Surprising Food Comparisons From A Nutrition Coach That Destroy Dieting Myths – Do You Agree With Him?


  1. artFido
    0

    Here we are again. Talking about obesity. And why it continues to rise in the UK (and the rest of the world). But more specifically in this case, how f*cked up we have become in our proposed solution to it. Irrational cherry picking and outright lies are vomited into our mainstream media every day. The latest installment of the former was last week on BBC 1. Apparently carbs are bad again ..In the 1990s, fat was the culprit. Out of all the food groups wrongly demonized, I guess fat makes the most sense as it contains 9 calories per gram and is thus the most calorie dense macronutrient. However, this was/is still an incredibly naive idea. In the early 2000s, carbs were the apparent cause of weight gain. You know... those carbs in the from of cakes, biscuits and pastries.... Yeah, the ones which actually contain more calories from fat. What about berries? Obviously lower in calories, but they are carbs too... This one is a joke as it can’t even correctly differentiate the foods it wants to demonize. In the last few years the blame has shifted to sugar - particularly refined sugar. It is not particularly satiating and is easy to over consume - but consumption is still decided by you. Naturally, it is included in sweet, calorie dense foods - so it’s easy to blame I guess

  2. artFido
    0

    Nutritionally speaking, snacking on fruit is better than snacking on processed foods of less nutritional value for a multitude of reasons. Nutrients. Hydration. Fibre. Vitamins... to name a few reasons. However, the term ‘fruit’ should not be confused with ‘dried fruit’ or further modified fruit such as these banana chips. This is because the calorie and sugar properties can be very different from the fresh versions. Why are the banana chips SO much higher in calories? Well, it’s a very simple answer. Fresh banana gets 70% of its weight from water. Whereas dried bananas lose around 95% of water content, making them a far more concentrated calorie source. Essentially, per 100g, you’re eating the calorie worth of what would be a LOT more fresh bananas. The same applies to all dried fruit. Banana chips are also different from dried banana. These chips are dehydrated, but also coated in oil and contain additional sugar, making their calorie/sugar content even higher still. Snacking on fruit is great. But you still have to be smart about it. If weight loss or reducing sugar intake is your goal you are better placed to consume fresh fruits, rather than dried or modified.. So called healthy foods still need the same level of awareness. They contain calories and sugar, just like any less nutritious food does. It’s this type of blind consumption without awareness that could stall fat loss progress or lead to insulin related health problems. Simply defining all forms of fruit as a good option is slightly short sighted. As you can see, gram for gram the differences can be astronomical. “But I snack on fruit”... yes but you also snack on calories and sugar. Therefore is might be a better idea to get clues up on the nutritional values of the food you consume. The likelihood is that you’ll source fresh fruit, lower in calories (and sugar if that’s a concern)

  3. artFido
    0

    Wine is not bad. It can be enjoyed as part of a fulfilling, healthy diet. In fact, a glass of wine each day can possibly fit the same statement.But here’s the thing. For fat loss, I always advise a gradual and sustainable calorie deficit - usually 10-15% from maintenance. For example if 2500 daily calories maintains your current weight, shaving off 10% leaves you with 2500-250=2250 calories per day to hit that 10% deficit. If we put daily consumption of a glass of wine into this scenario of daily, weekly and monthly calorie intake geared towards fat loss, this one glass could actually negate a big chunk of your calorie deficit. The question is; Do you really need it? Furthermore; Do you even track it?

  4. artFido
    0

    When eating out (and eating in general) there is a plethora of misconceptions regarding what’s ‘good and bad’. This results in the inevitable unnecessary elimination of the food you want, for something you’ll tolerate because you hear it’s ‘healthy’ aka ‘supports’ your goals. The problem is that most of the time, you simply don’t know what you’re consuming. For example; unless you enjoy it more, choosing brown bread over white is as pointless as choosing sweet potato fries instead of regular fries (unless you prefer SP fries). More fibre you say? How about you take care of your fibre intake with your overall nutritional intake instead. After all, you go out to catch up with friends, have fun. You don’t go out to stress profusely about decimal points of fibre intake (hopefully). Consumption of one mildly excessive, non controlled meal out of 20-25 meals each week will not impact progress unless you eat out several times per week - then the lack of knowledge as to what you are consuming may become an issue. It’s surely a better idea to, when out, order what you want when out and enjoy it. Then focus on your goal with controlled, measured intake of calories and nutrients the rest of the week (about 95% of your intake). It’s called balance.

  5. artFido
    0

    Special K. The ‘healthy’ cereal that ‘makes you slim’. There was a time a while ago where Kellogg’s created the special K diet for those looking to lose weight. ‘Drop a jeans size in 2 weeks’ I believe it was called...The concept was that you would eat special K suggested cereal servings/special K protein bar for breakfast and lunch, followed by a ‘normal’ meal for dinner (so this could literally entail ANYTHING... aka HEAPS of calories). I talk in the past tense as this is surely no longer a thing... I hope. The thing is. Whilst consuming vermin sized portions of Special K will naturally create a calorie deficit, so does eating any food, as long as you consume less energy than you expend. Maybe Kelloggs should create the same diet with their coco pops? Because exactly the same results would be achieved (nutritionally they are basically equal). But it’s the power of marketing, words and human vulnerability which run true here. This results in many perceiving the product on the left as ‘good’ for losing weight, whilst most people believe the product on the right will be inherently ‘bad’ for weight loss. But the reality is that neither are good or bad for weight loss.Weight loss can only occur if you are in a calorie deficit, regardless of food type. This example is indicative of MANY foods/products which market themselves as a food which makes you lose weight. It’s not the type of food that does the job, instead it’s the quantity of food.

