looking for nutritarian friends

jofjltncb6

While I applaud the intentional eating of nutritious foods, I cannot help but wonder what the point of eating so many nutrients is, as our bodies generally can only use so many per day.

If you're a 5'1" 62 year old female, it makes some sense.

How so? She will still reach a limit on utilization just like everyone else and any excess is (at best) excreted.

She'd probably be close to or at 1200 and it's just difficult to get all your nutrients in at that level. I eat more than double that and have to be very conscious of iron and vitamin A.

Vitamin A?

DYE(1ounceof)sweetpotato?

I eat sweet potato about every other week. Squash, leafy greens, dried beans, fruit, root vegetables. Pizza. Lots and lots of pizza. The older lady might want to eat less pizza.

My point is, if you're having trouble reaching your vit A target, an ounce of sweet potato all by itself gets you there...and is less than 25 calories! No one with access to sweet potatoes should *ever* struggle to reach their vit A goal.

Meh. I sometimes feel like this argument is coming from two very different perspectives, neither of which is capable of seeing the other side's. (And yes, I acknowledge that it is like that those on the other side feel this way about me.) I still believe that as long as we are not deficient/suboptimal in dietary nutrients, there is nothing beneficial or virtuous about eating more of them. (I also believe that these levels differ between people depending on their age/weight/activity level/other environmental factors/etc., but that's a level of detail far beyond where we currently are in this discussion.)

BrainyBurro

I can fit in plenty of (what is the opposite of nutritionally dense?) foods regularly as long as I make sure I watch my "trouble areas."

delicious foods... the opposite is usually called "delicious foods".

wheird

While I applaud the intentional eating of nutritious foods, I cannot help but wonder what the point of eating so many nutrients is, as our bodies generally can only use so many per day.

If you're a 5'1" 62 year old female, it makes some sense.

Not particularly. Nutritarianism requires you to be knowledgable about the nutrient content of foods, right? Well then I would assume that even a person who isnt couldd know which veggies/fruits are high in whatever nutrients they are lacking. Such as your vitamin A example with a very small amount of sweet potato.

But my argument still stands that you can only utilize so many nutrients per day. Even for that aging lady.

wheird

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

BrainyBurro

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Sabine_Stroehm

While I applaud the intentional eating of nutritious foods, I cannot help but wonder what the point of eating so many nutrients is, as our bodies generally can only use so many per day.

If you're a 5'1" 62 year old female, it makes some sense.

How so? She will still reach a limit on utilization just like everyone else and any excess is (at best) excreted.

She'd probably be close to or at 1200 and it's just difficult to get all your nutrients in at that level. I eat more than double that and have to be very conscious of iron and vitamin A.

And I'd also say: we all AIM to eat nutritiously, but rarely do we always succeed. I doubt most folks are excreting mass quantities of many nutrients.

I can fit in plenty of (what is the opposite of nutritionally dense?) foods regularly as long as I make sure I watch my "trouble areas."

Can the 5'1 62 year old? Her "discretionary" calorie allotment would be pretty small.
Here's my thing, I "aim" for the nutrient dense foods. I am not 100% successful. Nor will I ever be. Nor do I think that's a problem. I certainly don't think I'm excreting "extra" nutrients right and left.

likitisplit

While I applaud the intentional eating of nutritious foods, I cannot help but wonder what the point of eating so many nutrients is, as our bodies generally can only use so many per day.

If you're a 5'1" 62 year old female, it makes some sense.

Not particularly. Nutritarianism requires you to be knowledgable about the nutrient content of foods, right? Well then I would assume that even a person who isnt couldd know which veggies/fruits are high in whatever nutrients they are lacking. Such as your vitamin A example with a very small amount of sweet potato.

But my argument still stands that you can only utilize so many nutrients per day. Even for that aging lady.

No, she wouldn't need to eat more of any nutrient than she needs, but I was just throwing out an example of somebody who might need to be pretty selective in what they eat in a day to get everything that she needs.

