# 5 portions a day!



## Bigtallfatbloke (6 Oct 2007)

Fruit & Veg...generally I have to say they are not my fav foods. So my questions are:

1) One constitutes a portion...ie a single grape or a bag of apples?

2) Is there some easy way to get enough of the the stuff inside you without killing it's effect...I have to say I hate raw veg and fruit


----------



## Panter (6 Oct 2007)

I've been struggling with this for months............

1 portion = small bowl of grapes, 1 large apple, 2 plums, you get the idea.

A glass of juice counts too, and vegetables can be cooked, just don't overdo them.

Only way I found to do it is:

1) With Breakfast, large orange juice

2) Mid morning snack: piece of fruit (apple, orange whatever)

3) Lunch: Something with salad (reasonable portion)

4) Tea: Something with veg

5) Supper: another piece of fruit.

HTH 

Oh, there's plenty on google about it, I spent ages trying to achieve it 'cause it is quite a lot. Especially if, as me, you don't particularly like fruit.


----------



## Bigtallfatbloke (6 Oct 2007)

..damm you...I was hoping 5 portions meant 5 segments of an orange or something


----------



## wafflycat (6 Oct 2007)

A basic guide is from WeightWatchers introductory handbook:-

"One portion is equivalent to a piece of fruit,100g of vegetables, approximately 200g tin of fruit in its own juice or a small glass of fruit juice."

See also 

http://www.5aday.nhs.uk/WhatCounts/PortionSizes.aspx

Important to note that *starchy veg* do NOT count to your five a day - due to the starchy they count towards starchy carbohydrate requirements. So potatoes, parsnips, sweet potatoes, rice, bread, pasta.. don't count towards your five a day.


----------



## punkypossum (6 Oct 2007)

I always thought it was 80g, not 100, and I already struggled with that!  Also bear in mind that no matter how much juice/smoothies you drink, they only ever count as 1 portion - same applies to pulses, so 5 tins of beans are still only 1 portion...


----------



## bonj2 (6 Oct 2007)

wafflycat said:


> A basic guide is from WeightWatchers introductory handbook:-
> 
> "One portion is equivalent to a piece of fruit,100g of vegetables, approximately 200g tin of fruit in its own juice or a small glass of fruit juice."
> 
> ...



"still eating OVER the 5 portions of fruit and veg a day - managed to reduce Jez down to one, he still thinks potatoes count, the peanut!"


----------



## bonj2 (6 Oct 2007)

apparently according to tesco's it's "a handful".


----------



## alecstilleyedye (7 Oct 2007)

12 months commuting 10 miles a day. weight lost: 11kg (not allowing for fat turned to muscle). cholesterol reduced by 30%. portions per _day_? portions per _week_ would be around 5.

if the government thinks it can beat obesity with this arbitrary 5 a day rubbish then they can think again. i think the current campaign to increase your heart rate for 30 mins a day is much nearer the mark.


----------



## ufkacbln (7 Oct 2007)

I thought you meant sex!

In which case you are doing better than I can!


----------



## wafflycat (7 Oct 2007)

the five-a-day fruit & veg is not just about obesity. It's about more than that it's about having enough fibre in your diet - if you don't you increase your risk of bowel cancer, you can get constipated, risk piles, increase your risk of heart disease as fibre reduces cholesterol levels. It's only in part to do with weight control.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (7 Oct 2007)

i don't mean to say that 5 a day is in any way bad, but it's down to genetics really. some people will live to 100 on a diet of cigarettes and takeaways, others will die of cancer despite living healthily in their 50s.

@waffles: your point on cholesterol: mine has reduced from 5.1 to 3.8 as a result of 30 mins fast cycling every week day, despite having what might be described an "unhealthy" diet. i really think the government would be better encouraging a more active lifestyle, rather than relying on 5 a day.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (9 Oct 2007)

ivancarlos said:


> 5 a day is easily achievable  ...if you are with the right person



why is it that grapes count if they're out of a bag, but not if out of a bottle?


