# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As a nutritionist, my job isn't just to help you eat better, it's also to help you become better informed about the foods you eat. One change my clients often assume they need to make, is to switch to organic fruit and vegetables. It's often said with a hint of guilt during our first meeting "I know, we need to start eating more organic produce". It seems obvious to be choosing healthier, better and environmentally friendly produce. Doesn't it?

As we learn more about the ill effects of modern life on our health, organic food has moved up the priority list of many families. Well, I have some news that may surprise you. I don't buy organic fruit and vegetables*. Are you surprised? The truth is, organic doesn't mean healthier.

*Let me be clear, I don't avoid organic produce. Sometimes they're a delicious offering (especially at the local market). I just don't prioritize them from a nutrition perspective.

What is organic?

First lets take a quick look at what organic really means. Each country has their own guidelines and certification process about organic farming methods and the criteria varies. In Australia, the word organic is not regulated, meaning anyone can use it on their labels. We have only had guidelines (called a standard) since 2009 ( here). The standard isn't mandated but helps the ACCC ensure that claims made about organic foods are not false or misleading.

Organic-certified produce simply means the food was grown, harvested, stored and transported without the use of synthetic chemicals, irradiation or fumigants. So, organic fruit and vegetables can still be sprayed with pesticides and herbicides, they just need to be naturally occurring and not man-made.

The dirty dozen and cleanfifteen

If you've ever searched online for information about organic produce, you're bound to have come across the dirty dozen and clean/safe fifteen. A selection of conventionally grown fruit and vegetable samples are tested each year for pesticide residue, the twelves with the highest pesticide load make the dirty dozen list and the ones with the least make the clean fifteen. The idea is you buy only organic varieties of the dirty dozen and conventional is OK for the clean fifteen.

I have a few issues with these recommendations:

1. The recommendations are based on a small sample of produce, grown in the USA. It's unlikely to be representative of the conventional fruit and vegetables we have access to and that you are eating here in Australia.

2. Australian produce (grown and imported) is regularly and closely monitored for pesticide residue by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. They find the maximum safe limits of chemicals, reduce it by a lot (as a safety buffer) and sets these as maximum use regulations for our food supply. Put simply, you'd need to eat more of the dirty dozen than humanly possible to be effected by the residue.

3. All farmers use pest control (even organic) and they all use it safely. We are so lucky to have one of the most secure and safe food supplies in the world.

4. The benefits of eating as much fruit and vegetables as you can every day, severely out weighs any risk from chemicals. Reducing the amount you're buying in order to afford organic or avoiding anything on the dirty dozen list is reducing your intake and taking away those benefits.

5. It's just plain bad science and doesn't hold any scientific credibility (more on that here).

So please, the next time you see a clean 15 or dirty dozen list, just scroll past.

Why I don't buy organic fruit and vegetables:

1. Organic produce is not nutritionally superior

Organic food gets an undeserved health halo. Most people believe that organic food has higher nutrient content but this simply isn't true. Reviews of all the available studies consistently show that there is no evidence that organic foods are more nutritious than conventional foods (here, here and here).

Fans of organic foods will often show small studies that have found a difference in nutrients between organic and conventially frown fruit and vegetables. Even if this was the case (remember the studies above) the differences were very, very small, for a very small amount of nutrients. So over your lifetime of consuming organic fruit and vegetables, compared to the same amount of conventional fruit and vegetables, isn't actually going to leave you any better off.

When looking at packaged foods, the organic label only applies to the fact that the ingredients used have been grown organically. When faced with two similar foods in a packet or jar, many people assume the organic version is overall healthier, but this isn't always true. Using organic ingredients doesn't mean it is lower in sugar, salt or other additives. For example, organic baked beans aren't any healthier than regular Heinz -salt-reduced. They may be made with organic navy beans but they could have even more added salt and sugar. On the other side, my favourite lazy garlic from a jar happens to be organic. Nothing to do with the fact that the garlic was grown organically, it just doesn't have any added sugar or sodium! Always read the ingredients list and nutrition information panel to see what's in your food and to compare brands.

