There are no 'good' or 'bad' foods per se: what matters is the caloric balance and nutritional density of your overall diet, rather than the marketing promises of industrial products labeled 'healthy'.

noli's read

The idea that no food is inherently harmful and that only the overall nutritional context matters is widely validated by science. An official position from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (expert opinion) confirms that a flexible approach to eating, without arbitrary exclusions, fosters a better relationship with food and prevents restrictive behaviors. For weight management, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that overall energy balance and protein intake take precedence over the strict choice of specific food sources. Similarly, the claim regarding the uselessness of the glycemic index (GI) for healthy individuals is consistent: clinical studies indicate that the GI of an isolated food varies between individuals and loses its relevance within a mixed meal. However, comparing Oreos to grapes solely based on sugar is somewhat reductive, as large observational studies link the consumption of whole fruits to overall protective effects, unlike ultra-processed products. Nevertheless, the main message remains extremely robust against the marketing of expensive industrial alternatives.

the sources

1. 1Stewart TM, Williamson DA, White MA 2002
2. 2Neumark-Sztainer D et al. 2007
3. 3Hall KD, Heymsfield SB, Kemnitz JW, et al. 2012
4. 4Rolls BJ 2009
5. 5Chandon P, Wansink B 2007
6. 6Croker H, Packer J, Russell SJ, Stansfield C, Viner RM 2020