[orwin]

> It’s not “objectively bad” To feed your children ultra processed foods.

It is though, it's in the definition, UPF are distinguished from processed food by having additives of no culinary nor nutritional value. So at best, they aren't better than processed food, at worst, they have additive that increase negative health outcomes.

note that if an additive (let's say high-fructose corn syrup) have inferior nutritional value than the product it replace (let's say honey),it is considered UPF, even if the process is quick and easy (i.e: you don't need a big industrial process to be classified UPF)

That's the definition in my country at least, maybe it's different in the US. I think you mistakenly think UPF are the same as processed food. This isn't the case.

[edit] you're right that it isn't objectively bad, because its rare something is "objectively bad". It is objectively worse though.

[onli]

A good example for upf that is not likely to be bad for you is (European style) frozen pizzas.

And I think your comment is wrong. Parent is right in saying that there is no clear definition of what exactly ultra processed food is. However, in general, processed does not mean having additives, it means processed, running through multiple industrial processes to be made.

[orwin]

> Parent is right in saying that there is no clear definition of what exactly ultra processed food is

The definition of upf is 'food having additive of no culinary or nutritional value'. That's the current definition.

The original nova definition is 'food with additive of no culinary value', which isn't useful for nutritionists, hence it evolved.

I seriously doubt all frozen pizza are upf, the main advantage of frozen food is that you don't have to add nitrite salt or other conservatives. Maybe in some pizzas, to keep colours bright?