----------



## fossyant (9 Oct 2007)

Erm, sorry to upset you lot, but active cyclists are recommended to do about 7 portions a day.... I do that easy - banana with breckie, two banana's & 2 apples to snack on, bottle of orange then whatever comes with my evening meal or lunch.... easy.. 7 a day (at least)....

Active lifestyle is by far the best - I've dropped 10kg's in 10 weeks from commuting 30-40 mins each way and cut out some of the crap. My cholesterol was way to high 8.1 then dropped to 6 before I started commuting, now just need to test again - should be well in normal ranges now. Having trouble keeping the weight on as I'm now at my ideal 79-80kg's (12.5 stone) - the weight I used to race at 10 years ago.....


----------



## wafflycat (9 Oct 2007)

alecstilleyedye said:


> @waffles: your point on cholesterol: mine has reduced from 5.1 to 3.8 as a result of 30 mins fast cycling every week day, despite having what might be described an "unhealthy" diet. i really think the government would be better encouraging a more active lifestyle, rather than relying on 5 a day.



You're missing part of the point. Eating five a day is about more than any one individual aspect - it's about the totality of eating healthily. If you aren't getting enough fruit & veg in your diet then you aren't getting enough fibre inside you. You are missing out on the benefits of the fibre moving stuff through your innards quickly. If you don't get enough fibre, you don't sh!t often enough & when you do, it's too firm, so you risk constipation, piles, and increase your risk of bowel cancer (and that's a particularly nasty one to get). It won't do you any harm to up your fibre intake and it will do you a lot of good. As regards your cholesterol level, you may well be akin to the lucky smoker who doesn't get lung cancer but then goes on to die of a different smoking-related disease.


----------



## monnet (9 Oct 2007)

Waffly and alecs.. I think the truth lies in what you're both saying. Exercise is essential but diet also plays an important part. I think it is wrong to say the govt. should encourage a healthy lifestyle over eating 5 a day. In reality the government is trying to promote both (whatever you think of the cack handed way they're doing it they are trying to promote cycling, in a way). 

The thing is that exercise (particularly cycling) does have fairly instant results but diet is what looks after you long term. If you do plenty of exercise but don't support it with a balanced diet then you're still putting your body at risk - in the short term the risk of injury, in the long term more terminal problems such as Wafflycat has noted. 

On the five a day thing, I find it easy - I love fruit and veg (and I'm definitely not veggie either) and eat it at any opportunity. Fossyant - I'd be careful with that banana intake. The body can generally only digest two bananas a day and too much banana can mean too much potassium (in fact 9 bananas in a 24 hour period can lead to severe potassium poisoning). It's best to get as wide a variety as possible - I like to go for a banana, an apple, an orange/satsuma and one other fruit a day (whatever's in season) snacks of carrots, peppers and then I usually have a bit of lettuce and tomato with lunch and whatever I have with my tea.


----------



## wafflycat (10 Oct 2007)

monnet said:


> The thing is that exercise (particularly cycling) does have fairly instant results but diet is what looks after you long term. If you do plenty of exercise but don't support it with a balanced diet then you're still putting your body at risk - in the short term the risk of injury, in the long term more terminal problems such as Wafflycat has noted.
> 
> On the five a day thing, I find it easy - I love fruit and veg (and I'm definitely not veggie either) and eat it at any opportunity. Fossyant - I'd be careful with that banana intake. The body can generally only digest two bananas a day and too much banana can mean too much potassium (in fact 9 bananas in a 24 hour period can lead to severe potassium poisoning). It's best to get as wide a variety as possible - I like to go for a banana, an apple, an orange/satsuma and one other fruit a day (whatever's in season) snacks of carrots, peppers and then I usually have a bit of lettuce and tomato with lunch and whatever I have with my tea.



