There already have been arguments to reform the education of nutrition, which has not been updated since the 1930's-40's, to the public. However, there are disagreements as to who (FDA vs. Scientists that professionally study food and nutrition) are correct. The part that in my opinion the government needs to step in is the removal of specific chemicals that are used as preservatives that cause cancer and injury to the nervous system and alter the genome.
Omg the calories were not matched! They are way more calories. It’s still CICO, you’re being very misleading! “The study found that people who ate processed food ate more calories and gained more weight than when they consumed a whole food diet with foods that were unprocessed.”
@@Katherine_Ann “Energy intake was greater during the ultra-processed diet (508 ± 106 kcal/day; p = 0.0001), with increased consumption of carbohydrate (280 ± 54 kcal/day; p < 0.0001) and fat (230 ± 53 kcal/day; p = 0.0004), but not protein (−2 ± 12 kcal/day; p = 0.85).” “Weight changes were highly correlated with energy intake (r = 0.8, p < 0.0001)” Right from the summary. The ultra processed diet was both higher in calories and lower in protein.
When reading the entire study you can see that they did match nutrients (quoted below). I do understand the point you bring up. Each person was able to choose how much they wanted to eat of the given meal. It was shown that when eating the ultra processed diet, those in the trial decided to eat more. But however each meal was given in matched nutrients (quoted below). "During each diet phase, the subjects were presented with three daily meals and were instructed to consume as much or as little as desired. Up to 60 min was allotted to consume each meal. Menus rotated on a 7-day schedule, and the meals were designed to be well matched across diets for total calories, energy density, macronutrients, fiber, sugars, and sodium, but widely differing in the percentage of calories derived from ultra-processed versus unprocessed foods (Table 1) as defined according to the NOVA classification scheme (Monteiro et al., 2018). While we attempted to match several nutritional parameters between the diets, the ultra-processed versus unprocessed meals differed substantially in the proportion of added to total sugar (∼54% versus 1%, respectively), insoluble to total fiber (∼16% versus 77%, respectively), saturated to total fat (∼34% versus 19%), and the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids (∼11:1 versus 5:1)." "Until such reformulated products are widespread, limiting consumption of ultra-processed foods may be an effective strategy for obesity prevention and treatment. Such a recommendation could potentially be embraced across a wide variety of healthy dietary approaches including low-carb, low-fat, plant-based, or animal-based diets. However, policies that discourage consumption of ultra-processed foods should be sensitive to the time, skill, expense, and effort required to prepare meals from minimally processed foods-resources that are often in short supply for those who are not members of the upper socioeconomic classes."
The main issue with all of this (in my opinion) is that in America it is a for profit industry, so there is no motivation for anyone who is making money to make any changes. They don’t care if Americans are obese and sick, to them, those are dollars signs. I’m afraid in order to make significant change there must be regulation from the Government and also a real healthcare system.
Hey, thanks for your question! I don't have an answer for that, it depends on what you're looking for. Just because a university is "rated best" academically, doesn't mean they're the right choice for everyone. Cost, location, etc is just as important!
Thanks for sharing.
Yikes!
There already have been arguments to reform the education of nutrition, which has not been updated since the 1930's-40's, to the public. However, there are disagreements as to who (FDA vs. Scientists that professionally study food and nutrition) are correct. The part that in my opinion the government needs to step in is the removal of specific chemicals that are used as preservatives that cause cancer and injury to the nervous system and alter the genome.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
i mean you right
Why do you not link the study?
Honest mistake, linking it now 🙂
Omg the calories were not matched!
They are way more calories. It’s still CICO, you’re being very misleading!
“The study found that people who ate processed food ate more calories and gained more weight than when they consumed a whole food diet with foods that were unprocessed.”
From the article:
"Investigators thought weight gain would be the same in both groups, since nutrient composition was equivalent. They were wrong."
@@Katherine_Ann “Energy intake was greater during the ultra-processed diet (508 ± 106 kcal/day; p = 0.0001), with increased consumption of carbohydrate (280 ± 54 kcal/day; p < 0.0001) and fat (230 ± 53 kcal/day; p = 0.0004), but not protein (−2 ± 12 kcal/day; p = 0.85).”
“Weight changes were highly correlated with energy intake (r = 0.8, p < 0.0001)”
Right from the summary. The ultra processed diet was both higher in calories and lower in protein.
When reading the entire study you can see that they did match nutrients (quoted below).
I do understand the point you bring up. Each person was able to choose how much they wanted to eat of the given meal. It was shown that when eating the ultra processed diet, those in the trial decided to eat more. But however each meal was given in matched nutrients (quoted below).
"During each diet phase, the subjects were presented with three daily meals and were instructed to consume as much or as little as desired. Up to 60 min was allotted to consume each meal. Menus rotated on a 7-day schedule, and the meals were designed to be well matched across diets for total calories, energy density, macronutrients, fiber, sugars, and sodium, but widely differing in the percentage of calories derived from ultra-processed versus unprocessed foods (Table 1) as defined according to the NOVA classification scheme (Monteiro et al., 2018). While we attempted to match several nutritional parameters between the diets, the ultra-processed versus unprocessed meals differed substantially in the proportion of added to total sugar (∼54% versus 1%, respectively), insoluble to total fiber (∼16% versus 77%, respectively), saturated to total fat (∼34% versus 19%), and the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids (∼11:1 versus 5:1)."
"Until such reformulated products are widespread, limiting consumption of ultra-processed foods may be an effective strategy for obesity prevention and treatment. Such a recommendation could potentially be embraced across a wide variety of healthy dietary approaches including low-carb, low-fat, plant-based, or animal-based diets. However, policies that discourage consumption of ultra-processed foods should be sensitive to the time, skill, expense, and effort required to prepare meals from minimally processed foods-resources that are often in short supply for those who are not members of the upper socioeconomic classes."
The main issue with all of this (in my opinion) is that in America it is a for profit industry, so there is no motivation for anyone who is making money to make any changes. They don’t care if Americans are obese and sick, to them, those are dollars signs. I’m afraid in order to make significant change there must be regulation from the Government and also a real healthcare system.
@kata5182 thank you for sharing that! I absolutely see what you say when getting the government involved would be needed to make actual change.
Hiii Can u plzz tell me the best university of bsc nursing in USA
Hey, thanks for your question! I don't have an answer for that, it depends on what you're looking for. Just because a university is "rated best" academically, doesn't mean they're the right choice for everyone. Cost, location, etc is just as important!