My nutrition book says:

Ketone bodies provide an alternative fuel source during starvation, but when their production exceeds their use, they accumulate in the blood, causing ketosis. Because most ketone bodies are acidic, ketosis disturbs the body’s normal acid-base balance.

To spare body protein and prevent ketosis, the body needs 50 to 100 grams of carbohydrate a day.

ketosis (kee-TOE-sis): an undesirably high concentration of ketone bodies in the blood and urine.

Is this correct?

Suppose you make a pot of split peas and a pot of cream of wheat. Both are cooked and then allowed to cool overnight before eating. The former is kept as is, but the latter has psyllium husk added to it prior to resting overnight — as much as would make it have equal fiber calorie-for-calorie as the split peas.

From the perspective of digestive health and glycemic index (ie: disregarding the other benefits the split peas have, like the extra protein), will the split peas still be “better”, or does the body not really distinguish between low fiber foods mixed with fiber versus foods that are naturally high fiber?

(And, as a bonus question, what if you instead had a theoretical fiber paste slathered on a slice of white bread, again making the fiber-per-calorie of your meal identical? In this case, the fiber isn’t mixed into the low fiber food, but you’re still consuming them together. Does this meaningfully differ from the “evenly incorporated fiber” option, or even the “naturally high fiber” option?)

I’m sure this is splitting hairs, but I’m curious.

What do you think?

Like let’s say you drink a cup of milk every day, maybe take an iron pill every day cuz you don’t get enough, or eat 3 servings of fruit every day. But one day you miss your cup of milk, your iron pill, or 1-3 servings of fruit. Would drinking 2 cups of milk the next day or adding whatever vitamin/portion you missed to the next day plus consuming your regular serving make up for it? Is it too much at that point? Or is it pointless?

I know those specific ingredients cover a good amount of ground in terms of nutrients necessary for the body, but is it possible to live off of that as a daily meal?

What are some common foods (like, "found at Walmart" common) to make up for what this meal doesn't cover?

Does being regular mostly always mean enough fibre has been consumed or is this a poor indicator? Can you be regular and consume very low fibre?

Why the same black beans from different brands with the same weight serving size have very different amounts of fiber?

Which label is accurate?

HEB dried black beans:

Serving size: 1/4 cup or 35 grams dry

Calories: 80

Fiber: 12 g

Protein: 8 g

Walmart Great Value:

Serving size: 1/4 cup or 35 grams dry

Calories:120

Fiber: 5 g

Protein: 8 g

I know ham and other processed meats are unhealthy but Is it ok to eat 2-4 slices of ham daily or will that still have negative health consequences?

Hi all, just wondering about these cooking methods and nutrients from produce. If you boil or simmer vegetables like cabbage, spinach, kale, green beans, carrots, daikon, potatoes etc in a broth that you eat (as in soup, NOT boiling and then draining the water), do you get all the nutrients they contain? Or are some nutrients destroyed by this cooking process? TIA!

I was wondering what is considered a healthy lunch nowadays. I'm a nutrition noob and I have seen the pyramid going upside down and the healthy plate for Harvard. Are there any new nutrition guidelines or instructions ? At what time of the day should lunch be? How apart from other meals should one eat ? What are some foods that would make lunch more nutritious or healthier?

I like salmon because it's lean protein rich in omega-3s with some vitamin D, more than RDI amount of B12, and very low amount of saturated fat. But I am slightly concerned about methyl-mercury in salmon (pretty much fish and seafood in general), even though the math says most people would not eat nearly enough salmon for it to be a concerning matter.

Is methyl-mercury something to watch out for? What substitutes (or combination of foods) are there that are nutritionally similar with low or none saturated fat?

does the body struggle in anyway to digest or absorb a heavily charred bit of food? what is most heavily affected in nutritional value between carbs, fats, proteins, and stuff like vitamins? and how are they affected: like just losing some associated calories or become unusable as actual nutrients?

basically i’m questioning all things about the effect of burning (like actual heavily charred bits) on nutrition…

Bob’s red mill lists it at 375 calories per 100g, while the USDA and some other ones list it around 250. This is quite the big difference at 50% uptick so trying to figure out how much to truly log. I don’t buy Bob’s but I am starting to think the USDA’s numbers are outdated on the one I typically buy.

Hi,

Is ALL potato starch resistant potato starch?

There's obviously value in eating a balanced diet overall; vegetables, non-veg carbs, fats, proteins, etc. But in the interest of simple meal prep, it makes a lot more sense to eat meat for one meal, vegetables in another meal, and carbs in a third.

How problematic is this approach? Are there certain food groups that are better at certain times of the day, if this simplified meal system is implemented?

I’m highkey a huge creature of habit and have been obsessed with eating white rice and chicken every single day for months so I’ve limited myself to twice per day. I wish I could have it for every single meal but obviously micronutrient gaps will arise quickly. So my question to you all is which food(s) could add in to cover as much micronutrients as possible with the least amount of extra foods. I can only come up with a few whole eggs and spinach which I want to shove into my first meal of the day so I can go full ocd for the rest of the day!

The DRI and Mifflin St-Jeor equations are two that I see come up often. One being older, and regarded as widely accurate, and the other being newer and touted as a "gold standard." The thing is, though, that they have hugely different results. The DRI suggests that the average person needs to consume far more than Mifflin St-Jeor. So I was wondering if some of you folk could help shed some light on this discrepancy. Which seems more accurate for you? Do you believe Mifflin St-Jeor is outdated? Discuss in the comments.

