[SpicyLemonZest]

I'm not convinced that there's a coherent concept of real food. Most real food advocates I've seen are happy to eat, say, tofu. They'll admit that technically it's processed, in the sense that it's industrially manufactured by pulverizing soybeans beyond recognition then adding chemicals to the big holding vats. But people say it's not highly processed, or it hasn't lost the natural essence of soy, or whatever. I just can't find a way to extract a meaning beyond "the kind of food that real food advocates like".

[triceratops]

Tofu is processed but also incredibly ancient[1]. If it was bad for us, we'd probably have found out about it by now. Ditto for seitan[2], tempeh[3], various pickles and other types of preserved foods, and cheeses. "Traditionally" processed foods get a pass on the "real" food scale because they've (mostly, apart from smoked and cured meats and fish) passed the "is it harmful?" test.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tofu#History

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_gluten_(food)

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempeh#History

[kevinmchugh]

Your parenthetical about smoking means we should be cautious. The dangers of smoked meat only became known relatively recently.

[triceratops]

Also true. But arguably it was only possible for those dangers to become known recently. Smoked meats cause cancer. Death by cancer was not so frequent in the past, because fewer people lived long enough to develop cancers that could kill them. Or in other words, they were safe enough at the timescales that people previously operated in.

Also, even though the link between smoked meats and cancer is now as incontrovertible as the link between say tobacco and cancer, the risk is far lower. So it's not like they're wildly unsafe, just kinda sorta of unsafe.

[cortesoft]

Wouldn't that sort of counter your argument that traditional foods would have discovered the dangers over the ages? Traditional foods could have caused cancer and not been detected, according to your own argument.

[triceratops]

"they were safe enough at the timescales that people previously operated in."

If you were a peasant in the 1800s expecting to live till 50, sausages and smoked meat would probably _increase_ your life expectancy due to the additional protein. You would also not live long enough, or eat so much of it as to have a significantly higher likelihood of getting cancer.

The context in which those foods are consumed is different today than it used to be. People live longer and consume way more meat (of every kind) than they used to. If you eat smoked meats and fish (and really any other meats) at the same rates as peasants of 200 years ago, I doubt they'll increase your cancer risk by all that much.

[cortesoft]

Doesn't the point still stand, though, that you can't use historical usage to prove safety currently (given the change in how we eat food and how long we live)?

[buckminster]

The NOVA classification system adds some rigour. And there is growing evidence that ultra-processed food is particularly bad for you.

https://world.openfoodfacts.org/nova

[Nasrudith]

Really 'real food' is latter day religion/marketing based upon what sounds good and validates their emotions/sells the premium product.

The /actual/ ancient past was way more concerned about quantity and physiological performance in a 'can you get big on it' as a positive and 'how likely is it to kill you' as opposed to any high minded ideals.

Despite trying to sound like it 'real food' isn't a real goal or metric in the same way that dog breeds which don't have a purpose other than aesthetics defined by vapid breed standards rapidly become the canine counterpart to the Hapsburgs. Compare to a working dog breed's actual defacto requirements. "Smart enough to keep up with and herd livestock, mean enough to chase away predators but not so vicious it kills the livestock itself." is a real set of goals that constrains it into a functional space to optimize for and can even tolerate some wasteful vanity in appearance selection. Hell even something overspecialized like "Try to be the fastest on the race track without being so badly behaved that they are disqualified." is better.

I am convinced that the underlying issues be they dog breeds or food aren't the real problems but ways of thinking.

[ip26]

One question to ask might be, can I make this at home?

Just about anyone can make beer, grind flour, churn butter, or bake bread. Even make tofu.

[squish78]

It's OK if there's not a universal definition of every concept. Some things in life are culturally subjective - especially cuisine. However, I think an intelligent person can look at string cheese and say that's fake food.

I've started realizing that there is very little space for nuance and subjectivity in discussing things on HN

[SpicyLemonZest]

String cheese is another great example. Most people would identify it as a clear example of "fake food", but it's literally just mozzarella stretched in a particular way.

I have no objection to nuance and subjectivity. There's nothing wrong with someone saying "I like fresh salads and fish and tofu, but string cheese and Big Macs aren't for me". Certainly I wouldn't say that you must eat string cheese unless you have an ironclad reason to avoid it. What I object to (and what I think HN is particularly sensitive to) is trying to sneak personal preferences under the guise of loaded terms like "real food".

