>University of Leicester discovery identifies harmful bacterial molecules in processed foods and how to prevent them from arising.
>The study identifies a particular kind of contaminating molecule known as ‘pathogen-associated molecular patterns’ (PAMPs), which are released by certain types of bacteria as they grow during some food processing and refrigeration processes, and may increase our risk of developing conditions such as coronary artery disease and Type 2 diabetes.
>A low PAMP diet is associated with reduced levels of several cardiometabolic risk factors, while a high PAMP diet reverses these effects. These findings suggest a novel potential mechanistic explanation for the observed association between processed food consumption and risk of cardiometabolic diseases.
What is /sci/'s take on this?
Does this mean we can eat anything as long as it's unprocessed?
Too lazy to read the paper but doesn't sound very interesting. The term PAMP is misleading as non-pathogenic microbes can express the same things.
PAMPs include flagellin, peptidoglycan, Lipopolysaccharide, dsRNA, and more.
Your innate immune system is responsible for this recognition, many times through Toll-like receptors (TLRs) found on many cell types.
Eating foods with high levels of microbial structures could trigger a sort of chronic innate immune response. Inflammatory cytokines being constantly secreted could damage the body and may lead to the diseases they mentioned.
But correlation does not imply causation and I feel like a more likely reason is that processed food often has a bunch of junk added to it like more salt or sugar.
Why don't you use the UV disinfectants ? They're literally a radiation chainsaw that fuck up every living organism inside your food and rip them apart atom by atom.
UV has its own set of problems. It has to have direct contact or its killing power is greatly reduced. I remember an experiment in gen micro where we had bacterial cultures with the clear plastic lid on and the lid off. Put them in a UV chamber. The effectiveness of killing with just a clear lid on was much worse.
So if you're talking about food with loads of nooks and crannies that light couldn't reach it would be very ineffective.
Also time is a factor. Don't quote me but it's something like 10-30 minutes depending on other factors. Bacterial spores are also very resistant.
Overall it's just not very reasonable for a big food company
You might as well use a wizard wand for all what it will do.
Combine a high intensity x-ray generator with your fridge if you want bacteria killing power and cancer. If not just wipe down the bench with a detergent.
I know that most of them disinfect water like that. I guess since UV reaches everywhere, it rapes every organism inside.
How about microwaves ? I know their effective area is not uniform and lots of areas go unmicrowaved, but maybe a concentrated radiation room would be enough to kill everything that goes in it for like 20 seconds.
They might be resistant to UV light but nothing is resistant to electromagnetic waves that grind your atoms into a soup.
A processing step will cause stress on surviving bacteria not killed during said unit operation. I am also too lazy to read the paper but it doesnt sound like anything new, groundbreaking or important.
You seem to think that "processed foods" are unavoidable. "Processed foods" are not evil. Food processing operations, such as refrigeration, size reduction, drying, freezing, etc. are meant to increase the stability of the food matrix during storage, be it in your pantry or a manufacturing holing tank, etc etc.
If you go full "whole foods omg non-GMO fuck processing toxic chemicals in my juicy fruit gum", you are more likely to be exposed to pathogenic bacteria which HACCP operations aim to keep under control during food processing. If you live in the US, your food supply is incredibly safe, relative to other countries, thanks to the stifling regulations in the food industry.
>Does this mean we can eat anything as long as it's unprocessed?
You can eat anything and be safe and healthy provided you understand that bacteria are ubiquitous in foods, and you take necessary steps to reduce their numbers of chances of proliferation. Canned foods and dry goods are commercially sterile because of heat treatment and low water activity, respectively. The food safety issue mostly pertains to perishable foods.
In the food industry, there are several irradiation methods used to sterilize foods. These include Pulsed UV Light treatment, Electron beam irradiation, X-ray irradiation and others. These are incredibly effective but extremely expensive and thus may not be convenient for whatever food you are manufacturing. I visited the Omaha steaks company for example, and they extremely tight processing steps which include irradiation, chemical and steam sterilization of rooms and equipment.
Yes, some bacterial enterotoxins are heat resistance and persist in the food, even if the bacteria is cooked until death. Generally, the temperature required to destroy the bacterial toxin will have a negative effect on the food as well, and you might lose flavor, aroma and texture, and create undesirable flavors, aromas etc.
C. botulinum is a poster-bacteria for food safety, and processing steps are usually designed to kill this bacteria and its spores. The conditions necessary to kill C. botulinum will generally kill all other bacteria in the process.
Because all foods are different, microbiologist, food techs, food engineers, etc etc need to develop a HACCP plan to specific to the type of food being processed.