2. Organic food is expensive

There's no doubt that it takes more effort to produce organic food so the const is substantially higher. There is a much smaller range available of organically grown produce at a time, potentially limiting the variety of foods eaten by the family if you were restricted to organic only. If you live in an area with lower house prices (and more blue collar workers) your access to the organic fruit and vegetables is going to be limited too, purely on demand.

I'd rather spend our food budget getting more fruit and vegetables to make sure that we meet (and exceed) our recommended serves which is associated with better health outcomes than spend that finite amount to buy organic which has not been associated with better health outcomes, which limit our intake.

3. Organic does not mean pesticide free

Australian Certified Organic products are free from synthetic pesticides, herbicides, hormones and antibiotics. But they do use chemical products that are naturally derived. Pesticides like pyrethrins, light oils, copper and sulphur. As more research is done on natural pesticides we are realizing that many are in fact dangerous at certain doses, as synthetic versions can be too (note that many natural pesticides tend to need higher dose to be effective). Just because it's naturally occurring in nature, doesn't mean it's safe.

Synthetic chemical use on conventional produce is constantly being monitored and even the items on the dirty dozen list come well within safe limits when compared with the chronic reference dose. If you see the dirty dozen (which is just incorrect) and how most organic purchasing is done as a result of fear, guilt and not informed choice. Everyone wants the best for the health of their families but no-one should be spend extra money (or feel bad about not being able to spend extra money) on organic apples for a health benefit that isn't actually going to make anyone any healthier!

4. Organic farming is not always the best for the environment

As a nutritionist, my approach to food is always going to be nutrition, it isn't my job to influence your ethical choices, so I will be brief here! All farming is going to negatively effect the environment. Organic farming produces less yield for the area of land it uses and doesn't make use of the benefits of genetically modified crops (which require less pesticides). There are certainly benefits to organic farming methods, like hosting more bees and butterflies, crop rotations and mixed plantings. If you're passionate about the ethical considerations of our food supply, I encourage you to

Here's what you need to know before you decide to spend your hard earned dollars on organic produce:

In Australia, eating organically or conventionally grown foods (or a combination of both) is safe and can provide all the nutrients we need.

Eating a diet based solely on conventionally grown foods isn't at all harmful, and is a cheaper way of making sure you eat at least 5 serves of vegetables and 2 serves of fruit each day.

Organic food is more expensive and may limit the quantities of fruit and vegetables you eat

Like most things in nutrition, this issue isn't black and white. It is not any healthier to eat organic but choosing to isn't bad either.

I feel comfortable relying on the nutrition and safety of conventional produce to feed my family and you should too. Our priority needs to be at getting the maximum amount of fruit and vegetables in that we can.

Organic supporters often report they prefer the taste. There is no evidence to support this. It's probably due to the fact that most people who buy organic do so from local markets. The taste is coming from being locally grown, ripe and seasonal! Comparing organic apples from the local farmers market with supermarket apples grown interstate and left in cold storage for a little while, isn't a fair comparison!

If you prioritize some of the ethical or environmental aspects of organic farming - then go for it, but please be well informed from reputable industry sources, not just bloggers. As a nutritionist I hope it doesn't compromise the amount of variety of fruit and vegetables that you and your family enjoys. Don't let 'organic' have healthy associations in your mind on packaged foods. It always pays to check the nutrition information of anything that comes in a packet.

Eat ALL the fruit and vegetables that you can. Try new ones, source the tastiest you can afford. Because eating more fruit and vegetables WILL improve your health.

Sarah Moore is a mum, and university qualified Registered Nutritionist. She ha over a decade of experience working with families to improve their health and well-being. Sarah has a simplistic and practical approach to family nutrition and offer private consultations and group information sessions in Perth, Western Australia. You can find her on Facebook and Instagram for more healthy tips and tricks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why I don't buy organic | Sarah Moore Wellness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a nutritionist, my job isn't just to help you eat better, it's also to help you become better informed about the foods you eat. One change my clients often assume they need to make, is to switch to organic fruit and vegetables.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recently, Mommy-bloggers paid by the organic industry have been hitting the scientific and corporate communities quite hard, with fear campaigns and if you love your children guilt trips. Even Hollywood stars are reading from the Organic is what good mothers do script.

Ordinarily, eco-religious feel-good pulp from the privileged classes is better left ignored ¦ until mainstream media pick up on them and the marketing managers at large food and restaurant corporations begin to bow to FoodBabeArmy email campaigns.