Alas I've cycled for years and was still obese. Also loved fruit & veg too - never had a problem eating the stuff (apart from aubergine... blech ). For me, they key to not being obese is in the head, as from that follows what goes in the mouth. On the plus side, not being obese has made it a bit easier to cycle up any sort of hill, but that's about it as regards exercise being made easier. 

Example of what I ate yesterday:-

Breakfast: Porridge (oats, water, sweetener) topped with fruit (peach)
Lunch: rice, with lots of tomatoes, chilli, peppers, broccoli. Fruit to follow (bananananananana).
Dinner: Huge pile mixed green salad leaves, cucumber, tomatoes, chives, onion, peppers, with lean pork loin (all visible fat removed before cooking). Fruit to follow (apples).
Snacks: 4 x oatcakes
Milk in tea & coffee.

I don't have a problem eating fruit & veg


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

wafflycat said:


> You're missing part of the point. Eating five a day is about more than any one individual aspect - it's about the totality of eating healthily. If you aren't getting enough fruit & veg in your diet then you aren't getting enough fibre inside you. You are missing out on the benefits of the fibre moving stuff through your innards quickly. *If you don't get enough fibre, you don't sh!t often enough* & when you do, it's too firm, so you risk constipation, piles, and increase your risk of bowel cancer (and that's a particularly nasty one to get). It won't do you any harm to up your fibre intake and it will do you a lot of good. As regards your cholesterol level, you may well be akin to the lucky smoker who doesn't get lung cancer but then goes on to die of a different smoking-related disease.


i must have a genetic resisistance to a crap diet, because that is never a problem 

i admit that it's better to promote 5 a day as it will benefit everyone, rather than rely on joe public to make a sensible decision. however, rather than a series of vague aspirations (5 a day, elevated heart rate for 30 mins), encouraging people to _eat healthier_ and _exercise more_ as a combination would be much better.

and i should say that i do at least have an apple a day, so it's not all bad news on the diet front.


----------



## wafflycat (10 Oct 2007)

alecstilleyedye said:


> encouraging people to _eat healthier_ and _exercise more_ as a combination would be much better.



That's exactly what people are encouraged to do. Ask any doc, watch any 'diet' programme on the idiot box in the corner of the room. It's not just one message in isolation.


----------



## domtyler (10 Oct 2007)

monnet said:


> Fossyant - I'd be careful with that banana intake. The body can generally only digest two bananas a day and too much banana can mean too much potassium (in fact 9 bananas in a 24 hour period can lead to severe potassium poisoning). It's best to get as wide a variety as possible - I like to go for a banana, an apple, an orange/satsuma and one other fruit a day (whatever's in season) snacks of carrots, peppers and then I usually have a bit of lettuce and tomato with lunch and whatever I have with my tea.



From Health A to Z - Mineral Toxicity


> The normal level of potassium in the bloodstream is in the range of 3.5-5.0 mM, while levels of 6.3-8.0 mM (severe hyperkalemia) result in cardiac arrhythmias or even death due to cardiac arrest. Potassium is potentially quite toxic, however toxicity or death due to potassium poisoning is usually prevented because of the vomiting reflex. The consumption of food results in mild increases in the concentration of potassium in the bloodstream, but levels of potassium do not become toxic because of the uptake of potassium by various cells of the body, as well as by the action of the kidneys transferring the potassium ions from the blood to the urine. The body's regulatory mechanisms can easily be overwhelmed, however, when potassium chloride is injected intravenously, as high doses of injected potassium can easily result in death.



So it seems that one can eat as many 'nanas' as one likes.


----------



## monnet (10 Oct 2007)

Well assuming that you are 'normal' and vomit before pottassium content becomes a problem. It remains that they are still a problem to digest properly. Regardless, a number of doctors and trainee medics have told me that bananas are best consume in moderation. 

