Cognitive decline linked to ultraprocessed food, study finds(cnn.com)
cnn.com
Cognitive decline linked to ultraprocessed food, study finds
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/01/health/ultraprocessed-food-dementia-study-wellness/index.html
137 comments
Your body doesn't need ultra processed foods. It hasn't evolved to needing them. It has, in fact, evolved to surviving well on food within the horizon.
If you don't drink protein shakes, you will get as big as nature intended for your natural diet and genetics.
Cutting out ultra processed foods because they are not part of our evolutionary diet allows us to omit six or seven figures worth of grant money for science we don't need. Saves time for readers, too.
If you don't drink protein shakes, you will get as big as nature intended for your natural diet and genetics.
Cutting out ultra processed foods because they are not part of our evolutionary diet allows us to omit six or seven figures worth of grant money for science we don't need. Saves time for readers, too.
A thing common in ultra-processed foods is that they are heavily optimized to be palatable while also often losing its satiating effect. Those are things that can be measured only difficultly.
Ultra processed foods are defined by the "NOVA" classification system. https://world.openfoodfacts.org/nova
Yes, the definition is at the link I posted. I find it arbitrary.
It's not clear that "ultraprocessed" is the issue. The article says "they are usually very high in sugar, salt and fat". Too much salt and sugar are known to be problems. That has nothing to do with processing. Although it does have to do with what will sell.
The author has a "natural" bias.
The author has a "natural" bias.
This is something that often bothers me about the "real food" or similar debate that is largely emotional more than anything else.
What this should all build down to is the nutritional content of the food. Just because I go to a local farmers market and buy the greatest "organic" or "non-gmo" (or insert some other mostly meaningless thing that has been turned into a way to scare consumers to spend more money) and buy the greatest looking apples I can find.
That isn't going to do a damn thing if I turn around and try to replicate the McDonalds (or I guess Popeyes now?) fried apple pie. It is still horrible for me and I highly doubt there is much if any difference in the little bit of vitamins I would get from the apples still in the pie.
Meanwhile I can go for about as processed as you can get, and do Soylent or Huel and have a pretty damn balanced diet if I could somehow sustain myself entirely on that (more of a willpower thing and not an issue with the food itself).
This also ignores the major clasism that has made its way into how people eat and what food they have access to. There is a reason it tends to be urban well off white people going on and on about this stuff.
I cringe anytime I hear the words "real" or "whole" food as if that has any real meaning outside of a marketing term.
If anything this tells me that we need to do better with how we process food, not that processed food itself is the issue.
What this should all build down to is the nutritional content of the food. Just because I go to a local farmers market and buy the greatest "organic" or "non-gmo" (or insert some other mostly meaningless thing that has been turned into a way to scare consumers to spend more money) and buy the greatest looking apples I can find.
That isn't going to do a damn thing if I turn around and try to replicate the McDonalds (or I guess Popeyes now?) fried apple pie. It is still horrible for me and I highly doubt there is much if any difference in the little bit of vitamins I would get from the apples still in the pie.
Meanwhile I can go for about as processed as you can get, and do Soylent or Huel and have a pretty damn balanced diet if I could somehow sustain myself entirely on that (more of a willpower thing and not an issue with the food itself).
This also ignores the major clasism that has made its way into how people eat and what food they have access to. There is a reason it tends to be urban well off white people going on and on about this stuff.
I cringe anytime I hear the words "real" or "whole" food as if that has any real meaning outside of a marketing term.
If anything this tells me that we need to do better with how we process food, not that processed food itself is the issue.
Well... salt is generally used to preserve texture and flavor. At least that's from my canning background. It's possible to reduce some salt, but really depends.
There's emerging evidence that consuming potassium with salt tends to reduce the negative effects of higher salt intake. Basically, that many of the prior sodium studies ignored the sodium/potassium balance. Of course you could still have too much sodium while staying in balance, but just thought that's worth pointing out. If nothing else, it illustrates how complex it nutrition science can be, and how much we still have to learn (or at least dispel popular half-truths).
There's emerging evidence that consuming potassium with salt tends to reduce the negative effects of higher salt intake. Basically, that many of the prior sodium studies ignored the sodium/potassium balance. Of course you could still have too much sodium while staying in balance, but just thought that's worth pointing out. If nothing else, it illustrates how complex it nutrition science can be, and how much we still have to learn (or at least dispel popular half-truths).
Salt is a preservative and a key ingredient behind "ultraprocessed products". Are there ultraprocessed products with minimal amount of salt?
This seems like unnecessary nitpicking. What would you say are examples of ultraprocessed food that's not full of salt, sugar and fat?
That misses his point. You can have too much sugar/salt/fat without eating a single "ultra" processed food. So if the root of the problem is sugar/salt/fat it doesn't simply follow that "ultra" processed food is the problem.
The point here is that they are essentially defining "ultraprocessed" as being full of salt, fat and sugar. I can go buy a frozen pizza at Trader Joe's that contains organic flour, yeast, tomatoes and cheese. Nutritionally identical to what I'd make at home. I can also grind sugar cane and wheat berries and churn butter in my kitchen to make a cake that is just as unhealthy as a Twinkie.
As a layman non-scientist, I wonder why we see so many relatively low-value observational studies in diet/nutrition, often with results that get contradicted or fail to replicate a few years later.
What would prevent us from doing a study like this: take 1000 diverse subjects, assign each of them a lab assistant, and for 2+ years, diligently track everything they eat, their exercise, sleep, etc. You could pay each participant and staff $100k/each, and the cost would be on the order of $400MM.
May not be epistemologically perfect given that people change their behavior when observed, but still superior to plenty of the stuff getting published now, and likely the knowledge gained for humankind would be worth many billions.
What would prevent us from doing a study like this: take 1000 diverse subjects, assign each of them a lab assistant, and for 2+ years, diligently track everything they eat, their exercise, sleep, etc. You could pay each participant and staff $100k/each, and the cost would be on the order of $400MM.
May not be epistemologically perfect given that people change their behavior when observed, but still superior to plenty of the stuff getting published now, and likely the knowledge gained for humankind would be worth many billions.
> As a layman non-scientist, I wonder why we see so many relatively low-value observational studies in diet/nutrition, often with results that get contradicted or fail to replicate a few years later.
On my peak fitness enthusiasm I kept a rigorous food diary for some time and it was such a pain in the ass that I don't believe for a second that food diaries coming from people who are not 100% committed and interested in keeping one are accurate at all. People would often forget to log small snacks they have, or estimate portion sizes completely wrong, or neglect logging sauces, oils, condiments, etc.
On my peak fitness enthusiasm I kept a rigorous food diary for some time and it was such a pain in the ass that I don't believe for a second that food diaries coming from people who are not 100% committed and interested in keeping one are accurate at all. People would often forget to log small snacks they have, or estimate portion sizes completely wrong, or neglect logging sauces, oils, condiments, etc.
What you describe is still an observational study, just a very expensive one now. It's still quite possible you'd fail to measure something important you hadn't thought of.
Better to spend some of that budget instead on a randomised controlled trial but there are likely issues with getting people to follow their prescribed diets to the letter
Better to spend some of that budget instead on a randomised controlled trial but there are likely issues with getting people to follow their prescribed diets to the letter
What do you think you could learn from such an expensive study?
It seems too short and unfocused to learn anything meaningful.
It seems too short and unfocused to learn anything meaningful.
Really? I would think weight loss, inflammation, and psychological health measures would at least be affected on a timescale of a couple years, if not risks for things like cancer and heart disease.
Not for an observational study. There is simy too much variation and too many confounding factors. There would be no statistical power and infinite questions on the results.
Essentially everyone's condition and situation would be different.
Keep in mind that 1000 people is the size you might expect for a controlled trial where you change one single thing you expect to have a big impact like a cancer medication and even then you try to screen the patients to have as little variation as possible.
Essentially everyone's condition and situation would be different.
Keep in mind that 1000 people is the size you might expect for a controlled trial where you change one single thing you expect to have a big impact like a cancer medication and even then you try to screen the patients to have as little variation as possible.
There are a wide variety of heavily promoted dietary identities - from vegan to carnivore - but I'm convinced that in terms of one's health, eliminating these processed food items from one's diet is the one that has the most long-term benefits. The only downside is that relying only on 'real food' ingredients requires a fair amount of cooking, but the effort is well worth the payback.
