{"id":362705,"date":"2025-01-19T18:01:48","date_gmt":"2025-01-19T17:01:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=362705"},"modified":"2025-01-19T18:35:13","modified_gmt":"2025-01-19T17:35:13","slug":"modern-scientific-controversies-the-war-on-food-part-3-upfs-what-are-they-measuring","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=362705","title":{"rendered":"<\/font>Modern Scientific Controversies: The War on Food: Part 3 \u2014 UPFs: What Are They Measuring?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

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

According to the American Medical Association<\/a>, in an article that is part of JAMA\u2019s \u201cWhat Doctors Wish Patients Knew\u2122<\/a>\u201d series:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cResearch has shown that diets high in ultraprocessed foods are linked to more than 30 health conditions<\/a>, according to an umbrella review of meta-analyses that was published in The BMJ<\/a>. Meanwhile, more exposure to ultraprocessed foods was associated with a higher risk of dying from any cause. There were also strong ties with higher consumption and cardiovascular disease-related deaths, mental health disorders and type 2 diabetes.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This statement is based on reviews of many published nutritional epidemiology studies<\/em> (hundreds of them).   There were 45 review studies or meta-analyses<\/a> on UPFs published in 2024 alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nutritional Epidemiology?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

World-class statistician, William \u201cMatt\u201d Briggs<\/a>,  author of the book \u201cUncertainty: The Soul of Modeling, Probability & Statistics<\/a>\u201d, <\/em>tells us, in no uncertain terms<\/a><\/em>, that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEpidemiology is the field which officially mistakes correlations for causations.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a very serious accusation.  It is also true.  And it gets worse and worse.  It does so as a result of the very definition and practices of nutritional epidemiology<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNutritional Epidemiology<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Nutritional epidemiology is the application of epidemiological methods to the study of how diet is related to health and disease in humans at the population level. \u2026 Epidemiologists investigate how nutrition affects the occurrence of disease by collecting data on and comparing large groups of people. Statistical methods are employed to estimate the extent to which a factor influences risk of disease in a population. This estimate is often expressed as a measure of association.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn epidemiological research, diet can be studied at different levels comprising intake of nutrients, foods, food groups, and\/or patterns. These exposures can be measured by directly ascertaining what people eat (e.g., through the administration of questionnaires), by measuring markers of intake in biological specimens, or by estimating body size and the relative size of body compartments.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe exposure measure of interest in nutritional epidemiology is usually long-term diet, since the effects of intake on most health outcomes, especially those related to noncommunicable diseases, are likely to occur over extended periods.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The abstract of that chapter from the <\/em><\/strong>Encyclopedia of Food and Health, 2016<\/a>, <\/em>reads more succinctly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c<\/em><\/strong>Nutritional epidemiology is the application of epidemiological methods<\/a> to the study of how diet is related to health and disease in humans at the population level. This article reviews key issues in the field of nutritional epidemiology, including a description of methods to assess dietary intake, sources of variability in diet, the relevance of total energy intake to epidemiological analyses, and errors that may arise in measuring dietary exposures.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The problems of nutritional epidemiology appear obvious at once:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.<\/em>   \u201c\u2026the study of how diet is related to health and disease in humans at the population level.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            <\/em>If these population-level relationships<\/em> are attempted to be applied to individuals, we encounter the ecological fallacy<\/a><\/strong>: a logical error that occurs when you make assumptions about individuals based on group data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.   \u201c\u2026 This estimate \u2014 extent to which a factor influences risk of disease in a population \u2014 is often expressed as a measure of association.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            <\/em>A measure of association, a correlation, is not a risk \u2013 it is a statistic.  True risks come from exposure to a causal factor<\/em> and its dose<\/em>, and for that, researchers need to measure the dose received by an individual who has had an exposure to an hypothesized causal factor.  Hypothesized causal factors need to be backed by biological plausibility<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For UPFs, ideas such as the purposes for certain processing steps <\/em>or corporate ownership<\/em> of the manufacturer of a food item cannot be,  and are not,  biologically plausible causal factors for the myriad of negative effects claimed for UPF consumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.  \u201c\u2026These exposures can be measured by directly ascertaining what people eat (e.g., through the administration of questionnaires)\u2026\u201d<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Exposure can be<\/em> directly measured, but  Food Frequency Questionnaires<\/a> (FFQs<\/strong>) and 24-hour dietary recalls<\/a> (24HRs<\/strong>) do not directly measure exposure to or dosages of foods in a person\u2019s diet. They are, at very best, vague estimates of dietary intake. Many nutritional epidemiological studies are based on a single \u201cin the last year\u2026\u201d-type  Food Frequency Questionnaire.  Or even on a single, 24-hr Dietary recall.  These FFQs are then treated as real-world exposures and dosages.  Often participants are subsequently assumed to have the same diet over the following years or even, in some cases,  decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4.  <\/strong>\u201cThe exposure measure of interest in nutritional epidemiology is usually long-term diet,\u2026\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          As in the previous point above, the exposure to the measure of interest, in the present case, UPFs, is almost never actually measured in any scientifically defensible way.  And, except in one or two clinical trials, dose, in practice, was never<\/em> measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5.  \u201c\u2026<\/em>sources of variability in diet\u201d\u2026.  \u201cand errors that may arise in measuring dietary exposures.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          People\u2019s diets do not remain the same for years and decades.  And diet is a very difficult thing to measure<\/em> outside of an institutional setting.  Changes in marital status, age, becoming a parent, moving from university to professional life, changes in economic status, changes in employment, moving from one region or country to another \u2013 all these and many more factors directly change the day-to-day diets of most people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How does this all apply to the studies on Ultraprocessed Foods?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Modern Scientific Controversies:  The War on Food: Part 2, What are UPFs?<\/a>,  <\/em> we saw that the titular question was very difficult to answer definitively.  The definition is vague and based on nutritionally irrelevant factors, primarily relying on the \u201cNOVA food groups: definition according to the extent and purpose of food processing<\/em>\u201d<\/strong>,  such as the purposes<\/em> of processing  steps used in the food manufacturing: ensuring  product longevity, taste, palatability, enjoyable textures, etc. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

