Ever play devil’s advocate to keep a good discussion going?

I have.

I’m always on the lookout for stimulating conversation, but find it to be a bit of a rarity in today’s fast-paced society. So as a way to continue the back-and-forth flow when I am fortunate enough to find it, I will occasionally express an opinion contrary to the one just offered - even though I agree with it.

But devil’s advocates beware. Do too good a job and you get the opposite of what you’re wishing for.

Once, I got a good-natured tongue lashing during an enjoyable give-and-take. “Come on now,” the smiling female scolded. “I find it hard to believe a health nut like you won’t that admit optimistic people live longer.”

“I’ll admit that’s what studies show,” I conceded. “But what’s really hard for me to believe is that you can’t see the feedback loop at work here.”

Now, the important thing about my mention of the feedback loop is that I would’ve struggled mightily to explain it at that moment. But from all the reading I do, I knew the term was somewhat related to the topic at hand and thought tweaking her with its mention would give new life to the conversation.

I thought wrong.

She apparently was even less familiar with the term than I. This time, playing devil’s advocate backfired and ended the discussion.

It also caused me to read up on the feedback loop, learn that the term can be applied to mathematics, biology, mechanical engineering, and electronic engineering - and feel as if I were drowning in information a bit beyond me. Fortunately, an article geared for teachers and found at TeachThought.com threw me a lifeline by providing five basic examples of it.

Number three in the group explains how the feedback loop eliminates the need for an inquisitive child to burn his hand on a hot stove more than once.

I share all this because that example made me realize that when this column is at its best, it does at least half of the feedback loop for you. Allows you to feel the heat emanating from the health stove burner, so to speak, but eliminates your need - regardless of how inquisitive you are - to touch it.

Stick with me, my friend, and the only burn you’ll ever possibly get is the one from exercising for so long outside that your sunscreen wears off.

With that said, consider a study performed at the University of Sao Paulo Medical School in Sao Paulo, Brazil and published online on Dec. 5 by JAMA Neurology. It’s more proof that ultraprocessed foods are more than capable of giving your health a third-degree burn.

While lead author Natalia Gomes Goncalves, Ph.D., notes that for years UPFs have been linked to higher risk of cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and obesity, this study substantiates another published last July that found a correlation between UPF consumption and cognitive decline.

Goncalves and her colleagues reviewed the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health and worked with the information accrued on 10,755 people between the ages of 35 and 74. None reported extreme caloric intake, extreme caloric restriction, or the use of medication that can adversely affect cognitive performance.

These people initially completed a food-frequency questionnaire that allowed the researchers to separate them into four groups based on their daily consumption of ultraprocessed foods “as a percentage of total energy.” Next the 10,755 took the same cognitive test 3 different times and approximately 4 years apart.

From those tests performed an average of 8 years later, the researchers discovered the participants with the highest intake of UPFs had a 28 percent higher rate of cognitive decline when compared to those who had the lowest levels of UPF intake.

The prior study performed at the School of Public Health at Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China and published online last July by Neurology reviewed health information kept in the UK Biobank on more than 72,000 people. All were 55 years of age or older and did not suffer from dementia at the study’s start.

It revealed that 10 years after two initial 24-hour dietary assessments, those who had eaten the most UPFs (about 28 ounces a day) had developed 50 percent more dementia when compared to those who had eaten the least (no more than 8 ounces a day).

One final note: In Goncalves’ response to a thank-you email from another doctor, she calls the worldwide increase in the consumption of UPFs “worrisome.” Similarly I’m worried about you - and the entire United States - and for good reason.

A preprint of an article financially supported by Harvard University yet still to be peer-reviewed uses a “machine learning algorithm” and finds over 73 percent of the U.S. food supply is ultraprocessed.