|
'Energy'
equals calories in new snack bars
July 31, 03
Suzanne Havala Hobbs
When
was the last time you ran a 10K? Competed
in a triathlon?
Swam the English Channel?
I thought so.
If you aren’t an elite athlete, then
it’s likely you don’t burn an
extraordinary number of calories each
day. It’s also likely you don’t
have to carry your meals strapped to a
bike frame.
But, judging by the number of specialty
"energy bars" being marketed at
every supermarket, gym and drugstore,
you'd guess we're all high-intensity
athletes.
Also sold as sports bars,
meal-replacement bars, and protein bars,
each is formulated a little differently
than the next – a little more or
less protein or carbohydrate. They have
names like Luna, Clif, PowerBar, Balance,
and Met-Rx.
They’re marketed to people who want
a quick boost before or after a workout
or a convenient snack that won’t go
to mush in a fanny pack. In short, anyone
who needs a hit of energy during the day,
and who doesn’t?
But for most of us, the appeal is a
perceived need, not a real one. In most
cases, these products are not the best
choices.
Sure, sports bars have a role for a very
small group of athletes who find them a
quick, concentrated source of calories
and a light, compact snack to carry. For
example, they may be useful for someone
on a mountain hike who wants to pack as
lightly as possible but needs to bring
along enough food to sustain extended
exertion.
Then there’s the rest of us.
For everyone else, the drawbacks include:
* Calories. Most of us don’t need as
many calories as energy bars contain.
(Tip: when the label says
"energy," think
"calories.") Most bars contain
160-180 calories or more. If you’ve
just spent a half hour on the
Stairmaster, you may gain most of those
calories back in three or four bites.
That’s counterproductive if
you’re trying to lose weight.
* Nutrition. Many bars have unnecessary
gimmicks built in – they’re
high-protein, high-carb, formulated for
women, etc. Most are the nutritional
equivalent of a designer granola bar or a
fortified candy bar. Since they’re
processed and don’t contain much in
the way of whole foods, they lack the
beneficial phytochemicals and other
nutrients only real food – like
fruits and vegetables – provide.
* Cost. At $1.50 to $2.00 a pop, they can
cost up to four times as much as
you’d spend on a piece of fruit,
bagel, or a half sandwich.
The bottom line is that for the vast
majority of us, it’s cheaper and
healthier to rely on real foods for our
snacks.
And packing for convenience – snacks
that are neat, light, and won’t get
smashed in your purse or backpack –
is not an insurmountable obstacle.
Good choices:
* Fresh fruit. Crunchy apples come in
many varieties. Pears, grapes, and
bananas that aren’t too ripe can
also work.
* Dried fruit. A handful of raisins,
dried apricots, or a mixture of dried
fruits. Add a few seeds or nuts.
* Whole grain or raisin bagel.
* Baby carrots, cherry tomatoes, green
pepper slices.
* Nonfat or soy yogurt.
* Half of a peanut butter sandwich on
whole grain bread.
* Juice box containing 100% fruit juice.
Keep it simple, be creative, and stick to
real food as much as you can.
|
