Yes, it is official...I have registered for my first ever 40 mile race. Triple Lakes Trail Race
Although very supportive, my husband thinks I'm nuts (I'm sure he isn't the only one..) but that doesn't bother me. He doesn't understand why I can't just run half-marathons or marathons. Well, I CAN run those, but I want to run this too! Just once..just to do it..to see what it is like. Who knows, if I like it I may just do it again. Just don't tell HIM I said that...
Part of me does find it slightly humorous only because when I started back into running (Nov 2008) I said I had no desire or intention of ever running a full marathon, I just wanted to run a half. Ha! As a woman I am fully capable of changing my mind at any moment- without notice. And change my mind I did! Ok, getting me to register for my first full marathon (Marine Corps Marathon 2009) did take a bit of cajoling -thank goodness Katie Wade wasn't going to take 'No' for an answer- but before we even arrived in D.C. I had decided I wanted to run another full marathon. I wanted to train harder and see what I was capable of doing...
So that is where I am now..looking back over the full and half marathons I have done..looking forward to those I have scheduled for this year..but training for my first ever 40 mile race. Exciting and scary all at the same time. Ok, maybe scary isn't the right word..just 'unknown'.. Only change is, now all of YOU know I'm doing it too! I figure that in between all of my other ranting and such I can keep you updated on my training and nutrition and all...and who knows, it may just inspire one of you. No, you don't need to run a 40 mile race..well, unless that is your goal. Just get out there and run : )
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Sunday, August 7, 2011
THANK GOODNESS!!! Whew, I was soooo excited to learn- while watching tv with my husband last night- that Fiber One has come out with a 90 calorie brownie!! Wow, now all of our problems are solved! Dieters don't have to miss out (as the commercial says), now they can eat brownies too! Because THAT was the problem the whole time-- can't eat brownies while you are dieting...Sheesh, where would we have been if for ONE MORE DAY we had to go without eating brownies??? Thank you Fiber One and General Mills for saving us! Wonder if there is anything they can do about the national debt?
Just for kicks and giggles I decided to check out the ingredients of these magical dieter's brownies. Here's what I found on their website:
Ingredients: Wheat flour bleached, Chicory root extract, sugar, chocolate flavored chips (sugar, palm kernel oil, cocoa processed with alkali, soy lecithin, milk, salt, natural flavor) vegetable oil (canola, palm, palm kernel), fructose, cocoa processed with alkali, sugarcane fiber, vegetable glycerine, water, egg whites, cocoa, leavening (baking soda, sodium aluminum phosphate), natural flavor, corn starch, salt, soy lecithin, milk, xantham gum, locust bean gum.
Huh, ok, bleached flour as the first ingredient, sugar in the top 3 and then all kinds of oils...hmmmm, call me crazy but I don't find any of this helpful to anyone--especially dieters. Ok, I take that back...it would be very helpful if you would like to gain weight (read : fat), become less healthy or just throw some money away. If that is what you are looking for then go for it. Otherwise as Public Enemy says "don't believe the hype".
Just for kicks and giggles I decided to check out the ingredients of these magical dieter's brownies. Here's what I found on their website:
Ingredients: Wheat flour bleached, Chicory root extract, sugar, chocolate flavored chips (sugar, palm kernel oil, cocoa processed with alkali, soy lecithin, milk, salt, natural flavor) vegetable oil (canola, palm, palm kernel), fructose, cocoa processed with alkali, sugarcane fiber, vegetable glycerine, water, egg whites, cocoa, leavening (baking soda, sodium aluminum phosphate), natural flavor, corn starch, salt, soy lecithin, milk, xantham gum, locust bean gum.
Huh, ok, bleached flour as the first ingredient, sugar in the top 3 and then all kinds of oils...hmmmm, call me crazy but I don't find any of this helpful to anyone--especially dieters. Ok, I take that back...it would be very helpful if you would like to gain weight (read : fat), become less healthy or just throw some money away. If that is what you are looking for then go for it. Otherwise as Public Enemy says "don't believe the hype".
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
You don't LOOK like a runner..
So running AND weight training, huh? How do we make all of this work together?
Well, first off you need to know your ultimate goal- to run a specific race (5k, 10k, half marathon, full marathon, ultra..) or to use running as part of your weight training and physique development. Since this is my blog we'll look at what I'm doing..and I'm assuming if you are reading it, you are interested so here we go..
