Nutrition is a true paradox within fitness, simple in some regards but also highly intricate in others. It’s often considered the more complex of the wellbeing pillars due to the large amount of conflicting information coupled with its individualistic variables. While there is certainly some ill-will in the misinformation that’s readily available the majority is just misplaced, misguided, or comes from the overzealous pursuit of finding the perfect solution. In truth, there is no one size fits all approach but there is good, simple framework that most people would do well to understand and implement.

The global obesity crisis shows that the understanding of nutrition in relation to weight management is largely misaligned. What we consume, and perhaps more importantly how much of it, is likely to hold the greatest amount of influence over our body weight. This can all be boiled down to the energy equation and calories. Calories are the energy currency our bodies use to operate. Each of us has an inbuilt system that manages these incoming calories essentially balancing the books. If there is a surplus after the body has taken its cut for maintenance, this will be stored, typically as adipose tissue or body fat. This system is ingenious as this stored energy can be called upon during famine, when the body is receiving too few calories, a deficit, to bring balance to the equation and allow vital bodily functions to continue until the input is increased. If this equation is balanced and input and output are matched, body weight will remain static. Body fat is an important component in our physiology however too much can cause a host of issues, chief among them diabetes, heart disease, cancers, and strokes, many of the biggest causes of early mortality.

If the energy equation is the answer that’s rooted in physics, a universal truth if you will, then why is this model often brand-new information to people who for so long have overcomplicated their weight management?

Part of the answer to that complex question lies in the ‘what’ we consume and is rooted in the other side of the coin, psychology. 

If humans were programmable robots, then this equation would be the end of the discussion. Simply program the individual to consume below or at maintenance and the issue would be resolved. Thankfully, we aren’t robots, and we can’t be programmed. What this means however is that a myriad of factors prevents this seemingly simple solution to a global health crisis from being effectively implemented. Overall, people aren’t purposely endangering their health and wellbeing by deliberately becoming obese and they aren’t ignorant to the fact that it is ultimately some sort of numbers game, however complexities arise when modern lifestyles and their ultra convenient nature are considered and coupled with high levels of stress and poor emotional support habits. Highly processed foods are increasingly more commonplace in modern diets, these have been shown to be less effective at controlling hunger and lead to less overall satiation. Furthermore, food is a common coping mechanism that people turn to when emotionally charged. These factors alone can easily lead to overconsumption.

Diets are commonplace in society and have been for many decades. Time and time again people have shown willingness to adhere to sometimes absurd restrictions and lifestyle changes perhaps only for a short amount of time but that’s often due to the extreme asking of the diet itself. There isn’t a widespread want to suffer from ill health and for the most part, individuals in this situation appear stuck in a repetitive pattern. When considering a framework for ‘healthy eating’ the key is to use principles rooted in the scientific findings. Calorie intake should be considered initially and then the quality of the energy source next with majority of an intake comprising of whole foods. A consideration of macro nutrients would help next as knowing what the food source comprises of can further nurture the understanding of its nutritional density vs its ‘calorie cost’. Beyond this point lies the increasing complexities of nutrition that are often considered too early in the framework and further lead to confusion and inaction. Meal timings, micronutrients and supplementation are all finer points that often don’t factor in until much later if ever. Bringing these to the table too soon can detract from what will truly shift the needle and can often contribute to a failure to launch.

It would be ideal if this was the one and only answer to the crisis’s many are facing in relation to weight management, but the truth is that any physical shift needs to be collaborated with the psychological aspects also. In an ideal world this framework would be implemented alongside both a robust improvement in education regarding nutrition and a deep dive into the emotional associations with food and a concerted effort to repair these rifts.



At its core, nutrition will always be a complex science mainly due to the many ways in which an individual can arrive at the same destination, but this science isn’t devoid of some universal truths that can be used to develop an effective framework. One that can serve to effectively shift the needle on weight management and ultimately improved health and wellbeing.