Beets? Check. Swiss chard? Check. Blueberries? Check.
Did you catch this list of "11 Best Foods You Aren't Eating" over at the New York Times a few weeks ago?
We read it and found ourselves a bit, well, unimpressed. With the exception of turmeric and maybe canned pumpkin, none of the foods on this list came as much of a surprise. What did you think?
Maybe it's just that we're so used to seeing lists like this pop up every few weeks. (Or just that we're so used to seeing chard arrive in our CSA boxes!)
We're often skeptical of the health benefits associated with a lot of these foods, especially when the claims come peppered with words like "might benefit" and "could be helpful." So often, the quantity that needs to be eaten in order to actually have the claimed effect is beyond the scope of reasonable.
Of course, this is no reason to dismiss these foods altogether! For the most part, the foods on this list and every other list are great as part of a normal, long-term diet, but that rarely seems to be the emphasis.
What do you think: are these lists useful tools for staying healthy?
Related: Nutrients and Food: Michael Pollan in the Times Magazine
(Image: Evan Sung for The New York Times)
Copyright © 2008 Apartment Therapy
I'm pretty sure I read of a study completely debunking the whole cinnamon will lower your blood sugar and stop you from getting diabetes thing.
The whole thing about eating things for the health benefits of it really depresses me after a while. Better to eat swiss chard cause it's nummy.
view RoseCampion's profile
Why would you eat canned pumpkin when squash are available year round?
view SFGail's profile