In light of the media exposure and proclaimed “twinkie diet” that professor Mark Haub was on the good food vs bad food debate rages on.

I firmly believe there is no such thing as a good or bad food if you don’t consider the dose. In other words you can achieve any lifestyle/fitness/body composition goal you want eating a mix of foods that include the so called ‘bad’ foods.

The only way to improve a Twinkie: Deep Fry it!

If you stop and think about all the foods that are considered ‘good’ and all the foods that are considered ‘bad’ you will quickly find out that one of the most consistent things about each group is their relative caloric density.

In other words, most foods that are considered ‘bad’ are very calorically dense (they are high in calories per gram), and the foods that are considered good largely end up being lower in caloric density (less calories per gram).

Could it be that the good and bad food people are really just trying to say ‘high’ vs ‘low’ caloric density foods?

If it’s not caloric density what could it be? Vitamin content? Mineral Content? Fiber? Fat (or lack thereof)? Some other yet discovered ‘phytonutrient’?

If this secondary list is what really makes a food good or bad then a multivitamin protein paste or bar would have to be considered the best food, but that doesn’t seem right does it?

I think the answer is food is just food, and all of it can have it’s place in any diet no matter what your goals are…even a Twinkie…and damn are they ever tasty!

But if I’m wrong can you let me know what you think the criteria should be for judging if a food should be deemed ‘good’ or ‘bad’?

John

So we’ve all heard about the potential problem too much sugar can cause, and even too much carbohydrates in general regardless of it’s in the form of pure sugar.

The Hunt is on for Evil Foods

And of course saturated and trans fats are also bad.

It’s true that too much carbohydrate and sugar can cause measurable problems like advanced glycation end products (an issue with too much blood glucose) as well as affecting triglyceride levels (one of the circulating forms of fat).

It’s also true that excess dietary fat can cause cardivascular disease issues.

This information is likely nothing new to you as you and I are constantly bombarded with waves of media about the evils of sugar and fat.

But what is never talked about is the amount of each that might/could cause these issues? And even further the issue of total calories is never brought up.

It seems that the negative issues both sugar/carbs and fat can cause are also related to the total amount of calories you’re eating.

In other words, if you’re not eating too much overall, it seems unlikely that the mix or type of fat and carbs you eat will really have much of an impact on any of the health issues we’ve mentioned above.

A bigger issue that isn’t brought up is the stress that excessive calories puts on the body as a whole. There is a systemic inflammatory response that chronic overeating causes, and this response contributes to all of the lifestyle disorders that we associated with a ‘poor diet’.

The problem is that the focus gets shifted towards finding a food to demonize instead of the real culprit: too much food.

This proverbial food ‘witch hunt’ has been going on for longer than you or I have been alive and we just happen to be living in the most obsessive and information accessible time so it just seems even worse.

If you research the modern history of the physical culture and diet movement you’ll find that as early as the late 1800′s there were books and diets demonizing carbs, or fat, or protein (yes even protein has taken a turn as the evil food we should never eat)

It seems as though nothing has changed in the past 100 years. We’re still looking for the evil foods to blame for the problems that overeating causes.

I guess as long as this sort of misunderstanding is going on there will always be a need for someone like me to constantly repeat this simple message of ‘less total food’.

John

I was ordering a coffee today at one of my regular coffee shops and the girl behind the counter asked if I wanted anything to go with it…I said I’m not sure, and she said “well how bout something healthy like toast or a bagel”

Is there such thing as good and bad food?

This is interesting because she obviously has an idea in her head of what ‘healthy’ means and why toast or a bagel must fit into that definition.

Then it got me thinking, what do people think is a healthy food or an unhealthy food.

So I’m asking YOU.

If you had to try and categorize a healthy or good food vs an unhealthy or bad food what would be the criteria?

(I’m not giving my answer until later so as not to bias your answers)

Also try not to read other peoples comments until you’ve already finished writing yours so you don’t bias your answer.

John

As you may or may not know I don’t believe there is such thing as a good food or a bad food…As far as I’m concerned there is just food.

Is this a good or bad food?

When I make this sort of statement the common reaction I get is something like this: “surely it’s not healthy to eat candy all day long compared to fruits and veggies and lean protein.”

This is a false premise for the following reason; Eating any single food all day isn’t good for you (and it’s not the claim I am making).

For example you couldn’t exist eating only tomatoes all day any better than you could eating potato chips all day. But I’d bet 100 out of 100 people would suggest tomatoes are a ‘good’ food and potato chips are a ‘bad’ food. This isn’t an argument about the goodness of a food, it’s an argument about lack of variety.

The point here is that you will never encounter a situation when you are forced to choose one food alone to eat for an entire day or longer. This is an interesting thought experiment, but it will never happen in real life…or at least you pray it will never happen.

The other reason I say there is no good or bad foods is because of volume or quantity.

If a potato chip or candy is a ‘bad’ food, does that mean even 1 chip is bad? Or one piece of candy?

As with any food the devil is in the dose, not the food itself.

The following two statements are scientifically correct and demonstrate why it’s impossible to label something as good or bad without considering quantity, and variety of other foods.

a) 1 bag of potato chips isn’t going to cause any measurable health problems, however it would be impossible to survive eating potato chips alone.

b) 1 tomato isn’t going to cause any measurable health problems, however it would be impossible to survive eating tomatoes alone.

In both cases you cannot survive. You will need a variety of other foods to survive…so which is the good food and which is the bad food? The answer of course is neither, because neither a potato chip or a tomato has enough nutrients for a human being to survive.

The point is that you and I require a certain minimum variety of food and nutrients in order to survive and avoid deficiency.

At the end the day food is just the sum of its parts (macro and micro nutrients). Overloading your diet with any one nutrient is going to cause problems. Conversely striving to eat a variety of food is probably the best option for ensuring that you get all of your required nutrients.

Hence my position: There are no good or bad foods…there is just food.

John