating the pizza backwards
The baby has issues
Kids do all kinds of crazy things if left unattended.
Crust-first pizza eaters are sociopaths
Say that to Donatello (the ninja turtle)
Explains why Dwight Schrute ate his pizza crust first
What about a calzone?
Not a pizza. It’s the inverse, if you eat only the contents of the calzone and not the crust, you’re a sociopath
If it’s inverse they must eat it like reverse bread bowl. Eat only the crust then lick the contents off the plate. Or a spoon… If one were so civilized
I prefer my calzone without the shell.
Possibly stuffed crust
deleted by creator
Either ai or fucking stupid
Four out of five foods sold for toddlers in the United States
MATKETED to toddlers. Nobody is advertising apples and whole wheat.
When will toddlers stop spending their money on this food?!
What about the Big Apple?
Im more partial to human music
I’m not disputing that, just the article is specifically about the United States, which I think is an important distinction to make. Not everyone reading this is from the US.
Gotta get em young so they can later keep em dependant on the “health system”.
Again, I am glad I never procreated.
I’m glad I wasn’t born in burgerland.
Same. In hindsight, my parents raising me on McDonald’s was a terrible parenting choice.
Yes it was.
I’m sure they thought it wasn’t a big deal because I’ve been athletic my whole life, but I had a serious weight problem as an adult and lost 150 pounds. Probably wouldn’t have ended up that way if I didn’t have a taste for fast food.
Stay strong, man.
Removed by mod
Oh man, my brain left out “foods” in the title. Read it as “4 out of 5 toddlers are ultra processed”. This thread turned out WAY different than I was expecting.
Removed by mod
I’ve never heard anyone say that.
Nestle
Removed by mod
The saggy breasts thing is a myth. It’s pregnancy itself which leads to the sagging. Hormonal changes.
