Sunday, September 14, 2008

Response to comment

Now if I were just a teeny bit computer literate, I would know how to write a comment back to a comment but whatever.
Someone suggested that Carvel has good fat free sundaes. Okay. Here's the thing. Fat is not the issue here. It's calories. One small Carvel hot fudge sundae is 500 calories (read it and weep!); one small fat free is 380 calories. A savings of 120 calories and that's lovely but it isn't going to make anyone thin. Unless she is in the habit of eating one a day(and I want to meet that person!), then it will be a savings over the week. But for someone like me who just wanted to splurge, there's no reason to "save" 120 calories. Of course, I ate a large which is probably 1,000 calories!!!
This is one of the issues that confuses people: Just because something is fat free doesn't mean it's a better choice or that it's a healthier choice. In the case of hot fudge sundaes, I'm not sure we would call the fat free one a "healthier" choice. An apple would be a healthier choice!
The majority of calories probably comes from carbohydrates, namely sugar, since the dessert is still quite caloric (BTW...a small serving of Carvel is a's one bite) so saving the fat calories is not such a big deal. I bet a sugar free hot fudge sundae would be way less calories but all way less tasty.
At least, that's the way I look at it. I splurge for pleasure. So I want the real thing. My overall diet is exemplary--fruits and veggies, whole grains, lean poultry and fish, low fat dairy. It couldn't be any better. I eat about 8 fruits and veggies a day. I meet my calcium needs from dairy alone.
The hot fudge sundae is something extra (although we cannot discount the calicum the ice cream provides!). It's purpose is pure hedonism. Nothing to do with nutrients or health. Unless you count mental health.

No comments: