Of course kids should eat healthy, but a quick web search seem to disprove that higher calories snacks have a negative effect. Papers I found are https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0195666390900519 and https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S003193840200882X
School goes as far as preventing the kids to eat their snack if it’s not a fruit or a vegetable which I find excessive, as many healthy snacks exist today that still contain some (more) carbs (the two papers are even about candies…)
Are there some studies out there for what would be an optimal snack (both health and performance wise)?
I don’t even know how to parse this statement. Fruit has tons of carbs; so do may vegetables.
And people have such varied dietary needs, I find it shocking that a school would dictate what foods are permissible.
Curious where you’re located, generally.
A wholemeal cheese sammich would be much better. It fills you up and has fibre and protein.
Yes sorry, fructose is carbs; thinking more about slow carbs like rice crackers or other whole grain snacks
If it helps with your research, the scientific way of distinguishing between slow carbs and quick carbs is with the glycemic index: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_index
Thanks, I thought fructose was not much different than regular sugar/glucose, this proves it was my misconception
Yeah, I was actually wondering why that’s the case, or if it’s just a matter of only glucose being measured in the glycemic index.
But on the Wikipedia page for fructose, it says this:
So, I’m guessing, that’s what ‘slows’ it down and makes it healthier in that regard.
Fruit also have carbs, fiber, glucose and nutrients. I feel like you’re should start your search with understanding what is actually in fruit before you continue your crusade.