I find the amounts of things your supposed to get each day basically impossible to actually eat that much food. Is there any credible research that points to the nutritional advice being overkill? Do you really need 60 grams of protein for instance or the crazy amount of calcium that's typically recommended?
vapianogirl2553
Member Posts: 2 Member
Member Posts: 2 Member
Replies
4 oz of chicken (which isn't a lot of chicken...about 1/2 a breast at most) has around 35 grams of protein...more than 1/2 of the 60 grams.
In general, I find the food pyramid or myplate to be adequate, but minimal in most of their suggestions.
GO BIG BROCCOLI!!
The current one (MyPlate) doesn't try to say how many cals one should eat as a one-size-fits-all prescription, although it has suggestions for those on different calorie levels and a calculator similar to that on MFP. I did it, and it tells me I should eat 2000 for maintenance (which is consistent with what other calculators say with the same inputs).
It then suggests servings of various food groups in a way I find unhelpful, but someone with a bad diet and little knowledge about food. I think the recommendations for veg are way low, but given how few veg the average American eats I get they are trying to work with them, and I think recommending "protein foods" (a category separate from dairy, which can be a great source of protein) in oz rather than grams (although it does recommend leaner proteins) is silly in that obviously different sources have different cals and protein grams.
I didn't see a gram protein recommendation on MyPlate, or a specific calcium amount and am pretty sure that wasn't on the old pyramid either. I suspect you are talking about RDA, and RDA isn't especially high for protein at all (it's commonly recommended to have more if one is concerned with muscle building, maintenance when losing, when aging, and if an active person, such as someone who does a lot of exercise). As for calcium, I have no special knowledge, although the amounts recommended of various micros are supposed to be sufficient so that 95% of people won't be deficient or some such. Some may be fine on less. But no, I doubt it's crazy high and would suggest comparing US calcium recs to those in other countries if you think ours may be extra high (I don't know what the comparative amounts would be).
I didn't have super much trouble fitting reasonable nutrition (in excess of USDA RDAs for the things I pay attention to, which I admit isn't every detail) into fairly moderate calories (say 1400-ish plus exercise, maybe lower).
It makes me wonder how low a calorie goal you're trying to hit (at what current body size), and what foods are filling up that calorie goal without reaching protein goals or calcium? Do you have dietary limitations (like being a fully plant-based eater, not a bad thing at all - I'm vegetarian - but one that can make it a little tougher to hit calcium or protein, for example)?
Like Lemur said, the pyramid isn't even the current USDA paradigm, so I'm a bit confused here . . . ?
I wondered the same thing. Also, if the calcium is based on what MFP shows, it could be wrong, as many MFP entries don't have calcium filled in. So someone could be getting more than what MFP lists.
But absent something like being a plant-based eater new to watching macros, 60 g protein shouldn't be difficult on a reasonable calorie budget.
Right, and the protein and calcium numbers are from a separate source entirely. I'd like to know if we are talking about the RDA numbers, since I suspect all these people claiming the (no longer used) pyramid is so bad might not be so quick to dismiss the RDA. But who knows.
I would be curious how the US RDA numbers compare with those in the UK or other European countries, however.
If the average person actually followed the old food pyramid or MyPlate, a lot of people would be better off...it's not the recommendations that are the overall problem, it's that people in general don't remotely follow those recommendations. It's not perfect by any means, but for something that is supposed to cover a huge population, it's reasonably good...if people actually followed those recommendations.