Yep, background in physique competition meant lots of weight training and not too much running for me for years. Quite sad as running was my first love. Thank goodness I have become older and wiser (did I just say I was thankful I was older??? Oh well..) Can't be too upset about it as physique development and competition is what lead me to discover my passion for nutrition, sports nutrition and supplementation. Don't even want to think where I would be without that.
As my competitive career on stage slowed, my drive to get back into running increased 10 fold. I began slowly increasing my running mileage and working toward my first race. My training changed a little as I had to juggle time between training and running. Dedicating 3 days to running meant I only had 3 days to weight train. (I don't like to do both on the same day-more on that later). My nutrition didn't change too much- still eating every 2.5-3 hours. My physique changed a bit, a little less muscular, but heck, I wasn't training to be muscular, I wanted to be able to perform well.
My body was following the plan I had laid out. It is sort of like a science experiment..combine X and Y and get Z. If Z is what you want then you did the right thing. If you want to get something else out, then put something else in. Easy as that. If you put the correct things together there is NO WAY that you CANNOT get what you want. Period.
After 2 months of training, and a month ahead of my original plan, I entered my first half marathon.. (thanks Katie). As they say the rest is history... ran my first 15k the following weekend and my next half marathon 2 weeks after that. Add in a relay race across the state of Florida and 2 more half marathons and I was well on my way to training for my first full marathon-something I said I was not interested in doing (thanks again Katie). Marine Corps Marathon 2009 was my first full marathon, and what a great experience. I already had plans to run another full before we even arrived in D.C. I wanted to train harder.
Through all of these first experimental races I kept my nutrition plan pretty much the same..basically a hybrid of the nutrition of a physique athlete and an endurance athlete. Physique athletes are notorious for taking in few carbohydrates while endurance athletes suffer from protein intakes that are far too low. Combining these gave me a plan that seemed to be getting me what I wanted. Improved endurance and muscle maintenance.
I do get the "are you crazy??" looks from people when I say that I eat protein and carbohydrates in every meal..and most people would assume when I say that that I am eating copious amounts of bagels, pasta, bread..I mean, after all I AM a runner, right? This is where the sports nutritionist in me comes in handy. Nope, no need to think like an old school runner. There are plenty of other great carbohydrate sources that will help to fuel me without causing excess weight (read:fat) gain or impairing my performance. Most people would also assume that the inclusion of carbohydrates in each of my meals means that my overall % of calories coming from carbs each day is high (or at the very least equal to that of the typical American-55-60%). Sorry, have to squash that idea as well. The low glycemic index/glycemic load carbohydrate sources included in my day usually land me somewhere around 30-32% of my total caloric intake, keep my energy levels and blood sugar stable and help to keep me lean. Protein in each of my meals means that my body has plenty of amino acids to use for fuel, for repair and for any other process necessary. There is no need for muscle tissue breakdown to get those amino acids that are so desperately needed. Not only does my protein intake keep me from breaking down tissue to get amino acids, it also helps to build and repair the muscle tissue faster! All of that means I can train more effectively and perform better..and be faster! Who wouldn't want that?? So when I hear "You don't look like a runner. You look too muscular." I know I must be doing something right.
Well, first off you need to know your ultimate goal- to run a specific race (5k, 10k, half marathon, full marathon, ultra..) or to use running as part of your weight training and physique development. Since this is my blog we'll look at what I'm doing..and I'm assuming if you are reading it, you are interested so here we go..
Yep, background in physique competition meant lots of weight training and not too much running for me for years. Quite sad as running was my first love. Thank goodness I have become older and wiser (did I just say I was thankful I was older??? Oh well..) Can't be too upset about it as physique development and competition is what lead me to discover my passion for nutrition, sports nutrition and supplementation. Don't even want to think where I would be without that.
As my competitive career on stage slowed, my drive to get back into running increased 10 fold. I began slowly increasing my running mileage and working toward my first race. My training changed a little as I had to juggle time between training and running. Dedicating 3 days to running meant I only had 3 days to weight train. (I don't like to do both on the same day-more on that later). My nutrition didn't change too much- still eating every 2.5-3 hours. My physique changed a bit, a little less muscular, but heck, I wasn't training to be muscular, I wanted to be able to perform well.