When I read a rather weak, low-ball piece in Mamavation (Changing Lives One Mom at a Time) called The top 10 reasons to feed your family organic, I thought: This is nonsense (albeit, made to make people feel good about themselves). It challenged me to come up with some reasons not to feed your family organic and to make the point further I used the pro-organic campaigner s approach - like emotional blackmail, such as Are you a good mother?"

Here are the Top 20 Reasons Not to Feed your Family Organic:

1. Too expensive and poor quality
Why is organic food more expensive? Is it just because Whole Foods have spotted a vulnerable, rich market niche of aging Baby Boomers afraid of dying and willing to happily dispose of their income to rampant price gougers who help fund the scaremongering? Given the average lower yields from organic farming, the higher risk of crop failure tends to be priced into the market. Others would say organic has become a green designer label but this seems to contradict the second element, that organic is of a lower quality.Many pesticides are used to keep produce looking good and edible and preventing them from rotting on the branches. Food is emotional so for many, quality in appearance is important. Organic shoppers have other emotional stimuli which allow them to look beyond the inferior quality. I, myself, use no pesticides on the apples I grow at home and when I eat them, I core and slice them to get the wormy parts out. I accept that as part of my produce but I would not pay for such poor quality in a store.

2. Promotes child labor in Africa
This is an endemic issue in many African subsistence farming communities. See anILO report that breaks down child labour in Africa according to gender and type of farming. The logic is quite clear. Only 5.4% of European agricultural land use is organic, while the market for organic is growing much faster. African family farms are organic by default (due to the high cost of pesticides and fertilisers as well as pressure from EU import/export regulators to deny African agriculture the benefits of using modern technologies like GMOs).While the focus of child labour in Africa has largely been on cocoa production from West Africa, the inability of Europe to be able to feed itself (due to an absurd reliance on medieval agricultural technologies) has led to an increase of African organic agricultural exports. The organi-gurus seem content in denying this correlation when they choose organic, pretending they are not actually supporting those little hands that are manually pulling out the weeds and breaking off pest-ridden leaves rather than going to school. They argue to choose local, but you just can t grow enough locally to meet demand.

3. Pesticides approved for organic farming are toxic to bees
One very common misperception is that organic food contains no pesticides. Of course they do, otherwise organic farmers would grow food only to feed the insects and remediate the soil. In most countries, pesticides are permitted in organic farming if they come from a natural source (and thus not of a synthetic origin). In some cases, these natural substances can be synthetically manufactured although it depends from one country s standard to another s. In order to combat pest infestations, fungus and mould, organic pesticides need to be toxic (another point the organic industry lobby has not been very forthcoming on).

The eco-version of the naturalist fallacy assumes that anything natural is benign and acceptable, but many organic-approved pesticides are far worse for the environment that the well-tested synthetic substances. Pyrethrins, sulphates, nicotine ¦ are all meant to kill, and being of a natural source does not mean they are harmless to the environment.

I did a blog earlier this year where I looked at how two organic pesticides (Rotenone and Azadirachtin) were extremely toxic to bees and how the organic lobby was fighting to keep them on the market (see Reason 4).

More interesting perhaps is the level of toxicity of naturally occurring pesticides, toxins and carcinogens that evolution has brought about. Bruce Ames has highlighted the difference of the health risk from exposure to naturally occurring pesticides as opposed to the much more benign exposure we risk from synthetic pesticides. Have a look at Ames article and ask yourself what all of the fuss is about.

About 99.9 percent of the chemicals humans ingest are natural. The amounts of synthetic pesticide residues in plant food are insignificant compared to the amount of natural pesticides produced by plants themselves. Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99 percent are natural: they are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators.

I keep reminding myself that Ames was the darling of the environmental movement in the 1970s.

A cup of coffee is filled with chemicals. They ve identified a thousand chemicals in a cup of coffee. But we only found 22 that have been tested in animal cancer tests out of this thousand. And of those, 17 are carcinogens. There are 10 milligrams of known carcinogens in a cup of coffee and that s more carcinogens than you re likely to get from pesticide residues for a year!

