These nutrition charts will change the way you look at food forever!

How many cookies, chocolate bars, croissants would you need to be full? A pack, two? When people put food in their mouths, it is not the quantity that matters to us, but only that the food is good. But imagine what a favor you would do to your body if you simply listened to it!

Of course, swapping out food for healthier alternatives is the way to go, and below are some charts that speak with numbers. Write it down, because with this you will create a snack menu that you will never feel guilty about again!

The charts were prepared by Graeme Tomlinson, who is also behind the very popular Instagram account - The Fitness Chef – where you'll find numerous myth-busting nutrition infographics!

View this post on Instagram

We like to idolize and demonize most things. We crave affirmation that what we believe in is universally correct. An example can easily be found in those idolizing their favorite sports team, while demonizing that team's bitter rival. Yet, if put into non-emotional, neutral context, both teams are merely trying to beat each other by the same means. We idolize some foods because we believe them to be 'better' for us – we want affirmation that our consumption is correct. We demonize other foods because we believe they are 'worse' for us – we want affirmation that consuming these foods is incorrect. But in isolation, no food is correct or incorrect, it's just different. In this example we have avocado on brown bread and Nutella on white bread. The former is often idolized, while the latter is usually demonized or associated with guilt. Yet in this example, consumption of the former means enjoyment, more nutrients and fiber, but also more calories. Whereas consumption of the latter means enjoyment, less nutrients and fiber, but in this example, significantly fewer calories. ⁣⁣ Therefore the avocado toast may be a good idea if the goal is to consume more nutrients and potentially enhance satiety, but the Nutella toast can support calorie reduction as it is fewer in calories. These outcomes ultimately depend on overall dietary intake. Sometimes our unwillingness to consider what we don't believe in (known as confirmation bias) takes us away from what is actually true. Believing foods to be good or bad without inserting overall context is to digress from what matters most. Eating any food should be an enjoyable process. But it should be done in a place where feelings of 'good or bad' are replaced with understanding, reality and ease. When a sports team scores a goal against our team, the other supporters celebrate while we despair. But the neutral supporter appreciates the goal for its non-emotional value. Our beliefs in food should be no different. 🔥 - - #avotoast #nutrients #healthysnack #diet #fatlosshelp #avocatotoast #nutellatoast #caloriecounting #snack #avocado #nutella #healthysnacks #diettips #nutellalovers #losefat

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he May 13, 2020 at 11:07am PDT

View this post on Instagram

Intuitive eating has become fairly popular in recent years. Scores of bloggers and popular literature promote a concept that disregards physiological processes such as energy balance in favor of following one's dietary intuition. For compositional change, the essence of the concept appears sound in that waiting for hunger/satiety cue's before/during eating is helpful. But the first major issue arrives as soon as the hunger is dealt with. While hunger is being intuitively 'nurtured', the extent of energy consumed is largely unaccounted for. Therefore, while satisfying hunger is achieved, the effect on one's composition is unknown. And while calorie counting is not the only way to lose fat, it is the closest mechanism to the principles of calorie balance – which is fundamental to fat loss/gain. Of course one can lose fat while following intuitive eating structures. But in doing so, fat loss becomes much harder to predict when enjoyment of calorie dense food is left unaccounted for. By listening to our desire, it is highly likely that we will consume favorite foods in excessive quantities. And when fitness bloggers preach that their 16% body fat physique arrives by virtue of intuitive approaches, there is no doubt that there is consideration of energy consumed. This must be addressed. Each individual is free to choose which dieting method works for them. And whilst execution of calorie control is the simplest measurement of progress, based entirely on the physiology that evokes compositional changes, it should eventually morph into skilled eyeballing of portion sizes in alignment with a more intuitive approach. Thus, calorie counting should not be forever. But when starting a fat loss goal, learning the most relevant information relevant to that goal is going to be exceptionally useful. That way, one can leave confusion behind, gain important knowledge for a period of time and refer to such knowledge in a relaxed manner for the rest of their lives. 🙂 - - #intuitiveeating #caloriecounting #flexibledieting #caloriedeficit #treat #nutrients #eatsmart #snacks #caloriecontrol #dieting #snacking #bingeeating #diets #nutella