[squish78]

Then I guess I'm guilty sneaking my personal preferences. I wanted to have a conversation about the industrial food supply and failed to ask the right questions

[namdnay]

The ingredients for mozzarella are: buffalo milk, salt and rennet (and a bit of leftover whey for the bacteria). I’m sure there is far more in a packet of “cheese strings” than that

[NikolaeVarius]

Lets test the claim out.

https://www.frigocheeseheads.com/en/products/everyday-snacki...

> INGREDIENTS: Low moisture part skim mozzarella cheese (pasteurized part skim milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes)

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Great-Value-Mozzarella-String-Che...

> Ingredients: Pasteurized milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes

https://www.sargento.com/our-cheese/string-stick/string-chee...

> Pasteurized Reduced Fat Milk, Cheese Culture, Salt, Enzymes, Vitamin A Palmitate.

Nope, not checking out

[namdnay]

I guess it depends on the brands: https://www.cheestrings.ca/en/products.html

[paulcole]

To be fair, they listed 3 ingredients and the ones you listed have 4-5. That’s an increase of 33-66%.

[refurb]

That’s not a fair assessment at all. The grandparent made a claim and was proven to be clearly wrong.

[TheCoelacanth]

rennet = enzymes and the original list left out cultures, but there are undoubtedly cultures in their cheese, so the only difference in the lists is presentation.

[emodendroket]

> However, I think an intelligent person can look at string cheese and say that's fake food.

Why is it any faker than regular cheese? Perhaps I am not as intelligent as I'd like to think.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

Anything frozen & prepared seems to be taboo -- like a frozen pizza. But frozen peas and berries are fair game. Everything else seems to come down to branding.

I've seen premade refrigerated pizza fly off the shelf. I've seen drinks with all kinds of highly processed ingredients sell like hotcakes. I've seen condiments with a list of ingredients as long as a phone book purchase by plenty of people that eat only "real food".

Protein powders and supplements intrigue me to no end. These are some of the most processed and unregulated things sold on shelves. But "real food" advocates literally eat them up.

One of my friends is making millions catering to this group. I've been trying to figure out how these shoppers think. To me, it doesn't seem like there's much in common. It seems to be mostly branding.

[maximente]

consider signaling. if you only eat "real food", you give off a vibe (not proof) that you're some mix of: educated, with disposable income, purveyor of quality

this is largely the same with other quasi-positive labels (esp. political ones). lots of $$ to be made here, as people generally want to reinforce both their own and others' perceptions of them.

[SolaceQuantum]

"Anything frozen & prepared seems to be taboo"

This sort of thing always seems super american centric to me personally. It's common in chinese households to have a stash of frozen dumplings prepared in-kitchen, or frozen steamed buns, or various other frozen prepared foods that are kitchen staples. I get that if it's from a restaurant or big processing plant you might find things questionable, but if you prepare your own pizza and decide to freeze it for later I don't think anyone should besmirch you as suddenly less healthy compared to eating the pizza as soon as you made it.

[wutbrodo]

I don't think anyone has a problem with food you cook and freeze. "Frozen foods" in this context are generally understood to mean "packaged frozen food, prepared by the seller" (which excludes the corner case of a local charcuterie preparing and freezing something).

[emodendroket]

I think many people do have a mistaken impression that frozen produce is less nutritious than fresh. Kind of an inverse version of the "health halo" that attaches itself unjustifiably to products like "pure, natural" cane sugar.

[SpicyLemonZest]

I had that mistaken impression until this very second, and I've been buying a lot less vegetables than I should for fear of fresh ones going to waste. Guess I have a good new years' resolution now.

[emodendroket]

Nice to know Internet comments can have a positive effect on people's lives once in a while.

[triceratops]

> Anything frozen & prepared seems to be taboo -- like a frozen pizza

> I've seen premade refrigerated pizza fly off the shelf.

To be fair most frozen pizza is terrible - pre-baked bread that you're reheating, little better than frozen cheese toast. Whereas premade pizzas tend to be freshly made and you're baking the dough. So they taste a lot better.

[sadproton]

If you heat and then stretch mozzarella cheese, you get string cheese. Is it the heat that turns real food into fake food or the stretching?

[nkrisc]

Don't you know? It's the plastic they wrap it in. That's how you can tell, by the packaging.

[Symbiote]

Ingredients: Dairylea Strip Cheese: cheese (70%), skimmed milk (water, skimmed milk powder), butter, skimmed milk powder, stabilisers (sodium carbonate, citric acid), calcium phosphate, milk protein, flavouring, emulsifying salt (potassium citrate).

This is a string cheese sold on the UK. It looks like the product varies significantly between and within countries.