True, but plain apples are pretty boring. At least with peanut butter, you get the added benefit of protein.
Way better sources of protein than peanut butter. And most American’s aren’t exactly short on their daily intake of protein anyway. Its good, but if what you are trying to do is cut calories, the idea that every snack has to have added calories to keep it from being boring is counterproductive.
One of the huge problems with our weight is that “plain broccoli is boring, lets cover it in cheese. Plain carrots are boring, lets dip them in peanut butter. Plain popcorn is boring - its better covered in butter and parmesean cheese.” We start with the basics of a healthy snack, and then feel like everything we put in our mouth has to give us some emotional satisfaction beyond “hey, I’m not hungry anymore.” Evenutally (slippery slope time) it gets to “plain snicker bars are boring, lets cover them in batter and deep fry them.”
And yes, if you are making a mini meal, peanut butter is good. And yes, apples and peanut butter is not the best choice for a diabetic (or someone with a peanut allergy or whatever). What I was reacting to was that the solution for “hey, someone is going to package apples dipped in sugar” was “why do that, you could cover them in peanut butter.” Seemed like we were missing the step where the apple itself was - in most circumstances - an adequate snack. On occation, dipping your apples in peanut butter is a great treat, but if every apple you eat is coated in peanut butter and you are fighting a weight problem…
Yeah many ‘simple’ ingredient items available in USA have added unnecessary and sometimes downright awful ingredients. This is one of the ways where the food industry is fucking with you guys. Please for the love of og read the ingredient list on such items and refuse to buy the ones with unnecessary sugar, flavourings, colourings, etc. Even if you are healthy and don’t have weight problems please don’t buy the adulterated crap that some food companies would hoist upon you.
Considering the number of diabetics in the country, if something isn’t a good snack for diabetics, it probably isn’t a good snack to promote.
Not that an apple is horrible, of course. And different diabetics will react in different ways. My husband can eat berries, but not apples or (god forbid) bananas.
One thing that’s frustrating in “general” nutritional conversations is how so many people think that if something doesn’t have fat in it it’s suddenly a perfect food. I don’t know of any diabetics who can eat rice without a severe spike in blood sugar, but people blithely say how healthy rice is. There are a lot of diabetics, and a lot of other people who otherwise have impaired glucose/insulin functioning. There is no one size fits all nutrition.
Wait a minute, corn syrup is just nuts? I thought it was corn.
You never heard of corn nuts?
I’m not saying an apple is the perfect snack. I’m saying that an apple without peanut butter, without cinnamon and sugar - is a less caloric snack than an apple with peanut butter or cinnamon and sugar and it isn’t necessary to load your food with extra calories. Obviously, if you are a diabetic (which is 7% of the population - still seems like my original statement qualified with “in most circumstances” stands), you don’t want to snack on an apple.
(My dad is a diabetic, I really don’t need the lecture.)
I’m not lecturing you, I’m expressing frustration with general nutrition discussions, which is what I said. I commented on why an apple can be problematic, and I made a general comment, not one directed at you.
On, the other hand, many people are not making the choice between a plain apple or an apple with nut butter. They’re making the choice between an apple and a package of ring-dings. I think you get into the area of overcomplicating weight loss when you start talking about why an apple (with its vitamins and fiber) might not be a good snack. A lot of people would read that as, “See, even an apple isn’t *that *great.”
How many calories are there in prison loaf?
Screw the apples, I’ll just have a banana instead. Yummy!
The snack described in the taste test is pretty easy to put firmly into the “whoa, that’s bad” category. But when it comes to apples, or soy, or peanut butter, or a glass of milk, things do get complicated. For some people, these are all great foods, for others, they are all trouble.
Still, in case anyone wondered, my comments on this message board are not meant to be used as a guide to weight loss. Void where prohibited. Professional drivers on a closed course. Eat your vegetables, unless that would lead to overeating. Be home by ten. Don’t do that; you’ll go blind. Get off my lawn. 
Sorry, js. I think I more meant the general you rather than You you anyhow. But I was really just trying to point out an example of how this sometimes really does get overthought.
Excuse me and my Italian ancestors by way of Barcelona but no. If you use healthy ripe tomatoes, all you need is salt, olive oil an two pieces of garlic (which are not eaten, of course).
I don’t bother cook much but that doesn’t mean I don’t know how.
Sugar in tomato sauce… YEECH! Probably thought up by the same people who insist in battering up chicken and then wonder why KFC doesn’t “take” in Spain.
Tastes apparently differ. I was taught to cook a mean marinara by a Sicilian aunt. It includes a pinch of sugar.
As for the canned sauces, they probably aren’t starting with great tomatoes. They’re starting with cheap tomatoes.
OK, now you’ve crossed a line.
Disparage not thy fried fowl. Hath not a fried chicken crunchiness? Hath not a fried chicken wings, succulant breasts, thighs, drumsticks? Fed with corn, cut with a sharp chef’s knife, subject to the same herbs and spices, heated by the same oils,
warmed and cooled by the same pan and rack, as a chicken fried steak is? If you prick it, do its juices not run clear? If you tickle it, does it not cluck? If you skin
it, does it not lose crunchy goodness? And if you make the mistake of eating at KFC, shall we not laugh?
In moderation, of course.
I love KFC but I wouldn’t claim it was good for me. Except for the protein from the chicken meat.
My Sicilian ancestors (grandmother, her brothers and sisters) didn’t use the healthy, ripe tomatoes. They used the overripe or the not so great tomatoes to make a tomato gravy. Then they threw just about everything they had in the kitchen into the gravy - it was their way of letting no food go to waste.
They used the good tomatoes for raw or barely cooked dishes.
I should state that I am defending fried chicken in general, not KFC in particular. And not as a health food, but as a tasty treat.
The last time I ate at KFC was – well, the last time I’ll eat at KFC.
Fried chicken is one of those things that I love, but can’t remember the last time I’ve had it. KFC was fine when I was a kid, but now it terrifies me (I don’t want to think about what those no-account teenage employees are doing to the frozen, re-constituted “food”) and I can’t stomach the thought of other restaurants’ fryers (how old is that oil?). I don’t know how to make it at home, nor do I want to clean up afterwards. It’s not a good thing to eat on a date or a business lunch (too messy). As a result, I just don’t eat it, ever.
Yet when those KFC commercials come on I still think…mmm, that looks good.