Question about sweet potato ?

cbelc2

Poke several times with a fork, rub with oil, and roast them lighly wrapped in parchment paper at 400 degrees on a cookie sheet until soft.

rankinsect

midwest121 wrote: »

@CyberTone I ate yams today, but I have three sweet potatoes in the refrigerator, that I brought, I know they say regular potatoes are bad for you, so I wasn't for sure if sweet potatoes were bad for you, cause if they were I was just going to throw them out.

There are no bad foods (apart from toxins, of course, or foods you have an allergy or intolerance to). Foods, in isolation, aren't healthy or unhealthy. Diets can be healthy or unhealthy, but even this depends on your goals and your current state of health. A double cheeseburger could be healthier for you than a salad, for example, if you were deficient in protein or vitamin B12.

BinaryPulsar

I eat sweet potatoes.

CyberTone

Bumping thread for the upcoming holiday season of logging. When in doubt, log what you are eating as sweet potato, not as yam; because you are most likely eating sweet potatoes.

trigden1991

No food is bad for you (unless you are allergic to them).

Chunkahlunkah

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

trigden1991

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

Why are they healthy? Taste is individual. They are only low calorie if you eat small portions. A large portion would be high calorie.

lemurcat12

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

I like them, but agree that taste is individual. They are similar to potatoes in terms of nutrients and calories, which is great (I eat both) but I find it weird that they get held up as healthy by people slamming potatoes these days, often. Trendy, I guess. Anyway, definitely keep the skin if nutrients are why you are eating them.

I am not concerned about carbs but their carbs are also similar to potatoes. I don't like them with butter (I most commonly roast them with a touch of olive oil, as with potatoes) and don't think GI matters -- after all, presumably you eat them as part of a meal with other foods including protein and fiber and fat.

Chunkahlunkah

trigden1991 wrote: »

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

Why are they healthy? Taste is individual. They are only low calorie if you eat small portions. A large portion would be high calorie.

“Why are they healthy?” Interesting question! Healthy, in the sense that I was using it = Nutritionally rich.

Would you not consider them a healthy food? What do you consider “healthy” when it comes to food?

I think a food’s “healthiness” can be evaluated in two general ways:
(1) Intrinsically - the innate nutritional profile it offers us, and
(2) Contextually - the role it plays within the whole diet, and/or how well it meets a specific individual's needs.

Do you reject (1) as a way to evaluate a food?

Of course taste is individual. “Tasty” is subjective opinion. Implicit with subjective diction is “to me,” as in “tasty to me.” Since you saw it meaningful to point out that taste is subjective, I suspect you misinterpreted my meaning. I was naming the reasons I find sweet potatoes magnificent.

Well, calories being dependent on portion size is the nature of the beast with all foods. That goes without saying. It also ignores the idea of caloric density, which is what can distinguish high calorie from low calorie foods. Using the USDA database, sweet potatoes are about 0.86 calories per gram. For some context, compare that with peanut butter at 5.98, white bread at 2.66, and broccoli at 0.31. On second thought, I’d say sweet potatoes aren’t low but are instead a moderate calorie food. I say that because of their caloric density as well as their typical size, so “portion.” The non-massive ones that I currently have on hand average 187 calories. The massive one is 268. Again, that the portion could be decreased or increased applies to all food, so doesn’t conceptually apply when evaluating a food in terms of (1) but only in terms of (2).

Chunkahlunkah

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

I like them, but agree that taste is individual. They are similar to potatoes in terms of nutrients and calories, which is great (I eat both) but I find it weird that they get held up as healthy by people slamming potatoes these days, often. Trendy, I guess. Anyway, definitely keep the skin if nutrients are why you are eating them.

I am not concerned about carbs but their carbs are also similar to potatoes. I don't like them with butter (I most commonly roast them with a touch of olive oil, as with potatoes) and don't think GI matters -- after all, presumably you eat them as part of a meal with other foods including protein and fiber and fat.

To the part in bold -- don't think it matters universally, as in for all people?

I actually usually do eat sweet potatoes separate from a meal! They're the meal. I've been eating sweet potatoes regularly since, oh, probably 2010. I usually eat it with butter and walnuts.

I also love it roasted with oil too! I often top it with cayenne when I do it that way.

It's rare that I have it with a meal. Maybe 10% o the time that I eat it, it's like that. I can only eat a small amount when I do because combined with the protein in the meal, I get too stuffed if I eat more than half a sweet potato.

I love regular potatoes too. A significant difference between the two is sweet potatoes supply a ton of vitamin A.

cheryldumais

Kind of off topic but just wanted to say sweet potato with a little drizzle of oil, salt, pepper and thyme roasted in the oven is heavenly. Yes they are a starch but very filling and healthy in reasonable portions. I love them.

shinycrazy

I love sweet potatoes! I just bought a massive amount of them as they were on sale 0.49 a pound in my area. I look for the smallest ones as I'm diabetic and must watch my carbs. I eat one every day for dinner and it is usually my only source of carbs for that meal. I coat the skin with .25 tsp of olive oil and some kosher salt, poke holes with a fork and microwave it for 2.5-3 minutes per side. A pat of butter and I'm set. Having it tonight with fish fillet and probably something green.

