When it comes to losing fat without losing muscle to get that lean, healthy body you want, eating less calories then you burn while controlling insulin levels is critical. So how can you eat less calories than you burn without resorting to calorie counting? How do you know what foods spike insulin levels? What about making sure you’re eating enough protein?

While I’ve pointed out the benefits of the Harvard Healthy Eating Pyramid: Best Nutrition Guide You Don’t Know About, which I think is a solid framework for the general public, I wanted to take things a step further for you more advanced fitness devotees by introducing you to a conceptual framework I personally use and many natural bodybuilders, fitness models, and some sports nutritionists use as well, but it’s not mainstream at all.

This conceptual framework is based on 5 food groups, but they are different from the five food groups you probably know.

The Old Five Food Groups: USDA MyPyramid

The traditional food pyramid separates out food groups based on their basic properties:

1) Grains

5 Food Groups

Any food made from wheat, rice, oats, cornmeal, barley or another cereal grain is a grain product. Grains are divided into 2 subgroups, whole grains and refined grains. Whole grains contain the entire grain kernel — the bran, germ, and endosperm whereas refined grains have been milled, a process that removes the bran and germ.

Whole-wheat flour
Bulgur (cracked wheat)
Whole cornmeal
Brown rice

White flour
Degermed cornmeal
White bread
White rice

2) Vegetables

5 Food Groups 2

The meaning a vegetable is largely based on culinary and cultural tradition, but usually it means an edible plant, or part of a plant other than a sweet fruit, or seed. Vegetables are further divided into 4 sub-groups:

Dark Green Vegetables
Collard greens
Dark green leafy lettuce
Orange Vegetables
Dry Beans and Peas
Kidney beans
Lima beans
Starchy vegetables
Green peas
Lima beans (green)
Other Vegetables
Bean sprouts

3) Fruits

5 Food Groups 3

The non-technical meaning is a structure of a plant that contains seeds and is sweet and edible in its raw state.

• Apples
• Apricots
• Avocado
• Grapes

4) Milk (aka Dairy)

5 Food Groups 4

Milk is an “opaque white liquid produced by the mammary glands of mammals”. Now that sounds appetizing. Milk contains all essential amino acids.

• Whole milk
• Yogurt
• Cheese
• Eggs

5) Meat & Beans

5 Food Groups 5

Wait, didn’t we just say beans are a vegetable? Well, according to the USDA, they are in the Meat & Beans group too because they contain some protein. I don’t know about you, but I’m already starting to get confused. Meats include fish, beef, chicken, pork and other wildlife.

Finally, there is “Fat”, or oils, which are technically considered a separate food group, but few people acknowledge this.

The (New) Five Food Groups

The (new) five food groups separate food groups by their macronutrient profile, not just based on whether they are a plant, or animal, fruit, or vegetable. What I mean by “macronutrient profile” is that there are 3 macronutrients (protein, carbs, and fat) that provide calories to your body AND affect your body in different ways.

For example, protein (4 calories per gram) helps repair body tissue such as muscle, ligaments, organs. Carbohydrates (4 calories per gram) provide energy for your body and effect your insulin levels, which in turn directly affects your ability to lose fat. Because eating the right amount and type of carbohydrates is so important for losing fat, carbs are split into three sub-categories, fibrous, starchy, and simple. And finally you have fat, which contains 9 calories per gram, more than double protein and carbs! Dietary fat provides energy, helps maintain proper hormone function, and helps carry vitamins to a name a few of its benefits.

So now, wouldn’t it make sense to group foods based on their macronutrient profile, or roughly how much protein, carbs, or fat they contain? I think so!

Here are the “new” five food groups, which have been used by natural bodybuilders, fitness models, and sports nutritionists for years:

1) Lean Protein

Lean proteins includes any type of protein that has all 8 essential amino acids and is low in fat such as lean meats (fish, chicken, turkey etc.) and low fat dairy.

2) Fibrous Carbs

These are vegetables that are high in fiber, low in sugar and total carbs. From the USDA pyramid, all dark green vegetables are fibrous carbs. Orange vegetables and “beans”, however are NOT considered fibrous carbs, even though they are vegetables because they are much higher in total carbohydrates.

