I’ve been involved in discussions on this topic in various forms for more than 20 years, and I’ve found the conversation around it increasingly less thoughtful.
Some of what you said made me think of a piece the culinary historian Rachel Laudan wrote about a decade ago.
Ending with Jayson’s quote about the reduction in food preparation time is a form of socioeconomic commentary. But what a lovely way to end. Bravo, Hiya! You really did the topic justice.
Ah damn, you are right – couldn't help myself! To be more clear: I didn't want to make any arguments for UPF on the basis that it helps low-and-middle-income families eat. If ultra-processing is harmful, and it truly might be certain cases, then the consumption of those foods should not be substantiated by convenience alone.
But the time I got to the quote from Jayson's book, I felt that I had reasonably separated time-saving but nutritious processing from plain bad-for-you processing. Moreover, I think it is reasonable to assume that a large reason why women are able to spend less (but nowhere near zero) time in the kitchen is because of things like canned beans, frozen veg, and self-rising flour.
Thank you raising that point (and allowing me to clarify!) and for you very helpful suggestions!
This was a thoughtful piece.
I’ve been involved in discussions on this topic in various forms for more than 20 years, and I’ve found the conversation around it increasingly less thoughtful.
Some of what you said made me think of a piece the culinary historian Rachel Laudan wrote about a decade ago.
A Plea for Culinary Modernism
https://jacobin.com/2015/05/slow-food-artisanal-natural-preservatives/
how a lightly buttered slice with jam really saw us through some nights. great piece Hiya! :)
Ending with Jayson’s quote about the reduction in food preparation time is a form of socioeconomic commentary. But what a lovely way to end. Bravo, Hiya! You really did the topic justice.
Ah damn, you are right – couldn't help myself! To be more clear: I didn't want to make any arguments for UPF on the basis that it helps low-and-middle-income families eat. If ultra-processing is harmful, and it truly might be certain cases, then the consumption of those foods should not be substantiated by convenience alone.
But the time I got to the quote from Jayson's book, I felt that I had reasonably separated time-saving but nutritious processing from plain bad-for-you processing. Moreover, I think it is reasonable to assume that a large reason why women are able to spend less (but nowhere near zero) time in the kitchen is because of things like canned beans, frozen veg, and self-rising flour.
Thank you raising that point (and allowing me to clarify!) and for you very helpful suggestions!