Nowadays"Super" seems to have a new affixation. People love to attach it to all sorts of concepts related to health and nutrition.
By "Superfood," we refer to a food that is superior to other foods typically for its nutrient contents. This might mean they contain a variety of nutrients, such as antioxidants, healthy fats, fibre and phytochemicals - chemicals in plants which are responsible for vivid colours and smells, which have been associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular and other diseases. Salmon, broccoli and blueberries are just some of the foods that have been given the 'superfood' label. But do superfoods really exist?
The term 'superfood' is a marketing term rather than one based on or recognised by science, Of course there are undoubtedly some foods that contain particular ingredients that are very beneficial for health. But we still need to eat a wide range of foods in order to get all the nutrients we need - it is not appropriate to rely on a small number of 'superfoods.
Most everyone would agree that eating right is not a matter of adding healthy foods to one's diet; rather, it is about building a healthy food base. However, when you give the public any quick fix suggestions, such as super foods, you run the risk that people think they can balance unhealthy foods with such super foods.
Common dietary advice is to ‘eat the rainbow’, which encourages eating a variety of foods, especially fruits and vegetables. Different colours of foods are generally linked to different profiles of nutrients, and by eating all of these, the greatest variety of health benefits can be obtained.
In conclusion there is no God in any food...but instead there is a little God in almost every food.