3) Starchy Carbs

Any food that has a relatively high amount of carbs, lower in protein, fat, and sugar is considered a “starchy” carb. Foods include cereals, bread, potatoes, legumes (beans), pasta, rice, and orange veggies like squash. This is similar to the grains category in the USDA pyramid, but with orange veggies and beans thrown in.

Notice how beans are not considered a lean protein, based on their macronutrient profile. Most starchy carbs are rated medium to high on the glycemic index, which rates carbs according to their effect on blood-glucose levels. Starchy carbs are sometimes referred to as “fattening” carbs, but this is a stretch in my opinion. People who follow the Paleo diet (caveman diet), or Atkins diet eat almost no starches. As I’ve said before, I eat a moderate amount (40%-50% of my calories) of natural carbs.

4) Simple Carbs

Fruits, soft drinks like Coke, or sugary foods like a Snickers Bar are considered simple carbs. Of course, fruit is healthier than a candy bar because of the vitamins they contain AND because they typically have a lower insulin effect (fructose vs. sucrose), but all sugary substances go in this category. The molecular structure of “simple” carbs food is less complex than that of starches for example, which is why they typically spike insulin to a greater degree. Of course, I don’t recommend eating anything other than fruits as your source of simple carbs.

5) Fats

If a food derives most of its calories from fat, you can definitely put it in the “fat” category. Avocado, even though it’s technically a fruit, is not a simple carb at all, because it’s mostly fat (75% of calories!).

Fatty meats like bacon and deep fried chicken go in the “fat” category, not the protein category. Did you know a 6 ounce 80/20 hamburger, marked as 80% lean, 20% fat, really has 30 grams of fat, which is almost 60% of calories coming from fat? Other fats include butter, oils, nuts, and hummus, which contains about 40% of its calories from fat.

The limitation to this framework is that these five food groups do not necessarily provide the right nutrients to your body if you don’t eat at least some variety in each category, and some of the foods can be arguably be in 2 groups, like hummus, which can be a starch, but still has 40% of calories from fat.

I do believe, however, that eating foods using the new five food groups conceptual framework, it’s MUCH easier to control total calories and insulin levels, which is what fat loss nutrition is all about. It’s easier to control calories because now you will know what foods are high in fat and you should eat sparingly, you can control carb intake because you will know what foods are high in carbs (manage insulin levels), and finally you can consume ample, high value protein.

I would love to hear your thoughts. Do you think these 5 food groups make more sense to you than the USDA five food groups? Is this even more confusing?



  1. profile avatar
    Pat Clemente Sep 07, 2010 - 20:04 #

    How does the above compare with Take Shape for Life (Medifast) It sounds pretty much the same, but with Medifast having more options.

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 07, 2010 - 20:32 #

      Hi Pat, I really have no idea how Medifast can be compared to the above framework. Medifast is a primarily liquid diet with some bars and shakes, which I’m not a fan of at all. Maybe you could tell me how you find the above similar to Medifast? Also, not sure how you are extrapolating this framework having more, or less “options”. What I’ve presented is not a diet by any stretch of the imagination, again just a framework from which to understand calorie intake and control insulin levels. For some people this framework is helpful, for others, it’s not. Just wanted to give you some ideas! Maybe I totally did not describe everything properly. Will need to look it over.

  2. profile avatar
    Jane I Sep 07, 2010 - 20:50 #

    Hi Mark! I’ve been a vegetarian who also eats almost no milk products for years. I’ve always felt as though I get lots of daily protein, through egg whites (almost every meal), tofu & soy products, beans, and protein shakes like Spirutein. Do you put soy products with the rest of the beans as starchy carbs? Am I doomed in the “lean protein” category?


    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 08, 2010 - 11:43 #

      @Jane – That’s a great questions. I swear I was thinking about vegetarians as I was writing the Lean Protein section. By the way, this framework was created by bodybuilders, and you’re not going to find too many bodybuilding vegetarians around!

      With that said, the sources of protein you are getting sound awesome, and while some of the sources do not contain all 8 essential amino acids, I would definitely put Spirutein, tofu, egg white etc. square in the lean protein category. You are not doomed at all! Eating beans definitely gives you some protein benefit for sure. I’m going to be delving deeper into protein into future articles for sure so I’ll keep you posted!

  3. profile avatar
    Hank Sep 07, 2010 - 22:43 #

    This explains why fad diets are just that fads. You need to know what you are eating and how to prevent insulin spikes. Most important is “mindful approach” to what you are eating. Nothing wrong with an occasional indulgence as long as it is not a daily occurrence.