My body was following the plan I had laid out. It is sort of like a science experiment..combine X and Y and get Z. If Z is what you want then you did the right thing. If you want to get something else out, then put something else in. Easy as that. If you put the correct things together there is NO WAY that you CANNOT get what you want. Period.
After 2 months of training, and a month ahead of my original plan, I entered my first half marathon.. (thanks Katie). As they say the rest is history... ran my first 15k the following weekend and my next half marathon 2 weeks after that. Add in a relay race across the state of Florida and 2 more half marathons and I was well on my way to training for my first full marathon-something I said I was not interested in doing (thanks again Katie). Marine Corps Marathon 2009 was my first full marathon, and what a great experience. I already had plans to run another full before we even arrived in D.C. I wanted to train harder.
Through all of these first experimental races I kept my nutrition plan pretty much the same..basically a hybrid of the nutrition of a physique athlete and an endurance athlete. Physique athletes are notorious for taking in few carbohydrates while endurance athletes suffer from protein intakes that are far too low. Combining these gave me a plan that seemed to be getting me what I wanted. Improved endurance and muscle maintenance.
I do get the "are you crazy??" looks from people when I say that I eat protein and carbohydrates in every meal..and most people would assume when I say that that I am eating copious amounts of bagels, pasta, bread..I mean, after all I AM a runner, right? This is where the sports nutritionist in me comes in handy. Nope, no need to think like an old school runner. There are plenty of other great carbohydrate sources that will help to fuel me without causing excess weight (read:fat) gain or impairing my performance. Most people would also assume that the inclusion of carbohydrates in each of my meals means that my overall % of calories coming from carbs each day is high (or at the very least equal to that of the typical American-55-60%). Sorry, have to squash that idea as well. The low glycemic index/glycemic load carbohydrate sources included in my day usually land me somewhere around 30-32% of my total caloric intake, keep my energy levels and blood sugar stable and help to keep me lean. Protein in each of my meals means that my body has plenty of amino acids to use for fuel, for repair and for any other process necessary. There is no need for muscle tissue breakdown to get those amino acids that are so desperately needed. Not only does my protein intake keep me from breaking down tissue to get amino acids, it also helps to build and repair the muscle tissue faster! All of that means I can train more effectively and perform better..and be faster! Who wouldn't want that?? So when I hear "You don't look like a runner. You look too muscular." I know I must be doing something right.
Or....
So I was at Starbucks yesterday and a seemingly innocent comment started me thinking...
A woman looks at me and says:"Do you run or lift weights?" which she followed with a very complimentary observation.
I smiled and said "Uh, thanks I do both."
...and that was it..didn't think any more about it for at least a minute or so and then could help but focus in on her question. Did I run OR lift weights. Weird, I thought..I didn't realize that there was an OR option. I giggled to myself as I hurriedly texted this conversation to all of Team Hot Legs, surely they would find this just as humorous as I did. As we giggled more about the absurdity of this paradigm, I couldn't help but think that maybe this is part of the problem. There IS an OR mentality with weight training and running. Like they have to be mutually exclusive. One cannot not exist in the same space the other does. Runners are afraid of lifting weights thinking they will gain muscle and it will slow them down and people that lift weights are afraid of running thinking that it will cause them to lose muscle leaving them small and weak. Well, what if there was a way to do both?? GASP! How dare I suggest such blasphemy?! Ok, I won't suggest it. I will state it with confidence.
Just like you need to mix all of the proper amounts of each ingredient at the proper time to make your grandmother's famous cornbread recipe, you need to combine a well thought out training plan with proper nutrition and supplementation to maximize your efforts. Not willing to do that? Then it looks like you will be living in an OR situation for the rest of your life. Willing to think outside the box?? Read on..
Years ago, I was a subscriber of the OR mentality. Let's clarify that-- someone told me that it couldn't be done and I blindly accepted that as fact. I'm guessing that the problem may lie somewhere in a person's concept or definition of what running is. Generally running is thought of as long, slow distance running -what runners refer to as LSD. Long slow distance is one aspect of running training. Just as there are many different ways to weight train, there are many different ways to run. There are tempo runs, speed work, fartleks (from the Swedish 'speed play'), repeats, sprints and recovery runs. Running can fit into any fitness program but first you must establish the goal of your training. Looking to be a marathon runner? You'll need to incorporate all types of runs. But don't eschew weight training. You'll definitely need to include training for your core (hips, glutes, abdominals, back) as well as for the lower leg. The focus need not be to gain muscle mass, but for strength and stabilization. Leave this important training piece out and you will find yourself laid up with injuries. Proper weight training will also improve power output as well as help increase glycogen storage-two things that will only improve running performance. Looking to be muscular? Focus more on sprint, interval, fartlek and short repeat training in conjunction with your weight training.