There's no snappy one-word term for this dietary choice, maybe someone could come up with one.
There's no snappy one-word term for this dietary choice, maybe someone could come up with one.
> There are a wide variety of heavily promoted dietary identities - from vegan to carnivore - but I'm convinced that in terms of one's health, eliminating these processed food items from one's diet is the one that has the most long-term benefits.
What has you convinced?
I wouldn't be surprised, but I'm curious if you're relying on anything more than intuition. I don't think intuition is worthless, for whatever it's worth. Seems like a pretty common-sense idea that non-fresh foods could have adverse effects.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's a major factor in increased rates of cancer, which is surely a combination of many mild factors that accumulate over a long period of time.
What has you convinced?
I wouldn't be surprised, but I'm curious if you're relying on anything more than intuition. I don't think intuition is worthless, for whatever it's worth. Seems like a pretty common-sense idea that non-fresh foods could have adverse effects.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's a major factor in increased rates of cancer, which is surely a combination of many mild factors that accumulate over a long period of time.
I believe a Whole-Food Diet is the term for a non-processed diet.
I've heard "Eat food. Not too much." as a slogan for this.
The full quote is:
“Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”
― Michael Pollan, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/18508-eat-food-not-too-much...
“Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”
― Michael Pollan, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/18508-eat-food-not-too-much...
Incidentally, I think this is also why many extreme diets seem to have some evidence in favor of their health benefits. From where I'm standing, it seems like veganism/paleo/etc start being linked to various problems right around the time the agro industry starts cranking out specialized (read: highly-processed) products.
Relatedly: I'm taking bets regarding lab-grown meat.
Relatedly: I'm taking bets regarding lab-grown meat.
Which direction are you betting on lab-grown meats?
I'm betting they go in the same direction as margarine.
Does Meati change your mind?
This startup is growing a specific species of fungus that is high protein and vitamin rich. I haven’t tried it but reviews so far are saying it cooks, tastes and feels like meat.
This startup is growing a specific species of fungus that is high protein and vitamin rich. I haven’t tried it but reviews so far are saying it cooks, tastes and feels like meat.
That's not exactly lab-grown meat. But to your question, it's hard to take bets on individual things, so I'll answer this way: I'll bet against anything lab-grown or highly processed (Meati included), and I expect to make money on average.
Time will tell :)
Time will tell :)
How is it highly processed? They are mass producing a naturally growing fungus, not unlike farming mushrooms. They seem to be adding some seasonings and sodium before packaging but thats not "processing" exactly.
It's transformed from its naturally-occurring aspect into something resembling the texture of meat. That is processing. I suspect that it's also a non-trivial amount of processing, but I could be wrong. Contrast this with grabbing a handful of chanterelles and putting them in a bag.
I wish I knew what was ultraprocessed.
> "Ultraprocessed foods are defined as "industrial formulations of food substances (oils, fats, sugars, starch, and protein isolates) that contain little or no whole foods and typically include flavorings, colorings, emulsifiers, and other cosmetic additives," according to the study.
But if I have a package that says it is whole grain or whatever, how do I know if it is or isn't ultraprocessed or just, you know, regular processed?
> "Ultraprocessed foods are defined as "industrial formulations of food substances (oils, fats, sugars, starch, and protein isolates) that contain little or no whole foods and typically include flavorings, colorings, emulsifiers, and other cosmetic additives," according to the study.
But if I have a package that says it is whole grain or whatever, how do I know if it is or isn't ultraprocessed or just, you know, regular processed?
Indeed. I hate the term "ultraprocessed" so much, because I have no idea what to look for if I try to avoid it.
If I chop my potatoes before boiling them, is that processing? If not, which steps in cooking count as "processing"? And how many of those steps need to be included for the food to be "ultraprocessed"? How can I avoid accidentally "ultraprocessing" my food when I cook it at home?
If I chop my potatoes before boiling them, is that processing? If not, which steps in cooking count as "processing"? And how many of those steps need to be included for the food to be "ultraprocessed"? How can I avoid accidentally "ultraprocessing" my food when I cook it at home?
The definition I heard (apparently by the Brazilian woman that did the first research) was "any ingredient that wouldn't be found in a regular kitchen". Not meaning things like rutabagas or mangosteen, but rather things like xantham gum, soy lecithin, and things with organic chemical names. So by definition you cannot ultra-process your food in your home kitchen.
I think the name is lousy, but I think the reason is that things like xantham gum and soy lecithin are there to provide texture. For example, low-fat yogurt has some of these in it because if you take the fat out, it doesn't have the same texture (probably isn't even solid), so you need to do some processing to get it to the same place. See [1] for a summary.
There's a podcast on the BBC where a doctor tries to get his twin doctor brother of ultra-processed food. Unfortunately, most of the episodes involve emotional issues, but they do have a few minutes of interviews with major researchers. [3] is sort of a summary.
[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/what_is_ultra-processed_...
[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017tcz/episodes/player
[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/van_tulleken
I think the name is lousy, but I think the reason is that things like xantham gum and soy lecithin are there to provide texture. For example, low-fat yogurt has some of these in it because if you take the fat out, it doesn't have the same texture (probably isn't even solid), so you need to do some processing to get it to the same place. See [1] for a summary.
There's a podcast on the BBC where a doctor tries to get his twin doctor brother of ultra-processed food. Unfortunately, most of the episodes involve emotional issues, but they do have a few minutes of interviews with major researchers. [3] is sort of a summary.
[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/what_is_ultra-processed_...
[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017tcz/episodes/player
[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/van_tulleken
Xanthan gum is sold in major UK supermarkets. I have some myself; I use it for thickening home-made hot sauce. It works well for this because it exhibits "shear thinning". It's viscous enough to hold everything in suspension when it's in the bottle, but when you pour it the viscosity decreases, so it's easy to get it out.
If that's the case. shouldn't someone be able to find out which ingredients are harmful? It's unlikely all of them are.
Why are you seeking absolute definitions where none exist? If you have to ask, its probably bad for you. Edges of the grocery store, avoid the aisles, ingredients-not-meals, things not in packaging.... Rules of thumbs abound. Next, a bit of ultra processed stuff is obviously not going to kill you. Some soy sauce, or the ocassional frozen pizza is obviously OK. And its obvious that your example is needlessly contrived. No, its not processing.
This whole thread reads like pedantry for the sake of it.
This whole thread reads like pedantry for the sake of it.
Rules of thumb:
1. Don't buy meals; buy ingredients.
2. The longer the list of ingredients, the more likely it is to be "highly" processed
3. The way you avoid 'highly' processed stuff is to avoid processing altogether. Buy corn you have to husk, meat you have to cut, fish you have to filet, wine you have to uncork, bread you have to slice, etc.
1. Don't buy meals; buy ingredients.
2. The longer the list of ingredients, the more likely it is to be "highly" processed
3. The way you avoid 'highly' processed stuff is to avoid processing altogether. Buy corn you have to husk, meat you have to cut, fish you have to filet, wine you have to uncork, bread you have to slice, etc.
> Buy corn you have to husk, meat you have to cut, fish you have to filet, wine you have to uncork, bread you have to slice, etc.
Ok, this is just silly. Cutting your own meat doesn't make it healthier than having a butcher cut it for you. Box wine is no more or less healthy than bottled wine with a cork. Slicing bread yourself doesn't change its health contents.
Its statements like these that make the whole argument seem like nonsense.
Ok, this is just silly. Cutting your own meat doesn't make it healthier than having a butcher cut it for you. Box wine is no more or less healthy than bottled wine with a cork. Slicing bread yourself doesn't change its health contents.
Its statements like these that make the whole argument seem like nonsense.
It's a rule of thumb, friend. It actually does make a difference in the aggregate, as evidenced by the extra ingredients you will find in pre-processed supermarket meat. Have a look at what's in your hot dogs, for example.
Obvious exceptions apply, such as going to the butcher, as you have astutely observed. These do not invalidate the rule-of-thumb.
Obvious exceptions apply, such as going to the butcher, as you have astutely observed. These do not invalidate the rule-of-thumb.
The issue is rather that nothing in your rule-of-thumb works.