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jun 10, 2020 at 11:20am PDT

View this post on Instagram

Individual foods are vilified on a daily basis as being a direct cause of weight gain. They are lambasted up and down the land by those who refuse to consult evidence and apply rational context. This extreme motto usually includes refined carbohydrates. Many feel they must exclude their favorite breads, pasta, rice and potatoes, believing they are satanic villains, whilst wholewheat versions showcase as Captain America to save them from doom. Next door, Tracey is heard proclaiming that she is "being good today" by swapping white rice for brown. Yet a closer look at the nutritional value shows that brown rice holds similar caloric and fiber values to white rice. And these are the noteworthy topics of that discussion. Rice aside, fiber may be the one main nutritional difference between these crab-based foods. While there is more fiber the less refined foods, thus offering more likelihood of satiety, this is not guaranteed. Because despite feeling fuller, we can still choose to eat more. Furthermore, we need to appreciate additional foods consumed across overall diet and energy expenditure. A diet rich in fiber is advised to support overall health, gut in particular. In terms of composition, it boils down to the same thing again – energy balance. As you can see, there is a marginal difference in calories between the potatoes, rice, pasta or bread. Body composition is defined by how we manage our overall energy, regardless of the food type. Therefore, it is impossible to argue that consuming higher fiber foods will categorically be better for our body composition than lower fiber foods without assessing quantities of food consumed. And for those who argue that coconut oil boosts metabolism and specifically enables you to burn more calories (as seen in online style magazines), there is simply no reliable research to support this. The calorie value of any butter or oil is the salient determinant of body composition, while some offer additional nutritional benefits. No single food makes you leaner, just as no single food makes you fatter. If white toast and butter is enjoyed, facilitating its inclusion in your informed diet is essential. 🥖🧈🍝

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he May 18, 2020 at 11:17am PDT

View this post on Instagram

According to the Oxford dictionary, snack (noun), is a small amount of food eaten between meals. While Oxford dictionary definitions are not entirely relevant to one's nutritional understanding, the use of 'small' may hold relevance. For example, for a fat loss seeking, lightly active 190cm male, weighing 95kg with a 15% deficit target of 2200 calories per day, some portions of the snacks on the left can equate to a quarter of his required daily intake before additional snacks and main meals. For a fat loss seeking, lightly active 165cm female, weighing 80kg with a 15% deficit target of 1700 calories per day, some portions of the snacks on the left equate to a third of her required daily intake before additional snacks and main meals. In both examples, such portion sizes may hinder adherence to a calorie deficit. What's more, are they necessary? The salient variable in both these examples may well be one's recognition of a calorie deficit target. This being a means to measure and align behavior (consuming calories) with the fat loss principle (a calorie deficit). It could be argued that if there was awareness of the required deficit target, along with caloric volume consumed, that one would be more likely to manage portion sizes accordingly. Perhaps main meals would be structured in a way in which large caloric volume of snacks was no longer necessary or caloric volume of main meals reduced. Perhaps there may be a realization that satiety could still be achieved with smaller portions of the same enjoyed foods. Or that previously deemed 'insignificant' and thus, excessively portioned snacks was exactly where deficit adherence collapsed. Contrary to the dogmatic new social media trends, being in control of your energy intake to nurture your compositional goals is not obsessive. It is simply the most enlightening way to educate yourself on the relationship between your food behaviors and the scientific principle behind the success of your goal. 🙏 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he May 28, 2020 at 11:06am PDT

View this post on Instagram

The point of this post is not to strike fear into those who love to slurp regular caramel macchiatos. Instead the point is to inform with the use of perspective. Although we refer to all of our coffee-themed drinks as 'coffee', it is clear that one person's preference compared to another's may represent a monumentally different nutritional acquisition, especially over time. Simply put, coffee in its purest form contains 0 calories, but caloric calculation over time is therefore redundantly pointless. But should consistent selection of calorie inclusive coffee related beverages be consumed multiple times per day in bids to 'wake up', 'perk up' and enjoy a palatable drink, the caloric calculation may be significantly higher. And therefore, over time, an important dietary consideration. There is nothing wrong with consuming cappuccinos, lattes or caramel macchiatos. But if one is persistently bemoaning lack of progress regarding composition, reduction of such beverages offer a very easy opportunity to support a caloric deficit without upheaval of habitual eating habits. Furthermore, selection of alternative coffee inclusive drinks at lower (or no) caloric cost can ensure that one still 'gets their fill' of daily coffee whilst also getting more progress in their compositional goal. upheaval of one's diet comes reduced chances of long term adherence. But with smaller upheaval comes a greater chance of long-term adherence. For fat loss, long term adherence is the catalyst in building meaningful, educated eating patterns that support incremental change over time. Whether it's coffee, a biscuit or any given food, seemingly insignificant alternatives to minuscule parts of overall diet are likely these are the tweaks that finally deliver significant results. But more importantly, make the results last forever. 🙂 - - #coffee #coffeelover #cappuccino #losefat #dieting #dietplan #calories #caloriedeficit #latte #flexiblediet #macchiato #caffeine #losecounterbellyfat #balanceddiet #countingcalories #calorie