  4. profile avatar
    Adam K Sep 08, 2010 - 11:42 #

    Hi Marc. Thanks for your latest article.

    I agree that the USDA pyramid needs re-evaluation and is probably not the best guide for individuals who seek to reduce body fat. I think your framework generally makes sense, but for most people there would be some foods that they wouldn’t know what to do with, like red meat, most cheese, and seeds. Also, your framework does not explicitly provide guidance on relative volume like the pyramid, though flawed, does. Intuitively I would assume you may be implying a diminishing recommended volume from 1-5, which from a volume by weight perspective I might agree with; however, I believe most people have a misconception about the “fats” category, primarily because of the unfortunate title we give it. While obviously more calorie-dense, most people are unaware of the importance of consuming unsaturated fats (in moderation, like the other macronutrients). I might suggest offering some guidance in this regard, and a reminder of the relative % of each category you would recommend consuming.

    The term “melt” when it comes to fat reduction also might be a bit misleading – I like how simple you keep it on your web site – the caloric deficit concept. I would hope you’d stray away from the marketing speak used by so many quick-fix diets and fat-loss fads.

  5. profile avatar
    Marc Perry Sep 08, 2010 - 11:47 #

    @ Adam – I think you make all good points. The one thing I did have missing in the article was what percentage of calories, or what amount of food each group represents. I was hoping to get to that at a later date. And this framework was not meant to replace the Harvard Healthy Eating Pyramid, or become a pyramid, but to inform calorie awareness and macro nutrient breakdown. I feel like sometimes I’m throwing too much at people and making things more confusing then they have to be, but I will tie everything together in the future with sample meal/snack ideas and sample meal plans.

    Thanks of your comment!

  6. profile avatar
    Hassan Sep 08, 2010 - 20:25 #

    Hi Marc, i’m actually confused about the ideal and helathy nutrition diet, if it’s suits for many poeople, i read before a book considering the ideal diet should be according to the blood type, “eat write 4 your blood type” and i found it somehow weired, i.e for my blood type A, the book says type A should elimenate any nutrition depending on meat and milk that’s not suitable for their stomach and cost the digistive system too much effort for breaking down the elements, and for six months period i was vegetrian but i experienced a fatigue and my hemolgobine rate was decreased noticeblay. then i swithched to moderate diet sysem, i think the formula should be stick on nutriton pyramid as you mentioned above but moderately and with reasonable portions, because even the good food like fruits could be harmful if consumed in excess amounts.

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 11, 2010 - 13:23 #

      @ Hassan, I think that’s an insightful analysis. There is no “ideal” diet! Just eating clean, natural foods in variety and moderation is an intelligent approach, then from there, make adjustments based on one’s goals.

  7. profile avatar
    E Sep 12, 2010 - 11:25 #

    The USDA has long moved away from the food pyramid and food groups. Both were ineffective at getting people to eat well because the information was too much and too general. The new push is 5-a-day. Check http://www.fruitsandveggiesmatter.gov/ and you can see how the government is working toward providing more specific information like the exact number of fruits and veggies to eat. Also less information because information overload was frustrating the public.

  8. profile avatar
    Tim Sep 12, 2010 - 11:31 #

    I have an aversion to people who say “carbs” because it seems that they believe that carbohydrate is the enemy in your nutritional balance. A great pyramid would not include any of the pitfalls of the modern diet, the re-categorization is fine but why even have a “simple carbohydrate” section.. just do without it.. considering those things are not actually “food” Saying starchy is another anti-carbohydrate nomenclature because while traditional starches are vastly more calorie dense than your typical carbohydrate.. associated the word starch with things like cereals and whole foods made from them is necessary for the public’s own good and typically misinformed ear

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 12, 2010 - 11:44 #

      @ Tim – Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I prefer the Harvard Healthy Eating Pyramid as a guide for the general public. This article is specifically for those people who want to get to the next level and achieve impressive body composition. It’s how I approach my food intake, but I also know a lot more than the average person about nutrition. It was my fault for not making this clear, but I don’t think the 5 (new) food groups is a smart approach for the general public. I need to take another look over article and make this clear. I’m guessing you haven’t read all my other nutrition articles, so this article may have sounded more extreme. Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

    2. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 12, 2010 - 11:49 #

      @ Tim – I made a subtle change to the intro, which I think provides better context for the article. Again, thanks for the comments. Changes are underlined:

      While I’ve pointed out the benefits of the Harvard Healthy Eating Pyramid, which I think is a solid framework for the general public and some of the perils of the USDA food guide pyramid, I wanted to take things a step further for you more advanced fitness devotees by introducing you to a conceptual framework I personally use and many natural bodybuilders, fitness models, and some sports nutritionists use as well, but it’s not mainstream at all.