Frozen corn vs whole corn? Were you planning to eat the cob? Does it help my diet to cut corn kernels off manually? How?
Meat you have to cut? Maybe you're thinking hot dogs here, my first thought was ground beef. Does breaking out the meat grinder, and cleaning it, help me eat right? How?
Fish you have to filet? Can I just buy the filets? Or is it 100% necessary that fish skin rot in my garbage can.
Boxed wine? Generally I consider corked wine undrinkable, and I struggle to think what other contribution a cork per se can offer to wine.
Sliced bread? I mean. Look it's a really bad set of rules so I'll have mercy here, the kind of bread which is available only sliced is not great for you, so at least here I can infer your meaning.
Not that it matters because the #1 source of extra pounds on my waist is whole loaves of sourdough bread. I slice them myself.
Frozen corn vs whole corn? Were you planning to eat the cob? Does it help my diet to cut corn kernels off manually? How?
Meat you have to cut? Maybe you're thinking hot dogs here, my first thought was ground beef. Does breaking out the meat grinder, and cleaning it, help me eat right? How?
Fish you have to filet? Can I just buy the filets? Or is it 100% necessary that fish skin rot in my garbage can.
Boxed wine? Generally I consider corked wine undrinkable, and I struggle to think what other contribution a cork per se can offer to wine.
Sliced bread? I mean. Look it's a really bad set of rules so I'll have mercy here, the kind of bread which is available only sliced is not great for you, so at least here I can infer your meaning.
Not that it matters because the #1 source of extra pounds on my waist is whole loaves of sourdough bread. I slice them myself.
Yes, it requires some discernment, as do most rules-of-thumb. There is no algorithm, here.
These practices listed correlate with ultraprocessing though. Pre-sliced bread is more likely to be processed in other ways, too, than bread loaves.
It's a heuristic.
It's a heuristic.
Don't buy non-spoiled. Buy fresh.
The sorry state is that a chain is not stronger than the weakest link. And a food is not healthier than the worst ingredient/compound. A "good" nutrient does not make up for the bad/ultra processed additives.
Stay off the granola bar with high fructose corn syrup.
It is more important to avoid the bad anti-nutrients than to eat a particular food for a certain "miracle" nutrient.
Stay off the granola bar with high fructose corn syrup.
It is more important to avoid the bad anti-nutrients than to eat a particular food for a certain "miracle" nutrient.
> And a food is not healthier than the worst ingredient/compound. A "good" nutrient does not make up for the bad/ultra processed additives.
This can't be true in an absolute sense. There is no way that adding a single drop of high fructose corn syrup to a meal would completely ruin any health benefits of the rest of the meal. There is also no way that adding a bit of corn syrup to a plate of broccoli would be equally as unhealthy for you as a bowl of lucky charms. Obviously the mix of ingredients matters.
Where do you get the idea that a single bad ingredient ruins the entire food?
This can't be true in an absolute sense. There is no way that adding a single drop of high fructose corn syrup to a meal would completely ruin any health benefits of the rest of the meal. There is also no way that adding a bit of corn syrup to a plate of broccoli would be equally as unhealthy for you as a bowl of lucky charms. Obviously the mix of ingredients matters.
Where do you get the idea that a single bad ingredient ruins the entire food?
Sorry. You are right. The amounts matter as well. My bad.
> Stay off the granola bar with high fructose corn syrup.
Would a granola bar sweetened with the exact same number of sucrose/fructose molecules from organic coconut sugar (or palm sugar, or date juice, etc) be any more healthy?
I currently do not believe it would be. Sugar is sugar. But I'm not 100% sure.
Would a granola bar sweetened with the exact same number of sucrose/fructose molecules from organic coconut sugar (or palm sugar, or date juice, etc) be any more healthy?
I currently do not believe it would be. Sugar is sugar. But I'm not 100% sure.
Ultraprocessed for me means "truly delicious and dopamine-inducing". Not that I don't find other food tasty, but something that feels engineered to please your tongue is usually ultraprocessed.
> "People who consumed more than 20% of daily calories from processed foods had a 28% faster decline in global cognition and a 25% faster decline in executive functioning compared to people who ate less than 20%,"
I wish they just showed a graph of "decline in cognition" vs "percentage of calories from processed foods" instead of making me try to parse the relevant information out of sentences like that. What 10% of my calories come from processed foods? I'm I completely safe or is the effect linear in percentage of calories or what?
I wish they just showed a graph of "decline in cognition" vs "percentage of calories from processed foods" instead of making me try to parse the relevant information out of sentences like that. What 10% of my calories come from processed foods? I'm I completely safe or is the effect linear in percentage of calories or what?
>but something that feels engineered to please your tongue is usually ultraprocessed.
That describes nearly all modern cultivars of fruits/vegetables.
That describes nearly all modern cultivars of fruits/vegetables.
I envy you if you feel that way about apples and oranges just like you feel about cookies and pizza
Obviously I don't think apples/oranges are in the same category as cookies/pizza. The reason why I said they fit the criteria for "ultraprocessed" is to show how absurd your rule is (ie. "something that feels engineered to please your tongue is usually ultraprocessed").
It's so absurd that you understood exactly what I meant.
This page from the BBC explains the diffrences between unprocessed and minimally processed foods, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods, and ultra-processed foods.
"Ultra-processed foods usually contain ingredients that you wouldn’t add when cooking homemade food. You may not recognise the names of these ingredients as many will be chemicals, colourings, sweeteners and preservatives."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/what_is_ultra-processed_...
"Ultra-processed foods usually contain ingredients that you wouldn’t add when cooking homemade food. You may not recognise the names of these ingredients as many will be chemicals, colourings, sweeteners and preservatives."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/what_is_ultra-processed_...
you could distinguish a loaf of bread, which is processed, from boxed bread products like crackers or cookies (ultraprocessed), but i doubt that distinction matters much for our health, as they'll both likely include said additives in varying amounts. in shopping and food prep, i'd consider them synonyms--as in, things to avoid (but not dogmatically, sometimes you want some potato chips).
processed foods only comes in a box, bag, or can; that is, most of the center aisles in a grocery store. buy mostly fruits, vegetables, meats, seafood, and dairy--things found on the outer ring of the store. if you want grains or beans, prefer buying the grains/beans directly, not the boxed form of them.
processed foods only comes in a box, bag, or can; that is, most of the center aisles in a grocery store. buy mostly fruits, vegetables, meats, seafood, and dairy--things found on the outer ring of the store. if you want grains or beans, prefer buying the grains/beans directly, not the boxed form of them.
"packaged" alone should be you first indication.
One of the best thing about the "meal in a box" companies is they remove a lot of the friction from cooking from scratch. I use Blue Apron and love the convenience. They gather ingredients that aren't practical for a single person to normally source/maintain yet I get to have interesting and tasty meals. When it comes to a lot of fresh herbs or specialty items, the cost of meals through them can actually be lower since you have far less waste.
They also help force me out of my comfort zones. There are a lot of recipes that would never try cold out of a cook book, but because they are bundling everything needed the risk/reward tilts more firmly into the "why not try it" column.
Even if every meal was at a premium it's still worth it to me for the connivence.
I've shared free meal codes with friends/family - had a co-worker who's teenage daughter wanted to cook more but was overwhelmed. They tried the service, used it for a year and after she got her skills and confidence up they ended up dropping it, but remade their favorites from the last year and used those for ideas of other recipes to try that they probably otherwise wouldn't have.
You don't have to take them every week too - I currently skip around and do it maybe one or two times a month just to supplement my other cooking. The variety is nice. It is a bit of a pain requiring some micromanaging since they are obviously motivated to keep you on the weekly treadmill.
They also help force me out of my comfort zones. There are a lot of recipes that would never try cold out of a cook book, but because they are bundling everything needed the risk/reward tilts more firmly into the "why not try it" column.
Even if every meal was at a premium it's still worth it to me for the connivence.
I've shared free meal codes with friends/family - had a co-worker who's teenage daughter wanted to cook more but was overwhelmed. They tried the service, used it for a year and after she got her skills and confidence up they ended up dropping it, but remade their favorites from the last year and used those for ideas of other recipes to try that they probably otherwise wouldn't have.
