Apples - the great debate (thread split)

TommyKnocker

Hi All

Just a question to Mellor. In his reply to the OP below he made the following statement which I don't understand.

(strawberries are far better than I expected, apples far worse)

From what I have read on the web, Apples are classed as a low GI fruit, meaning that they do not cause a spike in insulin levels. So I would have imagined that Apples were a good fruit to be eating

Some "Apple" facts taken from this site http://hubpages.com/hub/Health_Benefits_of_Apple

Reported Health Benefits of Apple :

1. Apple is a rich source of flavonoid and polyphenols both are powerful antioxidant.
2. Study shown that by eating 100g of apple can give an antioxidant effect that equal to taking about 1,500mg of vitamin C.
3. Apple contain a large amount of minerals and vitamins that can strengthen the blood.
4. Apple contain malic acid and tartaric acid, that can help prevent disturbances of the liver and digestion.
5. Apple cider vinegar when used as beverage can help to prevent the formation of kidney stone.
6. The skin of Apple contain pectin that can help remove toxic substances from the system by supplying galacturonic acid. Pectin helps prevent protein matter in the intestine from spoiling.
7. Eating an apple daily can lower cholesterol and reduce skin diseases.

Apples have been recommended for : Obesity, Headache, Arthritis, Bronchial asthma, Inflammation of the bladder, Gonorrhea, Anemia, Tuberculosis, Neuritis, Insomnia, Catarrh, Gallbladder stones, Worms, Halithosis, Pyorrhea
Nutritive Values : Per 100 grams

• Vitamin A : 900 I.U.
• Vitamin B : Thiamine .07 mg.;
• Vitamin C : 5 mg.
• Vitamin G : Amount uncertain
• Calcium : 6 mg.
• Iron : 3 mg.
• Phosphorus : 10 mg.
• Potassium : 130 mg.
• Carbohydrates : 14.9 gm.
• Calories : 58

Best Regards,

M

Mellor

B-Builder wrote: »

From what I have read on the web, Apples are classed as a low GI fruit, meaning that they do not cause a spike in insulin levels. So I would have imagined that Apples were a good fruit to be eating

1. Apple is a rich source of flavonoid and polyphenols both are powerful antioxidant.
2. Study shown that by eating 100g of apple can give an antioxidant effect that equal to taking about 1,500mg of vitamin C.
3. Apple contain a large amount of minerals and vitamins that can strengthen the blood.
4. Apple contain malic acid and tartaric acid, that can help prevent disturbances of the liver and digestion.
5. Apple cider vinegar when used as beverage can help to prevent the formation of kidney stone.
6. The skin of Apple contain pectin that can help remove toxic substances from the system by supplying galacturonic acid. Pectin helps prevent protein matter in the intestine from spoiling.
7. Eating an apple daily can lower cholesterol and reduce skin diseases.

Apples have been recommended for : Obesity, Headache, Arthritis, Bronchial asthma, Inflammation of the bladder, Gonorrhea, Anemia, Tuberculosis, Neuritis, Insomnia, Catarrh, Gallbladder stones, Worms, Halithosis, Pyorrhea


Nutritive Values : Per 100 grams

• Calories : 58

I think you missing the point. There are many benefits to eating apples, I never said they were bad and my shopping each week always includes a few.

No food or drink that I can think of is good for you in excessive doses

In terms of improving ones over all diet, nutrients take a back seat to counting calories, carbs and protein.

An apple my be up to 200g or so, which is 100-120 calories a portion. Most people wouldn't expect an apple to be this high, hence my comments, worse than you'd expect.

Strawberrys are quite low per 100 grams (32 calories) as well as being not that dense (food density is very important when considering portion size). A punnet of strawberries is 250g, or 80 cals. A punnet might have 4 or 5 serves in it (togetger with oats or alone for a snack). 16-20 cals a serve is quite low. Most people would expect a luxury fruit like strawberries to be much higher, which is why I said better than expected.

TommyKnocker

Hi There

Cheers for the explanation and clearing up my confusion. I would agree that strawberries are slightly less calorie dense then apples. This post is not me being argumentative, just debating a point and hoping to increase my knowledge on the subject of nutrition.

