[ccffph]

Can you please explain how that appears to be the case? What mistakes am I making? What bias do I have? Everything I've alluded to is drawn from data. I never had a pre-existing dislike of ALAs lol.

And I'm being genuine, because I'd like to see where I'm flawed.

[SketchySeaBeast]

> This is not new at all. Ultraprocessed foods are usually supplemented with oils that increase inflammation and cause a variety of health issues.

Your thesis statement tells me that you're focused on oils. The article identifies and discusses multiple spectrums of why the ultraprocessed food would be bad, but it seems you've excluded the larger possibilities and have decided to focus on your own personal oil-based bugbear.

[ccffph]

I'm focused on ultraprocessed foods. Many people ask "how are highly processed foods different than regular whole foods". Thus I provide a deeper reason for ultraprocessed foods to be bad for you. They are often supplemented with fillers that are evidenced to be detrimental to health in a variety of ways.

I read the article and understand that many explanations were offered. However, none of them were more substantial than one study put together. In my opinion, the article was fairly high level and simply provided a brief overview of competing theories on obesity and processed foods.

I understand your point in that focusing on any "one thing" that allegedly drives poor health is a fool's errand, but you can't discount the facts. I also acknowledge that I could be wrong, ALA could have nothing to do with this, and we should quit all meats for maximum health. From what I have seen, the data has shown otherwise. But again, please prove me wrong.

[SketchySeaBeast]

The problem is that similar data can be found for sugars as well, so it's not just the one smoking gun, much like removing fats from the things in the 90's didn't suddenly make everyone skinny, even though there was research to suggest fat was the problem.