Wednesday, October 27, 2010




In the New York Times this morning there is an article entitled Is Candy Evil or Just Misunderstood, by Julia Moskin. The article was interesting and worth reading. One passage from the article reads  

“At least candy is honest about what it is,” she said. “It has always been a processed food, eaten for pleasure, with no particular nutritional benefit.” Today, she said, every aisle in the supermarket contains highly manipulated products that have those qualities with no particular nutritional benefit.” Today, she said, every aisle in the supermarket contains highly manipulated products that have those qualities." 

By coincidence, today's Orlando Sentinel, in the 'Health Watch' section has this headline Not-so-scary treats: With the help of a dietitian we rank mainstream candies in nutritional quality.  The article in-part reads:  

"For aid in sorting out the best picks among mainstream candies, we turned to American Dietetic Association representative Toby Smithson, who swiftly disabused us of the notion that any big-name Halloween treat might qualify as a good source of, say, protein or dietary fiber. The goal, Smithson informed us, was to minimize the negatives — basically calories — and avoid choices high in saturated fat. "Size does matter, so go with the fun-size bars instead of the full size," she said, noting that it's a rare person who eats just a third of a bar." 

On the one hand we are told candy has no particular nutritional benefit and on the other a newspaper, whose own source tells them flat out that there is no big name candy treat that might qualify as a good source of nutrition - still tells us that we can minimize the negatives and 'go for a fun-size bar instead of the full size. I give you this as an example of why it is so hard for people to keep the pounds off.  There are normal people who can do this. I even know some of those people. Some people are not normal. Many people are not normal and think they are. I am not normal. 

Do you know what I do when given the choice between a full sized bar and a fun sized bar? I choose the fun-sized bar - because you buy them in BIG BAGS! Unlike the full-size bar, fun-size does not come in single servings. Have you ever eaten just one fun sized bar and not touched another from the bag at all? I mean even a day or week or month later? If you answered yes to that question you need to stop reading this blog because you do not have the problem with food that is discussed here. 

I accept that today I am someone who cannot take it and must leave it - period. This article makes sense to people who can take it or leave it - and then actually do leave it. I was never one of those people. If you are trying to figure out how to keep the pounds off you are not one of those people either.  Some people might argue that this leads to feelings of deprivation and eventually to a revolt and return to all things sugar but I disagree. If you do not have a substance at all it is much easier not to obsess about it or over indulge because you tried 'just one bite.' I  like to learn about the ways the food industry is trying to use manipulation to get us to buy their products and share that information with you so that we can be ready to say no thank you and move on to keeping the pounds off for another day. 

1 comment:

Vickie said...

I want to add this post to my Halloween candy post collection, because this post does not have a title, I can't pull it up easily to link to it. Would you mind adding a title? and then pasting the link my comments so I can find it again?