And, for that reason, exactly which diet items on diet questionnaires [FFQs\/24HRs] were to be counted as UPFs in the various research efforts have varied over time and were often subjective [as in \u201cinfluenced by or based on personal beliefs or feelings, rather than based on facts\u201d] and thus different in each study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

None of the items in the lists of UPFs are distinct foods with distinct nutritional<\/em> qualities \u2013 nutritional value is not considered in the definitions.    The items on the UPFs lists do not share common ingredients.  The items on the UPFs lists do not share common processes.  Many anti-UPF claims contain heavy doses of anti-transnational corporatism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact, the whole subject is scientifically unsuitable for investigation.  To be scientifically sensible, the food item (or food group)  to which study participants are to be, or have been, exposed at some dosage level must be measurable and, if a number of items are being considered to be a group, the items must be commensurable\u2014it must be a homogeneous group\u2014a group of like things. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is impossible to measure the \u201cpurposes-ness\u201d or the \u201cownership-by-transnational-corporation-ness\u201d of varied items for sale in the grocery store. There is no acceptable metric for those concepts.   It is impossible to measure the relative \u201cUPF-ness\u201d of items sold in grocery stores, such as these ubiquitous grocery-store breads for instance:<\/font><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

<\/font>We can only scientifically<\/em> be interested in the dosage received<\/em> of the particular dietary item of interest and that dosage needs to be measured. Dosage is not a binary measure<\/a> \u2013 not yes\/no. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even known poisons depend on the dosage<\/a> \u2013 some have benefits from very small doses while larger doses kill \u2013 this is called hormesis<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

All the UPF prospective cohort and observational studies (cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort) and the review and meta-analyses and even the huge umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses (Lane et al. 2024<\/a>)  suffer from the faults detailed above.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

And what is the result of all that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A pseudo-science<\/a> fad \u2014 the anti-UPF movement \u2014 that has infected nearly<\/p>\n\n\n\n

every level of the health and nutrition science world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

Let me speak as plainly as I dare:  the anti-UPF movement is pure \u201cFad Science\u201d.  It is wasting untold research monies to bolster an ideological fight targeting the foods produced by transnational corporations on the trumped-up idea that they share something bad<\/em> <\/strong>hidden somehow <\/strong>in \u201cthe extent and purpose of food processing<\/em>\u201d.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are some voices trying to stem the rush to condemn all UPFs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Please, it is important to understand that UPFs does NOT MEAN JUNK FOOD.  That is an entirely different concept and classification. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nor are UPFs the same as foods containing  \u201cadditives\u201d or \u201dartificial colors\u201d or \u201dpreservatives\u201d  \u2014 foods can be and are classified as UPFs even when lacking those.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

UPFs are such an all-encompassing classification that it basically includes \u201cnearly everything sold in your grocery store in a package, plastic bag, or box\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The anti-UPF movement is a War on Food.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

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

According to the American Medical Association, in an article that is part of JAMA\u2019s \u201cWhat Doctors Wish Patients Knew\u2122\u201d series:<\/p>\n

\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. Meanwhile, more exposure to ultraprocessed foods was associated with a higher risk of dying from any cause. There were also strong ties with higher consumption and cardiovascular disease-related deaths, mental health disorders and type 2 diabetes.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":362706,"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":[691822134,691832565,691832711,691832563],"class_list":{"0":"post-362705","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-american-medical-association","9":"tag-food-frequency-questionnaires-ffqs","10":"tag-nutritional-epidemiology","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\/0d4331017934843.562c108350ee7-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1wm5","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":366302,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=366302","url_meta":{"origin":362705,"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":342352,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=342352","url_meta":{"origin":362705,"position":1},"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":361521,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=361521","url_meta":{"origin":362705,"position":2},"title":"Modern Scientific Controversies The War on Food: Part 2, What are UPFs?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/01\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"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\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs)\"","block_context":{"text":"Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=food-frequency-questionnaires-ffqs"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0l158_22901555935007.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":360523,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=360523","url_meta":{"origin":362705,"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":362705,"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":237455,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=237455","url_meta":{"origin":362705,"position":5},"title":"SCMP: Labelling Beef \u201cHigh Climate Impact\u201d Could Reduce CO2 Emissions","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"03\/01\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"As the professors admit, the study was not a very realistic test of their ideas.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/132b0bb7e35748270.jpg?fit=1080%2C976&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/132b0bb7e35748270.jpg?fit=1080%2C976&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/132b0bb7e35748270.jpg?fit=1080%2C976&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/132b0bb7e35748270.jpg?fit=1080%2C976&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/132b0bb7e35748270.jpg?fit=1080%2C976&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/362705","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=362705"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/362705\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":362710,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/362705\/revisions\/362710"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/362706"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=362705"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=362705"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=362705"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}