Nutritional myths masquerading as fact.

My pet hate is people who read an article out of the US, say, and assume it applies in an Irish context, when the reality is that the food industry over there, from farm to plate, is *extremely* different to here, for both meat and fruit & veg.

rawn wrote: »

Do you chew your fruit to smoothie consistency?? :pac:

The fibre hasnt gone anywhere, its still there and still needs to be broken down to be absorbed into your blood. A smoothie isnt like drinking a juice, it still has everything that the raw ingredients had, unlike a juice.

In any case, the difference between chewing a banana versus "Drinking" a blended one is minimal from an absorption point of view.

Telling everyone that its not is just another nutritional myth, so you are contributing to the problem by spreading it.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

A smoothie is not a meal. Its much more similar to a desert or treat and should be treated like that, as in eating it very rarely. I find it hard to believe an adult would eat no fruit whatsoever.

Why is it not a meal exactly?
What nutritional aspect is it missing that would make it a meal in your eyes?

Can I assume that MRE's and the food that we ship over to Africa and is consumed by astronauts are also not a meal in your eyes, since they are not in solid form?

GreeBo wrote: »

Why is it not a meal exactly?
What nutritional aspect is it missing that would make it a meal in your eyes?

I think they just mean that your average smoothie doesn't provide a broad range of nutrients. I.e.. they're all sugar, fibre (and a good few vitamins etc.) But don't provide much in the way of complex carbs, protein or fat.

Of course, it all depend on what you're juicing.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Sorry I don't know what MRE's are. The main factor that would make it not a meal is that it's liquid with no fibre and not very likely to fill you up in the same way normal solid food does. I don't really see a reason for liquidising your food, it seems pointless to me.

That's not really the point though, the main point is that they are not really that great to eat on a regular basis and certainly should not be considered very healthy due to the amount of sugar and that liquid does not act in the same way food does to fill you up and you are likely to eat more calories.

They are food rations typically used by soldiers and they are often blended and dried.

A smoothie is NOT a juice.

Where do you think all the fibre is going? Just becuase its blended its still fibre. My smoothies are full of fibre!
A smoothie will fill you up, if you make it properly.
If its very liquid then obviously it wont, but then you are not making it properly.
a well made smoothie is VERY healthy and a perfectly filling and nutritious meal. A smoothie doesnt create sugar, you have the same amount of fructose in raw fruit as you do from that same fruit added to a smoothie.

"liquid does not act in the same way as food"?
There is food in the bloody smoothie!

Like I said in my earlier post, its a meal, if you treat it like a dessert then expect dessert like results.

You are perpetuating more myths with this nonsense argument.

NiallBoo wrote: »

I think they just mean that your average smoothie doesn't provide a broad range of nutrients. I.e.. they're all sugar, fibre (and a good few vitamins etc.) But don't provide much in the way of complex carbs, protein or fat.

Of course, it all depend on what you're juicing.

You cant use shop bought smoothies to dismiss the merits of a home made smoothie.


My daily smoothie has more nutrients than I could get from any other meal for the same effort.
Bananas, Strawberries, Blueberries, Blackberries, Raspberries, Milk, Water, various nut butters, flax seeds, kale, wheatgrass, oats, honey and various other bits and pieces. Its thick and very filling.

Its about 450 calories and can keep me going until 2pm if I need it to.
It takes 5 mins to make and less to clear up and can be eaten on the go.

And its NOT juicing! Juicing to TOTALLY different from making a smoothie.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

And like I said, what do you want from it? It's food, it gives you energy, it doesn't harm you in the process, isn't that what a food is supposed to do?

So pretty ordinary in nutritional terms but if you like it then fair enough. Prefer a Bounty myself (in moderation).

Tigger wrote: »

It's all about calories for weight loss or gain but the type of food you consume to get those calories is also important
Eat nothing but rashers and see how you feel

Well, technically, it *is* all about calories when talking purely in terms of weight gain/loss. The side effects (or straight up health devastation) caused by the foods you use to obtain those calories will actually have no impact on your weight gain. If you did as you suggested, and ate a lot of rashers to gain weight, you would feel horrible and have terrible problems health-wise, but you'd still gain just as much *weight* as someone eating the equivalent calorie portion of celery.

