{"id":601,"date":"2026-07-04T11:36:56","date_gmt":"2026-07-04T11:36:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601"},"modified":"2026-07-04T11:36:56","modified_gmt":"2026-07-04T11:36:56","slug":"the-evidence-against-ultra-processed-foods-is-weaker-than-you-think","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601","title":{"rendered":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

In little more than a decade, the term \u201cultra-processed foods\u201d (UPFs) has risen from an obscure academic coinage to one of the most potent ideas in the American food imagination. It has saturated media coverage of diet and disease, spawned a profusion of guides teaching shoppers how to spot UPFs at the supermarket, and animated Robert F. Kennedy Jr.\u2019s crusade to remake American food policy.<\/p>\n

Read more The solution to America\u2019s 250th birthday mess? Party like it\u2019s 1976.<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It might also be kind of fake.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The trouble starts with the definition. UPF generally refers to packaged foods with questionable-sounding ingredients not typically used in household kitchens (high-fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin, and the like). But not even nutrition scientists can really tell you where normal processing ends and \u201cultra-processing\u201d begins, and the difference often comes down to vibes. (I once covered a study that, inexplicably, classified tofu as ultra-processed.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Further, much of the evidence linking ultra-processed foods to poor health outcomes such as heart disease and cancer is notoriously low-quality because it\u2019s based on big, noisy observational studies that can\u2019t disentangle correlation from causation. That weakness plagues a lot of nutrition research, but it\u2019s especially notable for UPF studies, because many of them are drawn from diet surveys that don\u2019t capture enough detail to tell whether the \u201cwhite bread\u201d or \u201cyogurt\u201d someone reported eating was ultra-processed in the first place.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

To correct for those problems, a handful of nutrition researchers have run randomized controlled trials (RCTs) \u2014 a gold standard for establishing cause and effect \u2014 to isolate the health effects of \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods. Several of the best-known trials have found that UPFs indeed do contribute to adverse health outcomes such as overeating and weight gain \u2014 seemingly offering the stronger evidence that observational studies could not.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But it turns out those trials might not show what they claim to, either. In a recent article published in Science<\/em>, a group of researchers analyzed data from five landmark randomized controlled trials of ultra-processed foods and found that most of them compared ultra-processed and non-ultra-processed diets that differed in important ways beyond processing. The ultra-processed diets tended to be more calorie-dense and lower in fiber, for example, which can lead to overeating regardless of whether a food is \u201cultra-processed.\u201d Accordingly, some of the effects that they attributed to processing may have had other causes.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These findings matter well beyond an academic fight over food categories. They offer the latest evidence against taking the UPF label too seriously when deciding what to buy \u2014 or fear \u2014 at the grocery store.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Randomized controlled trials sought to add clarity to the UPF debate<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

UPF researchers sort foods using NOVA, a classification system with four tiers. From least to most processed:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The categories sound tidy. They are not. Many nutrition experts have criticized them as overly broad and hard to apply consistently. Wheat gluten, for example, is an ingredient often added to packaged breads; it\u2019s not used in many household kitchens, and is usually classified as ultra-processed. Yet it\u2019s been used in many Asian cuisines for centuries and can easily be employed in your home kitchen; I use it in my own. There\u2019s no evidence that the ingredient\u2019s rarity in household pantries makes it unhealthy or deserving of a special \u201cultra-processed\u201d label. Nor is there any reason to assume that a store-bought whole grain bread with added gluten (category 4 under NOVA) is worse for you than, say, a homemade white bread (category 3).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

