Snack culture = unhealthiness?

[Jourdain11]

I watched the 1950s episode of Back in Time for Dinner on BBC last night and it was quite interesting that, while the young family members hated the food (which admittedly looked grim), they said that they realised that they didn't actually need to have snacks all the time.

I understand that there are a lot of considerations to take into account when "combatting the nation's obesity crisis", but I really wonder if a lot of the blame lies with snacks?

It seems weird to me that, from nursery onwards, we promote this culture of having constant snacks between meals. Healthy snacks, unhealthy snacks, "treat snacks"... much of which is just unnecessary eating. And also, some of the snacks have grown to the size of small meals!

In France, where I grew up, snacking between meals was not and is not really a thing. You are supposed to feel hungry for meals! The only "snack" we ever had as kids was an after-school snack, and that would be, for example, a piece of fruit, or a yoghurt, or a slice of bread and cheese.

To put it into context, the "3 meals, 3 snacks" model is used in ED recovery programmes, designed for aggressive weight gain, i.e. because it is actually dangerous for the person to remain at their current body weight. Yet it seems like quite a large proportion of the population are also following this model!

This isn't intended as a vilification of British eating habits (as I know this exists in many other cultures also) but it does make me wonder if we have collectively got into a warped mindset about healthy eating habits and hunger, and whether this may be a big contributor to the health crises we face in this country, which have made so many people more vulnerable to serious impact from Covid-19.

In France, where I grew up, snacking between meals was not and is not really a thing. You are supposed to feel hungry for meals! The only "snack" we ever had as kids was an after-school snack,

So snacking was a thing.

But one snack - and it was only for children...

It was still a thing. Not in the way it is in the U.K and many other nations perhaps, but you said snacking between meals was not really a thing, then went on to describe exactly that.

It was still a thing. Not in the way it is in the U.K and many other nations perhaps, but you said snacking between meals was not really a thing, then went on to describe exactly that.

This

I don’t think it’s the amount of snacks but the snacks people choose.

Everyone is different of course but if you're working and eat breakfast at say 7.30 and won’t have lunch til 1, I think it’s reasonable to be hungry between and have something small/healthy to keep you going. Or then if you eat lunch at 1pm but won’t eat dinner until 7-7.30 then that’s another 6 hours without eating - you’d likely be hungry especially if your job is quite busy. Some people might feel a bit faint depending on their metabolism/body/medical background.

I don’t think having something small and reasonably healthy in between those periods is the gateway to obesity. It’s only an issue if you scoff bags of crisps and handfuls of biscuits over fruit, or things like carrot sticks etc.

Snacks in themselves aren't unhealthy.

I cope much better on 5-6 small meal a day, which I suppose counts as "snacking" but I don't eat anymore than people who just eat three meals a day.

I eat little and often because it suits me better, big meals leave my feeling bloated and seems to give me big peaks and troughs in blood sugar levels so I'd rather have lighter meals and snacks in between.

Don't French families have their evening meal much later though?

YANBU

Our snacking culture is awful. So many reasons for it (availability, highly processed addictive food, terrible health advice) but at a biological level it is so so bad for you.

You need a gap between meals / snacking to allow your body to reduce insulin levels - at least 4 hours. I would think about 75% of our population do not do this at all. From what I see people are snacking every couple of hours in the day, and then not even getting a good break when they sleep - eating late and immediate breakfast.

There is no wonder there is an epidemic of Type 2 diabetes killing 24,000 people every year. And rising.

Even three meals a day is an arbitrary notion and, like everything, isn't one size fits all.

Rather than encouraging people to only eat three meals a day or to not snack or to snack but only if you're under a certain age or whatever else, I'd rather move towards the idea of eating when you're hungry and stopping when you're full.

Okay, fair enough, I contradicted myself. But there is a difference between one small snack (or even two small snacks) and promoting a culture of constant snacking. I think there is a point to discuss here, but you can focus on making fun of the fact that I contradicted myself if you want - it's a free country!

Don't French families have their evening meal much later though?

Yes, generally speaking they do but I'm not arguing if they should or shouldn't give their children a snack, I'm arguing that snacking clearly was/is a thing. The OP literally described French parents giving their children a snack between meals.

Also, it seems that snacking may be becoming more popular in France. www.thelocal.fr/20180312/how-the-french-have-grown-an-appetite-for-snacking

@dontdisturbmenow

Don't French families have their evening meal much later though?

