A question for the Food and Nutrition experts

This content has been removed.

Well those calories are not correct for either food. Food 1: 67 cals & Food 2: 65 cals

oh and I'd choose #2

It would absolutely depend on the day. If food #1 fit my macros that 'I had left, I would pick that. If food #2 did, then I would pick #2. It really does depend on what the food items are though. I'm not picking something I like less because of a few grams of this or that. I have been quite successful losing weight by fitting the foods that I like into my day and not eating "diet-friendly" foods or "healthy" foods. Both options look just as good to me... depending on the day.

This content has been removed.

I believe in good and bad foods so I can't answer that -- I need to see an ingredients list at the very least. Like for the first product -- where are those carbs coming from? How much naturally occurring fiber is there? For the second, is that fat from a seed oil? Trans fat? Why so much salt for so few calories?

And even above all of that what it tastes like matters too. I want all of the food I eat to be delicious and something I genuinely enjoy eating. So delicious first, whole foods second, and ingredient list third (few or no objectionable ingredients) -- calories and macro nutrients come in at a distant fourth.

Good and bad food? Without using trans fat as an example, what would bad food be?

I don't know. Food you wouldn't want to feed your kids for dinner would probably be as good a definition as any.

I believe in good and bad foods so I can't answer that -- I need to see an ingredients list at the very least. Like for the first product -- where are those carbs coming from? How much naturally occurring fiber is there? For the second, is that fat from a seed oil? Trans fat? Why so much salt for so few calories?

And even above all of that what it tastes like matters too. I want all of the food I eat to be delicious and something I genuinely enjoy eating. So delicious first, whole foods second, and ingredient list third (few or no objectionable ingredients) -- calories and macro nutrients come in at a distant fourth.

Good and bad food? Without using trans fat as an example, what would bad food be?

I don't know. Food you wouldn't want to feed your kids for dinner would probably be as good a definition as any.

Extremely vague response from you where you are just making assumptions.

However, I will say the first part was accurate, you don't know.

Since when does a belief need to explained to someone else satisfaction? I was being courteous in responding to you at all -- something you're obviously deficient in.

I don't judge foods based on macronutrients alone, I judge a food based on nutrients as a whole so I could not pick one of those foods. Based on calories and macros alone you cannot say whether one food is better than the other because you can always make up your macros with the rest of your meal and choosing one over the other would depend on the rest of the foods in my meal and day overall. For example, I might have some yoghurt which has mostly carbs followed by fat and protein but then to increase the protein I'll add some nuts or protein powder and I could make up those same macros and calories in a different meal with different foods.

Just to add, I don't consider myself an expert as I am only a student of nutrition still but I'm not sure many experts hang around these forums.

I'd eat both because 70 calories a serving isn't enough for me.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Assuming you like each of them equally it would still depend on your remaining calorie and macronutrient needs.

I would go with food option number two, more protein, less carbs!

Protein always wins.

Neither of these food items seems to make much of an impact in anything. I'd eat both, if I enjoyed them. If you're in a deficit, 70 calories over is still under. If you're at maintenance, 70 calories is within the margin of error, and if you're bulking, you better be eating all the food and not worrying about a 70 calorie snack.

I'm trying to figure out how something can have 5 grams of protein, 5 grams of fat but 0 carbs and be 70 calories. The math doesn't work. It would be 65 calories. Is this one of those things where the food doesn't count the carb if it is under a certain amount, like under 2 grams, or is it a zero net carb food with less than 2 grams of fiber?

Meh, I guess I don't care a lot what you eat, I just want to know why the data is inaccurate.

Based on the information given, food 1, but I'd be interested on the micronutrients as well.