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jul 30, 2020 at 11:03am PDT

View this post on Instagram

I wonder if Usain Bolt, Serena Williams or Lionel Messi have ever been nutritionally seduced by a juice cleanse… Or marveled over Herbalife… Perhaps after a grueling session they've considered swapping out a nutritious meal for a Kardashian endorsed appetite suppressant lolly pop? Of course they haven't. While the diets of the athletes above may vary, they all consume food. We idolize these people and believe their sporting abilities make their physiological make up different to ours, but they are the same. Whilst their technical abilities, skill and conditioned fitness is superior, they still have to monitor and control their composition to fit their goal – just like we do. controlled in relation to the amount of calories they expend. This doesn't mean we have to turn our life upside down and take up athletics or tennis. Instead, we need to be smart enough to realize that the principle demonstrated by most athletes is all the evidence we require for our physical aspirations. The products on the right of this graphic do not aid sustained change. They do not nourish, do anything that a caloric reduction and increased energy expenditure doesn't already do. They do, however, cost a lot of money. Being overweight is not a problem unless one is unhappy as a result of being overweight. Too often we are seduced by products that promise a quick, salubrious fix. The reality is that they stop any progress. For those who argue that athletes are leaner because they move more as part of their job and we don't, you are only partially correct. While it's an athlete's job to maintain optimal composition, it further illuminates the principle we must appreciate – the balance of energy. ⁣⁣ Fat loss is as simple an equation that has ever been unearthed by science. But then again, no one can sell a tub of "patient calorie deficit" in a box for £5799999.99. 🎈 - - #athletes #diettips #balanceddiet #mealprep #fatlosstips #losefat #nutritionist #realfood #caloriedeficit #fatlosstips #diet #dieting #healthyliving #dieter #athletics

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jun 20, 2020 at 5:04am PDT

View this post on Instagram

Monica gazes into the spring sunshine and remembers an important episode in her life. It was 18 months ago. In a desperate attempt to lose fat, she consulted the internet for 'healthy' snack ideas. Tulip was the name of the lean, blond haired women yielding 84 head touching, star gazing, smiling photos in her article advising that: "Fruit of any sort will help fat loss my lovely." She recalls when she arrived at the local convenience shop, skipping along the aisles, showing two fingers to Ferrero Rochers, hair whistling, and beaming with hope. She double took and ground to a halt. It was fruit. She did a Michael Jacksonesque rewind moonwalk before choosing a varied selection of dried fruit. As the weeks went by, Monica consumed an abundance of dried fruit. But as she ransacked packet after packet, she did so with a distinct malaise. She wasn't becoming Tulip. Until a car pulled up next to her. Jesus f*ck she recalls. It was Peter – her ex. They broke up a month earlier after a disastrous holiday in the Lake District. Their eyes fell, windows were rolled down. Monica remembers the conversation: Peter: "How are you?" Her: “Eh… fine”. Peter: "What did you get there?" Her: “Dried banana, I'm trying to lose weight.” Peter: "You know that dried banana is calorie dense, right?" Her: “WHAT”. Peter: "Yeah, for example, that 200g packet is 594 calories and 132g of sugar". Her: "But I researched this". Peter: "Where?". Monica: “tulipyourbodyhealer.com”. Peter: "Ok listen up, 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. Per 100g, you're eating the calorie and sugar worth of what would be a LOT more fresh fruit. The same logic applies to any dried fruit." Monica remembers flinging her packet into the back seat and gasping: "Back to mine?" She remembers Peters drooling before panting out the words “I would like that very much”… Both cars revved and squealed with delight.🔥 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Apr 29, 2020 at 10:10am PDT

