Also I want to emphasize that the thread is about treats, which in my book means something you don’t get every day and is in some sense an indulgence. A bowl of full fat ice cream with sugary raspberry sauce and whipped cream might be a treat for you. A bowl of fresh raspberries with Greek yogurt would be (for me) a healthy treat.
Perhaps, but by far the biggest single nutritional health problem that Americans face is obesity, so it’s not an unreasonable guess.
No one on a vaguely normal diet (and without other serious medical problems) has a vitamin C deficiency, and there’s no evidence that exceeding this amount is good for you.
I don’t think there’s any evidence that flavonoids have any beneficial effect on human health. A lot of studies and some in vitro effects but not much more.
“Satiating fat” is not good in and of itself; it may help you eat less at meals, especially as compared to soda, but this depends on the individual. As I mentioned, this treat may be good as a meal (full or partial) replacement, but as an adjunct it’s just extra calories.
Depending on the individual, calcium and fiber may be useful, but mainly only for someone not getting enough in the rest of their diet.
Let me put it this way: 10% extra nutrients (vitamins or whatever) is not going to make a significant difference to your health if you have a reasonable baseline. Mostly, your body just needs “enough” and the excess is wasted.
However, 10% extra calories on top of a neutral baseline is huge. It’s the difference between a healthy weight and overweight. If your hypothetical man has a stable weight with 2884 calories/day, then he will gain weight on 3164 calories/day, just as he will with the equivalent in soda. He can expect to gain a pound about every two weeks until he reaches a new, heavier equilibrium.
I’m not deriding it–I think it’s a fine snack. But the OP said “I define it as ‘if I ate it every day for a year I would be better off at the end.’”. That might be true if it replaces a distinctly unhealthy meal. But that’s also not usually what’s meant by “treat”, which is something one eats in addition to meals. And since the majority of Americans are overweight, the calorie increase is a significant factor here.
So I’d say the healthiest treat is one that enables you to reduce your meals by the largest amount. Maybe raspberries and Greek yogurt is that snack for some people; it depends on the person. But it’s not healthy in and of itself; to be healthier at the end you need to have changed your diet in some other way. Barring that, yes, raw vegetables and tap water are your best bet.
But if it’s rare, then the health factors are irrelevant, so again, the raspberries are no healthier than the soda–they have no significant effect at all. You can eat anything you want as long as you don’t do it too often. A gallon of ice cream eaten once a year is “healthier” than carrots and hummus eaten every other day (assuming the rest of the diet is constant and “normal”).
Anyway, my answer is “giant pot of coffee.” Almost zero calories, even with a small amount of sugar and milk added. I find that I don’t need to eat if I have sufficient coffee. However, I can’t have it every day, because the beneficial effects of the caffeine go away with a constant intake. I find that a weekly cycle is best.
Also, I should point out that your OP and latest post conflict to some extent, since you originally defined a healthy treat as “if I ate it every day for a year I would be better off at the end” and now you say “which in my book means something you don’t get every day”.
They are not in direct conflict since the OP is phrased as a conditional, and in principle you could have a treat which is healthy to eat every day and yet would still be a rare indulgence, but that’s kind of a weird argument to make.