You don't have to take them every week too - I currently skip around and do it maybe one or two times a month just to supplement my other cooking. The variety is nice. It is a bit of a pain requiring some micromanaging since they are obviously motivated to keep you on the weekly treadmill.
I'd like to hear more about the study design / quality of the science.
How are they correcting for correlation between the ability to afford the more money-expensive or more time-expensive ends of rich people with experts that cook for them, and health nuts (or suffers of seriously annoying allergies) that cook for themselves even though it's more time expensive?
How are they correcting for correlation between the ability to afford the more money-expensive or more time-expensive ends of rich people with experts that cook for them, and health nuts (or suffers of seriously annoying allergies) that cook for themselves even though it's more time expensive?
It would help if the exact factors that cause health issues in ultra-processed foods could be identified. "Ultra-processed" is too crude a heuristic. sugar and fat? refined seed oil? calorie density? Food coloring and other toxic ingredients?
I (and other) call Bs on classifying something as processed or ultra processed as inherently bad.
Baby formulas, workout premixes, and also home cooking are all forms of processed food.
It’s what you put in it and also at what ratio is what matters most.
If you get processed food that has all the good oils and fiber and proteins like YFood or Soylent that’s actually more healthy than say eating “unprocessed” fried potatoes for example.
Sounds similar to this paper [0] that compared the types of dietary fats eaten with cognitive decline in adults 65+.
"higher intakes of saturated fat (p for trend = 0.04) and trans-unsaturated fat (p for trend = 0.07) were linearly associated with greater decline in cognitive score over 6 years. These associations became stronger in analyses that eliminated persons whose fat intake changed in recent years or whose baseline cognitive scores were in the lowest 15%."
I, for one, am hoping it's largely to do with cheap, high-calorie ingredients and not to do with actually processing as I'm a big fan of Soylent (largely monounsaturated fats FYI) for its convenience and it doesn't get much more "processed" than that.
0 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15136684/
"higher intakes of saturated fat (p for trend = 0.04) and trans-unsaturated fat (p for trend = 0.07) were linearly associated with greater decline in cognitive score over 6 years. These associations became stronger in analyses that eliminated persons whose fat intake changed in recent years or whose baseline cognitive scores were in the lowest 15%."
I, for one, am hoping it's largely to do with cheap, high-calorie ingredients and not to do with actually processing as I'm a big fan of Soylent (largely monounsaturated fats FYI) for its convenience and it doesn't get much more "processed" than that.
0 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15136684/
Is there an official scale of processednes? NVM found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-processed_food
"TV dinners bad for you" sounds an awful lot like "Walmart shopping liked to early mortality". Entirely believable, but I have my doubts anyone could untangle the confounding sociological factors.
"...typically include flavorings, colorings, emulsifiers, and other cosmetic additives,"
I'm thinking it's probably relates to all the additives in foods today. I would love to see some sort of study comparing these commercially processed foods containing additives to more traditional processing (like my grandparents eating tons of homecanned and home processed foods).
I'm thinking it's probably relates to all the additives in foods today. I would love to see some sort of study comparing these commercially processed foods containing additives to more traditional processing (like my grandparents eating tons of homecanned and home processed foods).
[deleted]
It always amuses me whenever the crux of an argument is "too much X is bad", where the definition of "too much" is assumed to be commonly accepted, but when pressed for a definition it decays to precisely that amount for which X is bad (i.e. a tautological argument).
I think I sort of know what they are, but a definition of "ultra-processed" foods would be good.
The article says they are “industrial formulations of food substances (oils, fats, sugars, starch, and protein isolates) that contain little or no whole foods and typically include flavorings, colorings, emulsifiers, and other cosmetic additives”.
I take that to mean milk may be a whole food, yogurt might be a processed food, and spray cheese in a can would be ultra-processed.
I take that to mean milk may be a whole food, yogurt might be a processed food, and spray cheese in a can would be ultra-processed.
High glycemic index foods, full of chemicals / salt / etc linked to cognitive decline and other health problems? Shocker.
Are food companies incentivized to create addictive products that exploit human biology? 100%
Are food companies incentivized to create addictive products that exploit human biology? 100%
If you don't have a partner/parents at home you are less likely to cook yourself and eat more processed foods.
People are getting more lonely and eat more ultraprocessed foods because of it.
Search for the following food industry term “Bliss Point”. Related.
I'm always pretty skeptical of correlative nutrition science studies, and this one is no different.
I would posit that anyone who studies "ultraprocessed" foods is unlikely to ever release a study showing they are good for you. The very category of ultraprocessed foods was invented to be a "bad-for-you" food category, and so the research program is "find more evidence that they are bad."
Categorizing food based on whether it's industrial or home-made may be a useful heuristic for lifestyle choices, but it seems unlikely to me to be useful for getting a deep understanding of nutrition and health.
I would posit that anyone who studies "ultraprocessed" foods is unlikely to ever release a study showing they are good for you. The very category of ultraprocessed foods was invented to be a "bad-for-you" food category, and so the research program is "find more evidence that they are bad."
Categorizing food based on whether it's industrial or home-made may be a useful heuristic for lifestyle choices, but it seems unlikely to me to be useful for getting a deep understanding of nutrition and health.
> “People need to know they should cook more and prepare their own food from scratch. I know. We say we don’t have time but it really doesn’t take that much time,” Suemoto said.
This is bullshit in a very important way: you have to know how to cook. Bring back home economics classes.
This is bullshit in a very important way: you have to know how to cook. Bring back home economics classes.
I've long been an advocate for a 4 year program that coincides with the entire high school experience.
Students should grow, harvest and cook their own food. While doing so, every subject should be involved.
Chemistry and Biology are the more obvious ones for sake of soil testing, plant biology, cross pollination, and composting. Chemistry also should be involved in cooking.
Math and science classes for sake of grids, spacing, growth charting, control groups, etc as well as conservation.
Economics for understanding all of the costs involved from planting, to harvesting, to buying equipment and hiring labor, shipping to grocery stores, disposal of food that isn't purchased. Additionally, budgeting for ingredients to prepare meals.
History can bring a lot of this to life by studying agricultural history and the accompanying economics, including the world events surrounding them. I'm sure there's plenty of literature go to along with it as well.
And you can even get into computer science, engineering and robotics by setting up FarmBot's in schools, which are open source. Students can learn to use them as designed as well as program new functionality.
Help students learn by making it both beneficial, relatable and connected.
Students should grow, harvest and cook their own food. While doing so, every subject should be involved.
Chemistry and Biology are the more obvious ones for sake of soil testing, plant biology, cross pollination, and composting. Chemistry also should be involved in cooking.
Math and science classes for sake of grids, spacing, growth charting, control groups, etc as well as conservation.
Economics for understanding all of the costs involved from planting, to harvesting, to buying equipment and hiring labor, shipping to grocery stores, disposal of food that isn't purchased. Additionally, budgeting for ingredients to prepare meals.
History can bring a lot of this to life by studying agricultural history and the accompanying economics, including the world events surrounding them. I'm sure there's plenty of literature go to along with it as well.
And you can even get into computer science, engineering and robotics by setting up FarmBot's in schools, which are open source. Students can learn to use them as designed as well as program new functionality.
Help students learn by making it both beneficial, relatable and connected.
My high school had vocational agriculture classes that included much of that. Well more mechanics and weather science than history or lit, but still . . . that exists.
Pro tip: If they teach Vo-Ag in your area, look for the FFA (Future Farmers of America) kids. They fund-raise by selling wonderful produce.
Pro tip: If they teach Vo-Ag in your area, look for the FFA (Future Farmers of America) kids. They fund-raise by selling wonderful produce.
Great to hear!
And tbh, it really does take time to prepare a good meal, including washing dishes and all that. For those of us living alone it takes a good chunk of our free time after work.
Not arguing with you that it takes a considerable amount of time to prepare and clean-up a home cooked meal. But as someone who is not living alone (have a wife and kids), I'd say you probably have a lot more free time than you think you do, and I'm not sure that cooking just for yourself takes up any more time than it would cooking more food, for more people with varying tastes, allergies, etc. Add to the fact that most of the people being cooked for (kids) are basically freeloaders, I think that people living alone really have less excuse to eat healthy.
