new research debunks trad views on nutrition

Pics
"The simplest way of classifying UPFs is that they are made up of complex mixtures of chemicals and food extracts which don't resemble the original parts of whole foods" Spector op.cit. p. 34.
"UPF labels usually list over 10 [additives]...UPFs are designed to be highly profitable (with low cost ingredients and long shelf lives), convenient (ready to consume), hyper-palatable (addictive) products" p.35.
Sounds to me like a pretty good fit with pelleted feed.
When I think of UPF and being "addictive" I think of potato chips and peanut m & m's. They have that 'you can't eat just one' quality. So, given a choice between unlimited peanut M&Ms vs carrots and celery, I'm goin to keep eating the peanut M&Ms. However, maybe it's just my chickens, but they'll turn down chicken feed pretty quickly for an opportunity to rummage in the garden or eat a small helping of table scraps.

Personally, I think it would be great to give my chickens a more whole-food option that provides them with complete nutrition. But, I know I don't have the time or resources to make that happen - certainly not consistently.

I'm planning on putting a bug zapper above their run this summer. We'll see how that does for providing a supply of scrumptious morsels.
 
"The simplest way of classifying UPFs is that they are made up of complex mixtures of chemicals and food extracts which don't resemble the original parts of whole foods" Spector op.cit. p. 34.
"UPF labels usually list over 10 [additives]...UPFs are designed to be highly profitable (with low cost ingredients and long shelf lives), convenient (ready to consume), hyper-palatable (addictive) products" p.35.
Sounds to me like a pretty good fit with pelleted feed.
So the line between processed and ultra processed is perhaps mostly the 10+ added chemicals and additives? It seems like a lot of foods we eat don't necessarily resemble their original form but could still be considered healthy, IMO.
 
So the line between processed and ultra processed is perhaps mostly the 10+ added chemicals and additives? It seems like a lot of foods we eat don't necessarily resemble their original form but could still be considered healthy, IMO.
I remember reading about orange juice. Why is it that no two oranges seem to taste exactly the same ... Yet, day after day, month after month, any given brand of orange juice tastes exactly the same and they only have 100% orange juice in them?

Answer (paraphrased) extracted elements of orange juice can be re-introduced back into orange juice in various amounts to ensure that they final product has the desired taste.

The point ... even something with just 1 ingredient can be more processed than is apparent at face value.
 
@Perris what do you feed your chickens, if you don't mind my asking?

On the topic of goats over eating, we had a neighbor that free-fed grain to her goat herd, as in they had full bowls of grain available to them 24/7, and they never over ate. I had never seen anyone do that before.
I’m just going to have to say it. No they didn’t. They actually do die from bloat.
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom