{"id":361521,"date":"2025-01-11T10:43:43","date_gmt":"2025-01-11T09:43:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=361521"},"modified":"2025-01-11T10:43:46","modified_gmt":"2025-01-11T09:43:46","slug":"modern-scientific-controversies-the-war-on-food-part-2-what-are-upfs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=361521","title":{"rendered":"Modern Scientific Controversies The War on Food: Part 2, What are UPFs?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Guest Essay by Kip Hansen<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are Ultraprocessed Foods?\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>The UPF literature gives long and confused definitions, but in almost every case, falls back on the definition provided by Carlos A. Monteiro<\/a>\u00a0(and his colleagues In\u00eas Castro, Renata Bertazzi-Levy, Rafael Claro and Geoffrey Cannon) in\u00a0his\u00a0original work in 2009 on the subject<\/a>\u00a0titled: \u201cNutrition and health. The issue is not food, nor nutrients, so muchas processing\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Note:  The use of the word \u201cmuchas\u201d is in the original, Monteiro is Brazilian.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I give it here in a graphic, exactly as used in Monteiro 2019<\/a><\/a>, a restatement of the original work (link as a .docx file<\/a><\/a>, much easier to read):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
[\u00a0larger image in new tab<\/a>\u00a0]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

That definition has not changed in all these years since, but the actual lists used by researchers in all of studies \u2018measuring\u00a0exposure<\/em>\u00a0to UPFs\u2019 in\u00a0Food Frequency Questionnaires (<\/a>FFQs) and\u00a024-hour dietary recalls<\/a>\u00a0(24HR) has changed over time \u2013 adding another layer of uncertainty to the results of the studies when pooled.\u00a0 \u00a0Not all studies used the same FFQ and not all decisions as to which items in FFQs\/24hr Recalls were to be considered UPFs for each study.\u00a0\u00a0Lane et al. 2023<\/a>\u00a0[ .pdf<\/a>\u00a0] includes this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSACN [UK\u2019s Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition] expressed concerns about various key points. For example, it highlighted that the available studies applying the Nova system are primarily epidemiological in nature and may lack adequate consideration of confounding factors or covariates. Criticisms of Nova as a classification system also exist, with concerns raised about its possible imprecision and inconsistency among evaluators. In contrast, more recent assessments show acceptable construct validity and strong agreement among coders, with the definitions and examples provided by the Nova system deemed adequate in classifying more than 70% of the food items reported in food frequency questionnaires from various cohorts from the US, as well as more than 90% of the food items reported in 24-hour dietary recalls from participants in a national Brazilian dietary survey.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Elizabeth et al. 2020 Supplementary Information\u00a0<\/a>gives a chart of changes to UPF items since 2009:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Then there is one of the more popular  short-form definitions, offered by Dr Chris Van Tulleken<\/a>, an infectious diseases doctor at University College London, a BBC science presenter and a New York Times bestselling author who, gave this simple one-sentence: \u201cIf it\u2019s wrapped in plastic and it contains at least one ingredient that you don\u2019t typically find in a domestic kitchen, then it\u2019s ultra-processed food.\u201d\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supplemental information of  Monteiro et al. 2019<\/a> labels its chart of  NOVA food groups:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNOVA food groups: definition according to the extent and purpose of food processing\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ralph Nader refers to UPFs as \u201cUltraprocessed Deadly Corporate Food<\/a>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We see the anti-corporate mantra<\/a> appearing in the definitions of UPFs, even in the original from Monteiro et al. (2019):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cTheir convenience (imperishable, ready-to-consume), hyper-palatability, <\/em>branding and ownership by transnational corporations, and aggressive marketing give ultra-processed foods enormous market advantages over all other NOVA food groups. Marketing strategies used worldwide include vivid packaging, health claims, special deals with retailers to secure prime shelf space, establishment of franchised catering outlets, and campaigns using social, electronic, broadcast and print media, including to children and in schools, often with vast budgets.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You may rightly ask yourself, how does the ownership of the manufacturer of a food cause heart disease? or diabetes? or all-cause-mortality?   How does the \u201cextent and purposes\u201d of the processes used to manufacture the food cause those things?  Neither food company ownership<\/em> or processing purposes<\/em> are physical components of the food consumed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You would not be the only one asking.   Opinion in the nutrition field is growing in both directions:  support for anti-UPFs ideas has grown to include all the liberal journals and organizations, including the UN World Health Organization<\/a> and various national health organization, as they flock to the band-wagon for research funds and publication credits.   At the same time, individual nutrition experts are beginning to speak out against the anti-UPF movement<\/em> particularly its use all-inclusive definitions and the potential to nutritionally worsen, instead of improve, human diets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Levine and Ubbink<\/a> (2023) , from the Department of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, says this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe world\u2019s daily food supply is and will remain critically and increasingly dependent on the processing of foods and ingredients. With future population growth, climate change and the need for agricultural practices to become more sustainable, continued innovation in food processing is essential to guarantee a sustainable, healthy, and abundant food supply.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c<\/em>While many types of processing can have negative effects, food processing does not need to result in only unhealthy foods, but rather constitutes a critical and essential component of our food system. Ensuring public trust in food processing technology is undermined by the categorization of ultra\u2010processed foods without more nuanced understanding of the factors that determine the nutritional value (positive or negative) of these foods.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

