And what a chair has to do with it.
Research has shed light on the detrimental effects of prolonged sitting, even among those who meet physical activity guidelines. Studies have shown that excessive sitting time increases the risk of premature mortality. Many questions about how prolonged sitting impacts health still need to be answered, and fortunately, breaking up sedentary behaviour by incorporating periods of standing is beneficial.
But what does sitting have to do with classifying food as healthy or not? Allow me to elaborate.
Consider this humble chair.
Knowing the risks of prolonged sitting, when you see this chair, do you feel the need to label it as ‘dangerous’, ‘toxic’ or ‘bad’ or 'unhealthy'? Likely not. Your thoughts might revolve around its aesthetics, comfort level, or suitability for your current physical condition or level of fatigue. The chair, in essence, remains neutral, and you can appreciate that the context matters.
This neutrality mirrors how I perceive food.
Yet, for example, when a study reveals some adverse health effects of a diet pattern high in refined carbohydrates and low in fruit and vegetables, many often rush to categorise white bread as inherently "bad" and kale as “good”. I challenge this simplistic food classification approach, especially when communicating with children.
Classifying foods as 'healthy' or 'unhealthy' or 'good' or 'bad' is, at best, a vague, confusing, and inaccurate way of talking about food. At worst, it can cause harm and contribute to disordered eating.
Of course, food is a biologically active substance that has the power to influence our bodies and how they function. I understand that nutrition science is complex and nuanced, and many can’t be bothered about the intricacies. So, the temptation to simplify messaging by categorising foods persists. In recent years, a "traffic light system" has been promoted and included in many school curricula to teach children about "everyday foods", "sometimes foods", or "not very often foods". At one stage, I even promoted these messages (to be fair, I was a young dietitian with no children, parroting what I had heard and not thinking about it critically).
But over the years, I learned that these approaches are all inherently flawed for several reasons and can cause long-term harm, so I no longer classify food as healthy or not.
By sharing my reasoning, I hope you rethink using these terms, especially around your kids. You can change your mind even if this is how you have been talking. This will help you feed yourself and your children with more confidence, flexibility, and fun. At the same time, you will create a home that nurtures curiosity and competence around food, body acceptance, and appreciation.
Interested? Ok, so here is why I stopped classifying foods:
1. Food and nutrition are complex.
Each bite (or sip) of food and drink comprises a unique blend of nutrients, vitamins, minerals, and bioactive compounds, each with its own effects on our bodies. Of the compounds we know of, some have beneficial effects, some negative, some neutral, and some we don't know yet. These compounds also influence each other, making some nutrients easier to absorb and others less so. We also know environmental and farming conditions, storage, and cooking methods influence these compounds and their effect on the body.
When explaining my reasoning, I often encounter a common response: someone brings up the least and most nourishing foods they can think of, suggesting an extreme binary. So then I ask: What if you could only eat that “healthy” food and nothing else - would that lead to health? Or, imagine you were suffering from starvation or malnutrition (which many people worldwide are suffering from), and someone offered you this “unhealthy” food – would that sustenance offer health, even life-saving properties? These scenarios highlight nutrition's complexity and underscore that context matters and binary thinking is pointless.
2. Individual differences.
One of the biggest problems with food categorisation is that individuals vary widely in their nutritional needs and responses to different foods. Factors such as age, metabolism, genetics, and lifestyle all influence our dietary requirements and tolerances. For example, what works wonders for one person may cause havoc on another's digestive system, highlighting the inadequacy of universal food labels.
4. Evolving science
In our age of information abundance, believing we have a comprehensive understanding of health and nutrition is tempting. However, the more we delve into the intricacies of the human body and the impact of food, the more we realise everything we don't know. Scientific research continually evolves, revealing new complexities and nuances that challenge previously held beliefs. Furthermore, our environment, the human body, and food constantly change.
If you haven't noticed, many different opinions about what is considered healthy exist. Even the so-called experts disagree. As a result, I have seen major inconsistencies in how foods are categorised. This lack of consistency can be even more confusing for families. And what if your child's school curriculum is based on one way of thinking and your family on another?
Another uncomfortable truth is that the majority of medical and nutrition research that informs general guidelines has predominantly been done on white men in the global north. It is well known that females, people of colour, and marginalised communities are vastly underrepresented in medical research. Years of systematic discrimination have resulted in significant gaps in our medical and nutritional knowledge, raising concerns about the real-life implications of such research.
Despite remarkable advancements, there is still so much we don't know about the human body's response to different foods and the long-term effects of specific dietary patterns. What may be considered a nutritional truth today could be reevaluated tomorrow as our understanding deepens.
3. Health is not a simple construct.
With the sheer volume of nutrient messages, experts and wellness influencers, it's easy to think that what we eat makes up the bulk of what makes us and our children healthy.
But in reality, genetics, social support, access to medical care, mental health care, environment, sleep, and risk avoidance all play a significant role in our children’s health outcomes.
While certain foods and dietary patterns have been found to possess health-promoting properties, portraying food as a cure-all neglects the multifaceted nature of health and illness and is rooted in ableism and healthism*.
5. Food is more than nutrients
Food is so much more than nutrients; it reflects cultural identity, fosters connections between individuals and can be a great source of creativity. Across the globe, culinary traditions are deeply intertwined with cultural heritage, passed down through generations as cherished recipes and rituals.
For many people, sharing meals with others nourishes the body and the soul, strengthening bonds and creating cherished memories. And food can make us feel happy or comforted, like when we prepare or eat our favourite meals or snacks. From celebrating special occasions with traditional feasts to finding solace in familiar comfort foods during difficult times, our relationship with food extends far beyond its nutritional value. For many, it is a source of sustenance, culture, and emotional fulfilment, enriching our lives in ways that cannot be quantified by vitamins and minerals alone.
6. Harmful dichotomous thinking
Lastly, promoting dichotomous thinking in general—or polarising thinking—has been shown to harm overall health. Such rigid thinking fosters self-criticism and restricts individuals' ability to adapt to life's challenges creatively. Research has shown that this cognitive distortion can negatively affect relationships, work, self-esteem, and long-term relationships with food.
Furthermore, most children under 12 already have a very polarising way of thinking. And so when you say ice cream is 'bad', they might find it hard to understand why it is okay to have ice cream on some occasions. And then, is the adult who gave me the ice cream bad? Many children also start questioning if they are bad for liking it and start feeling shame around eating (this can sometimes result in sneaking food or eating in secret). This can have even more of an effect on children who are anxious, perfectionists, or neurodivergent and want to follow the rules to the letter.
In conclusion, navigating a lifetime of food choices requires a nuanced and flexible mindset.
By acknowledging the complexity of food, respecting individual differences, and embracing the diversity of our diets, we can cultivate a more balanced and informed approach to nutrition. Let's move away from simplistic labels and instead appreciate the rich tapestry of nourishment each meal provides.
If you, too, want to raise kids with a psychologically healthy relationship with food that can last a lifetime, let's focus on building trust around food and their bodies and building confidence and competence around food. To find out more about how to do this, be sure to look out for my upcoming workshops or reach out to book a Free Discovery call to find out how we can work together.
*Ableism is the discrimination of and social prejudice against people with disabilities based on the belief that typical abilities are superior.
Healthism is the idea that a person's health is entirely their responsibility. It places a moral importance on maintaining good health.
Comments