Member-only story

Why Superfoods Are Superfluous — at Best

Why don’t we get it?

Dr. David L. Katz and Mark Bittman
Heated
4 min readMay 6, 2019

--

Photo: Dünzl\ullstein bild via Getty Images

There’s no such thing as a superfood.

Sorry. That’s a stone-cold opener, right up there with a denunciation of the Easter bunny. But they’re roughly equivalent: Mythical.

There are many foods with terrific nutritional profiles: rich in valuable nutrients, free from nutritional liabilities, and either low in calories or notably satiating. Even a short list would overwhelm superfood claimants: spinach, hundreds of foods among beans and lentils; broccoli and most brassicas; chard, kale, collards and most dark greens; most berries, not just blueberries; almonds, walnuts, and most nuts; oranges, cherries, arugula, cabbage, and so on. Consider all fruits and vegetables, legumes and whole grains: It’s pretty much that simple.

Being “super” becomes super tough when you’ve got so much company. Accordingly, superfoods are pitched to us under a mystique of exoticism. The super nutrition of grocery cart mainstays is never mentioned because that would dilute the mystique. A line from The Incredibles comes to mind: No one’s special when everybody is.

Superfood claimants generally have two key characteristics: They are, for the most part, genuinely nutritious foods; and, they come from far away so that, ideally, you’ve not heard of them before: acai, or…

--

--

Heated
Heated

Published in Heated

Food from every angle: A publication from Medium x Mark Bittman

Dr. David L. Katz and Mark Bittman
Dr. David L. Katz and Mark Bittman

Written by Dr. David L. Katz and Mark Bittman

Dr. Katz is the director of The Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center and Mark Bittman has written about food and cooking for nearly 40 years.

Responses (29)