Waffly, I wasn't saying that 'fruit and veg plus cycling' stop you from being obese. I was saying that to be truly healthy you have to combine the two (along with,as you say, the mental strength to overcome obesity, if that is an issue). 

I'm one of those scrawny types that everyone hates - eats loads and still the same weight I was when I was 16. However, I feel awful after a few days of bad food/little exercise. Once I get good food and exercise into my sytem I feel great again. Even just taking one of these factors away (ie: good food no exercise or bad food lots of exercise) has a negative impact on the way I feel.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

wafflycat said:


> That's exactly what people are encouraged to do. Ask any doc, watch any 'diet' programme on the idiot box in the corner of the room. It's not just one message in isolation.



that programme with gillian mckeith is imho counter-productive. when shown that huge table of greenery "that's your new diet", most lardies are likely to come back with "f*ck that" and ignore the very idea of changing their diet. much as they would if you told them to cycle 20 miles a day from now on.

so here we are, most of us above average in terms of fitness and healthy eating arguing over points of detail whilst there is a whole mass of maccy ds eating, couch potatoing, exercise = not having a downstairs bog people who will probably cost the nhs a fortune in years to come. yep, and guess who'll be paying for it?

should 5 a day and 30 minutes exercise be made compulsory for the obese who aren't working?


----------



## wafflycat (10 Oct 2007)

domtyler said:


> So it seems that one can eat as many 'nanas' as one likes.



Not quite. If you have kidney problems you can well find you are told to limit intake of foods high in potassium - including bananananananas - as my nearest & dearest was told _(he is now okay )_


----------



## wafflycat (10 Oct 2007)

alecstilleyedye said:


> that programme with gillian mckeith is imho counter-productive. when shown that huge table of greenery "that's your new diet", most lardies are likely to come back with "f*ck that" and ignore the very idea of changing their diet. much as they would if you told them to cycle 20 miles a day from now on.
> 
> so here we are, most of us above average in terms of fitness and healthy eating arguing over points of detail whilst there is a whole mass of maccy ds eating, couch potatoing, exercise = not having a downstairs bog people who will probably cost the nhs a fortune in years to come. yep, and guess who'll be paying for it?
> 
> should 5 a day and 30 minutes exercise be made compulsory for the obese who aren't working?



There's more than 'doctor' GMcK (who I'd love to strangle - can't stand the woman) on the box. You do have a penchant for looking at this in isolation rather than as a holistic view. Exercise alone does not prevent obesity. 'Healthy' diet alone does not prevent obesity. 

As for lardies - being formerly obese I find your attitude to the overweight nasty and full of the usual prejudices about obesity. When I was obese I still used to cycle an average of 50 - 100 miles a week, week in, week out. No, I didn't sit on my arse all day stuffing my face with chocolate & crisps whilst watching Jeremy Kyle... yet I used to get all the usual offensive platitudes thrown my way.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

as an aside, david dimbleby was asked how he kept going all night during a general election without needing an extended loo visit, and he said that bananas kept things nice and slow for him.

this bizarre fact spawned banana time in a place i used to work, a bizarre practice of eating bananas, relating banana facts whilst listening to banana related music.


----------



## Arch (10 Oct 2007)

Have I ever explained my theory on how one Pain au Chocolat counts as three portions?

In terms of how much, I heard the other day that a portion is "as big as your fist" - which would make sense - bigger people with bigger fists need more food...

I'm still woefully short on my portions though, I know it. If someone could invent a fruit that tastes of chocolate, or cheese, I'd be well away...