Your goal will also dictate how many times a week you perform each type of training and in which order. Marathon runner- weight train 2-3x week while running 3 days/week. More muscular physique- run 2-3x week in conjunction with your weight training split-4-5x week. When or if running and training occur on the same day, realize that one will not be performed maximally. Meaning that undoubtedly one will 'suffer' slightly because of the other. Running first will reduce force production/power output for the weight training session. However weight training first may result in heavy, tired legs and a reduction in speed and running performance. Weight training and running would best be performed on different days, however if that is not feasible it is best to keep your main focus in mind and perform that activity FIRST.
This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to program planning. Nutrition and supplementation must be geared toward successful completion of and recovery from the specific training protocol. Without this you are dead in the water no matter what your training plan is. Plan properly and there isn't any reason to live an OR lifestyle.
A woman looks at me and says:"Do you run or lift weights?" which she followed with a very complimentary observation.
I smiled and said "Uh, thanks I do both."
...and that was it..didn't think any more about it for at least a minute or so and then could help but focus in on her question. Did I run OR lift weights. Weird, I thought..I didn't realize that there was an OR option. I giggled to myself as I hurriedly texted this conversation to all of Team Hot Legs, surely they would find this just as humorous as I did. As we giggled more about the absurdity of this paradigm, I couldn't help but think that maybe this is part of the problem. There IS an OR mentality with weight training and running. Like they have to be mutually exclusive. One cannot not exist in the same space the other does. Runners are afraid of lifting weights thinking they will gain muscle and it will slow them down and people that lift weights are afraid of running thinking that it will cause them to lose muscle leaving them small and weak. Well, what if there was a way to do both?? GASP! How dare I suggest such blasphemy?! Ok, I won't suggest it. I will state it with confidence.
Just like you need to mix all of the proper amounts of each ingredient at the proper time to make your grandmother's famous cornbread recipe, you need to combine a well thought out training plan with proper nutrition and supplementation to maximize your efforts. Not willing to do that? Then it looks like you will be living in an OR situation for the rest of your life. Willing to think outside the box?? Read on..
Years ago, I was a subscriber of the OR mentality. Let's clarify that-- someone told me that it couldn't be done and I blindly accepted that as fact. I'm guessing that the problem may lie somewhere in a person's concept or definition of what running is. Generally running is thought of as long, slow distance running -what runners refer to as LSD. Long slow distance is one aspect of running training. Just as there are many different ways to weight train, there are many different ways to run. There are tempo runs, speed work, fartleks (from the Swedish 'speed play'), repeats, sprints and recovery runs. Running can fit into any fitness program but first you must establish the goal of your training. Looking to be a marathon runner? You'll need to incorporate all types of runs. But don't eschew weight training. You'll definitely need to include training for your core (hips, glutes, abdominals, back) as well as for the lower leg. The focus need not be to gain muscle mass, but for strength and stabilization. Leave this important training piece out and you will find yourself laid up with injuries. Proper weight training will also improve power output as well as help increase glycogen storage-two things that will only improve running performance. Looking to be muscular? Focus more on sprint, interval, fartlek and short repeat training in conjunction with your weight training.
Your goal will also dictate how many times a week you perform each type of training and in which order. Marathon runner- weight train 2-3x week while running 3 days/week. More muscular physique- run 2-3x week in conjunction with your weight training split-4-5x week. When or if running and training occur on the same day, realize that one will not be performed maximally. Meaning that undoubtedly one will 'suffer' slightly because of the other. Running first will reduce force production/power output for the weight training session. However weight training first may result in heavy, tired legs and a reduction in speed and running performance. Weight training and running would best be performed on different days, however if that is not feasible it is best to keep your main focus in mind and perform that activity FIRST.
This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to program planning. Nutrition and supplementation must be geared toward successful completion of and recovery from the specific training protocol. Without this you are dead in the water no matter what your training plan is. Plan properly and there isn't any reason to live an OR lifestyle.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Don't eat theirs..ours is better..or not...
