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.

As long as somebody isn't consuming excess calories over the course of the day and is getting a balance of food types, it really doesn't matter whether they have 1 meal or 10 meals.

M’y second DS was born here in France. I know breastfeeding rates are dire here.... at the time I wondered if it was because the hospital breakfast consisted of a bowl of milky coffee and three tiny toasted bread things, and a packet of jam. That’s no way to feed a woman who’s just given birth! DH had to smuggle cheese baguettes in for me.

I agree it very regionally variable: I live in a posh part of a big city, and the French slim / healthy stereotypes are true here. But head to the poorer areas or out in the sticks, it is different.

I don't know, tbh.

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 model is used in all ED recovery programmes, not just for those who are very underweight. It's used for anorexia, bulimia, compulsive overeating and everything in between. I've been in and out of eating disorder units and treatments since I was a teenager and met people of all sizes with the same basic issues - all encouraged to try and get into a regular eating regime of 3 meals and 3 snacks.

Maybe it's not healthy, idk. But it works for me. As much as anything ever will work, anyway.

Definitely too much snacking. I always noticed when my kids were at nursery they skimmed down a bit (never actually overweight) in the holidays because they weren’t being given snacks all the time like at nursery!

I also notice one of my (primary age) DC often refuses breakfast - and when I try to push her (don’t want to neglect her!) she just says “it’s not long til snack, I don’t need breakfast”. I hope she doesn’t lose that natural ability regulate her appetite, it would be so fucking handy if I had it! 🤣

To put it into context, the "3 meals, 3 snacks" model is used in ED recovery programmes, designed for aggressive weight gain,

You are mistaken in this. The 3 meals, 3 snacks model is also used in ED recovery programmes which lead to weight loss. It's not about gaining weight but stabilising the peaks and troughs of blood sugar and how that drives binge and over eating.

It also the model used to control diabetes.

@manicinsomniac

I don't know, tbh.

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 model is used in all ED recovery programmes, not just for those who are very underweight. It's used for anorexia, bulimia, compulsive overeating and everything in between. I've been in and out of eating disorder units and treatments since I was a teenager and met people of all sizes with the same basic issues - all encouraged to try and get into a regular eating regime of 3 meals and 3 snacks.

Maybe it's not healthy, idk. But it works for me. As much as anything ever will work, anyway.

Yes, that's very true (and I almost went onto write that but then I was afraid that it would be taken as fat shaming etc.). And the model is the same but the purpose is different - in the case of bulimia, to discourage a pattern of restriction which leads to binging, in the case of BED to reset eating habits and to maintain regular blood sugar level.... etc. But the one common thing is that the snacks really are "snacks". In an anorexia nervosa treatment programme it is maybe likely to be something like a Twix or a huge ice cream shake rather than a banana, because part of the programme is literally just trying to get 3000 calories p/d into that person without them having to eat 24/7 (in other words, an apple which has 55 calories approx isn't going to cut it). What you wouldn't expect is to see a burger or a plate of toast followed by a yoghurt and grapes as a "snack".

But you are quite right, that the pattern of the meal plan is the same, even if the content differs. And for people in ED recovery, for all types of ED, it's proven to work well and often the best route forward is to maintain it. But for people who aren't experiencing any kind of disordered eating, I would query whether 3 snacks a day is necessary, especially when some of those snacks basically become an additional meal. Of course, if someone eats small meals with more regularity, that's different.

X post, sorry.

They're behind us, but don't be thinking France doesn't have a problem too. From a WHO report: "Intercountry comparable overweight and obesity estimates from 2008 (1) show
that 50.7% of the adult population (> 20 years old) in France were overweight
and 18.2% were obese. The prevalence of overweight was higher among men
(56.4%) than women (45.4%). The proportion of men and women that were
obese was 19.1% and 17.4%, respectively. Adulthood obesity prevalence
forecasts (2010–2030) predict that in 2020, 19% of men and 22% of women will
be obese. By 2030, the model predicts that 25% of men and 29% of women
will be obese"

@miimblemomble

I’m Brit living in France. The OP is NBU. Snacking, the way that Brits do it, does not happen here. The only accepted time to snack is an after school goûter, it’s strictly for children. Adults don’t snack - no 10am biscuit with a cuppa, no mid afternoon tea and cake, no sitting on the sofa after dinner munching crisps and chocolate. No play piece at school either.

There’s a good programme called The Men Who Made Us Fat. It explores the growth of the obesity epidemic in the UK and the US. In the UK, the marketing / processed food industries focused on making snacking acceptable - through advertising (a finger of Fudge etc) and creating new products. It just didn’t happen in France to the same extent and snacking is not as widespread.

In my head I sang 'a finger of fudge is just enough to give your kids a treat'

I'm sure there are plenty of French people who have a marvellous, healthy diet. But I am sure there are plenty of French families that don't

Yes. It annoys me, this idealisation/romanticisation of French (and other overseas) food cultures. The idea that everyone goes to their charming local butcher, the bakery, the darling little greengrocer etc. Has no one ever been to France and seen a massive Carrefour?

I blame the British middle classes on their smug holidays. 'Oh yes, we would shop at this adorable little grocer's in the village.' Yes mate, they keep that shop open especially for gullible foreigners like you, and charge you four times what they should for your apricots and your cheese.