But I like coffee! The point is that the risk from synthetic pesticides at the maximum residue exposure levels is practically meaningless. It is no surprise that caffeine is ten times more toxic than glyphosate a lot of other natural chemicals are far more toxic but the organi-gurus are too busy scaring us to make us get this point.

One little addendum to make today s anti-pesticide campaign seem even more ridiculous: Ames made this statement 21 years ago, so considering that synthetic pesticides were much more toxic then than they are today, we might need to radically revise Ames comparison downwards (perhaps to the equivalent of a sip of coffee today).

Plant biology is no different, no matter how the opportunists try to scare it up with the M word or calling them chemicals. We have a technology that can increase food supply, reduce hunger, fight diseases like Vitamin A Deficiency that kills half a million children a year, and neo-Luddites are going around shouting slogans, destroying test fields and spreading falsehoods in their witch-hunts. History will look back and scoff at this period (which I call the Age of Stupid).

The most ridiculous element of the organic lobby s big jump into the GMO debate is that GM technology is a tool for reducing both organic and conventional pesticide use. It should be welcomed as a scientific advance for organic farming. Instead they have created a fiction, to milk the anti-Monsanto crusade, that GMOs lead to more pesticide use, and that glyphosate causes all sorts of diseases. It does not. A shameful pack of Luddites with blood on their hands.

This of course is nowhere even on the scale when one considers the level of endocrine disruptors found naturally in coffee, soybeans and chick peas (and we are not even talking about hormones from birth control pills and HRTs flushed into the water systems). See a useful table that puts stupid into its place.

Conventional farmers have the option to use synthetic fertilisers which, when used precisely, are more efficient for direct nutrient management, emitting far fewer pollutants and reducing CO2 emissions. It is pure madness to reject this technology just because it is not natural, given the dire environmental consequences organic fertilisers are causing. And yet the organic lobby continues to tout the environmental benefits of their medieval farming practices.

1. Organic farming has led to serious E. coli outbreaks and fatalities
The over-emphasis on cow manure in organic farming has led to many serious human health crises, including most importantly, E. coli outbreaks due to fecal contamination from manure. In the US, E. coli affects thousands each year in everything from mild stomach discomfort to fatalities particularly among the vulnerable, elderly and disabled.Astudy comparing organic and conventionally farmed vegetables found E. coli traces on 10% of organic but only 2% of conventionally farmed vegetables. Indeed, bacteria are natural and organic consumers need to understand that natural is not always desirable.
The worst recent case of E. coli occurred in Germany in 2011. The public panic and regulatory mismanagement created headlines during an outbreak that affected almost4000 consumers, 800 with long-term illnesses, killing 53. Months later, after so many conventional farmers were falsely put under suspicion and had lost markets and international exports, the source of the outbreak was found to be an organic sprout farm (growing produce directly in fresh cow manure).

2. Organic food causes increased cancer susceptibility
If you want to prevent cancer, eat at least five servings of fruit and vegetables per day! We hear this often but what does it mean in an economy or region where a significant part of the population cannot afford to buy five fresh servings? Organic is a luxury brand for the wealthy or aspiring populations (why Hollywood celebrities have jumped onto the Bash conventional farming bandwagon).Organic has no health benefits (outside of psychological) see reason 7 but rather, by artificially interfering with the agricultural marketplace and campaigning to handcuff conventional farming , the organic lobby is putting price pressure on the availability of fresh fruit and vegetables. While this does not affect the arrogant, affluent FoodBabes of the world, it denies a significant part of the population from access to cancer-fighting micronutrients.Bruce Ames did astudy on this, finding that the lowest 20% income bracket in the US had the highest cancer rates. Excluding lifestyle issues like smoking, diet and the lack of access to fruit and vegetables was the highest contributing factor to cancers. Ames conclusion is to increase access to fruit and vegetables for the poorest population.

I just think all this business of organic food is nonsense basically. We should be eating more fruits and vegetables, so the main way to do that is to make them cheaper. Anything that makes fruits and vegetables more expensive may increase cancer.

Bottom line, if you choose organic because you think it is healthier and better for the environment, what the hell are you even doing eating meat??? The hypocrisy of the watermelon-type environmentalists is outrageous. If people want to eat and enjoy meat, that is perfectly fine. Just don t go about drawing lines where you are better than others because of your organic pretentiousness.