Most of us aren't that restricted in our calorie allotment and probably come very close to meeting our daily needs with the "6% of nutrient dense food" that the nutritarian Wikipedia article cites.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

Are you sure it's "extremely rare"? I'm not.

likitisplit

While I applaud the intentional eating of nutritious foods, I cannot help but wonder what the point of eating so many nutrients is, as our bodies generally can only use so many per day.

If you're a 5'1" 62 year old female, it makes some sense.

How so? She will still reach a limit on utilization just like everyone else and any excess is (at best) excreted.

She'd probably be close to or at 1200 and it's just difficult to get all your nutrients in at that level. I eat more than double that and have to be very conscious of iron and vitamin A.

And I'd also say: we all AIM to eat nutritiously, but rarely do we always succeed. I doubt most folks are excreting mass quantities of many nutrients.

I can fit in plenty of (what is the opposite of nutritionally dense?) foods regularly as long as I make sure I watch my "trouble areas."

Can the 5'1 62 year old? Her "discretionary" calorie allotment would be pretty small.
Here's my thing, I "aim" for the nutrient dense foods. I am not 100% successful. Nor will I ever be. Nor do I think that's a problem. I certainly don't think I'm excreting "extra" nutrients right and left.

You probably are. At least B and C.

wheird

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

In terms of bioavailability, nutrients from food are more easily absorbed. But you will also be getting nutrients from food in addition to pills if you take a multi.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

In terms of bioavailability, nutrients from food are more easily absorbed. But you will also be getting nutrients from food in addition to pills if you take a multi.

From the handful covered by that multi. If you take a good one.

BrainyBurro

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

Are you sure it's "extremely rare"? I'm not.

sorry, i must have missed the news reports on that last mass-outbreak of scurvy we had.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

Are you sure it's "extremely rare"? I'm not.

sorry, i must have missed the news reports on that last mass-outbreak of scurvy we had.

I'm glad you're confident about malnutrition. cheers smart A.

BrainyBurro

Me!!!!! Plant based here!!!!! Open diary!!!!!

Only thing I won't give up is my Greek yogurt and hot cocoa and Stevia

Other than those things plant based all the way I even make my own peanut butter no added sugars

Do you seriously frequently eat <50g of protein daily??? And frequently <20g fat???

Egads.

In addition to worrying about the damage you have done in the past (per your motto on your profile page), you may also want to give some strong consideration about the present and future.

I believe protein is overrated I have a number of reasons I believe this! The China study is one reason. If u want glowing skin and energy for days try a plant based diet. It is hard and scary to break away from the old ways of things though! So it may not be for you!

Good luck on your journey

the China Study is propaganda. thoroughly debunked propaganda. don't cite it as evidence if you want to be taken seriously.

wheird

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

wheird

Me!!!!! Plant based here!!!!! Open diary!!!!!

Only thing I won't give up is my Greek yogurt and hot cocoa and Stevia

Other than those things plant based all the way I even make my own peanut butter no added sugars

Do you seriously frequently eat <50g of protein daily??? And frequently <20g fat???

Egads.

In addition to worrying about the damage you have done in the past (per your motto on your profile page), you may also want to give some strong consideration about the present and future.

I believe protein is overrated I have a number of reasons I believe this! The China study is one reason. If u want glowing skin and energy for days try a plant based diet. It is hard and scary to break away from the old ways of things though! So it may not be for you!

Good luck on your journey

If you want glowing skin, eat plenty of fats.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

BrainyBurro

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

the snark is not aimed at the OP. it's aimed at the crackpot Dr. who cooked up this "theory" to try and sell books.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

wheird

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

I am sorry, I didnt realize that I had been snarky in this entire thread. I thought I was adding my opinions, very respectfully, into the discussion.

poedunk65

quote]

Quick, somebody Google it!