View this post on Instagram

For most individuals it is possible to consume balanced, nutritious food without eating into their overdraft. Bulk purchase of nutrient dense produce is possible. But, in 2019 it is becoming more difficult to source high quality convenience food for an affordable price. The immediate problem being that 21st century lifestyles now rely heavily on convenience food as part of total dietary intake. The price difference is not because supermarkets want us to become overweight or consume poor quality ingredients. Instead, it's simply down to the increased cost of quality, fresh produce in comparison to cheap, processed, lower quality produce. Many convenient, nutrient dense foods have also become fashion accessories, consumed boastfully with glee. The brutality of western business is exemplified by the rise of quinoa (which correlates with the rise of veganism). A grain which originated in Bolivia and Peru before its rise to the top of the Hollywood 'clean eating hall of fame'. Despite its palatable unavailability, flossing manufactures no doubt experienced a boom in sales as celebrity nutrition guru's the world over flocked to its side to feel 'superhuman' after consumption... ⁣ Back in the real world of toil and pluck, such is the demand for quinoa, that poorer Bolivians can no longer afford it. A previously local, nourishing, dietary staple has now been forcefully replaced by cheaper, low quality foods. Granted, non-optimal foods can be enjoyed as part of any diet. But bargain deals attached to lower quality produce increases the likelihood of excessive quantities being purchased and consumed. In 2019, regardless of business-based reasoning, quality is not available to some underprivileged people. While the price gap regarding convenience is large now, this may infiltrate into all food purchases, such is our societal appetite for elite nutritional status. ⁣ For us to progress as a nutritionally classless society which considers a duty of care for all, this has to change 🔥. But how? - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Sep 27, 2019 at 10:17am PDT

View this post on Instagram

As many choose and reject their cereals based on the unfounded notion that some are good for health and others are bad, they do so while overcome by unhelpful, morally persuasive marketing. Because no food is inherently good or bad. And even if key nutritional variables such as calories, protein, fiber and sugar were analyzed regarding this particular family of crunchy, palatable delights, one would see little nutritional difference between those regarded and health supportive and unsupportive. ⁣ Moving unhelpful marketing and moral biases aside, if one were to analyze the factual nutritional components of each cereal they would conclude that each 50g serving of cereal is relatively calorie dense and shares virtual equality in caloric value. They could then see that protein, fiber and sugar values are similar when compared. Even if one's moral cereal code was defined by beliefs that their choice included more healthy nutritional variables, such beliefs remain largely unproven by virtue of the more objective nutrition label and calm perspectives of a bowl of cereal's dietary influence on overall diet. If consumption of any of these cereals is enjoyed, they must be eaten. If one has a compositional goal, any of these cereals can accommodate that goal. Although, one must be mindful that multiple/larger portions of most cereal will result in consumption of several hundred calories in one, seemingly insignificant eating episode. In most body compositional goals, success derives from adherence. You want to strive for an equilibrium between enjoyment of as many foods as possible and consistent caloric control over time. Good and bad do not inherently exist in any given food. Eat what you enjoy. But if nutritional variables are relevant to you, the information lies on the nutrition label, not the marketing on the front of the box. 🙏 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jun 6, 2020 at 4:32am PDT

View this post on Instagram

When trying to reduce or maintain body weight, many continue to assume that bread must be abolished from their diet. In terms of energy, there is no difference between white or brown bread. And whilst the latter contains more fiber [which may increase satiety], one would be better placed to evaluate the total ingredients consumed with bread in order to determine a more holistic perspective. Not least because bread is rarely consumed alone. These additional ingredients equate to additional calories. In this example, smearing on a few of generous knives of peanut butter and jam (components of a 'hearty' PB & jelly sandwich) more than quadruples the total calorie content of the consumed food. Consequently, all of a sudden the debate is not about consumption of bread in the first instance, or it's color in the second. Adding an often invisible 10g of butter to a warm slice of bread will result in the calorie value of the 'bread' increasing from 95 calories to 169. Thus, although it's visibility is dormant, it is the butter that nearly doubles the calorie value of what we often perceive as the consequence of 'eating bread'. Standing alone, bread is merely one calorie variable. Using the examples shown in my graphic, there can be multiple additional calorie variables. The quantity of additional variables will influence the overall calorie value of that eating episode. Bread may not be the problem after all. This principle can be applied to one's rationale when assessing and addressing their overall diet. In doing so, one can move away from unwarranted demonization of a food which can be utilized as energy like any other. Of course, one may over consume bread. But unless their diet consists of only bread, this is a mere contribution to a larger sequence of variables. To catastrophize bread as a nutritional problem is to catastrophize a minuscule variable out of many. A calorie surplus over time results in weight gain, not bread. 🙂 - -

See also

Health

Myth or truth - Is it true that the rule "eat often and little by little" helps in losing weight?

