But studies have shown that only a very small percentage of people are actually prone to food intolerances, which means that many people are self-diagnosing and potentially limiting their food intake based on little real evidence that it is beneficial for them to do so. Could it be that some people see gluten free food, for example, just as a way to lose weight?

 

They’d be looking in the wrong places if that were the case. Many gluten free substitutes actually contain more kilojoules than their regular counterparts in order to make up for a change in flavour and texture. Failing the gluten free fad, I suppose one could claim that they are on a low or no carb diet to avoid the evils of bread and pasta.

 

But here’s the thing, carbs aren’t out to make you fat. Honestly. I’m guilty of believing this one myself for the longest time. While it’s true that a meal high in starchy carbs might temporarily bloat you, they are still necessary for energy and, as the attitude of most women on a diet suggests, mood stabilisation!

 

Fat, the other unholy evil, is also necessary to maintain bodily systems. As long as it fits into your energy intake for the day, it’s probably doing more good than harm in a healthy body, especially those good old unsaturated kinds. Or even the saturated kind  - roughly 10% of your daily energy intake should come from these fats alone.

 

Okay, but what about sugar free or paleo diets? Surely the human body just isn’t designed to handle some types of food! I understand where this is going, but the answer is a resounding no. There is no need to cut out specific foods entirely unless you know for a fact that you have an intolerance to them. Give your body a little credit. It can heal broken bones, fight off viruses and create other human beings; do you really think a little sucrose digestion is going to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back?

 

This brings me around to superfoods. Foods that are claimed to be so beneficial you would have to be insane not to be eating them no matter how terrible they taste or what price they come at. While some foods are undeniably better than others and there is anecdotal evidence for beneficial effects from eating some foods, scientific studies have yet to prove the effectiveness of most so called ‘superfoods’ - a word that is thrown around increasingly regularly these days. There are no real superfoods in evidence… Except garlic, get around that bulb!

 

Superfoods are usually backed by doctors wanting to make money; they are often invested in the product they are promoting. A lot of ‘research’ is backed by companies trying to sell their own product.

 

If you want a laugh and would like to learn a little more about the marketing tricks behind ‘superfoods’ then this video is a must watch!