ETA my diary is open if you want to see how I fit it in.

lemurcat12

shinycrazy wrote: »

I love sweet potatoes! I just bought a massive amount of them as they were on sale 0.49 a pound in my area. I look for the smallest ones as I'm diabetic and must watch my carbs.

I can never eat a whole sweet potato, so don't worry about the size. I just don't plan to eat a whole one, but share it or have leftovers. I don't eat them every day, though, as I am in favor of varying what I eat for nutritional reasons as well as personal preference. I roast them, but also in a bit of olive oil and with a little salt. No added butter, though -- I don't think they need it.

I'd assume that it's common for that to be the only primary source of starch in a meal, right? The way I grew up a dinner was normally meat (I'd expand that to vegetarian sources of protein now), vegetable, and starch, which could be potato, sweet potato, rice, pasta, bread, corn, peas, beans, etc, whatever we decided to have. I tend to plan meals that way even now.

Of course, it's not the only "source of carbs" under that pattern, as vegetables (say, brussels sprouts) are a source of carbs.

lemurcat12

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

I like them, but agree that taste is individual. They are similar to potatoes in terms of nutrients and calories, which is great (I eat both) but I find it weird that they get held up as healthy by people slamming potatoes these days, often. Trendy, I guess. Anyway, definitely keep the skin if nutrients are why you are eating them.

I am not concerned about carbs but their carbs are also similar to potatoes. I don't like them with butter (I most commonly roast them with a touch of olive oil, as with potatoes) and don't think GI matters -- after all, presumably you eat them as part of a meal with other foods including protein and fiber and fat.

To the part in bold -- don't think it matters universally, as in for all people?

The individual GI of a food? No, I don't -- what matters for those for whom it matters (mainly diabetics) would be the glycemic load of the meal as a whole.

I actually usually do eat sweet potatoes separate from a meal! They're the meal. I've been eating sweet potatoes regularly since, oh, probably 2010. I usually eat it with butter and walnuts.

Interesting, I always have sweet potato or potato or whatever as a side dish. But even so butter and walnuts are part of the meal and you'd have to consider them in figuring the GL, which is why worrying about the sweet potato on its own seems unnecessary IMO. (I do agree that if one is diabetic it might be necessary to count and balance carbs. I did not think we were talking about diabetics, though, as I dislike how people here often talk as if everyone should be worried about things like GL or carbs.) For those, like me, who have it as a side dish, it is balanced by the other foods that contribute protein and fat and fiber.

I also love it roasted with oil too! I often top it with cayenne when I do it that way.

Yeah, cayenne would be a nice addition.

It's rare that I have it with a meal. Maybe 10% o the time that I eat it, it's like that. I can only eat a small amount when I do because combined with the protein in the meal, I get too stuffed if I eat more than half a sweet potato.

Yup, I never eat a whole sweet potato either, as I just wrote in a different post, but a whole one on its own just isn't generally what I want and would be an enormous snack.

I love regular potatoes too. A significant difference between the two is sweet potatoes supply a ton of vitamin A.

Yeah, they have slightly different nutrients, but are similarly nutrient dense. Vitamin A is not something I'm ever low on, so is not a major concern for me, but I mostly was reacting to the fact that many seem to see sweet potatoes as good, potatoes as bad (white carbs or some such nonsense). Glad if that's not you -- MFP has made me a bit reactionary at times. ;-)

cwolfman13

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Chunkahlunkah wrote: »

Sweet potatoes are magnificent. Incredibly healthy, tasty, and low calorie. I'm cognizant of my carbs, but still find sweet potatoes easy to fit into my diet. They're a staple for me.

Eating them with butter lowers their glycemic index. And is delicious.

I like them, but agree that taste is individual. They are similar to potatoes in terms of nutrients and calories, which is great (I eat both) but I find it weird that they get held up as healthy by people slamming potatoes these days, often. Trendy, I guess. Anyway, definitely keep the skin if nutrients are why you are eating them.

I am not concerned about carbs but their carbs are also similar to potatoes. I don't like them with butter (I most commonly roast them with a touch of olive oil, as with potatoes) and don't think GI matters -- after all, presumably you eat them as part of a meal with other foods including protein and fiber and fat.

To the part in bold -- don't think it matters universally, as in for all people?

I actually usually do eat sweet potatoes separate from a meal! They're the meal. I've been eating sweet potatoes regularly since, oh, probably 2010. I usually eat it with butter and walnuts.

I also love it roasted with oil too! I often top it with cayenne when I do it that way.

It's rare that I have it with a meal. Maybe 10% o the time that I eat it, it's like that. I can only eat a small amount when I do because combined with the protein in the meal, I get too stuffed if I eat more than half a sweet potato.

I love regular potatoes too. A significant difference between the two is sweet potatoes supply a ton of vitamin A.

The overall GL is more important than the individual GI...but really, for an otherwise healthy person it doesn't matter a whole lot either way.