  6. artFido
    0

    ‘But measuring portions and tracking calorie intake is boring Graeme’. Yes, it is. But for all of the 4 minutes and 32 seconds it takes you each day, it could literally be the difference between fat loss progress, no progress or even regress. ‘But who measures butter to the gram Graeme?’ Well, you. A couple of times only... Then after this you’ll hopefully be able to eye ball it. The whole point of tracking is to educate you for the future, not punish you in the present. If you do track portion sizes of food as a means to measure your fitness goal, it needs to be accurate. If it isn’t it becomes somewhat useless. Whilst it’s not completely pointless and there is some awareness, as you can see, it is easy to underestimate or carelessly miscalculate portions. Whilst this isn’t really a problem for low calorie foods like vegetables, it can be with calorie dense foods. The calorie difference upon erroneous judgement is much bigger with calorie dense foods. Paying attention to the types of food you consume is important for overall health, but it’s the QUANTITY which matters most when it comes to fat loss, maintenance or weight gain. After all, body composition is completely determined by calories in vs calories out.

  7. artFido
    0

    When it comes to anything in life, convenience is useful and speed is helpful. These two things also apply to preparation of calorie/nutrient intake to fit your goal. Convenience and speed can help the process. But when somebody constantly says they flat out do not have 15 minutes per day to prepare a meal that will support their goal, they are full of sh*t. They really mean they don’t want to cook. They are not prioritising their goal. I once had a client who claimed they couldn’t cook. It was a hardship to them. If they did cook, they’d make the same meal over and over again. They bought extortionate ready made fitness meals to solve the problem, which unsurprisingly became financially unsustainable. The result would sometimes be a whole chocolate cake for breakfast. I’m not joking.

  8. artFido
    0

    I wonder if Usain Bolt, Sir Mo Farrah, Serena Williams... or Roger Federer have ever sipped Fit Tea... Or marveled over the marketed wonders of Herbalife... Perhaps after a gruelling session they’ve considered swapping out a nutritious meal for a glass of slim fast...? Of course they haven’t. Whilst the diets of the athletes above may vary, they all consume real food. We idolize these people and believe their sporting abilities make their biological make up different to ours, but they are actually the same as us. Whilst their technical abilities, skill and conditioned fitness is far superior, they also have to monitor and control their lifestyle to fit their goal - just like we do. Whilst eating a variety of real food, an athlete’s balance of calories consumed will be controlled in relation to the amount of calories they expend. This doesn’t mean that we have to turn our life upside down and take up athletics or tennis. It means we have to be smart enough to realise that the principle demonstrated by most athletes is all the evidence we require. The products on the right of this graphic have no relationship with the fundamentals of our biology. They do not nourish, do not do anything that a calorie deficit doesn’t already do, do not alter thermodynamics and do not cleanse us. They do however, cost a lot of money and propose an experience which is simply; unequivocal bullsh*t

  9. artFido
    0

    The nakd bar on the left markets some of its products as ‘guilt free’. This is absolutely correct. In fact, I like this. Why on earth would you feel guilty after consuming food? After all, we need energy to live. It doesn’t make sense to feel guilty doing something completely natural such as consuming food. However, this statement and very concept of ‘guilt free’, means that there must be foods that are not guilt free, right? There must be foods that you should feel guilty about consuming, right?Perhaps three of these Reese’s peanut butter cups? No ‘guilt free’ marketing in sight... High calorie...? High sugar...? Chocolate...??? Is it bad for you? If you eat it, should you be ashamed? No. It’s thought of this way because it’s never marketed as healthy. But it’s still food. Instead it’s seen as a vice - something you really want/enjoy but shouldn’t really have. When it’s consumed, for some strange reason you feel guilt. Then negative relationships with food are born, instead of seeing it for what it is - food.

  10. artFido
    0

    The ‘clean eating’ trend has dominated social media for a while now. Today, most health conscious recipe books fall under this categorized notion that; ‘eating clean food will make you lean’. Whilst the recipes will be excellent for an individual looking to consume more nutrients, there is an issue facing an individual who wants to lose fat (or do both). Where the recipes and support will be inspiring and educational to a degree, there is a distinct lack of focus on the direct cause of the individual’s problem - energy balance. These recipe books often fail to display the basic calorie amounts for each recipe, instead claiming that consuming nutritious ingredients alone will get you lean. This doesn’t cut it I’m afraid.


Like it? Share with your friends!

14.3k shares

0 Comments

Join the artFido Newsletter

artFido’s videos and content are viewed more than 2.5 billion times a month. This makes the network the seventh most viewed media company in the online sphere, behind the Walt Disney company in sixth place, and in front of US media giant Comcast in eighth place.*
* Statistics provided by research group Tubular Labs