4 ms·

This is going to mislead many folks. Unless nuts are one of your favorite foods, they're not a "health" food by any means. They're far too calorie dense, even a

This is going to mislead many folks. Unless nuts are one of your favorite foods, they're not a "health" food by any means. They're far too calorie dense, even after this recalculation to make sense in a diet. Which means most of the population is well advised to steer clear of them (and other worse foods) in favor of high volume, higher protein foods, and higher fiber foods (all measured in a denominator of _per calorie_). Sure if you love peanut butter and you want to fit it in to your calorie budget, and have the self control to not binge it, and are happy with the volume of food you get on a caloric deficit or maintenance, by all means. But for most (about 75%) of us we should be focusing on the food choices that make a deficit come naturally, because most of us have a few (or more) pounds to lose. Now I'm sure some nay sayer will come back and be like "It's better than pizza, fries, and (american) chips" ... yeah thats true, but we shouldn't fool people into thinking they're making a choice they can live on long term with nuts.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
throwaway22032 3y ago
In my world, most people who eat nuts do so because they're intentionally trying to eat more calories. They're tiny, it's easy to carry a few hundred grams of cashews on the trail. I don't know of anyone who sees them as being a good food on a cut, they have a high ratio of fat to protein.
- maerF0x0 3y ago
  Super agree they have no place on a cut. And 75% of us being overweight means 75% of us should be on a mild cut (or moderate, or severe[1] as is the case). But in many under food-educated circles "Nuts" are associated with "hiking" or "trail mix" and seen as a way to participate in "healthy lifestyle". Tiny people trying to gain (presumably lean) weight is a super small slice of the population, if I had to wager a guess, less than 1%. (just like I recently helped a friend understand that drinking full sugar gatorade was not good for her, she felt like she was participating in "athletic lifestyle" and would receive some benefits from it... nutritionally it's practically identical to drinking a cola) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast
  - throwaway22032 3y ago
    I mean the thing is that these things are useful as athletic aids. But they are useful only for the athletic pursuit, not just for the sake of it. Calorie dense foods help you hike further with less weight carried. Electrolyte drinks, even sugary ones, help you fuel yourself through workouts when your digestive system is iffy. In both cases the dietary impact is essentially irrelevant because you need to eat something to fuel the workout, if you try to hike on an empty stomach you will eventually damage yourself. But yeah, for someone who does intuitive eating (i.e. not tracking calories), they should probably stay away from calorie dense foods. You can easily drink yourself 1000 calories of soda with near zero hunger impact. The takeaway should probably just be that in a world with bountiful food supplies, intuitive eating just doesn't work for most people, like how a Labrador will just eat forever if you let them. Because most people sit on their arse almost all of the time and do fuck all.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

throwaway22032 3y ago

In my world, most people who eat nuts do so because they're intentionally trying to eat more calories. They're tiny, it's easy to carry a few hundred grams of cashews on the trail. I don't know of anyone who sees them as being a good food on a cut, they have a high ratio of fat to protein.

maerF0x0 3y ago
Super agree they have no place on a cut. And 75% of us being overweight means 75% of us should be on a mild cut (or moderate, or severe[1] as is the case). But in many under food-educated circles "Nuts" are associated with "hiking" or "trail mix" and seen as a way to participate in "healthy lifestyle". Tiny people trying to gain (presumably lean) weight is a super small slice of the population, if I had to wager a guess, less than 1%. (just like I recently helped a friend understand that drinking full sugar gatorade was not good for her, she felt like she was participating in "athletic lifestyle" and would receive some benefits from it... nutritionally it's practically identical to drinking a cola) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast
- throwaway22032 3y ago
  I mean the thing is that these things are useful as athletic aids. But they are useful only for the athletic pursuit, not just for the sake of it. Calorie dense foods help you hike further with less weight carried. Electrolyte drinks, even sugary ones, help you fuel yourself through workouts when your digestive system is iffy. In both cases the dietary impact is essentially irrelevant because you need to eat something to fuel the workout, if you try to hike on an empty stomach you will eventually damage yourself. But yeah, for someone who does intuitive eating (i.e. not tracking calories), they should probably stay away from calorie dense foods. You can easily drink yourself 1000 calories of soda with near zero hunger impact. The takeaway should probably just be that in a world with bountiful food supplies, intuitive eating just doesn't work for most people, like how a Labrador will just eat forever if you let them. Because most people sit on their arse almost all of the time and do fuck all.