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jun 17, 2020 at 10:38am PDT

View this post on Instagram

Our mindset before, during and after eating food is entirely based on how much we like, need and know about it. We like to believe our actions are good or bad because it's easier than researching the true nutritional values of the food we eat. But sometimes what we believe is not the reality. Viewing eating experiences as good and bad is useless if we want to understand what consumption truly means for us. And whilst the 'good/bad' mindset appears like it may only impact isolated food choices here and there, it actually impacts the next food choice. And the next… and so on until one's entire dietary intake morphs into one gargantuan clusterf*ck of useless perceptions based on nutritional fallacies. Being bad means one has to be good the next time they eat. And being means one is now deserving of being bad. Then the guilt from being bad again means one has to be punished with miserable meals for days. And they are him. It never ends. But there is a way to counter this cycle of emotional hell. The answer is knowledge. With appreciation of the basic nutritional information of the food we eat, we can replace false elation with calm choice. And unnecessary guilt with understanding that any food can be eaten whilst partaking in an optimal diet. Understanding the very basic science behind fat loss/gain and appreciating how our food choices/behaviours impact our subsequent dietary decisions is the benchmark for living a life where food is enjoyed, optimal health is nourished and compositional ideals are met. ⁣ There exist many coaches and influencers who inflict their personal/financially driven nutrition ideologies on you, resulting in a dietary decisions void of objectivity and use. Food exists to provide energy, nutrients and enjoyment. Your challenge is to make sure that the thoughts filling your mind are as useful as possible for serving your own unique requirements. ❤️ - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Jul 8, 2020 at 11:02am PDT

View this post on Instagram

Perhaps the BBC or channel 4 should take note of this study before they once again compare a potato to several sugar lumps, provoking prime time fear across a nation. Additionally, some should consider the value of this study before rendering potatoes to the 'high GI' scrapheap of foods never to be consumed in the name of low-carb crusades. This range of food represents only a small sample of foods available to us. But while this study did not tell us much about the nutritional quality of these foods, it's aim was to measure satiety among a reasonable sample of subjects. Each consumed 240 calories worth of 38 different foods. With white bread being the base barometer at 100%, the rest of the foods were measured. Unsurprisingly, due to their lack of protein and fiber and easily digested sugars, foods such as pastries, cakes and donuts are the least satiated. Whereas protein dense foods consistently placed high up on the score sheet. But it was boiled potatoes which placed top, significantly higher than any other food. This is of course, just one study... Despite this, its results are useful for an individual seeking a calorie controlled diet. While calorie adherence is paramount to dictating fat loss/gain/maintenance, adherence to a calorie target (especially a calorie deficit) becomes easier to achieve if one is satiated. Foods lower in satiety and higher in calories should be included if enjoyed. But in order to prevent the need for more calories, one should probably be aware of the correlation between calories consumed and satiety achieved. Excessive calorie consumption then becomes less likely, along with self-admonishment. Equally so, if fat loss is the goal, one should not consume food 'just' because it fills them up. Being aware of calorie balance is still required. This study clearly indicates that we should probably base our diet on whole foods, while including non-optimal, less satiating foods in moderation. What a surprise. 🙂 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Mar 30, 2020 at 11:17am PDT

