Dear readers, we at FIt is a Feminist Issue are constantly vigilant, keeping watch for encroaching messaging that suggests that we need to do some ridiculous cockamamie thing in order to maintain our health, fitness, sanity, and good humor as we run, jump. cycle, swim, climb, paddle, and dance our way through the life trajectory.
Here’s the latest insult that Samantha encountered recently. She put out an APBB (all-points-bloggers-bulletin) our our bloggers FB page, and I quickly responded. Take a deep breath, then take a quick look:
You may find yourself intuitively troubled, but not yet able to articulate exactly what is wrong with this picture. Again, don’t worry. Here goes…
On the one hand, the actual listed portions work for me personally (a 3-egg omelette is always more than I want in one sitting). Also, 2 slices of French toasts sounds fine. But I’m not now, nor have I ever been a hearty breakfast eater. Even when cycling or paddling in the morning (yes, I have documentation for these admittedly rare events), I tend to eat a little lighter before activity, and then eat energy bars or blocks during activity. One’s mileage varies.
(Parenthetical note: when ordering two slices of French toast, I’d love an egg on the side, but not an egg*. I have no idea what an egg* is, so am rightly suspicious. More research is needed here).
On the other hand, I strongly resent:
1) the idea that 55+ folks have to worry 1a) about calories; and 1b) about calories more than 54- folks. There’s data to suggest the opposite, namely that as people age, their metabolisms manage body weight differently. In particular, more body weight presents fewer risks to health and mortality in older people than in younger people.
2) the idea that 2a) 55+ people should avoid egg yolks for “health” reasons, or 2b) any folks at all (55+- )should avoid egg yolks for “health” reasons. I just wrote a blog post with the latest in egg-news, including the results of a July 2025 study showing that eating 2 eggs a day in fact reduces LDL cholesterol more than eating a high saturated fat diet, with or without an egg.
3) the suggestion that so-called Fit Fare reflects current– or any– research on 3a) nutritional needs for humans 55+-, or 3b) specialized nutritional needs for folks 55+. I looked around online and didn’t find anything, or at least anything positive to say about chain menus that offer lower-calorie variations on their usually-extremely-high-sodium menu items.
Past marketing research does show that casual-dining chains benefit financially from offering both packaged low-calorie food combos and so-called “healthier” combos. But it doesn’t mean that such combos are a) actually healthier, or b) what I want.
So, readers, when it’s breakfast time, my advice is eat what you want. You’ve got loads of options, no matter whether you are 55+ or 55-.
Hey readers– what DO You eat for breakfast? I’d love to hear your ideas, as it’s fun to switch thiings up every once in a while.
As you know, I’ve been cycling in France. (With zero training and mediocre fitness). This morning I had: a 6 minute egg (the French let you boil your own eggs! And you can take a cunning little timer to the table!); fresh squeezed OJ (I squeezed the juice of 1.5 oranges myself!); some ham, cheese and a hunk of baguette; some fruit cup; some tomatoes; two little pancakes with maple syrup and half a banana; coffee; a handful of dried apricots. And of course I made myself a cheese sandwich for the road and stuck it in my jersey pocket. It was a good day because there was fruit and tomatoes.
My absolute favourite breakfast is costa rican gallo pinto with one egg, a corn tortilla, avocado and fried plantain. Very hard to come by in Toronto lol.
My breakfast is more like dinner: 8 different veggies plus a bit of seafood sautéed in sesame oil, plus brown rice, all with some soy sauce & a few red pepper flakes. Oh, plus some fruit, usually canteloupe and berries. I’ve always been one to wake up hungry.
I obviously agree with your thoughts – no lo-cal meals for me! But sometimes in our area, senior specials are more about lower prices than they are about health. And unfortunately, too many seniors really need those discounts.
As with men’s and women’s bikes, it’s the labelling I hate. I often want a smaller breakfast but it’s “small” not “over 55.” Ditto wider shoes (men’s) and short torse bike frames (also men’s.) Why not just label things what they are, large breakfast and small breakfast and let people decide? Long torso bike frames and shorter torso bike frames? Wide shoes and narrow shoes? I don’t see how gender and age are helpful here at all.