Potatoes: Poe-tae-toe, Poe-tah-toe

Who'd have thunk the Potato question would be so controversial?

Alan Agaron on the question.................

http://www.simplyshredded.com/the-truth-behind-5-food-myths.html


"Sweet Potatoes are Better


Myth #2: "Sweet potatoes are better for you than white potatoes."

The origin: Because most Americans eat the highly processed version of the white potato—for instance, french fries and potato chips—consumption of this root vegetable has been linked to obesity and an increased diabetes risk. Meanwhile, sweet potatoes, which are typically eaten whole, have been celebrated for being rich in nutrients and also having a lower glycemic index than their white brethren.

What science really shows: White potatoes and sweet potatoes have complementary nutritional differences; one isn't necessarily better than the other. For instance, sweet potatoes have more fiber and vitamin A, but white potatoes are higher in essential minerals, such as iron, magnesium, and potassium. As for the glycemic index, sweet potatoes are lower on the scale, but baked white potatoes typically aren't eaten without cheese, sour cream, or butter. These toppings all contain fat, which lowers the glycemic index of a meal.

The bottom line: The form in which you consume a potato—for instance, a whole baked potato versus a processed potato that's used to make chips—is more important than the type of spud."

Not trying to make things difficult for myself.
I feel a lot better and don't feel lethargic after eating whole grains now.
Just wanted some advice on which potatoes are the better kind to eat,
you know like custard based ice cream vs. frozen yogurt.
The frozen yogurt tastes great, but is much healthier for you than the saturated custard ice creams.

Please no negativity, I'm all about helping others, encouragement, and honest advice.

No one is being negative. The advice you are being given is helpful. The debate of white potatoes vs sweet potatoes, which one is "good" and which is "bad" is pointless. Eat whichever potato you want. Not feeling lethargic after eating whole grains is all in your head honestly. 100g of sweet potato or 100g of white potato almost have equal nutritional values - Sweet potatoes being slightly higher calories and carbs because of the natural sugars. Honest advice - don't complicate your life. Unless you have a form of insulin resistance or are carb sensitive, just eat your carbs according to your daily goals. Focus on nutrient dense foods for overall health, but have fun as well. Carbs aren't bad. Now ditch the potato and have some ice cream!

Yup. Especially to the ice cream part.

Wholemeal potatoes.

Seriously...make friends with sweet potatoes. Far more nutrients than the regular spud.

LOL. No

Man you are great at spreading bro science

Maybe you should compare the vitamin A amounts in the two types before laying on the bro science accusation - the statement isn't strictly incorrect.

That's ONE nutrient. You know there is more to food than vitamin A, right?

White potatoes are full of some really great stuff. So are sweet potatoes.

I don't think one is necessarily better than the other. And sweet potatoes, FYI, aren't even actually potatoes.

Mmmmmmmmmmm, 'taters are GOOD!

Why do people give such bad labels to good, healthy food? Potatoes in all forms and colors are high in potassium, fiber, Vitamin C and Iron. And they actually have some good protein in them.

Don't be afraid of "white" food....................

We eat sweet potatoes often. Bake them whole, sweet potato baked fries, mashed up and mixed with quinoa, etc. However, you don't have to avoid the good ol' russet. Every once in awhile, I want a potato, so i have one (usually cut up, tossed with olive oil and s&p, and baked. Holy yum!!).

This. Eat what's tasty!

Who'd have thunk the Potato question would be so controversial?

I knew as soon as I saw the thread topic that it would be. Food controversies are like politics on MFP. :laugh:

Who'd have thunk the Potato question would be so controversial?

I knew as soon as I saw the thread topic that it would be. Food controversies are like politics on MFP. :laugh:

But have they ever caused a MFP shutdown ?

They shutdown non-essential parts, namely the threads. The mods drop by and lock them.

Not trying to make things difficult for myself.
I feel a lot better and don't feel lethargic after eating whole grains now.
Just wanted some advice on which potatoes are the better kind to eat,
you know like custard based ice cream vs. frozen yogurt.
The frozen yogurt tastes great, but is much healthier for you than the saturated custard ice creams.

Please no negativity, I'm all about helping others, encouragement, and honest advice.