> I'd say you probably have a lot more free time than you think you do
Not to sound harsh, this is just how I frame these sorts of things for my own benefit: If you have free time and are getting takeout or eating hot pockets, you're just borrowing that time from the end of your lifespan to use between work and sleep. It's like borrowing from a 401k on a fixed income.
Speaking of, the same goes for finances. We feel like certain essentials are disproportionately expensive because we can otherwise afford previously unheard of luxuries on average incomes, but we are actually just much less wealthy than consumerism makes us feel.
So if we live wisely and with discipline, it is quickly obvious that time and money are in much shorter supply than most realize. That isn't necessarily grim, but this framing is much more useful in good habit forming in my experience.
The value culture in the West has so quickly changed in only a generation or two depending on the specific region, that I'm more suspicious over time of the perceived unobtainability of certain ways of living that we frequently romanticize.
Not to sound harsh, this is just how I frame these sorts of things for my own benefit: If you have free time and are getting takeout or eating hot pockets, you're just borrowing that time from the end of your lifespan to use between work and sleep. It's like borrowing from a 401k on a fixed income.
Speaking of, the same goes for finances. We feel like certain essentials are disproportionately expensive because we can otherwise afford previously unheard of luxuries on average incomes, but we are actually just much less wealthy than consumerism makes us feel.
So if we live wisely and with discipline, it is quickly obvious that time and money are in much shorter supply than most realize. That isn't necessarily grim, but this framing is much more useful in good habit forming in my experience.
The value culture in the West has so quickly changed in only a generation or two depending on the specific region, that I'm more suspicious over time of the perceived unobtainability of certain ways of living that we frequently romanticize.
Electric pressure cookers are the key to encouraging home cooking.
I just throw in Chicken Thighs, Rice, Frozen Vegetables. Add water. Set for 7 minutes. Come back to several servings of perfectly cooked food. Add things like peanut sauce and seasoning to taste before or after pressurization.
Total human involvement time to prep, monitor, and serve: about 5 minutes, ingredients are available at any Walmart. Electric pressure cookers are regularly on sale for $40 at Best Buy.
Cooking the same meal using pots and pans would take 60 minutes of human time and require many more pieces of equipment to buy, use and wash.
Give every poor household in the USA an electric pressure cooker, and the instructions on how to use them. Poor households wouldn't even need cooktops or ovens anymore.
I just throw in Chicken Thighs, Rice, Frozen Vegetables. Add water. Set for 7 minutes. Come back to several servings of perfectly cooked food. Add things like peanut sauce and seasoning to taste before or after pressurization.
Total human involvement time to prep, monitor, and serve: about 5 minutes, ingredients are available at any Walmart. Electric pressure cookers are regularly on sale for $40 at Best Buy.
Cooking the same meal using pots and pans would take 60 minutes of human time and require many more pieces of equipment to buy, use and wash.
Give every poor household in the USA an electric pressure cooker, and the instructions on how to use them. Poor households wouldn't even need cooktops or ovens anymore.
I live alone and occasionally invite friends over to make + eat dinner together. An extra set of hands prepping food and cleaning up afterwards is definitely faster than doing it solo.
Totally. But I make one meal each night, if you don’t like it, you are on your own. I don’t mind cooking but I am not a short order cook! My son was making peanut butter and jelly at on his own 4 when he didn’t like what I made.
Get instapot. Throw ingredients into instapot. Press button. Put contents into bowl. Rinse out instapot. Eat. Rinse out bowl.
You don't even need to buy instapot. Roasting/baking is just as easy (especially if you have a thermometer), and most people probably already have a oven/toaster oven at home. The high temperatures that can be achieved with an oven is a plus as well, because that means you can get browning (maillard reaction) that you can't get with a pressure cooker.
Depends on how efficient you are, I prepare 18/21 meals a week at home, and have been doing this for years).
I spend 1 hour every two weeks getting groceries for ~$120. I spend 1.5 hours every two weeks (5 minutes a day + 20 minutes to prep 14 “containers”) preparing breakfast and rinsing dishes from the previous day for the dishwasher). My breakfast is cooked oat bran with walnuts, flax seed, wheat germ, Ceylon cinnamon, cacao, blueberries, raisins, chia seeds, pumpkin seeds, 4oz orange juice, fish oil, vitamins d3, k2.
I spend 2.5 hours a week (5 to 15 minutes a day) preparing lunch, typically steamed vegetables + 150 grams chicken + 1 cup dry instant brown rice cooked OR salmon + simple salad + sweet potatoes OR 8oz unsalted black beans with fresh guacamole OR lentils OR potato and egg tacos with homemade salsa OR “fried” rice, etc.
I spend the same preparing dinner with same / similar dishes as lunch.
I also snack on fresh fruit / vegetables between meals sometimes.
Roughly $240 and 15 hours a month (30 minutes a day) for all food prep + cleanup, and yes, the numbers are accurate as I have timed myself over a two week period in the past, if anything I’m probably faster now. I’m sure there are other factors that can add extra time, but for me, a single guy in the US, I spend less time and money cooking healthy delicious meals at home than I did going out to eat, and only slightly more time than heating up frozen dinners, which I think is more than compensated for by the resulting health benefits.
I spend 1 hour every two weeks getting groceries for ~$120. I spend 1.5 hours every two weeks (5 minutes a day + 20 minutes to prep 14 “containers”) preparing breakfast and rinsing dishes from the previous day for the dishwasher). My breakfast is cooked oat bran with walnuts, flax seed, wheat germ, Ceylon cinnamon, cacao, blueberries, raisins, chia seeds, pumpkin seeds, 4oz orange juice, fish oil, vitamins d3, k2.
I spend 2.5 hours a week (5 to 15 minutes a day) preparing lunch, typically steamed vegetables + 150 grams chicken + 1 cup dry instant brown rice cooked OR salmon + simple salad + sweet potatoes OR 8oz unsalted black beans with fresh guacamole OR lentils OR potato and egg tacos with homemade salsa OR “fried” rice, etc.
I spend the same preparing dinner with same / similar dishes as lunch.
I also snack on fresh fruit / vegetables between meals sometimes.
Roughly $240 and 15 hours a month (30 minutes a day) for all food prep + cleanup, and yes, the numbers are accurate as I have timed myself over a two week period in the past, if anything I’m probably faster now. I’m sure there are other factors that can add extra time, but for me, a single guy in the US, I spend less time and money cooking healthy delicious meals at home than I did going out to eat, and only slightly more time than heating up frozen dinners, which I think is more than compensated for by the resulting health benefits.
Having a sharp knife and preparing food in bulk for at least 3-4 meals is key to time savings. Most single men that I know like to prep food for the entire work week in advance.
If you're making a single serving (e.g. single dinner for yourself), then the overhead of cleaning dishes and pans makes it uneconomical to do so.
Also, certain things in cooking don't need supervision and you can perform other chores during that time (e.g. making beef/chicken stock in a pot, baking a roast, etc.)
If you're making a single serving (e.g. single dinner for yourself), then the overhead of cleaning dishes and pans makes it uneconomical to do so.
Also, certain things in cooking don't need supervision and you can perform other chores during that time (e.g. making beef/chicken stock in a pot, baking a roast, etc.)
Yup - when I was at my most organized I would make a normal family sized meal, eat one portion then portion up the leftovers on a plate, slip the whole thing in a bag and seal with a vacuum sealer and toss 'em in the freezer. Home made TV dinners!
Now I'm spoiled with services like Blue Apron, but I still will occasionally make my favorite meals and portion them up into my own frozen dinners :)
No doubt. But how much time and money could obesity and cognitive decline cost you?
There are plenty of less complicated, one pot meal recipes littering the internet. Have you tried an Instapot or a nice air fryer?
There are plenty of less complicated, one pot meal recipes littering the internet. Have you tried an Instapot or a nice air fryer?
I find it is quite troublesome to:
find a recipe
get the ingredients
make the meal
So most of the time I just substitute on pasta with a tomato/cucumber/whatelseIgrabbedintheshop salad.
~20 mins to shop for a two-three days worth of food, ~20 mins to make, even less if I'm lazy and bouggt frozen dumplings.
find a recipe
get the ingredients
make the meal
So most of the time I just substitute on pasta with a tomato/cucumber/whatelseIgrabbedintheshop salad.
