Are 'superfoods' A Real Thing Or Just A Marketing Term?
"Superfood" is a marketing term coined to sell products. It is a vague concept in nutritional science and has no formal meaning. Sure, some foods may be more nutritious than others, but that doesn't make for a complete and varied diet.
The "superfood" fad is another symptom of our constant need for solutions or quick fixes to our problems. Our bodies don't work that way.
"Superfoods" focus on individual nutrients, discounting what actually leads to long-term health: eating a variety of foods like vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seeds, nuts, legumes, and mushrooms. Since we do not eat individual foods in isolation, we should not evaluate their health benefits in isolation.
A 2017 study in the International Journal of Eating Behavior and Physical Activity surprisingly found higher consumption of "superfoods" among people with higher incomes. It has also been suggested that people choose to eat "superfoods" because they believe that the "rich" do so.
Your overall diet and your long-term diet will always be more important than any single product. If your overall diet is too low in whole foods and too high in ultra-processed foods, adding some "superfoods" won't affect the effect of your diet.
Think of it another way: If your diet consists mostly of nutrient-dense whole foods, adding a treat here won't make a difference. So why is it important to add "superfoods"?
There's nothing wrong with "superfoods"...they're often the best choices in a variety of foods. But they won't boost your immune system, cure cancer or give you amazing superpowers.
Karina Inkster is a health and fitness coach, author of five books, and host of the No-BS Vegan Podcast.
If you have expert advice to share with Peak readers, please email editor@prpeak.com for details .

Comments
Post a Comment