No one is being negative. The advice you are being given is helpful. The debate of white potatoes vs sweet potatoes, which one is "good" and which is "bad" is pointless. Eat whichever potato you want. Not feeling lethargic after eating whole grains is all in your head honestly. 100g of sweet potato or 100g of white potato almost have equal nutritional values - Sweet potatoes being slightly higher calories and carbs because of the natural sugars. Honest advice - don't complicate your life. Unless you have a form of insulin resistance or are carb sensitive, just eat your carbs according to your daily goals. Focus on nutrient dense foods for overall health, but have fun as well. Carbs aren't bad. Now ditch the potato and have some ice cream!

Yup. Especially to the ice cream part.

Wholemeal potatoes.

Seriously...make friends with sweet potatoes. Far more nutrients than the regular spud.

LOL. No

Man you are great at spreading bro science

Maybe you should compare the vitamin A amounts in the two types before laying on the bro science accusation - the statement isn't strictly incorrect.

That's ONE nutrient. You know there is more to food than vitamin A, right?

White potatoes are full of some really great stuff. So are sweet potatoes.

I don't think one is necessarily better than the other. And sweet potatoes, FYI, aren't even actually potatoes.

I don't recall stating that there was only vitamin A. Is there a particular reason why you would think that I believe that there is nothing more to food than that?

I was responding to a blanket statement of "no" to the notion that sweet potatoes are more nutritious (in this one area, they certainly are and it's not even close). And I was correct, so I don't see the issue.

That doesn't make them "more nutritious." That just means they have more of one specific nutrient. I guess if your goal is to get more vitamin A, you should choose sweet potatoes.

"That doesn't make them "more nutritious." That just means they have more of one specific nutrient."

All else being equal, that would actually be the definition of more nutritious.


A person was saying that sweet potatoes were not more nutritious. (statement)

I pointed out that in one way, they certainly were. So "not so" as the final answer isn't entirely accurate. (correction of statement)

How this became a point of contention is very confusing for me.

Because as someone else pointed out they have less of other nutrients such as iron and other vitamins (the list is above somewhere). Both are nutritious but both contain different micronutrients. Solution: eat both. :laugh:

"That doesn't make them "more nutritious." That just means they have more of one specific nutrient."

All else being equal, that would actually be the definition of more nutritious.


A person was saying that sweet potatoes were not more nutritious. (statement)

I pointed out that in one way, they certainly were. So "not so" as the final answer isn't entirely accurate. (correction of statement)

How this became a point of contention is very confusing for me.

Because as someone else pointed out they have less of other nutrients such as iron and other vitamins (the list is above somewhere). Both are nutritious but both contain different micronutrients. Solution: eat both. :laugh:

Of course. That was my opinion all along - in fact I often mash them together for an unholy slurry of goodness.

"That doesn't make them "more nutritious." That just means they have more of one specific nutrient."

All else being equal, that would actually be the definition of more nutritious.


A person was saying that sweet potatoes were not more nutritious. (statement)

I pointed out that in one way, they certainly were. So "not so" as the final answer isn't entirely accurate. (correction of statement)

How this became a point of contention is very confusing for me.

Ah.

So an orange is more nutritious than a steak because an orange has more viatmin C.

Good use of logic. A+.

You're grading me on a thing I never said or implied. I'll let you think on that for a while until you calm down. It's grown-up time.

"That doesn't make them "more nutritious." That just means they have more of one specific nutrient."

All else being equal, that would actually be the definition of more nutritious.


A person was saying that sweet potatoes were not more nutritious. (statement)

I pointed out that in one way, they certainly were. So "not so" as the final answer isn't entirely accurate. (correction of statement)

How this became a point of contention is very confusing for me.

Because as someone else pointed out they have less of other nutrients such as iron and other vitamins (the list is above somewhere). Both are nutritious but both contain different micronutrients. Solution: eat both. :laugh:

Of course. That was my opinion all along - in fact I often mash them together for an unholy slurry of goodness.

Now I just wonder what mixed mashed potatoes tastes like. And for herbs, should I go sweet or savory?! Must experiment...

You're grading me on a thing I never said or implied. I'll let you think on that for a while until you calm down. It's grown-up time.