It’s a great idea. You have a billion dollar snack industry and a billion dollar diet industry. Win-win for the men in suits!

My family doesn't snack (maybe occasional piece of fruit after exercise), but I get what you mean. I will never understand the parents who meet their kids at the school gate with a bag of Malteasers or pack snacks for a two hour dance class. My DD went to a 2.5 hour musical theatre club a few days this summer, and some kids had a lunchbox filled with snacks! People just don't require that many calories. It messes with your hunger signals over time.

I was a child in the 1970s. Children back then were skinny by today's standards. At secondary school (1980s) there were only a few noticeably overweight children.

We ate breakfast, dinner/lunch, tea (snack) +supper (evening meal) or tea (meal), and at home we had free access to the fruit bowl. We didn't help ourselves to crisps and biscuits.

We ate nothing between meals, or drank anything, or if we did it was tap water or sometimes squash.

We hardly ever had sweets. Pop and sweets were treats.

Nowadays, people eat out or in the streets, then we ate at home.

Nowadays, eating out is done as entertainment, then even a takeaway was a rare treat.

@IntermittentParps

I'm sure there are plenty of French people who have a marvellous, healthy diet. But I am sure there are plenty of French families that don't

Yes. It annoys me, this idealisation/romanticisation of French (and other overseas) food cultures. The idea that everyone goes to their charming local butcher, the bakery, the darling little greengrocer etc. Has no one ever been to France and seen a massive Carrefour?

I blame the British middle classes on their smug holidays. 'Oh yes, we would shop at this adorable little grocer's in the village.' Yes mate, they keep that shop open especially for gullible foreigners like you, and charge you four times what they should for your apricots and your cheese.

I do agree with this, except about the bakery. Everyone does go to the bakery - they are everywhere, in a way that is not the case here!

Jourdain11, well, OK, I'll give you the bakery. But I'm sure French supermarkets have bakery sections, and it can't just be foreigners who shop there...

Smaller food shops have been doing well in lockdown, apparently a lot of British people have returned to using local butchers, bakers and greengrocers. Whether this will trigger a change in eating culture remains to be seen.
If you're talking about increased snacking, I think shops like Poundland have a lot to answer for, aisles full of cheap multipacks of crisps, sweets and fizzy drinks. Though of course no one is forced to shop there or buy this stuff, it's up to the individual.

One difference is that the French don't seem to eat ready meals.

@MikeUniformMike

One difference is that the French don't seem to eat ready meals.

Not just french. I was surprised at the abundance of ready meals when i came here. And takeaways.

It messes with your hunger signals over time.

This really resonated with me. I've never heard it put like this . But I think I strongly agree.

IMHO I've noticed when I'm eating a lot over a Christmas week for example I'm never really hungry, but it doesn't stop me eating the next delicious meal or round of eats. And after a while being hungry becomes irrelevant. It's like you lose your Hunger Dial.

No idea about the French though.

@SchrodingersImmigrant, the takeaways and ready meals are a big factor.
If you have a family where the person preparing the food works (either single parent or two-parents in the home), the temptation to feed the family a takeaway or something that can be shoved in the oven or microwave, especially as it's cheap, is immense.

The takeaways around where I live are generally cheap - cheaper than cooking at home.

@YorkshireParentalPerson

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'm T1 diabetic and this is mostly BS.

There are plenty of snacks that won't cause you to produce more insulin (eg anything with almost zero carbs like eggs, cheese etc). So again it's not the act of snacking that's the issue but what you're snacking on.

Your body produces insulin all the time even when you're not eating. Ergo diabetics need background insulin even when they're not eating.

Intermittent fasting works not because it stops insulin production but because by restricting the number of hours in which youre "allowed" to eat you eat less. There's only so much food anyone can cram in 8 hours or whatever.

Nothing wrong with a croissant and a bowl of cafe au lait for breakfast - calorifically that’s under 500 calories, and if your other meals are going to be protein rich and vegetable heavy, it’s fine.

I also find it easier to eat and plan for 3 meals a day, with a mid morning snack. I don’t make good food choices if I eat when and whatever I feel like. If you eat regularly, I think you’re less likely to get hangry or get so hungry you eat all kinds of rubbish.

Nothing wrong with a croissant and a bowl of cafe au lait for breakfast

In terms of calories, sure. But I can't function on coffee and a pastry on its own and it baffles me that people can (my DP can happily go and do a morning's work after a breakfast like this). I need protein, fat and some 'proper' starch like good grainy bread, not flaky pastry, or I just feel tired and can't concentrate all morning.

I do sometimes have a pastry, but as 'pudding' after my breakfast of toast and avocado or eggs or whatever. It's a treat as far as I'm concerned, not 'proper' food that has a nutritional function.

Intermittent I’m the same Porridge or egg in a muffin is the only thing that sets me up.

There are plenty of snacks that won't cause you to produce more insulin (eg anything with almost zero carbs like eggs, cheese etc). So again it's not the act of snacking that's the issue but what you're snacking on.

I agree, but the western snack industry is almost solely about high carb low fat food so it does become about the act for many - my DH won't eat cheese or nuts and his snacking is, by default, carb heavy. I don't think Mosley is looking for zero insulin, but rather recognising that many of us live in almost permanently with very high insulin levels because we eat carbs every couple of hours.