THE BALANCING ACT FALLS OVER

No this is not what you're thinking - I'm good and going strong :-)

In Adelaide's daily paper The Advertiser yesterday and article appeared on page 19 headed 'Balancing act' and the lead in blurb read " A study released yesterday suggested people eating red meat had an increased risk of early death. So and so (not his real name) asked the experts what makes up a healthy diet."

The full page article then listed all the food groups and gave the standard "healthy eating" advice that should suprise nobody including recommended serves for women, men and children. It wasnt until the 'bread, cereals, rice and pasta' section that I raised my eyebrows in surprise. The advice began with the comment that this was the largest of the food groups and should make up 2/3s of our dietary intake. It then went on to quote the recommended serves and serving sizes.

So a serving size was 2 slices of bread or a small roll, a cup each of pasta, rice, noodles or cereal (including oats) and half a cup for muesli. Decent serving sizes, me thinks. It was at the recommended intake that I balked. Women were quoted to required 4-9 serves a day, qualified with a staement about levels of activity dictating the requirement.

This got me thinking - how many sedentary and overweight women would read that and think that eating up to 18 slices of bread a day was "healthy" or lets say 6 slices of bread + a bowl of cereal + up to 5 cups of pasta or rice for dinner. This is the stuff that endurance athletes may require not the average person reading the daily paper. (More on this below) I would question whether even a moderately active person would need THAT many carbs.

Dont get me wrong - I'm not a paleo or low carb activist - I love my carbs - but lets be realsistic about how many we need and question whether the advice given by "the experts" is what our overweight and obese population need to be hearing. Look I'm not naive enough to think that those carbs are the source or cause of our obesity epidemic - fast food, processed food, sugar in everything and a propensity for laziness - have a lot to answer for but my mind boggles at these recommendations.

Incidentally the recommended daily serve of meat/fish/poultry/eggs and nuts for women is ..... wait for it ...... ONE!!!! Followed up with a quote "Prof Cobiac says meat contains essential proteins and iron which is important for growth but too much without exercise may cause obesity." I AM GOBSMACKED. So if I eat 3 serves of meat the size of a deck of cards - I might add - then I'm at risk of obesity.

I always thought most athletes would be eating generous portions of carbs because their training would be torching the calories and the carbs would fuel their workouts. So it was really interesting to read about Libby Trickett's training to get back into shape and swim fast enough to qualify for the London Olympics. Sure her diet had oats in it but the majority of her meals were based on protien with only small amounts of carbs. Yes she had to lean down but hey isnt there a lesson in that for our experts and overweight population.

OK I'll get off my soap box now and make myself a relaxing tea and perhaps have a couple of slices of toast with it seeing as its just one serve (of many) carbs I can enjoy in a day. I'd be interested to hear if you think I'm off the planet or if there is some sense in my opinion. (Sorry I cant find the article to link to it.)

M