To be fair to the UPF framework, its whole point is to try to capture something distinct from traditional nutritional metrics, to help make scientific sense of why modern, industrially produced food feels<\/em> wrong. Some researchers argue that reducing foods to their individual nutrients misses something about industrial food as a whole. But many of the other factors that can make foods unhealthy or prone to being overeaten \u2014 calorie density, soft texture, hyper-palatability \u2014 are already well-known to nutrition science. The question is whether \u201cultra-processing\u201d explains anything beyond those familiar mechanisms.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Kevin Hall, one of the most prominent nutrition scientists in the US, known for his research on UPFs, told me in an email that he was initially skeptical of the NOVA system but has come to appreciate some of its attributes as \u201ca complementary lens for viewing food that can be a helpful integrative addition to the reductionist nutritional profiling lens.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Researchers like Hall have employed randomized controlled trials to rigorously test whether \u201cultra-processing\u201d has real, and really troubling, effects. These trials work by recruiting a few dozen participants and assigning them pre-specified diets that are similar in their nutritional profiles but different in processing level. The researchers then examine whether any differences in participants\u2019 health outcomes, like weight gain and cholesterol levels, can be pinned on the ultra-processed diets.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Hall\u2019s seminal RCT, one of the five trials examined in the new Science<\/em> analysis, controlled for things like the number of calories made available to participants on unprocessed and ultra-processed diets; the amount of carbs, fat, and protein in those diets; and other factors. It found that the ultra-processed diets led to increased calorie intake and weight gain.<\/p>\n

Read more The late historian who rekindled my hope for America\u2019s future<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The Science <\/em>analysis, though, finds that the ultra-processed and non-ultra-processed diets in Hall\u2019s study and other RCTs still differed in ways that could confound the trials\u2019 results. The UPFs used in the trials tended to be softer than the non-ultra-processed foods, which can accelerate eating rate and lead to excess calorie consumption. They also tended to be more energy-dense (meaning that they had more calories per gram of food), less fiber-dense, and higher in saturated fat and sodium.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These aren\u2019t inherent properties of \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods. \u201cWhile UPFs are often characterized by properties such as soft texture, higher energy density, and lower fiber content, these features are neither unique to UPFs nor consistently present across them,\u201d Faidon Magkos, a professor in obesity and metabolism at the University of Copenhagen and an author of the Science<\/em> analysis, told me in an email. \u201cThere are many non-UPF foods with similar properties, and conversely, many UPFs that are harder in texture, lower in energy density, or higher in fiber.\u201d (To name one example, I eat these ultra-processed bars, which are hard in texture and a good source of fiber, multiple times a week.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

A core issue with most of the trials is that they compared ultra-processed diets (NOVA group 4) with diets made mostly or entirely of unprocessed foods (group 1). That \u201cextreme contrast,\u201d as Magkos and his co-authors call it, is not the cleanest comparison to make if the goal is to isolate what ultra-processing itself does. Nutrition scientists already know that unprocessed diets made up of whole foods are generally the healthiest for us and that many age-old processed foods, like white flour, white sugar, and cured meat, can be bad for us. But the question is whether there\u2019s something uniquely bad about ultra-<\/em>processing when compared with other types of processing.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Consider a pair of meals from one of the trials: One ultra-processed breakfast consisted of Honey Nut Cheerios, milk, a powdered fiber supplement, a packaged blueberry muffin, and margarine. An unprocessed breakfast, meanwhile, included whole oats, blueberries, almonds, milk, and salt. These are so different that it would be hard to attribute the health differences to the presence of, say, tripotassium phosphate in Honey Nut Cheerios, rather than to the added sugars and refined flour in the ultra-processed meal \u2014 long-established nutrition problems that can be explained without the UPF framework.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

When I asked Hall about the criticisms raised in the Science<\/em> analysis, he wrote that the analysis \u201cpresents plausible hypotheses to explain the observations from past UPF studies\u201d but argued that its \u201cimplication seems to be that we already understand enough about the past UPF data and can simply skip the step of critically testing our ideas with careful experiments.\u201d Magkos and his co-authors, for their part, do call for more research refining the past trials and better isolating the specific attributes of UPFs.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

