fruit is the worst snack

Okay, so I know I'm about to be barraged on all sides for this statement, but I agree with you that fruit is an essential part of any healthy diet, packed with nutrients, fibre, antioxidents, etc.  However, I think that to tide yourself over between meals, it is the worst thing that you could have.   So just hear me out, okay?

For one thing, fruit is extremely high in sugar, and when eaten alone it spikes your blood sugar, and leaves you feeling hungry soon after... just like ANY sugary snack will do.  When you eat fruit you should eat with some protein or a light meal, like blueberries with milk, or an apple with peanut butter... NOT ALONE. 

Two, think about your poor teeth.  Fruit is packed with sugar and acid, so having a sour apple for a snack corrods your teeth while leaving it with no other food to neutralize the sugar and acid.

And I know some people are going to come back and say... but fruit has 'complex carbs' which means that it takes a long time to digest, and therefore it won't leave you feeling hungry.  You're right in the fact that fruit does have complex carbs, however, it's still full of sugar.  If you look up the glycemic index of fruit you'll find that it's really high, in other words it'll spike your blood sugar, unless you eat it with peanut butter, or some other protein to curb the insulin release.

Okay, go ahead, rip my arguement apart. 

Not everyone eats fruit with meals though.  So eating fruit for a snack when you don't eat fruit during meals is perfectly fine.  The fiber in most fruits is very filling, as well as high in nutrients.   Personally I eat meat, grains, and veggies for meals.  Then fruits are my snacks.  As long as you are meeting your daily requirements for calories, veggies, protein, and fruit...etc it really doesn't matter when you eat it.  And its a much better option than many things...including diet coke.

If you don't want to eat fruit for a snack, don't.

If someone else likes fruit for a snack, what's it to you?

Sheesh!

All things in moderation. 

Not all fruits are highly acidic, and some fruits are higher in sugar than others, but fruits offer nutritional value that helps to offset the sugar intake.

The only fruit I've found that actually makes me feel hungrier is an apple.  Bananas, berries, and citrus fruits I find very satisfying.

You make good points about the glycemic index, and certainly, if you have diabetes, you definitely must be very careful with your choices.  But for people like myself, with no blood sugar issues, my body can handle a small sugar spike just fine.  My insulin does its job, and that IS its job.  For most of us, sugar is not the enemy.

But to say that fruit is "the worst" thing you can eat is just asinine.  That's a ridiculous statement that I know you put in your post simply to draw attention and an outcry.  I just cannot believe that you cannot think of anything worse to eat as a snack than fruit - c'mon, seriously? 

Fruits aren't generally high on the GI scale.  Not sure why you think they are high.

I agree with you.  But - At the same time, I do eat fruits alone as snacks.  I have noticed that I'm hungry again within a half hour of eating the fruit - I just drink water at that point and ignor the hungry feeling I have.

I normally do a few black plums, red delicious apples and bananas.  On occasion I'll buy grapes too - I love grapes.

But, thanks for pointing out the damage the sugars and acids can do to one's dental work/teeth.

yea i agreefruit is too high in sugar
but uhhh.. keeping away from fruit cuz of the acid content sounds retarded

Yeah, I don't think I would say they are the "worst" snacks by any means. If you don't have issues with your blood sugar, I don't think it's a big problem.

As for the dental aspect, any sugars can rot your teeth, but brushing them should help. ;)

yay for the toothbrush, a miracle of modern science!! 

okay, stellajo, you're right... fruits are not the ultimate worst snack.  But they're definitely not optimal... there are other sugary foods WITHOUT the health benefits that are a lot worse, like donuts, for instance.  However, I think any snack that is really sugary is bad.  Period. 

If you combine fruit with something (milk, peanut butter, cheese, etc) I think that is an excellent snack. 

And to eastside :

The glycemic index of an average chocolate bar = 49
banana = 56
apple = 38
orange = 43
grapes = 46
watermelon = 72!!!!
(etc)

why do they tell you not to eat a chocolate bar for a snack?  Cuz it will spike your blood sugar, and leave you feeling hungry soon after! 

Actually, although the GI of fruits vary, most are considered to have a Low Glycemic Index and are consider to be a healthy snack.

You go tom- the voice of reason, oh, and I agree with you.... :)

However, I think any snack that is really sugary is bad.  Period. 

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the facts just don't back you up.  It sounds like you may still be clinging to the idea that particular food groups are "bad."  Sugar is not evil, (okay refined sugar, such as the kind in candy bars is probably a little evil.)  Milk has sugar in it.  So does peanut butter.

My husband, my mother, and my grandmother all have diabetes and I feel quite confident that if the sugar in fruit was THAT bad, especially for someone whose body doesn't manage it as well, that one of their doctors would have mentioned it.

 

A chocolate bar, with a GI of 49, is a Low GI snack.  The reason they tell you to eat fruit instead is that the chocolate bar does not have the nutrients and fiber that fruit have.  However, chocolate does have antioxidants that are consider benefical so a chocolate bar is not all that bad either.  Snickers bars are a good choice because the chocolate combined with peanuts give them a low GI and very healthy ratio of fat, carbs, and protien.  Snickers are very close in composition to the more expensive energy bars.

They tell you to not eat a chocalate bar because it is low in fiber, high in fat, and high in sugar.  Considering you can eat about 3-4 servings of fruit before equaling the calorie content of a chocolate bar, the two aren't really comparable. 

Also, the glycemic index is a relatively poor indicator for dieters to use compared to the glycemic load.  Compare the glycemic load of watermelon to a chocolate bar.  Watermelon (and most fruits) wins hands down.

You can't compare fruit sugar (natural sugar) to the stuff that's in junk food. Usually the sugar that's in junk food is refined, and comes with an assortment of other crappy ingredients like hydrogenated oils. And think about it this way - you could eat 4 medium sized apples or one coffee crisp bar... odds are that after you eat the coffee crisp you'll be looking for another salty snack or a drink to wash it down with. If you ate four apples in a sitting you'd probably be uncomfortably full. 

There are a lot of different factors that play into how your body absorbs sugars. The reason why sugar in the form of fruit is better than say, a chocolate bar is because of the fiber. The more fiber in a food means that your body digests it slower, the slower digestion allow for slower sugar absorption by your body and thus, your blood sugar does not spike like it would if you ate refined sugar, which takes practically no time to digest.

Glycemic load should also be taken into account. GI doesn't account for the amount of carbohydrates per serving of a food. Watermelon might be high on the GI list (72), but it is mostly made of water, so the carbohydrates per serving is low. This puts it at a low GL (4.3)

ok if fruits are not good as a snack, what would you eat as a snack then? if you have a good suggestion , please let me know.

Sugar rotting your teeth is a myth. Sugar is cleared from the mouth far too fast. Stuff like bread, coffee, nuts, or anything else that gets jammed between teeth and stays there for a while will cause decay.

true- raisins are notorious for that- sticky foods...

hiya.  thanks for your guidance!  i was going to have an apple for snack today, but instead had a mini-pack of oreos.  it was much better.