Really there is not that much in the difference when judging equal quantities of these two fruits IMHO.

i.e.

Accordig to Fitday.com a large apple (approx 225g/250g) is rated as having 110 calories.

As Fitday don't have a figure for just plain, raw strawberries (without sugar) I used nutritionaldata.com. This site gives strawberries a calorie rating of 32 calories per 100g. So if I ate 225g of strawberries I would get approx 72 calories and for 250g of strawberries I would get approx 80 calories.

IMHO 30/40 calories is not that big a difference between fruits.

Also I would disagree with your statement

In terms of improving ones over all diet, nutrients take a back seat to counting calories, carbs and protein.

IMHO counting calories is only the very first rung on the ladder of working out a good diet. And when you start considering the Carb, Protein and Fat content of the food you are eating you are working with the "Nutrients" (Macro-Nutrients) in the food.

Simply counting calories, I need around 2,760 calories daily for maintanence. 3 Big Mac meals would give me around this amount of calories, but would not meet my Macro-Nutrient or Micro-Nutrient requirements to maintain the lean mass to body fat ratio that I currently have and stay healthy. Neither would it help when my goal changes to building lean mass as cleanly as possible or lowering my bodyfat % while holding on to as much lean mass as possible.

IMHO making sure you are getting the correct levels of Macro & Micro nutrients within your specific calorific requirements is very important and should not "take a back seat" to simply counting the number of calories you require for your specific goal.

Just my 2c worth.


Best Regards,

M

Mellor

B-Builder wrote: »

Really there is not that much in the difference when judging equal quantities of these two fruits IMHO.

Equal quanties in terms of what?

Accordig to Fitday.com a large apple (approx 225g/250g) is rated as having 110 calories.

As Fitday don't have a figure for just plain, raw strawberries (without sugar) I used nutritionaldata.com. This site gives strawberries a calorie rating of 32 calories per 100g. So if I ate 225g of strawberries I would get approx 72 calories and for 250g of strawberries I would get approx 80 calories.

IMHO 30/40 calories is not that big a difference between fruits.

Their exact figures I quoted above.

Did you even read my post properly. You seamed to miss the cals in strawberrys I posted, and you also missed the single most important part. You are taking the whole thing out of context.

Where did I say that 100 cals of strawberries are better than 100 cals in apples.

Obviously if you ate 80 cals of strawberries is not much different that eating slightly more in apples. But my whole point, that you either ignored, can't understand or missed, is that you are not likely to eat 250g of strawberries when you are watching your food. If you have a sweet tooth and are peckish, 50-100g of strawberries is more than enough. 100g is 5 large strawberries. how is this point hard to understand?

IMHO counting calories is only the very first rung on the ladder of working out a good diet. And when you start considering the Carb, Protein and Fat content of the food you are eating you are working with the "Nutrients" (Macro-Nutrients) in the food.

Simply counting calories, I need around 2,760 calories daily for maintanence. 3 Big Mac meals would give me around this amount of calories, but would not meet my Macro-Nutrient or Micro-Nutrient requirements to maintain the lean mass to body fat ratio that I currently have and stay healthy. Neither would it help when my goal changes to building lean mass as cleanly as possible or lowering my bodyfat % while holding on to as much lean mass as possible.

IMHO making sure you are getting the correct levels of Macro & Micro nutrients within your specific calorific requirements is very important and should not "take a back seat" to simply counting the number of calories you require for your specific goal.

What is all that nonsense about?? you are simply playing with words and arguing a point that I (or anybody else) didn't make.
How is that relevant to anything that I said??? You are welcome to disagree, debate and argue any point I make, but please don't argue a point I didn't make or take me out of context.

Where did I say calories is all that is important? Obviously getting calories from big macs is a bad idea, seriously grow up.
I specifically said calories, carbs and protein (implying fats by proxy). Which would be the macro-nutrients you refer to.
When I said nutrients, I was under the impression that you figure out that I was using the word it in vernacular form, referring to micro nutrients, as opposed to macro. (the fact that I also named them should of made it obvious too). "Takes a back seat" simply means that getting the right amount of calories, carbs, protein is the most important part, its has priority, once done the (micro-)nutrients can be worked on.

corkcomp wrote: »

op, you seem to have a decent understanding of nutrition and your right about not making up your calorie allowance from crap like big macs ... Dont worry about the cals in apples, you could have three apples for the same cals as a yorkie bar and you would get all the fiber + minerals and none of the crap...