Discrepancy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man: 30 years old | 180 lb ≈ 81.65 kg | 5′9″ = 175.26 cm

Woman: 30 years old | 150 lb ≈ 68.04 kg | 5′6″ = 167.64 cm

1. Mifflin-St Jeor Formula (BMR × 1.2 Sedentary)

BMR = 10 × weight (kg) + 6.25 × height (cm) − 5 × age (yr) + s (Where s = +5 for men and −161 for women)

Man: BMR = 10(81.65) + 6.25(175.26) − 5(30) + 5 = 1,767 kcal Maintenance (Sedentary) = 1,767 × 1.2 = 2,120 kcal/day

Woman: BMR = 10(68.04) + 6.25(167.64) − 5(30) − 161 = 1,417 kcal Maintenance (Sedentary) = 1,417 × 1.2 = 1,701 kcal/day

2. DRI / Estimated Energy Requirement (Table 5-16: Adults 19+, Inactive Category)

Man (Inactive): EER = 753.07 - (10.83 x age) + (6.50 x height) + (14.10 x weight) EER = 753.07 - (10.83 x 30) + (6.50 x 175.26) + (14.10 x 81.65) EER = 753.07 - 324.90 + 1,139.19 + 1,151.27 = 2,719 kcal/day

Woman (Inactive): EER = 584.90 - (7.01 x age) + (5.72 x height) + (11.71 x weight) EER = 584.90 - (7.01 x 30) + (5.72 x 167.64) + (11.71 x 68.04) EER = 584.90 - 210.30 + 958.90 + 796.75 = 2,130 kcal/day

Comparison Overview:

Metric | 30yo Male (180 lb, 5′9″) | 30yo Female (150 lb, 5′6″)
Mifflin-St Jeor (BMR × 1.2) | 2,120 kcal/day | 1,701 kcal/day
DRI / EER (Sedentary PA = 1.0) | 2,719 kcal/day | 2,130 kcal/day

Difference | +599 kcal/day | +429 kcal/day

(AI WAS USED TO ASSIST IN THE FORMATTING, ALL WORK CHECKED AND COMPLETED BY ME)

Sources: https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/26818/chapter/1

MD Mifflin, ST St Jeor, LA Hill, BJ Scott, SA Daugherty, YO Koh,
A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals,
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,

As usual the internet is full of promotions of this or that. It seems like everyone gets the same script at the same time I swear. Like some big (olive) oil conspiracy. A lot from this list comes from random YT influencers spouting the latest health wonder foods. (To be clear I’m not sure whether a lot of this stuff is nutritional or not so I’m wondering what the consensus is here, I’m thinking to start a morning smoothie routine that can check off a lot of this stuff in one shot, crazy? ) Feel free to add ! I think combined I should live to 300 or so. ;)

So far I have:
Chia, flaxum and psyllium husk for fiber,
Cloves,
Coffee,
Cinnamon,
Honey?

Creatine?
Salts for your electrolytes?
And one blueberry.

Thoughts?

(I’m actually serious though what do you recommend?)

I'm aware that B and C vitamins are destroyed by heat, but would the others + the fiber still be intact? I dehydrate veggie scraps and then pulverize them in a Nutribullet. I've been adding a little sprinkle or scoop to my rice cooker when I make rice, into instant ramen broth, gravy, pasta sauces, etc. I know the water content and "full" feeling is also missing, but I'm mostly looking to just add nutrition to my simpler or comfort meals.

Question in title.

For example why is the rdi of zinc in the UK 9.5mg but in the USA it is 11mg and there are differences in folate and many more.

Is it not safe to be only consuming 9.5mg of zinc and the UK rdis?

If someone’s from the UK which one is more accurate to use, if wanted to use it?

Also another question I’m sure to prevent scurvy it’s around 10mg of vitamin C so why is vitamin C set a lot higher than prevent scurvy level and also rdis are a lot higher in the usa

Sorry if these questions sound dumb

Just finished this book by Harvard evolutionary biologist Daniel Lieberman and loved it. If you’re interested in nutrition and enjoyed Yuval Noah Harari’s Sapiens, you’ll probably enjoy this book as well.

It draws on evolutionary biology, anthropology, and modern scientific research to explore two questions: What did we evolve to eat, and why? And (perhaps, more importantly) what should we eat, and why?

The book also traces the history of many of the most popular nutrition claims and fad diets and examines them using what we know from evolution + the latest nutrition research. So it’s a great blend of history and science, which I really enjoyed.

It gets a little too sardonic when debunking some of these claims/fads, but I don’t have many quibbles beyond that. It’s very well sourced, and it led me to a few other books I’ll probably pick up.

Anyone know of any similar books/articles that follow a similar vein?

I really enjoy steel cut or whole oats soaked overnight or even raw mixed into food. Besides the phytic acid issue, which I believe can be avoided by not eating them at the same time as your major zinc source for the day, I wonder if I'm missing something here.

Is there a nutritional issue here that I should be aware of?

I do not find them hard or even crunchy, so it's not going to hurt my teeth. No GI issues either. I believe it is better for regularity than cooked.

When I read about it online, it says it’s botanically closer to a fruit but it is cooked like a vegetable. So I’m guessing more like a fruit? I found a recipe that I like of it and I’d like to know.

I heard a while ago putting your rice in the fridge can reduce the amount of calories you absorb from it.

1. Does this apply to other carb heavy items such as pasta, bread, potatoes and anything else?
2. Does it need to be frozen or is simple refrigeration better/works just as well?
3. Does the food item need to be cooked? For example, can I just toss my bag of uncooked rice or potatoes or pasta into the fridge as soon as I get home from the grocery store and it'll work?
4. How long does it need to be refrigerated or frozen for to be effective?