For some reason there is no reply button on the other replies.

Maybe the evidence for meat doesn't generalise, but the idea that fresh vegetables would retain some sort-lived structures that start to break down once processed seems plausible. I was just pointing out that GPs claim could do with some backup.

I think GP didn’t provide citations as it’s a fairly well known and un-controversial opinion.

If this idea was new to you then maybe have a look at these sources, or do some other searches

https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/red-and-proce...

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/processed-foods...

Your references seem to back me up, and not the person I was replying to? Eg:

"There is evidence showing an association with certain types of food processing and poor health outcomes (especially highly- or ultra-processed foods). This association applies mainly to ultra-processed foods that contain added sugars, excess sodium, and unhealthful fats."

From the second one. Maybe you confused my position?

Evidence for processing meat doesn't transfer well as evidence for processing beans.

That's mostly related to the curing salts and their reaction with heme iron. Curing salts are not used when processing vegetables; heme iron is not added either (I hope), so this should not apply in this case.

Impossible patties have heme iron added.

https://www.thrillist.com/eat/nation/impossible-burger-vs-be...