He isn't the OP. Nutrition maybe, he understand of simple english leaves alot to be desired. Nobody suggested using big macs, nor avoid apples. A simple (I have no idea how it was confusing) tip of snacks and fruit was taken out of context.

justsomebloke

oh sweet jebus.

seriously if you are going to down down the route of extracting the exact calories that you get in fruit and veg you should then at least take into consideration the amount of calories that you body has to use to digest the different fruits and veg as well as it may work out more even if yous are going to actually try and be strict about it.

People just eat your greens......


.....and your yellows and your reds and your purples i.e. just get a wide variety of different fruits and veg into you and stop worrying about the minute details unless you are in the run into a competition

corkcomp

Joe the Santa wrote: »

oh sweet jebus.

seriously if you are going to down down the route of extracting the exact calories that you get in fruit and veg you should then at least take into consideration the amount of calories that you body has to use to digest the different fruits and veg as well as it may work out more even if yous are going to actually try and be strict about it.

People just eat your greens......


.....and your yellows and your reds and your purples i.e. just get a wide variety of different fruits and veg into you and stop worrying about the minute details unless you are in the run into a competition

+1, couldnt agree more .. Its bordering on OTT to be saying any fruit is "better" than any other .. of course they all have different cals per 100g and different nutrients etc.

As mentioned above, eat as many fruit and veg as you can every day (in place of refined carbs, sat fats, fast food and crap in general), you WONT get fat from doing this ...

corkcomp

Mellor wrote: »

Equal quanties in terms of what?



Their exact figures I quoted above.

Did you even read my post properly. You seamed to miss the cals in strawberrys I posted, and you also missed the single most important part. You are taking the whole thing out of context.

Where did I say that 100 cals of strawberries are better than 100 cals in apples.

Obviously if you ate 80 cals of strawberries is not much different that eating slightly more in apples. But my whole point, that you either ignored, can't understand or missed, is that you are not likely to eat 250g of strawberries when you are watching your food. If you have a sweet tooth and are peckish, 50-100g of strawberries is more than enough. 100g is 5 large strawberries. how is this point hard to understand?



What is all that nonsense about?? you are simply playing with words and arguing a point that I (or anybody else) didn't make.
How is that relevant to anything that I said??? You are welcome to disagree, debate and argue any point I make, but please don't argue a point I didn't make or take me out of context.

Where did I say calories is all that is important? Obviously getting calories from big macs is a bad idea, seriously grow up.
I specifically said calories, carbs and protein (implying fats by proxy). Which would be the macro-nutrients you refer to.
When I said nutrients, I was under the impression that you figure out that I was using the word it in vernacular form, referring to micro nutrients, as opposed to macro. (the fact that I also named them should of made it obvious too). "Takes a back seat" simply means that getting the right amount of calories, carbs, protein is the most important part, its has priority, once done the (micro-)nutrients can be worked on.




He isn't the OP. Nutrition maybe, he understand of simple english leaves alot to be desired. Nobody suggested using big macs, nor avoid apples. A simple (I have no idea how it was confusing) tip of snacks and fruit was taken out of context.

Split thread - B-Builder was the OP of the thread I was posting a reply to

As another poster mentioned, dont worry about the cals in fruit unless approachingsome dealine or competition, when you see some of the diets posted here fruit is the least of the problem!

Mellor

corkcomp wrote: »

Split thread - B-Builder was the OP of the thread I was posting a reply to

Haha, nice try,
Too bad the thread wasn't split when you replied, (your post was also left behind in the other )

As another poster mentioned, dont worry about the cals in fruit unless approachingsome dealine or competition, when you see some of the diets posted here fruit is the least of the problem!

I agree. The split thread is completely out of contect, nobody said any fruit is bad. I'd take apples most other foods any day (except eggs maybe )