    3. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Sep 12, 2010 - 11:50 #

      @ Tim – I made a subtle change to the intro, which I think provides better context for the article. Again, thanks for the comments. Changes are in italics:

      While I’ve pointed out the benefits of the Harvard Healthy Eating Pyramid, which I think is a solid framework for the general public and some of the perils of the USDA food guide pyramid, I wanted to take things a step further for you more advanced fitness devotees by introducing you to a conceptual framework I personally use and many natural bodybuilders, fitness models, and some sports nutritionists use as well, but it’s not mainstream at all.

  9. profile avatar
    Mary Sep 14, 2010 - 01:16 #

    After reading your article, it is understandable why bodybuilders and fitness models would be using the (new) five food group framework. It is an excellent way to eat if you want more definition. Great information.

  10. profile avatar
    Gren Oct 01, 2010 - 03:27 #

    Hi Marc

    Was googling around for sites that can help me achieve a lean physique and I’m glad I stumbled upon yours. I have a broad chest, probably too broad. I don’t suppose there is any exercise that can “de-broad” them!

    Also, on the topic of diet, what’s your take on whey supplements?

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Oct 01, 2010 - 14:53 #

      @Gren – Thanks for the compliments on the website! Regarding having a broad chest, typically if you lower your body fat percentage (I don’t know what it is right now), your chest will appear less broad. Getting lean is all about losing fat without losing muscle. Then, if you are still not happy, when you train chest, do higher reps with less weight, or simply forgo chest exercises all together. I haven’t lifted my arms in almost a year because they are simply as big and strong as I want them, and they get a lot of work with back/chest compound exercises.

      Regarding whey supplements (I’ll be writing a post about this eventually), they are simply a supplement. They are just dietary protein, but there’s no thermic effect (calories are not burned off during digestion, like when you eat chicken). Natural bodybuilders sometimes call protein shakes “lazy”, but whey protein can be very convenient for after a workout. Again, why protein is not magic, just an alternative form of protein that’s sometimes more convenient than eating meat, or dairy. Most of the reputable protein supplements on the market are fine. Hope that’s helpful!

  11. profile avatar
    Gren Oct 03, 2010 - 02:19 #

    Now this is why I love this site even more – you actually get replies back!
    I got one more question : i’ve read enough about why fruit juices are bad and it’s better to have the fruit instead. Part of the reason is that fruit juices contain preservatives and added sugar. But what about those juices that contain neither – Tropicana does have one such product on their list – 100% juice – no added sugar, colour or preservatives. Would that be a Yes then or still better to have the fruit?
    Btw, I usually have an 8oz glass every day (the 100% variety…not the sugar one)

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Oct 03, 2010 - 19:39 #

      Hi Gren, I was thinking about this fruit juice vs. fruits debate recently, because I drink 8 ounces of orange juice every morning. If you are trying to maintain your existing fitness, having a fruit juice here or there I don’t think is that big of a deal. In general though, there is no question eating whole fruit is superior to juices. Aside from the added sugar and preservatives, many fruit juices have no fiber. An apple for example has 4-5 grams of fiber, which helps fill you up. Also, an orange is only about 60 calories, with about 15 grams of sugar and 4 grams of fiber vs. 8 ounces of orange juice at 120 calories, no fiber, and about 24 grams of sugar. I wouldn’t kill yourself over these relatively trivial decisions compared to the big picture, but I think it’s smart you are trying to optimize your health. Hope this is helpful!

  12. profile avatar
    Toni Jul 02, 2011 - 07:58 #

    I’m surprised about the low-fat dairy particularly cheese as a protein source because I was always told that cheese is bad and causes your bad cholesterol to skyrocket. The last few years I’ve shied away from all cheese except cottage cheese and my doctor said my cholesterol was too low. So I started adding some back in like swiss cheese (in moderation) and my cholesterol is now at a healthier level. I really like the newest myplate.gov too that Mrs. Obama implemented recently. It’s much easier to follow than the pyramid from 1992.