Sitting in my hotel room, watching another episode of Law and Order (love that show) and can't help but laugh when I see the commercial for Subway with the guy eating the greasy burger and he falls through his hammock. I have to admit I think it is a great advertisement..eating greasy burgers could very well cause you to bust out of more than just your hammock..
Subway is advertising their Orchard Chicken Salad Sub as a healthier option- apparently one that won't cause you to break your hammock. Knowing what I do about advertising, and how effective (read deceptive) it can be, I decided to look into the nutrition facts for Subway's Orchard Chicken Salad Sub and compare it to a burger from Burger King. Voila! Guess what I found..nothing that surprised ME..but maybe something that will surprise YOU. Subway's Orchard Chicken Salad Sub (6 inch) comes in at 370 calories while Burger King Whopper Jr. has 340 calories. The Orchard Chicken Salad Sub also has 560 mg sodium and 54 grams of carbohydrates, 14 grams of sugar and 20 grams of protein. Whopper Jr. comes with 530 mg sodium, 29 grams carbohydrates, 6 grams of sugar and 14 grams protein. Hmmmmm...maybe that sub isn't better than that greasy burger after all.
What about this commercial http://youtu.be/tl1tKgIzNKg
Ok, let's look at the Black Forest Ham (6 inch) 290 calories (up to 350 depending on the cheese you pick) 830 mg sodium (not to forget add 200mg for cheese), 46 grams of carbohydrates, 8 grams of sugar and 18 grams of protein. Roast Beef (6 inch)? Three hundred twenty calories, 700 mg sodium, 45 grams of carbohydrates, 7 grams of sugar, and 24 grams protein. Again..sub not sounding like a better option.
Am I saying eat the burger? Ummm, no. I'd opt for neither. Just trying to open your eyes..look past the picture presented to you. High sodium and high glycemic index carbs (from highly processed sources- bread) are just bad news. Reams of scientific evidence shows the link between consumption of high glycemic index carbohydrates and increased incidence of diabetes, heart disease, high cholesterol and some cancers.
“Long term consumption of a diet with relatively high GL is associated with an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease.” Liu et al. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;71
So are the commercials funny and entertaining? Yes. Are they leading you in a better direction? No.
Watching Law and Order for those of us not involved in law, law enforcement or forensics is just a form of entertainment. It does not give us a true representation of the way things work in the real world. Just ask anyone who works in those fields. They often seem irritated when someone says: "Oh, you work in forensics- like on Law and Order or CSI! That is so cool!" Well, yes it may be a very interesting career but I can guarantee it is not as it appears on T.V. This is the same frustration those of us involved in nutrition feel when we see commercials like these. They are entertaining, but not an accurate representation of the way things really work.
Subway is advertising their Orchard Chicken Salad Sub as a healthier option- apparently one that won't cause you to break your hammock. Knowing what I do about advertising, and how effective (read deceptive) it can be, I decided to look into the nutrition facts for Subway's Orchard Chicken Salad Sub and compare it to a burger from Burger King. Voila! Guess what I found..nothing that surprised ME..but maybe something that will surprise YOU. Subway's Orchard Chicken Salad Sub (6 inch) comes in at 370 calories while Burger King Whopper Jr. has 340 calories. The Orchard Chicken Salad Sub also has 560 mg sodium and 54 grams of carbohydrates, 14 grams of sugar and 20 grams of protein. Whopper Jr. comes with 530 mg sodium, 29 grams carbohydrates, 6 grams of sugar and 14 grams protein. Hmmmmm...maybe that sub isn't better than that greasy burger after all.
What about this commercial http://youtu.be/tl1tKgIzNKg
Ok, let's look at the Black Forest Ham (6 inch) 290 calories (up to 350 depending on the cheese you pick) 830 mg sodium (not to forget add 200mg for cheese), 46 grams of carbohydrates, 8 grams of sugar and 18 grams of protein. Roast Beef (6 inch)? Three hundred twenty calories, 700 mg sodium, 45 grams of carbohydrates, 7 grams of sugar, and 24 grams protein. Again..sub not sounding like a better option.
Am I saying eat the burger? Ummm, no. I'd opt for neither. Just trying to open your eyes..look past the picture presented to you. High sodium and high glycemic index carbs (from highly processed sources- bread) are just bad news. Reams of scientific evidence shows the link between consumption of high glycemic index carbohydrates and increased incidence of diabetes, heart disease, high cholesterol and some cancers.