Reduction in agricultural yields creates more global food insecurity
This is a no-brainer and perhaps the strongest reason we should prevent the selfish endeavour of encouraging organic farming. With a growing global population, yields per hectare need to be going up, not down. We have had the good fortune of not having any significant crop failures in the last few years there has been little impact on global food reserves. But as more extreme weather conditions are expected in the coming decade, the idea that we can be complacent about food production levels is troubling.

Besides weather and disease outbreaks, there are also man-made stresses that play havoc with global food security. A decade ago, environmentalists had pushed for increased biofuels production and as agriculture recalibrated for the new energy opportunities, food stocks decreased dramatically, prices soared and many poor economies faced crises. I have argued that the Arab Spring phenomenon was due to the fall-out from the food price increases that had affected most middle and lower income countries at that time.

Rising demand for lower-yielding organic food production will irresponsibly add stress to the global food production levels. The organic lobby s reply is smug and cynical: there is no problem, we just need to reduce food waste ( ¦ and lower population levels). But here is an issue to ponder. Consider tomorrow what would happen if Coca-Cola bowed to activist pressure and committed to sourcing only organic, non-GMOs. It would be impossible to produce sufficient maize for this one global client and prices in poor countries would go through the roof. What a great victory that would be!

1. Organic accentuates social exclusion
Organic is just one piece of a nasty fabric I have referred to as theeconomic injustice of environmentalism. The Green Movement has influenced policies to help the rich, aristocratic class do well at the cost of the poor, working class.Whether it is subsidies for solar panels (paid in the form of higher rates on those who could not afford panels) or electric cars, the affluent do not think about the consequences of their actions on the poorer classes. As prices increase on food and choices go down, will the FoodBabe feel sorry for those without? As Vivienne Westwood said: poor people should eat less so they can afford organic food.

2. Exporting anti-technology ideologies on poor economies is immoral
Many of the angrier comments I have read on the Risk-Monger Facebook page have been narrow and locally based. My critics only buy locally, don t worry how their food demands affect global food security, they shun large global food companies, and expect that everyone in the world will do just fine making the same food decisions they make in their isolated economic wonderland. But putting organic, anti-GMO demands on poor, developing countries is immoral.I have lashed out regularly at Greenpeace for itsenvironmental colonialism and attacks on the capacity of developing countries to try to have access to modern food technologies. Their campaigns against Golden Rice exemplify the moral vacancy of that horrid organisation.

Food is a very personal, and very emotional issue for each individual. Concerns multiply when, as parents, we struggle with decisions that affect those precious to us. I totally get that, so I do not expect you to agree with all 20 of these reasons. But if you accept even 5 of the 20 reasons, then you should reconsider your position before you decide to share or retweet some feel-good argument from someone paid by the organic food industry.

You are perfectly free to choose to eat organic if that makes you feel good and you can afford it or live with the consequences and contradictions that is why we have religion. But if you want to influence others to do the same, then you have to address these 20 points, not with feelings, anecdotes and stories, but with facts. It would be more intellectually honest to realise flaws in arguments than to continue to push bad ideas that have enormous consequences for the sake of fundamentalist purity.

Note: This is an edited version of two articles that appeared on the Risk-Monger site in September 2015.
http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2015/09/10/the-top-20-reasons-not-to-feed-your-family-organic-part-1/ http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2015/09/10/the-top-20-reasons-not-to-feed-your-family-organic-part-2/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20 Reasons Not To Feed Your Family Organic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mommy-bloggers paid by the organic industry have been generating fear campaigns of late with "if you love your children ... " guilt trips, pressing consumers to buy organic. In response, David Zaruk says this nutty movement has challenged him to come up with reasons not to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You may hear, " Organic food isn't any more nutritious - so don't waste your money." However, The Soil Association notes that an organic diet increases the consumption of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and essential fatty acids.

Health and safety should not be confused with nutrition. While most research can't prove, beyond a doubt that organic food is more nutritious, it is much safer, which may translate to a healthier body, able to absorb healthy nutrients.