  13. profile avatar
    Tatianna Oct 17, 2011 - 03:28 #

    This makes perfects sense to me. I never really cared about what USDA says. This is why so many people in this country is overweight, because they usually believe what USDA says. This post makes it very easy to understand how food groups are divided.

  14. profile avatar
    Ari Jan 27, 2012 - 14:54 #

    Hi Marc,

    I just learned about your website through a friend and I am amazed and thankful for all your info. Just one question: I unfortunetly have high cholesterol levels thanks to my genes and I am now stuck on what I should or shouldn’t eat? I was given a guide called the Mediterranean diet, do you have any info or insight on this diet?

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Jan 27, 2012 - 16:53 #

      @Ari – Thanks for checking out my site. I appreciate it! Sorry to hear about the cholesterol issue. I have a friend who has high cholesterol and she’s had it since she was a little kid. She takes medication to help keep it lower. I am familiar with the Mediterranean diet, which is a relatively high fat diet, 30-40% of calories typically come from healthy dietary fat like olive oil, nuts and seeds. I think the conversation of what best to eat to help lower your cholesterol is best done with your doctor, or a registered dietitian. I would love to help more but it’s outside my scope, which is mostly focused on fat loss.

    2. profile avatar
      Marc Perry Jan 28, 2012 - 12:41 #

      @Ari – I wanted to follow up with you about the Cholesterol question. A diet called the Portfolio Diet by Dr. David Jenkins was able to lower bad cholesterol as much as statins. The idea is that a portfolio of foods that provide a hefty amount of soluble fiber and plant sterols can do the trick. Definitely look into the Portfolio Diet.

  15. profile avatar
    Anika Feb 17, 2012 - 17:37 #

    wow this has been really helpful for me actually… i just got into the whole eating healthy thing and was confused over the types of carbs. i would really appreciate if you could write something on what combinations of macros and intervals are ideal for weight loss and gaining muscle. For example I read your article on pre workout meals and post work out meals. I’d really appreciate if you came up with more details on for eg perhaps higher protein + low fat, protein : carb ratios, basically ideal combos!

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Feb 19, 2012 - 21:49 #

      @Anika – Thanks for the question. I do plan on tackling ideal macronutrient ratios in the future, but I’ll give you the short scoop:

      I generally believe a relatively higher protein diet is good whether you want to lose weight, or build muscle. By high protein, I mean relative to customary dietary guidelines of 10-15% of total calories. I think the 30-35% range can work well for active individuals who also do some strength training. For couch potatoes, 10-15% can work well!

      The tricky part is carbs/fat breakdown. There are high fat and low fat phenotypes, where some people lose more fat on lower fat diets, and some lose more fat on higher fat diets (which implies higher carb vs. lower carb). Some diets like the Paleo diet call for as much as 65% of calories from fat, where a bodybuilding diet is around 20% from fat. Me personally, my sweet spot is around 30-35% protein, 40-45% carbs, and 25% fat. Again, I think you should play with it to see what creates a feeling of satiety for you and helps you get the best results. At some point, I imagine we will be able to genetically test what types of foods/macronutrient ratios are ideal for a given person, but this type or testing is still being refined.

      Between gaining muscle and losing fat, it’s less tweaking the macronutrient ratios and more eating less, or more calories. With that said, I generally up my carb intake a bit in addition to total calorie intake when gaining muscle.

  16. profile avatar
    Kornkarn Mar 03, 2012 - 01:16 #

    It is very clear Marc. Good general grouping for current time. My hat off for you.

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Mar 10, 2012 - 17:10 #

      Happy you enjoyed the article! I think conceptually it’s a powerful way to think about food as long as you don’t lose sight of the nutrient density and breath of the food you are eating.

  17. profile avatar
    Erica Mar 12, 2012 - 15:04 #

    Marc –

    I enjoyed your site and I think the point your trying to make is very clear. You broke it down in easy terms which helps to understanding it better. With all the information out there about eating right, you did a nice job explaining it.

    Keep it up!

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Mar 12, 2012 - 20:40 #

      @Erica – Thanks for the comment. Much appreciated!

