Meal Variety: Necessity or Not

RllyGudTweetr

When I was in school, well before the internet became a thing most had access to, they taught us that it was important to have a varied diet, regardless of how nutritionally balanced a given day's menu might be, or else run risks of malnutrition. That said, I recognize that it's just possible that we might have learned a thing or two, nutritionally and scientifically speaking, since then.

So, if you had a hypothetical single-day menu that was within, say, 15 calories one way or the other of your goal weight's maintenance calories and supplied all of your macro and micronutrient needs, would you really need to vary it for any reason other than preventing boredom with your diet?

Lizzy622

I have come close but have yet to find this elusive combination of foods. I tend to be high on some and low on others and see-saw between. Maybe that prison loaf they serve in solitary confinement?

Confuzzled4ever

I think changing it up is more effective. This is based on my weight loss patterns. It seems that when I get into a "food rut" so to speak.. i level off and stop losing. when I change it up, add in different foods and mess with my macros a bit, I start losing again. I think everyone is individual and you have to experiment until you find what works for yourself.

Disclaimer:
This study is based on 1 participant with no control group

RllyGudTweetr

I think changing it up is more effective. This is based on my weight loss patterns. It seems that when I get into a "food rut" so to speak.. i level off and stop losing. when I change it up, add in different foods and mess with my macros a bit, I start losing again. I think everyone is individual and you have to experiment until you find what works for yourself.

Disclaimer:
This study is based on 1 participant with no control group

Sample size parameters duly noted.

Mokey41

It's actually been proven that people who automate their meals are less likely to over eat. Eating the same thing day after day becomes routine and the food isn't interesting enough for you to crave more of it.

Most people who are overweight love food for the taste, smell, experience so eating that way sounds like a death sentence but if you get past food as pleasure and see it as nourishment and fuel then automated eating is quite effective.

bcattoes

Assuming one was at goal (no weight loss/gain needed) then I would guess not. But I doubt there is any science to back up, and if there is I am unaware of it, so it is just a guess.

endoftheside

How sure are you that you are actually getting ALL your micronutrients? Do you know the minimum and optimal levels for each and every micronutrient? I don't think there is even a universally agreed upon standard. RDA is a minimum, not an optimal level, and even that is not established for a lot of micros. MFP tracks pitifully few micros because very little of that information is required on nutrition labels.

Look at how often baby formula is changed due to updated recommendations (real changes based on science, not just marketing hype). Is variety necessary to prevent a major deficiency disease, no, at least not in the short/medium term. Is a fixed menu optimal, I can't imagine that it would be! In a way it's a measure of human arrogance to believe that we can synthesize all the beneficial components of food individually and somehow beat nature. Taking a single real food day and repeating it over and over is similar but not quite as extreme.

flumi_f

I would find that a bit boring for the most part. I like variety and I like to cook. Some meals are 'normal', some a bit special, but always colorful and spiced with herbs, curries etc. Most of my foods are fresh and unprocessed, when I buy them. Alot is organically grown and/or from the farmer around the 'corner'. One reason for doing this is the environment, the other is just straight out - the apple from the farmer next door just tastes so much better!

I also think alot of foods have micronutrients in them, some of which may not even be known yet. Thus I prefer to mix and match different foods into different meals using different colors and spices to pep things up. Then even these spices are said to have different nutritional benefits.

A varied diet will help you achieve your macros and will also give you micronutrients that you probably aren't counting (I'm not) At the end of the day, when I look at my macros, I'm usually low in sodium and carbs, the rest is pretty much on target. Low sodium and low carbs help me lose weight and keep my digestion running well, so I'm good with that. Although I don't really look at the macros before cooking, because my diet is varied, it usually comes out ok.

RllyGudTweetr

How sure are you that you are actually getting ALL your micronutrients? Do you know the minimum and optimal levels for each and every micronutrient? I don't think there is even a universally agreed upon standard. RDA is a minimum, not an optimal level, and even that is not established for a lot of micros. MFP tracks pitifully few micros because very little of that information is required on nutrition labels.

Look at how often baby formula is changed due to updated recommendations (real changes based on science, not just marketing hype). Is variety necessary to prevent a major deficiency disease, no, at least not in the short/medium term. Is a fixed menu optimal, I can't imagine that it would be! In a way it's a measure of human arrogance to believe that we can synthesize all the beneficial components of food individually and somehow beat nature. Taking a single real food day and repeating it over and over is similar but not quite as extreme.

Methinks you're either missing, or avoiding, the point of the question.

katbirdinpa

I would have to vary my dishes to prevent boredom.

Francl27

I'd have to vary dishes too. But mostly, you'd miss out on vitamins and nutrients by always eating the same things.

RllyGudTweetr

I'd have to vary dishes too. But mostly, you'd miss out on vitamins and nutrients by always eating the same things.

Only if you're disregarding the second paragraph in my opening hypothetical would you be missing vitamins and nutrients. So, I'm not really sure how "but mostly" applies.

endoftheside

How sure are you that you are actually getting ALL your micronutrients? Do you know the minimum and optimal levels for each and every micronutrient? I don't think there is even a universally agreed upon standard. RDA is a minimum, not an optimal level, and even that is not established for a lot of micros. MFP tracks pitifully few micros because very little of that information is required on nutrition labels.

Look at how often baby formula is changed due to updated recommendations (real changes based on science, not just marketing hype). Is variety necessary to prevent a major deficiency disease, no, at least not in the short/medium term. Is a fixed menu optimal, I can't imagine that it would be! In a way it's a measure of human arrogance to believe that we can synthesize all the beneficial components of food individually and somehow beat nature. Taking a single real food day and repeating it over and over is similar but not quite as extreme.

Methinks you're either missing, or avoiding, the point of the question.

Hmm. I guess I just don't think it can be done in reality. To get every single micro AND meet your macros all in the same day...I always feel like I am playing whackamole even at the macro level. An example--every time I focus on getting more fiber all of a sudden I'm not meeting my protein requirement.

So if you are dealing only in hypotheticals, sure, go ahead and groundhog day it. If you have a real menu in mind, I'd love to see it. :glasses: