Read more »
How many times a day does a regular about the nutrition internets hear this term? One, two ... a dozen? In this community, it is often carbohydrates that are slapped with this tag. I find it ridiculous to label a class of molecules as "empty" with no mention of the context in which they are found and consumed. It is also rather warped that most of the residents of relatively wealthy countries view calories for the sake of the life sustaining energy -- so that the body doesn't have to cannibalize itself -- in a negative light. Does anyone really think paleolithic humans thought about whether their food came with an appropriate density of vitamins and minerals? Of course there would have been little opportunity for them to consume such foods ... those are processed/refined foods. I also cannot envision our ancestors passing up starchy plants to consume non-digestible fibers, but that's a topic for another day.