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

wafflycat said:


> There's more than 'doctor' GMcK (who I'd love to strangle - can't stand the woman) on the box. You do have a penchant for looking at this in isolation rather than as a holistic view. Exercise alone does not prevent obesity. 'Healthy' diet alone does not prevent obesity.
> 
> As for lardies - being formerly obese I find your attitude to the overweight nasty and full of the usual *prejudices about obesity*. When I was obese I still used to cycle an average of 50 - 100 miles a week, week in, week out. No, I didn't sit on my arse all day stuffing my face with chocolate & crisps whilst watching Jeremy Kyle... yet I used to get all the usual offensive platitudes thrown my way.



i don't assume that anyone i meet that is obese is so because of bad diet and lazyness (mrs alecetc is overweight despite eating healthily and being active and quite fit), but there are people like that out there. i know that if i don't exercise (ie cycle regularly) i do put on the pounds.

this is coming back to my point about genetics; some of us are lucky enough to be able to eat what we like and exercise little and stay slim, others are unfortunate enough (like mrs alecetc) to do all the right things but still be overweight. most of us are somewhere in between. i'm lucky to be able to control my weight via exercise alone.

sorry if you thought i was referring to you waffles, i shouldn't have assumed that my assumption that as you are on here, then you are not sitting on your arse all day stuffing my face with chocolate & crisps whilst watching Jeremy Kyle, was obvious


----------



## Blonde (10 Oct 2007)

Arch said:


> Have I ever explained my theory on how one Pain au Chocolat counts as three portions? ... I'm still woefully short on my portions though, I know it. If someone could invent a fruit that tastes of chocolate, or cheese, I'd be well away...



Chocolate fondue? (or indeed cheese fondue) Dip any old fruit into it and enjoy! Oh and before anyone says it, by 'old fruit', I do not, I repeat, *do not* mean Patrick!


----------



## wafflycat (10 Oct 2007)

alecstilleyedye said:


> sorry if you thought i was referring to you waffles, i shouldn't have assumed that my assumption that as you are on here, then you are not sitting on your arse all day stuffing my face with chocolate & crisps whilst watching Jeremy Kyle, was obvious



I didn't think you were referring to me specifically, honest  But you did come out with the usual prejudices about obesity generally


----------



## Blonde (10 Oct 2007)

My Mum is overweight and it is her fault. It is in her power and is her responsibility to do something about it but she wont take responsibility for it - as far as I know she isn't doing anything about it. She eats anything that is put in front of her by my Father who cooks. If there is food left on the table she will eat it no matter how much she has had on her plate. I have witnessed her eat half of a meal my Dad prepared for six people - ie we ate half of what was there between five of us,and she ate the rest. Loved one suggested my Dad should stop cooking so much but IMO it is her responsibility to look after herself and I don't think he will ever stop cooking that huge amount of food unless she leaves some but she never does. My dad looks after her in every way basically, does all the housework DIY, gown vegetables on his allotment, cooks, sorts out the bills etc so she never has to take responsibility for anything - not even her own health. She does work - as a teacher in adult education and enjoys her job but even that will go if she gets to the stage where she cant go out the house (like her Mum did 20 odd years ago - I never went out with my Nana, she was always in the house. If we as kids went to the shop across the busy A road from their house, she would watch out for us for the door - we went on our own because she couldn't walk that far!)

It worries me because she is actually ill because of her weight (heart murmer, high PB and cholesterol and diabetes type 2, and sleep apnia - she has to wear a machine to keep her airways open in bed at night). I love her very much but don't half get irritated with her when I think of how I will end up having to look after her in old age, just as she is her Mother, who has had all the same problems and some more, due to weight for about 40 years, but has spent the last 20 years (literally) being waited on hand and foot by my parents, because she is so ill due to obesity. I don't want to be in the same situation, caring for my own Mum for 20 plus years. it really worries me. It seems to me that she is being selfish because we will both have to change jobs and move home to looks after her and it will effect our relationship and family in the same way that my parents have been effected by my Nan's problems.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

wafflycat said:


> I didn't think you were referring to me specifically, honest  But you did come out with the usual prejudices about obesity generally



i'm not prejudiced about obesity as, by definition, prejudice is a function of ignorance. i know perfectly well that obesity is not all down to chocolate and laziness and that people may have a genetic predisposition (my original point) to obesity, or it may be as a result of another medical condition etc. but that does not mean that there are not the type of people (disturbingly, many still at primary school) who should eat less and exercise more.

