10 foods you're probably not eating enough

[Cavernio]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

hollandaise should be regarded similarly to the sauce on a big mac or any other insanely fatty substance

eggs benedict is one of my favorite dishes, but I place it next to Carl's Jr in terms of indulgence

What's wrong with fat?

[Arch0wl]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

nothing is inherently wrong with fat, you missed the qualifier I attached to it

[choof]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

insanely fatty

[DigitalS3r4ph]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

Fruit is excellent and all but most of what you buy out there is definitely not like what your great grandparents used to eat; a lot of the nutritional value is lost, making supplements in today's age almost a necessity (thanks to the pasteurization process, GMOs, pesticides, Monsanto, other tinfoil hat thingies). I mean sure, you can eat it, but it would take baskets of produce a day which will get extremely pricey.

That being said, I LOVE bananas personally because they are just absolutely rich in everything, including fiber.

If you have the space to spare, obviously home growing your vegetables and fruit is one of the most rewarding and close to nature things you can do for your body.

Archowl does have some merit to the things he's saying, although I didn't really get the egg whites only bit lol. I also don't agree and definitely don't recommend drinking or eating ANYTHING Dole as your fruit serving intake. Every body is different in the way it takes things though.

[Arch0wl]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

my point about egg whites is based on several assumptions about The Normal Person, namely that their caloric intake is too large above anything else and that most people don't get that much protein (maybe 60g per day, based on what most people I know eat)

if you google egg white vs. egg yolk you will notice that while egg yolks have a greater concentration of micronutrients, the caloric value is insane by comparison -- about six times greater

now, the wharton life expectancy calculator provides a great way to estimate the effects of many detrimental habits on your long-term health. you will notice that severe obesity is FAR more detrimental than obesity in that obesity takes off 15-20 years from your estimated lifespan while smoking habitually for many years takes off four. (keep in mind that this is 'estimated'; it also asks you about sex habits, but only because this increases your risk of getting a fatal STD -- if you never get one, for an estimation of your individual life expectancy this sex habit would not affect you at all)

in other words, I am assuming that low-calorie / high-protein foods will be better for a normal person than high-calorie high-protein foods in terms of macronutrients. 'nutritionally' admittedly is vague in this sense and I apologize for that, but I didn't anticipate someone would demand clarification. in hindsight I probably should have.

micronutrients are a far greater gamble but that's why I suggested spinach; notice spinach performs very well against egg yolks. this is further why I think you should supplement multivitamins, because eating every major micronutrient every day just isn't going to happen. regardless, with extremely nutrient dense and low calorie foods like spinach / kale you can supplement a lot of these vitamins while remaining low-calorie.

of course, you could be already quite skinny, in which case the most beneficial thing for you to do would be to add on muscle mass, in which case this thread is gold since high-protein is essential for that. however, I'm assuming that this is targeting a fairly average audience, and the average person is slightly overweight if not quite overweight (I recall the average male being something like 5'9" 190lb), therefore I prioritize low-calorie content since a mere diet change for a person like this would shave off several hundred calories per day and over time cause the participant to drop about a dozen pounds in a year

[Reincarnate]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

There are a lot of old people, and there are a lot of fat people, but there aren't a lot of old fat people

[Arch0wl]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

my immediate thought to that was "well, there's my grandmother, but frankly I don't know why she hasn't died yet"

however it occurred to me that this would sound like I'm waiting on her death and I promise I'm not, just that with her physiology (obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure) the way it is I'd peg her at like 70 years and she's pushing 80

[tosh]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

@OP: Chicken is my shit. <3
Though I can't regularly have fish because I have to watch my potassium.

There are a lot of old people, and there are a lot of fat people, but there aren't a lot of old fat people

I would say that depends on a variety of factors. I grew up in a small farming town in Nebraska and just about every elderly person was overweight and many would be considered obese.

[Reincarnate]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

Sure, of course it depends. "aren't a lot of" != "are no"

My general point is that being obese really screws you over on a variety of levels.

[Syhto]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

you could be "healthy" by all measures on a physical count but your stress levels could be through the roof and before you know it you have a heart attack at 35, you never really know. some of the oldest living people weren't necessarily healthy

but... who is to say if their quality of life would have been better, if they had better nutrition etc. I just think sometimes worrying is one of the worst things we can do for ourselves, which includes putting too much emphasis on doing what's "right" instead of what makes us feel good.

that being said there's a balance. you could say smoking cigs makes you feel good but I bet you'd feel better in general if you didn't smoke. idk. there's a give and take. so i think a lot of this health bs really isn't necessary. it's good to get all your vitamins etc so your body is functioning properly and has the means to heal itself, to keep up, to be the best it can be

but lol @ fruits being bad for you. there have been studies about like oranges and lemons etc not digesting properly for some people or something....

i just think that eating alkaline foods including acidic fruits (which turn alkaline during digestion or what have you) and have natural antioxidant properties, it's good for you. bottom line

like be reasonable. i think its fair to say no one knows everything about nutrition. that's the first time ive heard anyone say screw fruits drink fruit juice and take vitamins, lol. interesting

[cetaka]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

my immediate thought to that was "well, there's my grandmother, but frankly I don't know why she hasn't died yet"

however it occurred to me that this would sound like I'm waiting on her death and I promise I'm not, just that with her physiology (obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure) the way it is I'd peg her at like 70 years and she's pushing 80

I'd peg your grandma too Arch0wl

[Arch0wl]

Re: 10 foods you're probably not eating enough

but lol @ fruits being bad for you.

[...]

that's the first time ive heard anyone say screw fruits drink fruit juice and take vitamins, lol. interesting

these weren't things I said; fruits aren't 'bad' for you, they're just not that great for the most part -- suboptimal, in other words, because you can get the nutrients elsewhere and with less sugar/calories

re: stress. everyone talks about stress levels, but I personally think that the effects of stress on health are overhyped. I know they're there, but I have to question how much stress food-related shit could possibly cause. I suspect that if you're susceptible to getting stressed out over food there are probably a lot of more general things that provoke stress for you, not food specifically. it's my understanding that the people who die from stress-related shit are people who experience intensely stressful situations on a daily basis, like trial lawyers, chefs and law enforcement.

some attempts to measure it have been made though. it'll be interesting when health science can get a more accurate picture of how stress is contributing to life expectancy.

"some of the oldest living people weren't necessarily healthy" -- this is true, but it has more to do with genetics, i.e. if you're one of those people who isn't genetically advantaged, you'll probably live longer by making healthier choices

there's one thing you mentioned that I don't think was a major point in your post but is good to talk about anyway and that's the naturalness of food. something being 'natural' doesn't necessarily make it better for you. dan dennett has a ted talk where he mentions several examples of 'supernormal stimuli', a term from ethology where you're overloading stimulation for some evolutionary response. sugar is this way, fruit and sugar in general tastes so amazing because we had so little of it in the past. now that human beings have a lot, decisions regarding the body need to be effectively 'unnatural' to be optimal; pursuing natural instinctive impulses will probably make you obese (also note that cavemen, despite being 'natural', probably didn't have optimal nutrition because of simple resource scarcity)

having said all of this

I am extremely pro-drugs and personally take great pains to ensure every life choice other than my reckless indulgence in substances I'm not going to mention on this forum is on point so that I can die at a nice solid 70 instead of, say, 50.