In the past few videos, I covered the nutrient profile of ultra-processed

the industrial contaminants, the additives, both intentional and unintentional, as well as changes

in texture.

But what's this about food matrix? In the famous study that found that ultra-processed diets caused excess calorie intake

and weight gain compared to unprocessed diets, despite the fact that both diets were

matched for calories, sugar, fat, and fiber, suggested that it may be something about the

processing itself, such as the concentration of calories and the changes in texture

that allow the foods to be eaten so much faster.

But wait, how did the researchers match for fiber?

It's hard to imagine ultra-processed foods having much fiber.

Here are two representative dinners.

On the ultra-process side, non-fat yogurt, fruit in heavy syrup, baked potato chips,

a deli meat-and-cheas sandwich, and three cups of diet lemonade.

And the same number of calories, fat, and sugar, on the unprocessed side,

a southwestern entree salad with greens, beans, nuts, fruits, and vegetables.

How could the ultra-process meal possibly have the same amount of fiber?

What they did was sprinkle a fiber supplement into the yogurt and lemonade.

So technically both meals had the same amount of fiber, but that's not how fiber works.

A half century ago, the dietary fiber hypothesis was proposed, suggesting that fiber was the reason

that diets centered around whole plant foods were so protective against chronic disease.

Predictably, this gave rise to a multi-billion-dollar fiber supplement market.

People could just eat real food, but where's the money in that?

...