Non-organic food often contains harmful hormones and pesticides. Pesticides are poisonous - by nature, they're designed to kill. Pesticides can cause neurological problems, cancer, infertility, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, allergies and asthma, wheezing, rashes, and other skin problems, ADHD, birth defects and more. Basic logic would tell you not to eat poison, so why not go organic and avoid pesticides?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Get the Facts About Why Consumers Should Buy Organic Food

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You may hear, " Organic food isn't any more nutritious - so don't waste your money." However, The Soil Association notes that an organic diet increases the consumption of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and essential fatty acids. Health and safety should not be confused with nutrition.

# data[].attributes.body
AGHE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Australian Dietary Guidelines group foods together that share similar nutrients, this creates the Five Food Groups. For example milk, cheese and yogurt are all good sources of calcium, riboflavin, protein and B12.

Within each food group the Australian Dietary Guidelines identifies the serve size of different foods that have roughly the same amount of key nutrients and kilojoules but that also reflect the amount of food commonly eaten in Australia, for example one piece of whole fruit or one slice of bread.

The 'serve size' is a set amount stated in the Australian Dietary Guidelines and this doesn't change. However, your 'portion size' will depend on how hungry you are and what type of meal or snack you are eating. For example, your 'portion size' may be two slices of bread in a sandwich for lunch, but only ½ slice of bread with a meal when you aren't very hungry.

The serve size tables ( Adults, Children, Adolescents and Toddlers) in the Australian Dietary Guidelines is often not the same as your portion size. Portion size is the amount that you actually eat. For example, your 'portion sizes' at breakfast may be half a small tub of yoghurt on your ½ cup muesli. This would only be half a 'serve' of yoghurt, but two 'serves' of muesli. To see how big a serve is for different foods, take a look at the Five Food Groups via the links below under 'getting portion size right'.

Getting portion size right

It is important for weight control and essential for weight loss to think about your portion size. We tend to ignore our bodies signals of hunger and satiety (satisfaction) until we've eaten too much and are overfull.

Many people say they rarely feel hungry. Learn to recognise how it feels to be 'peckish', 'hungry', 'ravenous', or 'satisfied', 'full' and 'stuffed'. Perhaps imagine your stomach as a petrol tank with a gauge and aim for somewhere between quarter and half full. When you eat, think first about how much you really need to feel satisfied and how far away the next meal or snack is.

Take a look at the Five Food Groups and see how big a serve is for each of the Five Food Groups:

How much water is needed?

There is no single recommended amount of water, as a person's requirements at any one time will vary depending on climate, physical activity, and individual bodies. The following intakes can however be used as a general guide: about 4-5 cups of fluids a day for children up to 8 years, about 6-8 cups for adolescents, 8 cups for women (9 cups in pregnancy and lactation) and about 10 cups for men. These amounts include fluid from all sources including all hot and cold drinks, but water is the best.

How much unsaturated spreads and oils can I include in my diet?

A 'serve' of foods that provide unsaturated fat such as unsaturated margarine or oil, nuts and seeds is 10g (such as two teaspoons of margarine or oil). However, these foods are high in kilojoules so remember to always keep quantities small, especially if aiming to lose weight. Spread unsaturated margarine, nut pastes and avocado thinly. Use just 1 teaspoon (measured not poured) per person in cooking and think of avocado, seeds and nuts as sprinkles, garnishes or a snack in small quantities.

Follow the links below to find out how many serves you need to eat per day. To read the table, find your sex, then read across to find your age and keep reading across from left to right along each food group listed at the top of the table to find the number of serves you need from each food group.

Minimum recommended average daily number of serves from each of the five food groups

Some days people might eat more serves from one food group, and other days less. However, over the week, the average number of serves from each food group should match the minimum recommended in the Guidelines.

There are endless possibilities for how to combine these serves from the food groups in interesting and tasty ways. Click on the link below to see how you might spread them out over one day.

Beef salad sandwich - serve breakdown

Grain (Cereal) foods

Vegetables legumes/beans

Fruit

Milk yoghurt cheese and alternatives

Lean meats and poultry, fish, eggs, nuts and seeds legume/beans

Unsat spreads and oils

Meal Planning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Australian Dietary Guidelines group foods together that share similar nutrients, this creates the Five Food Groups. For example milk, cheese and yogurt are all good sources of calcium, riboflavin, protein and B12.