Yes - we usually had ours around 7pm, 8pm.

If you follow Michael mosley et Al, there is a lot of evidence to show that snacking does lead to putting weight on. Not particularly for what you eat although sugary stuff doesn't help, but for the fact that eating causes your body to create insulin which contributes to weight gain. Reducing the amount of times you eat, gives your body chance to fully digest its last meal and reduces insulin production which in turn reduces the amount of weight you gain. It's one of the reasons that intermittent fasting works so well for people losing weight, your body is getting a true rest from foods!

I agree. You aren't going to starve if you go 4 hours without eating. I think it's better for the metabolism to not be constantly grazing on snacks.

@AllPlayedOut and @hula008 don’t be obtuse. The OP is clearly drawing a distinction between the excessive snacking culture for kids in the U.K. (where toddlers and children seem constantly to be eating) and the single snack for children which I understand has been part of French culture for generations.

@Jourdain11 YANBU. I’ve regularly seen snacking used in the UK as a way to placate children (if their mouths are full of food, they’re not able to make noise in cafes etc). It’s incredibly unhealthy.

[quote AllPlayedOut]Don't French families have their evening meal much later though?

Yes, generally speaking they do but I'm not arguing if they should or shouldn't give their children a snack, I'm arguing that snacking clearly was/is a thing. The OP literally described French parents giving their children a snack between meals.

Also, it seems that snacking may be becoming more popular in France. www.thelocal.fr/20180312/how-the-french-have-grown-an-appetite-for-snacking[/quote]
Yes, but I would argue that there is a difference between having A Snack and snacking all the time.

It's not a controlled snacking what's a problem. It's grazing (if that's the correct term for continuous snacking) what causes issues. I grew up with 5 meals: breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, dinner. Now I am doing similar when losing weight. It's ok to have an fruit and yogurt at 3 when your lunch was at 12 and dinner is at 7. Small thing to tie you over, and you will still be hungry for main meal. It becomes a problem when you have lunch at 12, snack at 1, snack at 2:30, snack at 3, another at 4 and then another at 5.

I get what you mean by the "In France, where I grew up, snacking between meals was not and is not really a thing.". I don't consider my 3pm snack a snack, but a meal. So that's why many of us foreigners say snacking isn't a norm where we grew up.

I like that programme op very interesting. I seem to remember it’s not until you get to the 80’s that there was always ‘extras’ in the larder. Up until then it was what was needed for meals and that’s it. I was born in 1963 and we definitely did not snack between meals. Didn’t have bottles of water clutched in our hands permanently either.

I'm not making fun of you. Just pointing it out.

I agree with those who say it matters what people are eating. I don't think that eating three meals a day works for everyone, or is inherently superior to eating say, five smaller meals. We're all different and what works for one doesn't work for another.

I don't eat breakfast. It makes me feel ill. I don't eat before 12, sometimes not until 2, but others would feel terrible without breakfast. Likewise some people feel great on a low carb diet, I feel weak and hungry on low carb.

Personally I like all of my food for the day within a six hour window. Usually two meals but sometimes one meal and a snack.

When I was a child, I remember a regular comment of my mother's was 'not now, you're about to have lunch/dinner', even if it was actually some hours until the meal, so clearly she was resisting giving us snacks. In comparison, I see children now being being given substantial snacks such as yoghurt, or a slice of leftover pizza, less than half an hour before their meal! And it's not just to fend off a tantrum, the parents just casually offers it so child eats it although they haven't asked for it. I agree OP, this constant grazing cannot be good for metabolism.

YANBU.

Since WFHing I've realised how much I snack (even if it is "healthy" things such as some cucumber and hummus, or nuts, or fruit) - partly out of habit, partly out of boredom if I'm doing something not terribly engrossing or I'm not busy and partly because I just love food. Whatever the reason it's still extra energy in that my body could quite easily live without.

I've really noticed how I don't tend to eat properly until lunchtime now, and just coffee until then.

So yes, YANBU. We are geared up to snack all the time and it's not healthy.

Didn’t have bottles of water clutched in our hands permanently either.

You sound like my husband.

Yanbu op. I rarely give snacks between meals and on the rare occasion I do they are much lower calorie than often suggested on here - a small piece of fresh fruit or a few carrot sticks for example. My children eat well at meal times and are healthy weights.

Some people are genuinely frightened of being hungry.