  18. profile avatar
    jennifer Apr 13, 2012 - 01:20 #

    Hi marc..
    i have been exercizing for quite sometimes but im not losing weight…
    i once loss 25kgs thru diet n exercises but then i put on back 10 kgs. Im desperate abt this. How can i adjust my food intake to make this happen a bit fast? ?

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Apr 15, 2012 - 23:16 #

      @jennifer – Track your nutrition intake by using a food journal is probably the best way to make your eating habits conscious so you can change them. If you are unable to change your eating habits for the long haul, the weight will keep coming back.

  19. profile avatar
    Oscar Apr 23, 2012 - 15:51 #

    Hi Marc,
    If I follow your sample meal and I eat similar during the other days, am I getting enough protein to build muscle or should I get a protein shake after workout or HIIT?
    Thank you.

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Apr 29, 2012 - 12:10 #

      @Oscar – The general rule regarding protein intake and muscle building is shoot for 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight. I don’t love protein supplement, but post-workout and during a muscle building program, they can make a lot of sense.

  20. profile avatar
    Jayesh May 04, 2012 - 23:14 #

    If I eat any food but under calorie count will it help in weight loss ie if I eat fatty food but not exceeding calorie intake of a day will I be adding up weight

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT May 07, 2012 - 13:57 #

      Hey Jayesh, according to the Energy Balance Theory of weight loss, if you eat less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. The macronutrient breakdowns of those calories (protein, carbs, and fat) are less important. So yes, you can eat a higher percentage of dietary fat while keeping your total calorie intake lower and still lose weight. With that said, the pace of fat loss may be different on isocaloric diets (diets that have the same number of calories) that have different macronutrient breakdowns. Ultimately, you should find a breakdown of macronutrients that keeps you feeling full yet does not provide many calories and use that strategy.

  21. profile avatar
    Paul G Jul 26, 2012 - 12:37 #

    Hi Marc, first let me say thanks for your site! I have book marked it and find very informative, refreshing and honest!

    I would like to refer to further research on the role of insulin in body fatness and dig a little deeper.
    A good source is Stephan Guyenet’s blog and in particular his article titled:

    The Carbohydrate Hypothesis of Obesity: a Critical Examination

    You can find it here: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html

    Keep up the good work!!

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Jul 27, 2012 - 08:15 #

      @Paul G – Thanks for the kind words regarding the site! I am aware of Stephan Guyenet’s blog having read many articles. Thanks for mentioning. We have an article planned that will attempt to tackle the energy balance theory vs. carbohydrate hypothesis debate, so we’ll see how that goes! We will be drawing much of the information from Stephan’s articles, and also Petro Dobromylskyj at hyperlipid.

  22. profile avatar
    Priscilla L. Martin Aug 21, 2012 - 19:24 #

    Nice cupcake article. The article led me to this older article because I am interested in the food groups. I have been trying to understand what insulin spike means. I think I understand from your article that sugar level can fall with such as intense short term workout, which might lead to rapid heart rate, which requires proper nutrition and rest. Is that correct?

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Aug 23, 2012 - 10:02 #

      @Priscilla – I would recommend checking out my article on carbohydrates. Insulin is a storage hormone that sucks excess glucose/sugar out of your blood stream. When you eat a lot of sugar, or processed carbs, your insulin levels can spike, which may make you hungrier faster. Over time, frequent insulin spikes from over-consumption of sugar can lead to diabetes.

  23. profile avatar
    uncadonego Sep 29, 2012 - 07:19 #

    Hi Marc – The Harvard Pyramid says to only eat 2-3 servings of fruit per day. I estimate that I am eating 5 or 6 a day. Umm, sometimes more. It has become my replacement for all other snacks like pies, tarts, chips, and chocolate bars. I’ve lost over 30 lbs. in less than 9 weeks so far, but is there a time coming when eating all this fruit will get in my way, vis-a-vis getting lean?

    1. profile avatar
      Marc Perry, CSCS, CPT Sep 29, 2012 - 18:59 #

      @uncadonego – At the end of the day, it’s about calories in and calories out. If you are eating less calories than you are burning, you should continue losing fat. There is no doubt fruit is better than chocolate bars. I usually eat around 2-3 servings per day, so basically with my breakfast and in between one of my meals. Works for me, but ultimately you have to find what works for you.

Comments are closed 30 days from the publication date.