Seriously...make friends with sweet potatoes. Far more nutrients than the regular spud.

LOL. No

Man you are great at spreading bro science

Maybe you should compare the vitamin A amounts in the two types before laying on the bro science accusation - the statement isn't strictly incorrect.

Thank you for re-posting the thing that I said that was entirely accurate, in the hopes of preventing disinformation being taken as true. Not sure what you're doing.

Still waiting for my orange / steak comparison you graded me on, though. You know, that thing I didn't do. Because those things are not comparable, as I took pains to point out previously by saying "all else being equal".

Please take an hour or two to calm down before continuing. Internet arguments have a certain reputation because of things like this.

Maybe it's the editor in me, but I read what you wrote, not -- apparently -- what you meant.

Someone said sweet potatoes are "more nutritious." Someone else called it bro science and you backed up the poster who said they were more nutritious by citing one single nutrient. Having more of one specific nutrient does not make something more nutritious than something else.

By your logic (having more vitamin A makes a sweet potato more nutritious), an orange is more nutritious than a steak due to its high amount of vitamin C.

No amount of, "I didn't say that," will make it disappear. Because you did. And then insulted me for pointing out that you were incorrect.

But, yes, I'm the one who is having a tantrum and needs to grow up. :flowerforyou:

Also, so we're clear, pointing out an inaccuracy does not mean I am upset. There is no need to calm down. I'm perfectly calm. I'm not sure why you think I'm not.

If you really want a baked white potato, have one. Just don't load it up with butter and sour cream, that's what makes them unhealthy. They are delicious with salsa! Don't forget to eat the skin, that's where you get the nutrients and fiber.

I was under the impression that bacon, butter, and sour cream would slow the absorption of the relatively simple carbs in a baked potato, making it "healthier"

You're grading me on a thing I never said or implied. I'll let you think on that for a while until you calm down. It's grown-up time.

Seriously...make friends with sweet potatoes. Far more nutrients than the regular spud.

LOL. No

Man you are great at spreading bro science

Maybe you should compare the vitamin A amounts in the two types before laying on the bro science accusation - the statement isn't strictly incorrect.

Thank you for re-posting the thing that I said that was entirely accurate, in the hopes of preventing disinformation being taken as true. Not sure what you're doing.

Still waiting for my orange / steak comparison you graded me on, though. You know, that thing I didn't do. Because those things are not comparable, as I took pains to point out previously by saying "all else being equal".

Please take an hour or two to calm down before continuing. Internet arguments have a certain reputation because of things like this.

Maybe it's the editor in me, but I read what you wrote, not -- apparently -- what you meant.

Someone said sweet potatoes are "more nutritious." Someone else called it bro science and you backed up the poster who said they were more nutritious by citing one single nutrient. Having more of one specific nutrient does not make something more nutritious than something else.

By your logic (having more vitamin A makes a sweet potato more nutritious), an orange is more nutritious than a steak due to its high amount of vitamin C.

No amount of, "I didn't say that," will make it disappear. Because you did. And then insulted me for pointing out that you were incorrect.

But, yes, I'm the one who is having a tantrum and needs to grow up. :flowerforyou:

Also, so we're clear, pointing out an inaccuracy does not mean I am upset. There is no need to calm down. I'm perfectly calm. I'm not sure why you think I'm not.

I can't think of another reason why you're still going on with this. Make it disappear? Make what disappear? I never said that a sweet potato is more nutritious than a white one - because that isn't true, and they both have strengths. I said that it's more nutritious in one specific way, as an example. Big difference.

person A: " Far more nutrients than the regular spud."
person B: "LOL no - blah blah bro science"
me: "Maybe you should compare the vitamin A amounts in the two types before laying on the bro science accusation - the statement isn't strictly incorrect."*

you: decide to argue this and purposely misquote me repeatedly, while inventing comparisons I never made.

*Carefully note the lack of me saying that white potatoes are inferior as some sort of more-less blanket statement. The statement of person A isn't entirely incorrect because sweet potatoes have more of some nutrients.

Still have no idea why you're arguing this, and inventing comparisons I never made about oranges and beef and whatever else you're going on about completely at random. I can only conclude that you're a person that bunkers down and argues until the other person just dies of exhaustion, facts be damned.