View this post on Instagram

When you eat pizza you experience the same principled metabolic process that you would if you ate any food. When you consume it, it passes through the esophagus, at which point it enters the stomach before entering the small intestine. At this point, energy and nutrients are absorbed and passed into the bloodstream. The calories from this pizza are made up of protein, carbs and fat. The carbs will go directly into the bloodstream or be stored in the liver as glycogen, leftovers are stored as fat. The fat will travel to the liver where some of it is burned and some is sent over to fat cells until they are needed. As for the protein, it is broken down into peptides, which become amino acids which build protein stores. Excess amino acids are excreted or stored as body fat. The facts are that pizza (or any calorie dense food) simply has more overall caloric density when the above elements take place. But the process is the same. Excessive calorie intake of any food source will result in more fat cell production. No food inherently makes you fat. 1000 calories of pizza is the same as 1000 calories of asparagus in the simplistic terms of metabolism and storage of energy, although the latter is concentrated with elements that support functional health (presence of many micronutrients). The apparent damage one single pizza or meal out has on one's health is rendered entirely from one's psychological state when faced with it, as opposed to the way we metabolize it. Stop beating yourself up when you eat the food you love. Understand what consumption of it means and adjust your overall diet to make it fit. 'Health' is about finding a balance of calorie intake, calorie output, nutrients, adherence and eating those tasty foods. They should all come together to support your goal and make you bloody happy. 🙂 - - #calories #caloriedeficit #nutritionist #pizzanight #guiltfree #losefat #bingeeating #fatloss #fatlosscoach #fatlosstips #fatlosshelp #pizzatime #dominos #nutritioncoach #selflove #selfcare

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Feb 26, 2020 at 10:14am PST

View this post on Instagram

According to the oxford dictionary, the word 'Snack' (noun) is: 'a small amount of food eaten between meals'. If one is to embark on a goal to lose fat, they will likely focus their attention on main meals consumed. They may be vigilant in ensuring the consumption of calories aligns with their fat loss target. They may also believe that consumption of large quantities of food from main meals carries more caloric significance than that of smaller amounts of food in the form of snacks. The problem is, sometimes there is no correlation between relatively small amounts of food and its native caloric value. A 115g blueberry muffin represents 5-8 bites of food – and 420 calories. Coffee with milk and 2 tsp of sugar represents a 10-minute drink – and 60 calories. 75g of fruit and nut mix represents 2 handfuls of dried fruit and nuts – and 360 calories. The Friday represents the day where one feels they deserve 1 or 2 (or 7) treats. The snacking pattern on the left demonstrates how easy it is to consume significant calories from small amounts of food. On the right side of this graphic, the weekly total is over 3000 calories less, yet virtually the same volume of food is consumed (minus reduced portions of nuts and custard creams). There is a balance of foods that require similar lengths of time to consume, foods that one may refer to as a treat and foods that are nutritious. There is also an element of intelligence implemented on Friday by the inclusion of a time consuming food (popcorn), while still engaging with colleagues and enjoying a Danish pastry. When we are hungry, we should eat. But when we are trying to reduce body fat, we should implement strategic awareness. Adherence to balanced, calorie supportive, satiating main meals should be a priority, but so should adherence to well planned (and measured) snacks which also support one's caloric deficit, satiety and still provide a disco on your tongue with each bite. 🤜🤛 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Nov 6, 2019 at 11:14am PST

View this post on Instagram

The shaming of dietary choices in 2020 is rife. These shamings are usually void of any meaningful context and, at times, spearheaded by those in positions of nutritional authority. Forever catapulting assumptive rhetoric without appreciating overall food intakes over periods of time. If these food shamers did apply perspective each time they lambasted an individual for eating morsels of chocolate, pasta, meat, pizza, sweets, cereal, or any food , they would understand the following: The presence of sugar in food is not a problem – the quantity and regularity of consumption is more relevant to one's health. Satiety is subjective. We literally have the mental capacity to choose to stop eating food. Therefore it is not down to the food, it is down to our decisions over time. Moderate intake of saturated fat is probably less harmful to our health than stress, or many other unappreciated health inhibitors. Most foods are processed to a point. It is a better idea to understand the nutritional properties of ingredients before labeling food as bad just because it was modified. All foods (and water) contain chemicals, otherwise they wouldn't exist. The danger arrives in the dose. Apple seeds contain cyanide (a lethal poison), but the dose in apple seeds is too small to be lethal. Finally, the term 'empty calories' is a contradiction of basic science. As a calorie is a unit of energy, it literally exists as that. If there are calories, there are macronutrients. Emptiness is impossible. Persistent criticism of food without any overall dietary/lifestyle context displays poor understandings about the food we eat. Additionally, striving for so-called nutritional perfection may negatively affect one's relationship with food. We are best placed to eradicate extreme, unfounded noises. If one acquires evidence-based knowledge about the food they eat, demonization of any food will never occur. 🙂 - -

A post shared by Graeme Tomlinson (@thefitnesschef_) he Aug 3, 2020 at 11:02am PDT