Below is from the British Medicine Journal open, a scholarly peer reviewed article. Processing food matters.
"Results Ultra-processed foods comprised 57.9% of energy intake"
"Conclusions Decreasing the consumption of ultra-processed foods could be an effective way of reducing the excessive intake of added sugars in the USA." bmjopen
This is useful to the raw vegan community because every once in a while you get a person who advocates that processing food does not matter. That diet is simply calories intake minus out take. This is a oversimplification fallacy. Many other factors come into play including fiber.
Science is slow but reliable. This is not absolute proof, yet the evidence is increasing that a whole plant based diet is the way to go.
Also note later in the article that added sugars is to be avoided.
This shows that added sugars is a problem and ultra-processed food are part of the problem. Also, note that difference between added sugars and non-added sugars like that in a whole apple, banana, or carrot. Some promoters of low carb diets will argue that all sugars and carbs are detrimental to health. This would be an over-simplification and cherry picking fallacy since only added sugars are the problem.
Finally, I end this post with an ethical question? Is lying for a just cause moral or immoral? If you could lie and save 100,000 animals lives, would you tell a falsehood?
The reason I ask is humans tend to believe lies over truth. Fake news penetrates further on social media and spreads faster. Overall, my opinion on the matter is that you are trading long term for short term if you were to lie. 100,000 animals might be saved in a year, but in 25 years it might cost the lives of 200,000 animals.