In Parts 1 and 2, van Tulleken aims to establish that there is strong evidence linking UPF consumption to both obesity and poor health. Now, van Tulleken examines more exactly why this is the case. One reason, he argues, is because UPF is soft. The extreme processing of UPF relative to non- or minimally processed foods makes it much easier to be eaten more quickly. This is despite the illusion of texture on first bite, created by much UPF, such as cereals and burgers. Because we can eat UPF faster due to this softness, we consume more calories than we would with non-UPF before our body’s satiation hormones take effect.

Van Tulleken expresses concern that the UPF industry is suggesting that food could be “given back” its toughness to minimize excess calorie consumption. As he says, “[R]ather than proposing a shift to whole food, more processing is proposed instead” (178). This is what he calls “hyper-processing.” Van Tulleken argues that this proposal is misguided because softness and calorie density are essential to UPF since soft, calorie-dense products sell better. As such, “hyper-processing” of texture into food is unlikely to catch on and risks further unknown health effects.