Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Do potatoes count as a vegetable (for nutritional purposes)?

Do potatoes count as a vegetable for nutritional purposes?

  • Total voters
    47
Leafster said:
I think potatoes are often discounted when it comes to nutritional value.



Potato Nutrition

They can be good for you as part of a balanced diet.

Oh, I don't think Bangers and Mash would constitute a balanced healthy meal (on its own) :D
Click to expand...

well done for posting the exactly same link as mua, which I did earlier in the thread ;)
 
Blagsta said:
People who draw a distinction between vegetables and carbs make me laugh though.
Click to expand...

Vegetables and carbohydrates are not comparable classes of object. Carbohydrates are a constituent of all vegetables but it is only the root vegetables that have a high carboydrate content. The green vegetables have a lower carbohydrate content.
 
kabbes said:
Potatoes also have tonnes of vitamin C. Because you eat a lot of them at once, you're likely to get more vitamin C from potatoes than anywhere else.
Click to expand...

They also contain Vit A, E, iron and potassium - the vast majority of these nutrients are in the skin though, or just below. A peeled potato is considerably less nutritional than an unpeeled one. I think this is the reason that if you're going to use a simplified guide to a balanced diet they are often put in the carb group rather than veg. Also it stops people thinking that eating loads of chips is good for you.
 
kabbes said:
Yeah, this is rather the point. Talking about it being "classed" as a vegetable somehow implies that so long as you put the right label on it, you don't have to worry about the whole issue any more. The fact is that we need a balanced diet that includes a number of different things that will come from various elements of the "vegetable" class. Calling potatoes a vegetable won't mean that they suddenly have the things that green leafy veg has, for example.
Click to expand...

THIS!
 
...and equally green leaves don't contain some of the nutrients that potatoes do. all vegetables have varyign amounts of different nutrients, so you just have to eat a mix of them. it would be just as bad for you to eat nothing but spinach
 
rutabowa said:
...and equally green leaves don't contain some of the nutrients that potatoes do. all vegetables have varyign amounts of different nutrients, so you just have to eat a mix of them. it would be just as bad for you to eat nothing but spinach
Click to expand...

Someone should start a campaign :)
 
rutabowa said:
...and equally green leaves don't contain some of the nutrients that potatoes do. all vegetables have varyign amounts of different nutrients, so you just have to eat a mix of them. it would be just as bad for you to eat nothing but spinach
Click to expand...

Which is why I would have potatoes AND a green veg. Bloody hell, is it really that confusing?! :D
 
They don't count as part of your 5 a day, but I think that is just to encourage variety. Most people eat enough potatoes already, I guess.
 
This is alarming. I have a tesco finest bangers and mash ting for me dinner later, does the cider I'm drinking now mean I'll be nutritionally balanced or do I need to eat something green too?
 
Yes, it may all be scientifically bollox but the fact is that most (wild estimation) people in this country don't pay much attention to this stuff.
We also love potatoes here.
How can it be a bad thing to tell people to eat roughly 5 a day of certain fruits and veg but potatoes don't count?
People often eat potatoes anyway so they are not loosing out on them with the '5 a day' stuff.

If people are eating slightly better then how is bad?
 
if i were to eat a portion of carrots, a portion of cabbage, a portion of salad and an apple, would a portion of potatoes be enough to take me up to my five portions of fruit and veg a day, or would i need to supplement my daily intake with something else?
 
strung out said:
if i were to eat a portion of carrots, a portion of cabbage, a portion of salad and an apple, would a portion of potatoes be enough to take me up to my five portions of fruit and veg a day, or would i need to supplement my daily intake with something else?
Click to expand...

You would be fine as their only guidelines *said in pirate voice* ;)
 
They're root vegetables and they do count towards the magical 'five a day' that will ensure immunity from AIDS and cancerz and all that jazz.

Not cooking the shit out of them probably helps with the nutritional biz, as does leaving the skins on (protein and other vitamins are mainly found there, iirc?).

You can pretty much survive on 'taters though can't you? At a pinch? They have vitamin C in them, so no scurvey etc...
 