technically, this time last year my 30% bmi made me "obese", despite cycling 10 miles a day. that same 10 miles a day has, over a year, helped me lose that rather ridiculous tag and get my bmi down to 21%.

i would suggest that the rise in levels of obesity is due in greater part to the more sedentry, consumer lifestyle espoused by many than genetics etc, although i will concede that many people who do not regard themselves as "obese" (as i didn't), technically are. 

you and i both know what our bodies are capable of and what affects them, there are a lot of people out there who don't know and, worse still, don't care.


----------



## domtyler (10 Oct 2007)

> by definition, prejudice is a function of ignorance



I am not sure I agree with that. I would say that there are plenty of examples of people who are fully aware of the facts yet still succumb to the prejudice.


----------



## steviesch (10 Oct 2007)

taking the mick out of fat people is the least of their problems...and it is a problem of their own making in many cases...those that can waddle out of doors should be laughed off the street and made to feel thoroughly ashamed of themselves!


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Oct 2007)

domtyler said:


> I am not sure I agree with that. I would say that there are plenty of examples of people who are fully aware of the facts yet still succumb to the prejudice.



that would be a case of simply ignoring inconvenient facts that contradict a previously held view. 

*prejudice:* _a preconceived judgment made without adequate evidence_


----------



## fossyant (16 Oct 2007)

What's this a banana bashing thread....?????? I generally eat the nana's in the morning. They are a complex carb, and hence good for exercise as a fuel, but wasn't aware of the excess potassium issues.... although I'll still be eating 2-3 a day


----------



## gbb (4 Nov 2007)

I think some are reading too much into a simple piece of advice...
5 portions of fruit or veg....its not written in stone, just a guide. 

While youre eating those 5 or so portions (fruit in particular, cos you tend to snack on them), you (importantly) wont be eating crisps, chocolate or snacking on something equally bad for you...cos hopefully, you'll be satisfied by the good stuff. Its a double whammy.



FWIW, i love fruit and veg. Give me a Sunday dinner without the meat, i'd be just as happy. Luckily, i work in a fruit importers... i'm probably eating 6 satsumas a day at the mo...


----------



## bonj2 (4 Nov 2007)

domtyler said:


> I am not sure I agree with that. I would say that there are plenty of examples of people who are fully aware of the facts yet still succumb to the prejudice.



Ignorance doesn't mean you _don't know_ the facts. It just means you haven't taken them into account. That may be because you don't know them, or it may be because you have chosen to disregard them.


----------



## domtyler (4 Nov 2007)

alecstilleyedye said:


> that would be a case of simply ignoring inconvenient facts that contradict a previously held view.
> 
> *prejudice:* _a preconceived judgment made without adequate evidence_



Interesting facts, nevertheless I would still say that there are plenty of examples of people who are fully aware of the facts yet still succumb to the prejudice.


----------



## domtyler (4 Nov 2007)

bonj said:


> Ignorance doesn't mean you _don't know_ the facts. It just means you haven't taken them into account. That may be because you don't know them, or it may be because you have chosen to disregard them.



Well, there we go. Straight from the horses mouth!


----------



## PrettyboyTim (5 Nov 2007)

wafflycat said:


> the five-a-day fruit & veg is not just about obesity. It's about more than that it's about having enough fibre in your diet - if you don't you increase your risk of bowel cancer, you can get constipated, risk piles, increase your risk of heart disease as fibre reduces cholesterol levels. It's only in part to do with weight control.



In that case, why doesn't a bowl of Bran Flakes count as one portion?


----------



## Elmer Fudd (5 Nov 2007)

My acupuncturist, as part of my health prob, went on a weekend trip to Amsterdam and got langered on cocktails. She claims that it's OK though as they contain fruit so count towards your five-a-day quota


----------