~20 mins to shop for a two-three days worth of food, ~20 mins to make, even less if I'm lazy and bouggt frozen dumplings.
> For those of us living alone it takes a good chunk of our free time after work.
It takes even more time for people preparing food for a family. Throw in kids who are picky eaters, and it is even harder.
It takes even more time for people preparing food for a family. Throw in kids who are picky eaters, and it is even harder.
You can make your kids not picky by putting a plate in front of them and providing the choice of either eating it or going to bed hungry. Kids aren't born only wanting to eat chicken nuggets and mac n' cheese.
I thought this, too, until I had kids. I tried this... they didn't eat, then couldn't fall asleep because they were hungry, so stayed up all night crying because they were hungry. Tried again, they took a few bites then threw it all up.
Maybe they would have broken after a few more days of starvation, but I didn't have it in me to do it.
Maybe they would have broken after a few more days of starvation, but I didn't have it in me to do it.
What were you trying to feed your kids that they wouldn’t eat anything at all for days? I let my son choose breakfast and lunch, within reason. And then mommy and I choose dinner. If he doesn’t like dinner he can have some fruit or sometimes he makes a pb&j if he is hungrier. If he eats dinner we made, he can have a treat. No dinner, no treat. There is no fight or arguing, that’s just the established rules now and he is aware of them.
I didn't make it multiple days, and it wasn't just a single food she wouldn't eat.. it was multiple options, but she refused them all.
We have gotten to a better place now. She still will rarely eat what we eat (unless it is on one of her 3-4 meals that she will eat), but there are some healthy (enough) staples that she will eat when we eat our meal... strangely, she likes plain, uncooked, beans from a can with plain rice. She eats berries, and likes to eat plain, uncooked, spinach. She is also more open to trying new foods now, although she almost always dislikes them; our only ask of her is that she at least tries something before refusing it. If it was up to her, she would eat nothing but pizza or chicken nuggets for dinner.
She is 6, and it is an ongoing process to get her to eat more things. She complains that most food is too 'spicy', even if it isn't spicy at all. I don't think there is some magic cure that would make her eat a wider variety of foods. Her grandfather is similar, he only eats the most bland food possible.
We have gotten to a better place now. She still will rarely eat what we eat (unless it is on one of her 3-4 meals that she will eat), but there are some healthy (enough) staples that she will eat when we eat our meal... strangely, she likes plain, uncooked, beans from a can with plain rice. She eats berries, and likes to eat plain, uncooked, spinach. She is also more open to trying new foods now, although she almost always dislikes them; our only ask of her is that she at least tries something before refusing it. If it was up to her, she would eat nothing but pizza or chicken nuggets for dinner.
She is 6, and it is an ongoing process to get her to eat more things. She complains that most food is too 'spicy', even if it isn't spicy at all. I don't think there is some magic cure that would make her eat a wider variety of foods. Her grandfather is similar, he only eats the most bland food possible.
Saying either he can eat what we eat or have a safe alternative sounds like the exact opposite of eat or go hungry that the thread is about. Your dinner time routine sounds very reasonable. I'm a new parent and our methods are growing into something similar.
>You can make your kids not picky by putting a plate in front of them and providing the choice of either eating it or going to bed hungry. Kids aren't born only wanting to eat chicken nuggets and mac n' cheese.
Yep. I never understood the whole "my kids won't eat $x" thing.
When I was a kid, i ate what was given to me (which was the same as everyone else got) or I didn't eat.
And not because we were poor and couldn't afford to indulge me either. We were a family and ate the same food together. There was never any discussion or expectation of anything different.
Yep. I never understood the whole "my kids won't eat $x" thing.
When I was a kid, i ate what was given to me (which was the same as everyone else got) or I didn't eat.
And not because we were poor and couldn't afford to indulge me either. We were a family and ate the same food together. There was never any discussion or expectation of anything different.
It's not as easy as "going to bed hungry". It requires work by parents to provide a positive environment when it comes to food - never giving certain foods a stigma, not putting pressure on them to "eat their vegetables", never reminding them what they like or don't like, always making meals positive, letting them choose what to eat, etc.. The concept is, I believe, called "baby-led weaning"; my wife discovered it and both of our kids are phenomenal eaters as a result.
But yeah, it's absolutely not as simple or easy as, "Well, if ya don't eat you'll be hungry" - because congratulations, now they will carry that hatred towards that food with them and it'll come out the next time you serve it to them. And even then, if they're not picky, cooking still takes time because there's a kid running around who often doesn't give a shit about the fact that you have to tend to whatever's cooking at the moment, or they're too little so you need to modify your food prep in order to eliminate/reduce choking hazards.
But yeah, it's absolutely not as simple or easy as, "Well, if ya don't eat you'll be hungry" - because congratulations, now they will carry that hatred towards that food with them and it'll come out the next time you serve it to them. And even then, if they're not picky, cooking still takes time because there's a kid running around who often doesn't give a shit about the fact that you have to tend to whatever's cooking at the moment, or they're too little so you need to modify your food prep in order to eliminate/reduce choking hazards.
While your suggestions about how to treat food as to not create issues down the road are correct, I still think you are attributing too much power to parents. Everyone wants to believe that if you just do these certain things, then your kids will turn out a certain way. That just isn't true; while a parent can help shift some things, a lot of things are just about how a particular kid is. Some kids are just more picky than others, no matter what parenting techniques you use.
I never said that any kind of parenting method is guaranteed to achieve the results you want. My kids still aren't into certain foods and won't eat them, but it's not like they actively hate those foods, and I'm not setting thems up for avoiding those foods entirely in the future. It's a general concept that I am sure we will find ourselves employing throughout their lives, even as adults - build and maintain a strong foundation upon which they can grow on their terms.
The crux of my point was to highlight that parenting is never as simplistic as the previous comment ("All ya have to do is tell them to eat or go hungry!") may have made it sound, not to suggest that you can mold your children exactly as you would like.
Edit: And your point about some kids being pickier than others is actually exactly my point. That's why I said it's not easy - it has taken a lot of time and patience for us to get our children to this point. I've heard stories of parents struggling for over a year or more to get a kid to break certain eating habits. It's not just picky eating, though - correcting various aspects of a child's personality requires a LOT of time and attention, often over the course of years. That's why I took an issue with OP brushing it off so casually.
The crux of my point was to highlight that parenting is never as simplistic as the previous comment ("All ya have to do is tell them to eat or go hungry!") may have made it sound, not to suggest that you can mold your children exactly as you would like.
Edit: And your point about some kids being pickier than others is actually exactly my point. That's why I said it's not easy - it has taken a lot of time and patience for us to get our children to this point. I've heard stories of parents struggling for over a year or more to get a kid to break certain eating habits. It's not just picky eating, though - correcting various aspects of a child's personality requires a LOT of time and attention, often over the course of years. That's why I took an issue with OP brushing it off so casually.
Best method that works until they are 7: make up an imaginary friend (like a fairy, gnome, etc) that visits you once a year and brings you toys IF you eat the being's favorite foods, which happen to coincide with what the child detests
Works. 100% guaranteed. They will eat everything with a smile
In my case, I use the Tio de Nadal, which makes for a fun time when he visits (Kids have to hit the Tio with a stick and sing songs, then he shits sweets and toys)
Works. 100% guaranteed. They will eat everything with a smile
In my case, I use the Tio de Nadal, which makes for a fun time when he visits (Kids have to hit the Tio with a stick and sing songs, then he shits sweets and toys)
This is the way. I also gave them the extra option to eat fruit instead of what I made. Also works wonders in the morning when he gets dressed slowly. “Oh you aren’t ready,bummer, looks like we are going to school in your pj’s”. Only needs to happen once and they get ready real quick.
I think that required housewives. We're missing a full day's domestic labour.
Nah. I work long hours and still find time to cook. Dinner takes about 15 mins to prepare, on average. I think the issue has more to do with people not knowing how to cook things that are both simple and nutritious.
I really feel for people who are trying to learn; every beginner's cookbook is full of things that require specific ingredients, complicated prep work, or a shit-ton of chopping.
I've toyed around with the idea of writing a cookbook of my own, but _that_ is something I truly do not have time for. Ah well :/
I really feel for people who are trying to learn; every beginner's cookbook is full of things that require specific ingredients, complicated prep work, or a shit-ton of chopping.