Practically, you are right that it's best to watch what you eat, basing it on more than the calorie density or whatever, but scientifically weight gain is caused by a surplus of energy from calories over what your body used up (and nothing else, bar hormones and minor exceptions).

bmurph16 wrote: »

the zika virus is bs. its just the fact that monsanto gm foods dominate brazil

Could you cite your source? Back up this claim? Or are you just going to let it sit there like a really terribly researched opinion on an open forum?


inb4 naturalnews/mercola source

My smoothie is bigger then yours.

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

If you consume 500 calories in the form of a soft drink it hits your blood stream quickly,you get an insulin surge, some of it is used to restore glycogen levels and the rest gets proceed as by your liver and stored as fat in muscles or in fat deposits under skin.

If you you eat fruits for the same calories only a fraction of it hits the blood stream quickly, the rest is bound in fibre structures and gets released a lot slower so you get a steady supply of fructose to the blood system, you don't get a sudden insulin surge telling your body to store it all as fat, and quite a lot of it never gets digested at all and passes out your pooper with the fibre it's bundled in.

Both are 500 calories, mostly from simple sugars, but the bio-availablity is massively different between the two.

Can you cite a peer-reviewed paper backing this up? I've never heard of this phenomenon.

malnurtured wrote:

Can you cite a peer-reviewed paper backing this up? I've never heard of this phenomenon.

Just Google it. You shouldn't even have to, though. I would have assumed it was common sense to anyone with even Junior Cert Biology.

Dial Hard wrote:

Just Google it. You shouldn't even have to, though. I would have assumed it was common sense to anyone with even Junior Cert Biology.

Insulin causes you to store more fat. Which will be burned off later when you require those calories that you didn't get from the carbohydrates you aye.

malnurtured wrote:

No need to be like that. If someone makes a claim, it's on them to back it up if they want people to take the claim seriously. 'Just google it' is also what conspiracy theorists and the like say when you question what they say, so that they don't have to go to the effort of finding a source (if it even exists). Surely you've seen the evidence that convinced you of your position, so why is it hard to share that knowledge?

It's not a claim or a conspiracy theory, though; it's common knowledge that the bio-availability of various macros are affected by differing delivery systems.

If he was making some very obscure claim then, yes, I'd expect sources to back it up. But this is a bit like asking someone for peer-reviewed studies to prove that gravity exists.

strelok wrote:

well you can overdose on certain vitamins and minerals, not easy to do but possible.

Hypervitaminosis, (vitamins a and d, I think) from consuming excess amounts of fish liver oil - especially halibut liver oil.
You wont get it from eating veg...
Although kids went orange from sunni delight ,beta-carotene

GreeBo wrote: »

They are food rations typically used by soldiers and they are often blended and dried.

A smoothie is NOT a juice.

Where do you think all the fibre is going? Just becuase its blended its still fibre. My smoothies are full of fibre!
A smoothie will fill you up, if you make it properly.
If its very liquid then obviously it wont, but then you are not making it properly.
a well made smoothie is VERY healthy and a perfectly filling and nutritious meal. A smoothie doesnt create sugar, you have the same amount of fructose in raw fruit as you do from that same fruit added to a smoothie.

"liquid does not act in the same way as food"?
There is food in the bloody smoothie!

Like I said in my earlier post, its a meal, if you treat it like a dessert then expect dessert like results.

You are perpetuating more myths with this nonsense argument.




You cant use shop bought smoothies to dismiss the merits of a home made smoothie.


My daily smoothie has more nutrients than I could get from any other meal for the same effort.
Bananas, Strawberries, Blueberries, Blackberries, Raspberries, Milk, Water, various nut butters, flax seeds, kale, wheatgrass, oats, honey and various other bits and pieces. Its thick and very filling.

Its about 450 calories and can keep me going until 2pm if I need it to.
It takes 5 mins to make and less to clear up and can be eaten on the go.

And its NOT juicing! Juicing to TOTALLY different from making a smoothie.

I am sorry I don't agree with you at all. I would much rather have the whole food and no honey with all that broken down fruit, I think fibre acts differently when blended. But if you like it,that's great.

Its a different opinion from you which does not make it nonsense. No need to be so rude because somebody thinks differently then you.