FoodDrinkEurope<\/a>, an food industry advocacy group in Europe, offers a review of the science on UPFs<\/a> (link is a .pdf ) which includes these critical points (out of very many):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cClassifications are ideologically biased<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Classifying foods according to their assumed \u2018purpose\u2019, including their design to be, for example, \u2018highly profitable\u2019, \u2018intensely appealing\u2019 or \u2018convenient\u2019 is subjective and has been suggested to reflect an ideological bias against modern food production systems (Forde, 2023b<\/a> [.pdf<\/a>];  Visioli et al., 2022<\/a> [.pdf<\/a>]). There is no evidence that foods which are unprofitable, unpalatable, expensive or inconvenient are linked to better health outcomes (Forde, 2023b<\/a> [.pdf<\/a>])<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Classifications are too broad and inclusive and not based on scientific evidence<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The classifications are diverse, based on the extent and nature of change in a food from its original form, including changing inherent properties of foods, the addition of ingredients, as well as considering the place of processing, and the purpose of processing. There is no agreement as to what constitutes a processed food or different degrees of processing, including to what extent they should only reflect technical processes and\/or include formulation\/ingredients. From a food science and technology perspective, without evidence for a correlation between the extent of processing and a products nutritional value, these aspects should remain distinct. Furthermore, the classifications seem to assume that most food processing is deleterious for health, and are hypothesis driven rather than derived from strong scientific evidence i.e. studies using NOVA to support claims made by the NOVA classification itself may represent a circular argument (Sadler et al., 2021<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Without scientific evidence for adverse effects of specific ingredients or processing methods, the ultra-processed category may be too broad and inclusive \u2013 covering a high proportion of energy sources (up to 60% in some developed countries) and approximately ten to twelve different food groups with a wide and diverse nutrient composition (Forde, 2023a<\/a> [.pdf<\/a>], 2023b<\/a> [.pdf<\/a>]).\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The FoodDrinkEurope review<\/a> [remember, it was produced by a food industry advocacy group] may be biased against the anti-UPF movement, but it does include a extensive list of the literature on the subject through early 2024, and its summaries of the papers listed seem to be straightforward.  In any case, it represents a good summary of the criticisms of the NOVA system of classification of foods from the professional nutrition field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The best actual answer to the question: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhat are Ultraprocessed Foods, exactly?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

seems to be:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAlmost everything on the shelves, in the aisles, of your grocery store<\/em> and in the cupboards and refrigerators of your home.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such an answer leaves us to ask  \u201cIf not UPFs, what are people to eat?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

# # # # #<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author\u2019s Comment:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is yet another ongoing Modern Scientific Controversy (MSC)<\/strong>.\u00a0 That means that scientists and experts are taking sides, for and against, and battling it out in the media and in the journals.\u00a0 In these controversies, these \u201cWars\u201d, the usual niceties are often forgotten, and papers are written to bash the \u201cother side\u201d, editorials are written in which insinuations of scientific impropriety are allowed to be spoken.\u00a0 And, as we have seen in other MSCs, views are hardened and papers become more and more biased towards whatever view attracts more research funds and buys more publication credits.\u00a0 Currently, journals favor \u201cUPFs are bad\u201d, which has become a\u00a0Popular Health Fad<\/a>, but, at the same time, nutrition experts willing to take a contrary view are making some headway in the journals and are being given some preferential space in the mass media as the contrarian view.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The next part of this series will cover a more in-depth view of what is up with the science, as opposed to food-world politics, of the UPF issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks for reading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