I've toyed around with the idea of writing a cookbook of my own, but _that_ is something I truly do not have time for. Ah well :/
> Dinner takes about 15 mins to prepare, on average.
This doesn't include time to meal plan, grocery shop, and clean dishes. Also, 15 minutes isn't a ton of time, but it isn't nothing.
This doesn't include time to meal plan, grocery shop, and clean dishes. Also, 15 minutes isn't a ton of time, but it isn't nothing.
It also doesn't include the opportunity cost of not doing all that. If getting a meal quick saves stress, time, planning, etc. etc. then it's providing a highly valuable service.
If you truly cannot find 15-30 mins for this, then I have no advice to offer.
For the rest, having your groceries delivered is one solution. Life is about trade-offs.
For the rest, having your groceries delivered is one solution. Life is about trade-offs.
Maybe we could unionize the tech industry so we have the time to cook healthy meals.
If you're working so many hours that you physically cannot cook for yourself, then you have my sincerest sympathy, but that is not the norm. Speak for yourself.
I don’t know anything how to cook anything from fresh ingredients that takes just 15 minutes from entering the kitchen to going to the table to eat. It takes 7 minutes for my kettle to bring 1.5 L of water to boil. (Yay 120v…)
Instant oatmeal I guess? Anything requiring dairy or eggs won’t work.
Instant oatmeal I guess? Anything requiring dairy or eggs won’t work.
I've been cooking a long time and IME there's about a 95% chance that a recipe billed as "15 minutes" is only actually 15 minutes if you don't start the timer until all the veggies are processed, all the equipment is out, and all the ingredients are measured.
Almost always the actual time for "15-minute meal" is 30-40 minutes—sometimes even longer. Not counting stuff like clean-up (any that you can't accomplish via clean-as-you-go, anyway) or shopping or any of that, just the actual time between "I have all the stuff I need for this recipe and am going to make it now" and "OK it is ready to eat".
Almost always the actual time for "15-minute meal" is 30-40 minutes—sometimes even longer. Not counting stuff like clean-up (any that you can't accomplish via clean-as-you-go, anyway) or shopping or any of that, just the actual time between "I have all the stuff I need for this recipe and am going to make it now" and "OK it is ready to eat".
Agreed. This is precisely the issue with a lot of beginner-oriented cookbooks.
Fortunately, 15 min start-to-finish recipes exist. And once you have four or five under your belt, it becomes something of a pleasure to extend the 15 mins to 20 (or even 30) and make something better. At least, when you have the time, which for me is on Sunday.
Fortunately, 15 min start-to-finish recipes exist. And once you have four or five under your belt, it becomes something of a pleasure to extend the 15 mins to 20 (or even 30) and make something better. At least, when you have the time, which for me is on Sunday.
Non-instant oatmeal takes 5 minutes. Eggs 2 minutes (but fine if you won't eat them). Broiling a steak takes 6 minutes. Broiling a salmon filet takes 15 minutes. A single serving of rice in a saucepan takes about 15 minutes. Steaming or sauteeing vegetables takes about 10 minutes, plus a few more to chop them up at the start (though not the insane time to dice tomatoes or onions). Boiling and mashing potatoes takes about 10 minutes.
These are the basic staples I use personally. Three meals a day, hand-cooked from scratch. Add to that something pre and post workout consisting of whey protein, fresh fruit, and possibly some maltodextrin or blended frozen berries, that don't need to be cooked, and that's my entire diet.
I never had to take a home ec class and my mom did not teach me to cook. The basics are pretty simple. Apply heat until what you're heating is sufficiently palatable or above a safe temperature for meats that is indicated directly on the thermometer. Working from home is pretty key, though, since I don't have to eat super early in the morning, super late at night, or reheat a soggy lunch in the break room microwave. I guess a more powerful stove helps, as it doesn't take me anywhere near 7 minutes to bring a pot to boiling.
These are the basic staples I use personally. Three meals a day, hand-cooked from scratch. Add to that something pre and post workout consisting of whey protein, fresh fruit, and possibly some maltodextrin or blended frozen berries, that don't need to be cooked, and that's my entire diet.
I never had to take a home ec class and my mom did not teach me to cook. The basics are pretty simple. Apply heat until what you're heating is sufficiently palatable or above a safe temperature for meats that is indicated directly on the thermometer. Working from home is pretty key, though, since I don't have to eat super early in the morning, super late at night, or reheat a soggy lunch in the break room microwave. I guess a more powerful stove helps, as it doesn't take me anywhere near 7 minutes to bring a pot to boiling.
Adding to this (excellent) summary:
- Buy the best ingredients you can
- Taste and smell as you go
- Don't overcook
Following these three rules will allow for culinary experimentation, while avoiding disaster.
Final bit of advice: enjoy it. It's fun to make something delicious, especially after a hard day full of "emotional labor" and whatnot.
- Buy the best ingredients you can
- Taste and smell as you go
- Don't overcook
Following these three rules will allow for culinary experimentation, while avoiding disaster.
Final bit of advice: enjoy it. It's fun to make something delicious, especially after a hard day full of "emotional labor" and whatnot.
> Final bit of advice
Don't be afraid to fail. The worst what can be is what you would wait for a pizza delivery while you are scrubbing pots.
No snapshots and backups there!
Don't be afraid to fail. The worst what can be is what you would wait for a pizza delivery while you are scrubbing pots.
No snapshots and backups there!
Ok, so you can add 5 mins to set the table. Are we really going to nit-pick?
If you can't find 30 mins to make a meal, lowering that to 15 mins isn't going to make a difference. Just get up 30 mins earlier if it comes to that.
If you can't do that, then yeah ... you might be part of the .005% of people who are really in a bind, and physically cannot cook for themselves. My advice does not apply to such cases, and I can only give you my sincerest best-wishes.
If you can't find 30 mins to make a meal, lowering that to 15 mins isn't going to make a difference. Just get up 30 mins earlier if it comes to that.
If you can't do that, then yeah ... you might be part of the .005% of people who are really in a bind, and physically cannot cook for themselves. My advice does not apply to such cases, and I can only give you my sincerest best-wishes.
You're not pricing the stress and emotional labour required to do this at the end of the day, for people who also have to look after children; themselves, etc.
This isnt an issue of whether people can physically move.
This isnt an issue of whether people can physically move.
If you're not in a place where you can find 15-30 mins to cook for yourself, you indeed have much bigger problems that cooking advice cannot solve. I sincerely wish you fair winds.
I was struggling with that until I started prepping ingredients ahead of time.
If you already have diced onion, bell peppers, and mushrooms in the fridge, then it doesn't even take fifteen minutes to make an omelette, a salad, or some sauteed vegetables with sausage.
The only thing that you need is that after bringing groceries home you need to prep the vegetables and put them in the fridge. The good thing is that all that labor is amortized for the rest of the week, and it makes home cooking easier and faster than ordering delivery.
If you already have diced onion, bell peppers, and mushrooms in the fridge, then it doesn't even take fifteen minutes to make an omelette, a salad, or some sauteed vegetables with sausage.
The only thing that you need is that after bringing groceries home you need to prep the vegetables and put them in the fridge. The good thing is that all that labor is amortized for the rest of the week, and it makes home cooking easier and faster than ordering delivery.
>Anything requiring dairy or eggs won’t work.
Is that because you're vegan, or because you think it takes a long time?
I'll be having an omelette for dinner this evening and if it takes me more than 10 or so minutes to prepare, I'll be quite surprised.
Is that because you're vegan, or because you think it takes a long time?
I'll be having an omelette for dinner this evening and if it takes me more than 10 or so minutes to prepare, I'll be quite surprised.
I'm allergic to caesin or whey and I haven't figured out what is in eggs that makes me feel sick.
My diet is basically vegan + meat. (Easiest way to explain it.)
My diet is basically vegan + meat. (Easiest way to explain it.)
I'm sorry. I imagine that limits you in many ways, since dairy and eggs are ubiquitous in western cooking.
Stir-fry meat and vegetables can be quite tasty and quick to prepare.
Something like mustard greens or gai lan[0] can be shredded by hand in a few moments and/or cut up almost as quickly.