“Long term consumption of a diet with relatively high GL is associated with an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease.” Liu et al. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;71So are the commercials funny and entertaining? Yes. Are they leading you in a better direction? No.
Watching Law and Order for those of us not involved in law, law enforcement or forensics is just a form of entertainment. It does not give us a true representation of the way things work in the real world. Just ask anyone who works in those fields. They often seem irritated when someone says: "Oh, you work in forensics- like on Law and Order or CSI! That is so cool!" Well, yes it may be a very interesting career but I can guarantee it is not as it appears on T.V. This is the same frustration those of us involved in nutrition feel when we see commercials like these. They are entertaining, but not an accurate representation of the way things really work.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
oh geez, here we go "50 Best Low Calorie Snacks"...
"50 Best Low Calorie Snacks" as Good Housekeeping sees it...Taken directly from their article:
How we tested: The Good Housekeeping Research Institute Nutrition Department checked out 235 products — tossing anything with trans fats or too much saturated fat or sodium. Our focus: healthy, nutritious nibbles with filling protein and fiber. (We also green-lighted treats like chips and chocolate). Then, dozens of hungry volunteers sampled them and commented.
Read more: Best Low Calorie Snacks - Healthy Snack Food Ideas - Good Housekeeping
Ok so they threw out anything with trans fats and too much saturated fat..nice first step. Aiming for things with protein and fiber, I TOTALLY agree with that. "Green-lighting" chips and chocolate...hmmmm...why???? I thought they said 'healthy, nutritious nibbles'. I guess they have a different definition of healthy...no other reason to include those in any 'approved list' as far as I'm concerned. ..And fed them to hungry people..yeah, that is a GREEEEEAT measure of a good snack. I bet people will be touting how great these snacks are by the end of the day..telling all of their friends, family and probably their personal trainers as well.
Good Housekeeping reader: "100 calorie snack pack of fudge petites and an iced coffee is a great low calorie snack! I have it every day"
Me: "Really, why is it a great snack?"
GH reader: "well, it only has 100 calories"
Me: "ok, well if I made a 100 calorie snack pack of dog poop, would it be a good snack?"
GH reader: "No"
Me: "why not? it only has 100 calories."
GH reader: "well because it is dog poop."
Me: "riiiiight. so you are saying that even if it is 100 calories, if it is dog poop then it isn't a good snack?"
GH reader: "yes"
Me: "ok, so tell me again why the 100 calorie pack of fudge petites is a good snack???"
Get it??? Just because it is 100 calories DOES NOT MEAN IT IS GOOD FOR YOU!!!!!!!
I have had enough of this marketing of 100 calorie packs ..of all kinds. Who came up with this, and why does everyone love them??? Maybe I'll go one step further..I'm going to come up with the 50 calorie snack pack! Yep, just 50 calories, so OBVIOUSLY mine will be better. Doesn't mater what I put in there as long as it is 50 calories. I'll be rich, it'll be great.
Nah, I think I'd rather just get the word out that 100 calorie snack packs are NOT going to save the world, and will NOT solve your nutrition woes. One hundred calories of processed crap is NEVER a good idea for a snack.
Ok a hard boiled egg, but listed at #29 and with a V8. Ohh a pear at #49... and Number 1..is pretzel M&M's?????? WTF...REALLY???? I thought they were looking for protein and fiber?? Ohhh, maybe they forgot.
Let's look at this again..how did this list come into being...riiight, it was 'approved by a nutritionist and has 115-125 calories'. First of all, I'd looove to meet this nutritionist and see what they eat everyday **wince**. Second, if I make the serving size small enough I could put ANYTHING on this list. What about dog poop? Yep, I can put that on there. What about crack or cocaine? I don't even think they have calories, do they?? Wow, that would be the top of the list.
Some of you may think I am being a bit ridiculous about this. Not intended to be ridiculous...just trying to get your attention... to illustrate a point....But to be completely honest, allowing publication of lists like this including most of the items they did is, in my opinion, just like listing dog poop, crack and cocaine as great snacks. Things like this only add to the frustration and confusion of those attempting to better their health and nutrition habits.
Way to go Good Housekeeping...
Hold on, on second thought..THANK YOU Good Housekeeping...you just pointed out 50 things people don't need to eat as snacks..now that IS a help.
