Interesting Links for 28-04-2025

1. 177-meter-long machine renews entire railway tracks — removing old rails, cleaning ballast, and laying new track all in one go!

(tags:trains Technology impressive video )

2. A 10-foot microscope reveals big lessons about the tiniest threats to the human body

(tags:virus microscope impressive viaKenny )

3. The Settlers is Louis Theroux at his shocking best

(tags:israel palestine gaza tv review )

4. Edinburgh to get 160 new affordable homes

(tags:edinburgh housing )

Why I don't think that "UPF" is a very useful term

I've just been having a not-very-helpful conversation about Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) which mostly just reinforced my view that the UPF category is not a very useful one.

It contains so many different things that are so very different to each other - thousands of ingredients, thousands of processes. And occasionally someone comes along with a new study that says "UPFs kill 4% of people!" and it's incredibly frustrating because what I want to know is *what* kills 4% of people. Is it baking? Is it emulsifying? Is it flavourings? Is it baking powder?

Telling me "Any pre-prepared food you buy is killing you!" isn't very actionable for most people. If we actually care about people's health and its relationship with food then some large-scale research into exactly *what* foods are causing increased deaths, and which preparation methods, so that people can avoid those specific things.

Additionally, if we want to save live then a systemic fix is probably a good approach - regulate the use of things that kill people. And "Restrict the use of High Fructose Corn Syrup" sounds like something you could regulate. "Restrict the use of UPFs" is something so general as to be unmanageable.