Mushrooms (whole if you're in a rush, or sliced -- that only takes a minute or so), tofu (i prefer firm tofu), are also quite nice for such a dish.
And you can grill your meat/fish/poultry and saute your vegetables too.
Fresh fruit is also quite tasty.
I guess my point is that one can make tasty, healthful food quickly and easily, even if you have dietary restrictions.
In fact, those with dietary restrictions are likely better off cooking than eating prepared/pre-processed foods, as you don't have any insight/control over the kitchen/factory in which those foods are prepared.
Not telling you what to do, just sharing my experiences. I hope you find them useful.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gai_lan
Stir-fry meat and vegetables can be quite tasty and quick to prepare.
Something like mustard greens or gai lan[0] can be shredded by hand in a few moments and/or cut up almost as quickly.
Mushrooms (whole if you're in a rush, or sliced -- that only takes a minute or so), tofu (i prefer firm tofu), are also quite nice for such a dish.
And you can grill your meat/fish/poultry and saute your vegetables too.
Fresh fruit is also quite tasty.
I guess my point is that one can make tasty, healthful food quickly and easily, even if you have dietary restrictions.
In fact, those with dietary restrictions are likely better off cooking than eating prepared/pre-processed foods, as you don't have any insight/control over the kitchen/factory in which those foods are prepared.
Not telling you what to do, just sharing my experiences. I hope you find them useful.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gai_lan
Have you come across any good (or, better,) cookbooks or resources for simple and nutritious food? I'm about to go to college so it would be a great help
I have heard good things about Tim Ferriss' The Four Hour Chef, though I have not read it myself. What I like about it is that it seems to focus on the process of cooking, rather than giving you a list of recipes. It's about turning you into "someone who cooks" rather than documenting such and such recipe.
The rules of thumb, which I am paraphrasing from secondhand discussions about the book, are as follows:
1. Buy good ingredients.
2. Taste and smell as you go.
3. Herbs and spices are your friends.
4. Don't overcook.
I agree with all of them.
Here's the thing: cooking is a skill, like juggling or programming. Just knowing all the rules (techne) doesn't suffice to actually perform the act. You need to spend some time applying the principles to concrete situations (metis). The good news is that if you follow the above rules, you'll basically never make something inedible.
Another tip I can give you is to get familiar with substitution ingredients. Don't have any sour cream? Yogurt is probably fine.
Now, in direct contradiction with what I've been saying so far, let me share with you one of my favorite recipes that got me through my PhD. Cooking time: 10 mins.
INGREDIENTS:
1. 1 or two whole leeks, depending on how hungry you are
2. Sour cream (or whatever)
3. Bacon (or lardons, if you can find them, but seriously... whatever)
4. White wine (optional, but _really_ makes a difference. Prefer dry wine, but whatever.)
PREP:
1. Cut your leek in 1cm rings. Throw away the dark green part.
COOKING:
1. Cook your bacon until crispy, then crumble it and set it aside.
2. While the bacon is cooking, put some butter in a pan and cook your leeks until they're soft and slightly translucid (kinda like you would cook an onion). Don't sweat it; it's hard to fuck up.
3. Add bacon and sour cream. Stir.
4. Add white wine. Stir until you're happy with the consistency
Boom. Done. Keeps well in the fridge, to boot.
The rules of thumb, which I am paraphrasing from secondhand discussions about the book, are as follows:
1. Buy good ingredients.
2. Taste and smell as you go.
3. Herbs and spices are your friends.
4. Don't overcook.
I agree with all of them.
Here's the thing: cooking is a skill, like juggling or programming. Just knowing all the rules (techne) doesn't suffice to actually perform the act. You need to spend some time applying the principles to concrete situations (metis). The good news is that if you follow the above rules, you'll basically never make something inedible.
Another tip I can give you is to get familiar with substitution ingredients. Don't have any sour cream? Yogurt is probably fine.
Now, in direct contradiction with what I've been saying so far, let me share with you one of my favorite recipes that got me through my PhD. Cooking time: 10 mins.
INGREDIENTS:
1. 1 or two whole leeks, depending on how hungry you are
2. Sour cream (or whatever)
3. Bacon (or lardons, if you can find them, but seriously... whatever)
4. White wine (optional, but _really_ makes a difference. Prefer dry wine, but whatever.)
PREP:
1. Cut your leek in 1cm rings. Throw away the dark green part.
COOKING:
1. Cook your bacon until crispy, then crumble it and set it aside.
2. While the bacon is cooking, put some butter in a pan and cook your leeks until they're soft and slightly translucid (kinda like you would cook an onion). Don't sweat it; it's hard to fuck up.
3. Add bacon and sour cream. Stir.
4. Add white wine. Stir until you're happy with the consistency
Boom. Done. Keeps well in the fridge, to boot.
Flat leafed parsley, Parmesan, and mix this all into farfalle and its a Gordon Ramsay approved recipe.
Agreed, but let's not overwhelm the guy/gal ;)
> I'm about to go to college
You don't even need a cookbook, just take your time to learn how to use a frying pan and basic boiling in a pot skill.
Eg:
Plain pasta - cheap, extreamly energy dense, soggy if you overcook or don't use enough water (1L/100g dry w.)
Now chop the onion, saute until it's ready, drop the [the timed to cook, it's hard first three times] pasta in it for a 15-30 secs. BAM, a whole different meal.
Now the same, but add a grated carrots. BAM, a whole different meal.
The same but add tomatos OR tomate paste: BAM, whole two new meals.
Now replace pasta with a boiled or fried potatoes: BAM, 8 more meals.
Replace/add frozen vegetables - BAM... well, you know, more meals.
Just learn how to time, not using American anounts of oil and when it is time to get the pan or pot of the heat.
And no, no plastic anything IN the oven.
You don't even need a cookbook, just take your time to learn how to use a frying pan and basic boiling in a pot skill.
Eg:
Plain pasta - cheap, extreamly energy dense, soggy if you overcook or don't use enough water (1L/100g dry w.)
Now chop the onion, saute until it's ready, drop the [the timed to cook, it's hard first three times] pasta in it for a 15-30 secs. BAM, a whole different meal.
Now the same, but add a grated carrots. BAM, a whole different meal.
The same but add tomatos OR tomate paste: BAM, whole two new meals.
Now replace pasta with a boiled or fried potatoes: BAM, 8 more meals.
Replace/add frozen vegetables - BAM... well, you know, more meals.
Just learn how to time, not using American anounts of oil and when it is time to get the pan or pot of the heat.
And no, no plastic anything IN the oven.
yeah lets gender cooking now too in the effort to...?
This. I'm one of the fortunate ones who learned to cook from my mother. Teaching me to cook is truly one of the greatest favors she did for me, bar none. This is not only because cooking is an essential part of eating well, but also because it's such a goddamn joy (if you're not following a recipe).
I've noticed people are afraid of cooking for no reason. Everyone needs to eat, so it's an obvious skill to pick up. It doesn't take much to learn the basics and cook for yourself by trial and error. Cooking for others is on another level though.
There's plenty of how-to-cook information on the internet. I'm a passable cook from what I've learned online. It's easy to learn a new thing every meal, and after a month, you have quite a toolkit.
So I don't disagree with you, but I think there's a faster, easier way now than home ec.
And to Suemoto, every nontrivial thing you cook takes waaaaay longer than getting a $9 burrito.
So I don't disagree with you, but I think there's a faster, easier way now than home ec.
And to Suemoto, every nontrivial thing you cook takes waaaaay longer than getting a $9 burrito.
I don’t think that it’s that they can’t cook at all. I do agree you should learn more about it in general for reduction of waste and food safety. A lot of the problem however is people don’t ever get over the hump where the time investment pays off and you become more proficient, faster and a better cook in general.
[deleted]
Cooking is literally as simple as following a recipe.
Like playing an instrument is just following the notes?
You can do it, but the result won't be good until you practise some. Mistakes will be made. Results may have to be eaten due to financial constraints, good or not.
You can do it, but the result won't be good until you practise some. Mistakes will be made. Results may have to be eaten due to financial constraints, good or not.
[deleted]
if you put the cut potatoes yourself in the deep fryer I guess that that wouldn't be that beneficial
[1] https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/CA5644EN/