Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Healthy "filling" snacks/foods

  1. #11
    Wow...this is easy! Kind Bars or some sort of really good trail mix! You get your healthy fats from the nuts.....plenty of protein, vitamins and minerals. Then, you can get your sweet on with some dried fruit, coconut chips, etc......

    I am not eating Kind Bars now, but they are incredible. I can't recommend them enough. Also, some of the Kind Bars only have 5 grams of sugar...and they are not processed in any way. They are gluten and sugar free (they use a touch of honey to sweeten the low-sugar ones).

    Some of my favorite Kind Bars are the Salted Caramel and Dark Chocolate Nut, Maple Glazed Pecan and Sea Salt.

    One thing I like about Kind Bars too is that I never had one where the nuts had gone bad and were rancid. That's pretty rare...nuts go rancid pretty quick. That means they always seem to be very fresh. I liked the grain Kind Bars too, in particular the Maple Pumpkin .

    But I like the nut Kind Bars much more because they REALLY fill you up and satiate, and are delicious but low carb, low sugar. They had become my favorite snack before my diagnosis.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to CatchyUsername For This Useful Post:

    Seedsower (03-01-2016)

  3. #12
    Administrator fuego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    16,274
    Thanked: 14133
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by CatchyUsername View Post
    Wow...this is easy! Kind Bars or some sort of really good trail mix! You get your healthy fats from the nuts.....plenty of protein, vitamins and minerals. Then, you can get your sweet on with some dried fruit, coconut chips, etc......

    I am not eating Kind Bars now, but they are incredible. I can't recommend them enough. Also, some of the Kind Bars only have 5 grams of sugar...and they are not processed in any way. They are gluten and sugar free (they use a touch of honey to sweeten the low-sugar ones).

    Some of my favorite Kind Bars are the Salted Caramel and Dark Chocolate Nut, Maple Glazed Pecan and Sea Salt.

    One thing I like about Kind Bars too is that I never had one where the nuts had gone bad and were rancid. That's pretty rare...nuts go rancid pretty quick. That means they always seem to be very fresh. I liked the grain Kind Bars too, in particular the Maple Pumpkin .

    But I like the nut Kind Bars much more because they REALLY fill you up and satiate, and are delicious but low carb, low sugar. They had become my favorite snack before my diagnosis.
    Interesting article on Kind Bars. No, it is not 'anti' kind bar. :)

    I bolded some stuff for emphasis. It's basically about Kind Bars trying to get the government to redefine using the word 'heathly' since the govt. is still regulating the use of the word based on outdated info of what is actually healthy.

    Kind Bars to U.S. Government: Redefine 'Healthy'

    A snack-food company stumbled into a glaring loophole in the federal definition of healthfulness.

    You've probably never bought almonds that said "healthy" on the package. If you did, they were probably illegal almonds.

    Because despite the fact that almonds are among the foods most clearly proven to be elements of health-promoting diets, almonds contain too much fat to qualify for the right to bear the label "healthy." That is, according to "the U.S. government."

    The government of the United States of America mandates that "the term 'healthy' and related terms ('health,' 'healthful,' 'healthfully,' 'healthfulness,' 'healthier,' 'healthiest,' 'healthily,' and 'healthiness')" may be used only if a food meets certain nutritional requirements, and that among these are sensible things like a not-unreasonable amount of sodium and a modicum of "beneficial nutrients."

    Meanwhile, note that "healthtastic," "healthtopian," and "healthish" are completely unregulated words.

    Few people know this better than the makers of Kind bars. The ubiquitous checkout-aisle nut-sugar logs made national news this year when, on March 17, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) director of compliance William Correll issued a "warning letter" asking the company to remove the term "healthy" from their product labels. Kind did so, only after several public displays of indignation and bewilderment. The company told NPR at the time that it didn't know the word healthy came with a set of rules and regulations, and that the word had been on the labels since 2004.

    But revenge is, like almonds, best served at room temperature. Now the company is striking back at the FDA. On December 1, the makers of Kind bars filed a citizen petition—with the support of several prominent nutrition scientists, including the chair of the department of nutrition at Harvard School of Public Health, Walter Willett—imploring the federal agency to redefine "healthy."

    The most immediate public-health concern surrounding the current definition of "healthy" is that it requires a food to be low in fat. This is consistent with the prevailing nutritional wisdom of 1985. Any food that contains more than four grams of fat (in the quantity "customarily consumed per eating occasion") cannot, regardless of any other factors, be considered healthy.

    The idea that "low fat" means "healthy" expired decades ago. Lumping all fatty acids together into one nutrient bucket and calling them "bad" or "good" is about as useful as doing so with children. Unless you are an immortal magical man with flying reindeer, don't try it. Trans fat is the closest thing to categorically bad that exists in the world of nutrition, while omega-3 fatty acids are integral to the diets of the world's longest-lived, healthiest populations. In addition to "at least seven glasses of wine per week," the Mediterranean Diet makes staples of olives, fish, and nuts—many of which would not qualify as "healthy" by the outdated FDA definition.

    At a time when more than four in 10 American adults has a preventable chronic disease related to poor diet, the petition from Kind et al. urges the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to update its policy as an urgent matter of public health. And as a matter of free speech, the group argues that the definition of healthy "prevents the dissemination of truthful and non-misleading information about the role of certain foods in maintaining healthy dietary practices in violation of the First Amendment."

    Instead of building a diet based on recommended levels of nutrients, the petition argues, the focus belongs on eating "certain foods, including vegetables, fruits, whole grains, low- or non-fat dairy, seafood, lean meats and poultry, eggs, legumes, and nuts and seeds, in achieving better health and wellness."

    That is all in accordance with the recommendations of the 2015 U.S. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, though it contrasts with the popular approach of the 1990s and 2000s. Until recently, experts emphasized levels of macronutrients—fat, carbohydrate, protein—rather than the collective effects of food-consumption patterns on health. They recommended nutrients rather than foods. The ultimate manifestation of this was the 2014 launching of the high-nutrient liquid-parchment Soylent.

    The current FDA definition of "healthy" is another relic. "Many current federal labeling regulations are based upon this past thinking," the petition argues, in this case because they "exclude an entire category of foods that is recommended in the dietary guidelines—nuts—from bearing such a claim because nuts are not low in fat."

    Meanwhile, products like low-fat pudding and Pop-Tarts meet the criteria for the "healthy" designation. The label on a Pop-Tarts box still today reads "low fat" as well, an homage to the elusive health-conscious Pop-Tart consumer...

    http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...s-govt/419352/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
You can avoid unexpected and expensive repair costs with an extended service plan for your Lexus. Many vehicle repairs can cost thousands of dollars in unexpected expense, now may be the time to consider an extended service plan for your vehicle.