This is not just academic<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

One of the most insightful critiques I\u2019ve heard of the focus on ultra-processed foods came from Kevin Klatt, a nutrition scientist at the University of Toronto. The definition of ultra-processed foods in the NOVA framework, he told me in a conversation last year, \u201chas absolutely nothing to do with processing.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The comment surprised me, but Klatt makes a good point: Consider something like edamame pasta, he said. It undergoes intense industrial processing \u2014 it\u2019s pulverized and extruded, which changes the plant\u2019s cellular structure and makes its proteins and starches more digestible. Yet it would be categorized by NOVA as minimally processed, because its only listed ingredient is \u201cedamame.\u201d Seen in that light, the problem with UPF as a concept may not be just that it\u2019s hard to define, but that it lacks a reasoned organizing principle beyond casting aspersions on an arbitrarily selected set of ingredients that have little in common with one another.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Even so, you might say, if many if not most UPFs \u2014 things like Oreos, Pringles, Twinkies \u2014 are junk, why does it matter?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It matters because nutrition guidance ought to be based on real information about the world, and when it isn\u2019t it leads to bad politics and policy that don\u2019t solve problems and may well make them worse. We have a live case study: a health secretary urging Americans to eat lots of red meat and full-fat dairy, while stigmatizing plant-based diets and \u201cultra-processed\u201d meat and dairy alternatives. The public\u2019s turn against UPFs, as Vox has written before, has likely contributed to the declining popularity of plant-based meat and milk, even though those foods are often healthier than their animal-based counterparts and are undeniably better for the climate and animals.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Federal and some state officials are now seeking to build food regulations around the \u201cultra-processed\u201d concept for programs like school meals, which could push food companies to reformulate products without making them any healthier. A growing number of programs now exist to certify foods \u201cnon-ultra-processed,\u201d and, as Washington Post food columnist Tamar Haspel has pointed out, that has had the effect of lending the halo of health to conventionally, boringly unhealthy packaged foods like cookies. It\u2019s hard to see how this helps consumers make better choices. Meanwhile, they can be misled into making worse<\/em> choices if the UPF frame nudges them to choose, say, butter instead of a vegetable oil-based spread lower in saturated fat, because they\u2019ve been convinced that the former is healthier (the American Heart Association and other authorities recommend the latter).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It\u2019s not hard to see why the idea of ultra-processed foods has resonated so deeply. It taps into a justified feeling that food corporations profit at the expense of our health, and it has quite explicitly tried to turn that instinct into a scientific agenda. But a framework that cannot clearly diagnose what makes our food system harmful offers no real leverage against the industry that profits from it.<\/p>\n

Read more Why Gen Z bros are ditching their MAGA hats<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

See More:<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
  • Culture<\/li>\n
  • Food<\/li>\n
  • Future Perfect<\/li>\n
  • Policy<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    A new\u00a0Science\u00a0analysis argues that key randomized trials on UPFs were not controlled enough to show whether ultra-processing itself is harmful.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":600,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-601","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interesting"],"yoast_head":"\nThe evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A new\u00a0Science\u00a0analysis argues that key randomized trials on UPFs were not controlled enough to show whether ultra-processing itself is harmful.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Living Report\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8\"},\"headline\":\"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601\"},\"wordCount\":1876,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp\",\"articleSection\":[\"Interesting\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601\",\"name\":\"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":624},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?p=601#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Living Report\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanlivingreport.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report","og_description":"A new\u00a0Science\u00a0analysis argues that key randomized trials on UPFs were not controlled enough to show whether ultra-processing itself is harmful.","og_url":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601","og_site_name":"American Living Report","article_published_time":"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8"},"headline":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think","datePublished":"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601"},"wordCount":1876,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp","articleSection":["Interesting"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601","url":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601","name":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think - American Living Report","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp","datePublished":"2026-07-04T11:36:56+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/84690b219d7abb2368d900106be7a80a.webp","width":1200,"height":624},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?p=601#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The evidence against \u201cultra-processed\u201d foods is weaker than you think"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/","name":"American Living Report","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7b970e3bc484fe2e26860a4380d70de8","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanlivingreport.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/601","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=601"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/601\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/600"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=601"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=601"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanlivingreport.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=601"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}