Per wiki:

A nutritarian is a person who has a preference for foods that are high in micronutrients.

The term “nutritarian” was coined by Dr. Joel Fuhrman. In his book, Eat to Live, he offers this health equation while describing the nutritarian approach to health:

Health = Nutrients/Calories (or H= N/C for short).

In other words: the more nutrients you consume per calorie, the healthier you will be.

Nutrients in the numerator (top part of the equation) include vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals. Since these are found in small quantities in food, they are considered to be micronutrients. Caloric sources in the denominator include the macronutrients: fat, carbohydrate, and protein. We need to meet our micronutrient needs without consuming excessive calories.

A high N/C diet is also called “nutrient-dense” or “nutrient-rich.”

In the Standard American Diet (SAD), about 6% of the total caloric intake comes from nutrient-rich foods.[citation needed]

Nutritarians eat a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, onions, mushrooms, whole grains, beans, and berries, and particularly consume leafy greens, which are the most nutrient-dense foods. A nutritarian strives to consume at least 90% of their diet from these foods.

A nutritarian diet will lower the risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and even such conditions as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.[citation needed]

Nutritarians do not necessarily exclude animal products. Many nutritarians do choose to be vegan (excluding all animal products). Many vegetarians, however, are not nutritarian, if they frequently consume products containing processed grains, oils, sugars, or salt.

It takes a bit of education to become a nutritarian. One must learn the relative nutrient density of various foods. For instance, many people are surprised to learn that bok choy has more calcium per calorie than whole milk, and even than “2% fat” milk. The same is true for many other leaf greens.

so basically it seems like getting the most nutritional bang for the buck.
[/quote]WOW, talk about going overboard. I couldn't do all that. Good luck to ya

likitisplit

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

I think the value of the dietary approach is worth discussing.

It doesn't sound "wrong" as long as somebody isn't using it to be orthorexic (is that a word). It doesn't sound like something we all necessarily need to try either.

ETA: the "health=" equation concerns me. Spurious health claims concern me.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

I think the value of the dietary approach is worth discussing.

It doesn't sound "wrong" as long as somebody isn't using it to be orthorexic (is that a word). It doesn't sound like something we all necessarily need to try either.

Discussing. Absolutely. The first 15 or 20 posts didn't seem like discussion. It seemed more like the gate at the dog park when a new and younger pup arrives.

Sabine_Stroehm

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

the snark is not aimed at the OP. it's aimed at the crackpot Dr. who cooked up this "theory" to try and sell books.

And thus, the OP's beliefs.

likitisplit

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

I think the value of the dietary approach is worth discussing.

It doesn't sound "wrong" as long as somebody isn't using it to be orthorexic (is that a word). It doesn't sound like something we all necessarily need to try either.

Discussing. Absolutely. The first 15 or 20 posts didn't seem like discussion. It seemed more like the gate at the dog park when a new and younger pup arrives.

This is MFP after all.

BrainyBurro

And isnt most of this discussion rendered moot because of vitamin supplements?

Nope. I don't think there's consensus that our bodies absorb the nutrients from vitamins in pill form the same as food, and there are many more nutrients (using that term broadly) than the average person's "One a day" supplies.

malnutrition is extremely rare in the western diet. extremely rare. so the presumption that a so-called nutritarian diet provides a richer dietary intake of micronutrients seems a bit spurious to me.

i think this is the point reality_is_harsh is making. you don't get extra credit for eating more micronutrients than your body can actually use.

Yes, that is my point.

No, you don't get extra points. But what's the big deal if a group of folks want to call themselves something, and eat with nutrition as the center of their decision making?
Why all the snark toward the OP? That's my point.

the snark is not aimed at the OP. it's aimed at the crackpot Dr. who cooked up this "theory" to try and sell books.

And thus, the OP's beliefs.

only people looking to be butthurt would see that connection.

if i told you that Star Wars was stupid, would you take that as a personal attack?