# # # # #<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What are Ultraprocessed Foods?\u00a0\u00a0The UPF literature gives long and confused definitions, but in almost every case, falls back on the definition provided by Carlos A. Monteiro\u00a0(and his colleagues In\u00eas Castro, Renata Bertazzi-Levy, Rafael Claro and Geoffrey Cannon) in\u00a0his\u00a0original work in 2009 on the subject\u00a0titled: \u201cNutrition and health. The issue is not food, nor nutrients, so muchas processing\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":361530,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691832565,691832564,691832566,691832563],"class_list":{"0":"post-361521","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-food-frequency-questionnaires-ffqs","9":"tag-modern-scientific-controversy-msc","10":"tag-sacn-uks-scientific-advisory-committee-on-nutrition","11":"tag-ultraprocessed-foods-upfs","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1440%2C810&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1w2Z","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":366302,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=366302","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":0},"title":"Modern Scientific Controversies: The War on Food: Part 4","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/02\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Remember, UPFs does not mean \u201cjunk food\u201d.\u00a0 UPFs does not mean sugary sodas, hamburgers, French fries, candy and snacks.\u00a0 Those are a concern in modern societies, but, while they are often included in UPFs, they are not the core of UPFs.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"Epidemiology\"","block_context":{"text":"Epidemiology","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=epidemiology"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":362705,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=362705","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":1},"title":"Modern Scientific Controversies: The War on Food: Part 3 \u2014 UPFs: What Are They Measuring?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"19\/01\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"According to the American Medical Association, in an article that is part of JAMA\u2019s \u201cWhat Doctors Wish Patients Knew\u2122\u201d series: \u201cResearch has shown that diets high in ultraprocessed foods are linked to more than 30 health conditions, according to an umbrella review of meta-analyses that was published in The BMJ.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"American Medical Association\"","block_context":{"text":"American Medical Association","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=american-medical-association"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":342352,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=342352","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":2},"title":"What Junk Nutrition Science Looks Like","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/09\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Thanks to the New York Times, in an article in the EAT section, we have the news that \u201cthose who consumed the most ultraprocessed foods were 11 percent more likely to develop cardiovascular disease and 16 percent more likely to develop coronary heart disease during the study period\u201d. The article\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"CHD\"","block_context":{"text":"CHD","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=chd"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/zslide-16-1024.webp?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/zslide-16-1024.webp?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/zslide-16-1024.webp?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/zslide-16-1024.webp?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":360523,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=360523","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":3},"title":"Modern Scientific Controversies: The War on Food: Part 1","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/01\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"This is a new entry to a series-of-many which have discussed ongoing scientific controversies, a specific type of which are often referred to in the science press and elsewhere as \u201cWars\u201d \u2013 for instance \u00a0The Monarch Wars, The Meat Wars, The Obesity Epidemic, The Salt Wars, The War in Sugar\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"British Medical Journal (BMJ)\"","block_context":{"text":"British Medical Journal (BMJ)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=british-medical-journal-bmj"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":372690,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=372690","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":4},"title":"OOPS \u2014UPFs are Not Addictive","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"29\/03\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Dr. Kevin Hall, at the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), has recently been conducting \u201crandomized clinical trials to study how diets high in ultra-processed food may cause obesity and other chronic diseases\u201d, and was the lead author of a study, Hall et al. (2019) titled \u201cUltra-Processed Diets Cause Excess\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"energy intake\"","block_context":{"text":"energy intake","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=energy-intake"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Firefly-war-on-food-44418-scaled-1.webp?fit=1200%2C686&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":222902,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=222902","url_meta":{"origin":361521,"position":5},"title":"The SKY IS FALLING at the PNAS","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/10\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Every time I read a story, such as this, I get an overwhelming urge to start chanting a famous Passover ritual, the recital of the Ten Plagues:\u00a0Blood, Frogs, Lice, Pestilence\u2026.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-403.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-403.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-403.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/image-403.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361521","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=361521"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361521\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":361532,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361521\/revisions\/361532"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/361530"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=361521"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=361521"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=361521"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}