Stop hunting evil nutrients and target ultra-processing as the real risk

For decades, debates swung between blaming fat or carbs. Each swing spawned products that tweaked a nutrient but kept the processing intact. Low-fat cookies surged, then high-protein bars, then low-carb everything. Meanwhile, serving sizes grew, and ingredients lists stretched.

A different lens asks how aggressively the food has been engineered. Ultra-processed foods are designed for shelf life and irresistible textures, often combining refined starches, sugars, and industrial oils. They digest quickly, hit reward circuits hard, and tend to bypass normal fullness cues. A quick anecdote: one person swapped daily protein bars for nuts and fruit plus a real lunch, and afternoon cravings faded within a week.

Focusing on processing simplifies choices and aligns with observed health patterns across many traditional diets. It also explains why “health-washed” products underperform real food despite better macros. Systems thinking matters, too: strong financial incentives reward processing and marketing, so confusion persists. Your response doesn’t need to be radical, just consistent—more cooking, fewer packages, and skepticism toward claims that sound like magic.

This week, stop arguing about good or bad nutrients and score processing instead: choose foods that would rot, skip those that brag, and cook simple meals most nights. Bring leftovers or a real lunch to work and avoid products you’ve seen advertised heavily. On Sunday, do a quick package audit from your bin and set a small reduction target for next week. Keep it practical, not perfect—your appetite will do the rest once processing steps down.