How we tested: The Good Housekeeping Research Institute Nutrition Department checked out 235 products — tossing anything with trans fats or too much saturated fat or sodium. Our focus: healthy, nutritious nibbles with filling protein and fiber. (We also green-lighted treats like chips and chocolate). Then, dozens of hungry volunteers sampled them and commented.
Read more: Best Low Calorie Snacks - Healthy Snack Food Ideas - Good Housekeeping
Ok so they threw out anything with trans fats and too much saturated fat..nice first step. Aiming for things with protein and fiber, I TOTALLY agree with that. "Green-lighting" chips and chocolate...hmmmm...why???? I thought they said 'healthy, nutritious nibbles'. I guess they have a different definition of healthy...no other reason to include those in any 'approved list' as far as I'm concerned. ..And fed them to hungry people..yeah, that is a GREEEEEAT measure of a good snack. I bet people will be touting how great these snacks are by the end of the day..telling all of their friends, family and probably their personal trainers as well.
Good Housekeeping reader: "100 calorie snack pack of fudge petites and an iced coffee is a great low calorie snack! I have it every day"
Me: "Really, why is it a great snack?"
GH reader: "well, it only has 100 calories"
Me: "ok, well if I made a 100 calorie snack pack of dog poop, would it be a good snack?"
GH reader: "No"
Me: "why not? it only has 100 calories."
GH reader: "well because it is dog poop."
Me: "riiiiight. so you are saying that even if it is 100 calories, if it is dog poop then it isn't a good snack?"
GH reader: "yes"
Me: "ok, so tell me again why the 100 calorie pack of fudge petites is a good snack???"
Get it??? Just because it is 100 calories DOES NOT MEAN IT IS GOOD FOR YOU!!!!!!!
I have had enough of this marketing of 100 calorie packs ..of all kinds. Who came up with this, and why does everyone love them??? Maybe I'll go one step further..I'm going to come up with the 50 calorie snack pack! Yep, just 50 calories, so OBVIOUSLY mine will be better. Doesn't mater what I put in there as long as it is 50 calories. I'll be rich, it'll be great.
Nah, I think I'd rather just get the word out that 100 calorie snack packs are NOT going to save the world, and will NOT solve your nutrition woes. One hundred calories of processed crap is NEVER a good idea for a snack.
Ok a hard boiled egg, but listed at #29 and with a V8. Ohh a pear at #49... and Number 1..is pretzel M&M's?????? WTF...REALLY???? I thought they were looking for protein and fiber?? Ohhh, maybe they forgot.
Let's look at this again..how did this list come into being...riiight, it was 'approved by a nutritionist and has 115-125 calories'. First of all, I'd looove to meet this nutritionist and see what they eat everyday **wince**. Second, if I make the serving size small enough I could put ANYTHING on this list. What about dog poop? Yep, I can put that on there. What about crack or cocaine? I don't even think they have calories, do they?? Wow, that would be the top of the list.
Some of you may think I am being a bit ridiculous about this. Not intended to be ridiculous...just trying to get your attention... to illustrate a point....But to be completely honest, allowing publication of lists like this including most of the items they did is, in my opinion, just like listing dog poop, crack and cocaine as great snacks. Things like this only add to the frustration and confusion of those attempting to better their health and nutrition habits.
Way to go Good Housekeeping...
Hold on, on second thought..THANK YOU Good Housekeeping...you just pointed out 50 things people don't need to eat as snacks..now that IS a help.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Shopping on a budget...save now, pay later
Ok all you budget conscious folks, this one is for you. Healthy eating does not have to break the bank..so let's ditch that common excuse. (Yes, I did say excuse) Sure, crap food is cheap...now. But how much will you be paying later? First you'll have to buy bigger clothes. After packing on those extra pounds you'll still need to get dressed. Then the cost of time off from work for the doctor's visits. The cost of the prescriptions for high cholesterol, hypertension, diabetes, depression and possibly even cancer.
Now that we are focused on our health..and the money involved there..let's see what can help us save money in the store and in life. Cereal..one really expensive junk of an isle if you ask me. Over $4 for a box of CornFlakes at Publix grocery stores...for a box of ummmm...dust, if you ask me. Once was a 'whole food' (maybe) turned into dust smashed and stamped into a shape..oh wait that was AFTER vitamins were added BACK into it since the processing stripped all of the naturally occurring nutrients from it. Oatmeal- whole grain oats..$2 and change. Low glycemic carbohydrate source, fiber, and saved you money.