I know a kid who survives solely on doritoes and yoghurt but it doesnt make it good for you to eat too much of certain things.

They over all do count towards a nutritional diet but the '5 a day thing' is a man made concept that chose to leave them out so people didn't misinterpret what they were getting at.
 
Forgetting the delicious taste of shnacks like Doritoes, living on just potatoes is probably better for you health wise... especially if they're cold...

"A small but significant portion of this starch is resistant to digestion by enzymes in the stomach and small intestine, and so reaches the large intestine essentially intact. This resistant starch is considered to have similar physiological effects and health benefits as fiber: It provides bulk, offers protection against colon cancer, improves glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity, lowers plasma cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations, increases satiety, and possibly even reduces fat storage.[54][55][56] The amount of resistant starch in potatoes depends much on preparation methods. Cooking and then cooling potatoes significantly increased resistant starch." (Wiki)

Engels compared them with iron for their "historically revolutionary role" apparently. I'm sure he was well versed in his chip supper :cool:
 
Riklet said:
Forgetting the delicious taste of shnacks like Doritoes, living on just potatoes is probably better for you health wise... especially if they're cold...

"A small but significant portion of this starch is resistant to digestion by enzymes in the stomach and small intestine, and so reaches the large intestine essentially intact. This resistant starch is considered to have similar physiological effects and health benefits as fiber: It provides bulk, offers protection against colon cancer, improves glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity, lowers plasma cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations, increases satiety, and possibly even reduces fat storage.[54][55][56] The amount of resistant starch in potatoes depends much on preparation methods. Cooking and then cooling potatoes significantly increased resistant starch." (Wiki)

Engels compared them with iron for their "historically revolutionary role" apparently. I'm sure he was well versed in his chip supper :cool:
Click to expand...

Brilliant work, you also quoted exactly the same thing I quoted earlier in the thread :D

must be a wind up ;)
 
I think this is the most successful thread I've started on urban ... :oops:

Anyway, no-one has managed to change my view that sausage + potato does not equal nutritionally balanced meal :cool:
 
it's not nutritionally balanced, but then again neither would sausage and carrot be.

potato can be one of your 5 a day depending on how it's prepared. basically.
 
girasol said:
Brilliant work, you also quoted exactly the same thing I quoted earlier in the thread :D

must be a wind up ;)
Click to expand...

Not had my five big 'taters today, sorry, brain's not working....

Should read threads more :( Nice having the wiki quote WMD argument winner though.. haha.
 
kittyP said:
If people are eating slightly better then how is bad?
Click to expand...

Because it means that you (or they) have taken responsibility for any future ill health off the government and their fifty-odd years of fucked-up food policy.

That's the bottom line of "Five a day" - Its a political fudge, based on a gross underestimate and oversimplification of what actually might be healthy.
 
pogofish said:
Because it means that you (or they) have taken responsibility for any future ill health off the government and their fifty-odd years of fucked-up food policy.

That's the bottom line of "Five a day" - Its a political fudge, based on a gross underestimate and oversimplification of what actually might be healthy.
Click to expand...

Has anyone done this thread before?
 
temper_tantrum said:
Has anyone done this thread before?
Click to expand...

Quite a few times now! :mad:

One thing though - Since the last time we did this (Christmas?) I've heard that the govt may be having a rethink and are going to up it to "Eight a day" but I don't know if they are going to advise grouping of fruit and veg and still no concrete advice on portions, so it will probably still be worse than useless. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Dog nutrition query (probably one for the experts)
Replies
3
Views
268
not-bono-ever
not-bono-ever
Elpenor
Do you own a jug?
2 3 4 5
Replies
126
Views
3K
pug
pug
High Voltage
There is no such thing as a five minute job
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
3K
newme
newme
gentlegreen
Change in law banning pre-packed fruit and vegetables at supermarkets - WTAF
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
199
Views
26K
polly
polly
S
Asbestos in ceiling?
Replies
9
Views
186
gentlegreen
gentlegreen
Back
Top Bottom