I'm always pretty skeptical of correlative nutrition science studies, and this one is no different.
I would posit that anyone who studies "ultraprocessed" foods is unlikely to ever release a study showing they are good for you. The very category of ultraprocessed foods was invented to be a "bad-for-you" food category, and so the research program is "find more evidence that they are bad."
Categorizing food based on whether it's industrial or home-made may be a useful heuristic for lifestyle choices, but it seems unlikely to me to be useful for getting a deep understanding of nutrition and health.
I would posit that anyone who studies "ultraprocessed" foods is unlikely to ever release a study showing they are good for you. The very category of ultraprocessed foods was invented to be a "bad-for-you" food category, and so the research program is "find more evidence that they are bad."
Categorizing food based on whether it's industrial or home-made may be a useful heuristic for lifestyle choices, but it seems unlikely to me to be useful for getting a deep understanding of nutrition and health.