Convenient protein sources- lunch meat, pre cooked chicken, turkey and steak. Think again, how many carbohydrates do you think a protein source should have?? Hmmmm, I'm going to vote for....pretty much zero. Ever read the labels of those convenience meats?? Yep, you're right..you'll find some carbohydrates there. Why? Well, reading the ingredients you may find things like high fructose corn syrup, sugar, caramel colorings, fillers (corn, soy etc). Not too different from the cereal isle. What to do, what to do??? How about buying a whole turkey or chicken and cooking it at home. Slice it up for snacks or salads... save yourself in the long run. I didn't do the math here..someone else already did..check this out http://frugal.families.com/blog/whole-turkey-versus-turkey-breasts-cost-comparison
Healthier AND more cost effective.
Keep eggs in mind as well. Great source of bioavailable protein and can be used in virtually every meal of the day for only pennies.
Fruits and veggies- jackpot of nutrients..just as long as they haven't suffered the same fate as most grocery store items..processed with added sugar! Fresh fruits/veggies are not always a better choice..depending on how long those items have been aging vital nutrients may already be lost. Frozen may be a little cheaper..like I said, be sure to read the ingredients-- no added sugar please.
So what do we buy when we head to the store? Of course there are variations, but these are staples in our house:
Whole grain oats
Sweet potatoes
Chicken breast
Ground turkey breast
Salmon
Egg whites
Black beans
Kidney beans
Crushed tomato (to add to the chicken)
Whole raw almonds
Raw walnuts
Frozen strawberries
Frozen mixed berries
Miscellaneous "salad" veggies
"Saving money" now using coupons to buy processed, boxed pseudo-foods will only cost more in the long run. Investing in yourself with healthy, nutrient rich foods will save you tons in the future.
SMART SHOPPING = APPLAUSE
Now that we are focused on our health..and the money involved there..let's see what can help us save money in the store and in life. Cereal..one really expensive junk of an isle if you ask me. Over $4 for a box of CornFlakes at Publix grocery stores...for a box of ummmm...dust, if you ask me. Once was a 'whole food' (maybe) turned into dust smashed and stamped into a shape..oh wait that was AFTER vitamins were added BACK into it since the processing stripped all of the naturally occurring nutrients from it. Oatmeal- whole grain oats..$2 and change. Low glycemic carbohydrate source, fiber, and saved you money.
Convenient protein sources- lunch meat, pre cooked chicken, turkey and steak. Think again, how many carbohydrates do you think a protein source should have?? Hmmmm, I'm going to vote for....pretty much zero. Ever read the labels of those convenience meats?? Yep, you're right..you'll find some carbohydrates there. Why? Well, reading the ingredients you may find things like high fructose corn syrup, sugar, caramel colorings, fillers (corn, soy etc). Not too different from the cereal isle. What to do, what to do??? How about buying a whole turkey or chicken and cooking it at home. Slice it up for snacks or salads... save yourself in the long run. I didn't do the math here..someone else already did..check this out http://frugal.families.com/blog/whole-turkey-versus-turkey-breasts-cost-comparison
Healthier AND more cost effective.
Keep eggs in mind as well. Great source of bioavailable protein and can be used in virtually every meal of the day for only pennies.
Fruits and veggies- jackpot of nutrients..just as long as they haven't suffered the same fate as most grocery store items..processed with added sugar! Fresh fruits/veggies are not always a better choice..depending on how long those items have been aging vital nutrients may already be lost. Frozen may be a little cheaper..like I said, be sure to read the ingredients-- no added sugar please.
So what do we buy when we head to the store? Of course there are variations, but these are staples in our house:
Whole grain oats
Sweet potatoes
Chicken breast
Ground turkey breast
Salmon
Egg whites
Black beans
Kidney beans
Crushed tomato (to add to the chicken)
Whole raw almonds
Raw walnuts
Frozen strawberries
Frozen mixed berries
Miscellaneous "salad" veggies
"Saving money" now using coupons to buy processed, boxed pseudo-foods will only cost more in the long run. Investing in yourself with healthy, nutrient rich foods will save you tons in the future.
SMART SHOPPING = APPLAUSE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)