The green Mediterranean diet builds on the traditional Mediterranean diet that focuses on fruits, vegetables, and other plant-based foods. The diet also includes unique additions, apart from what we already know being part of the Mediterranean diet. In the green Mediterranean diet, things like green tea, Mankai duckweed, and walnuts, all of this offers enhanced heart health benefits as compared to the Mediterranean of standard version.
This diet was created in 2020, this diet also encouraged a more sustainable and health-focused way of eating.
The researchers for the first time introduced the green Mediterranean diet in 2020 which enhances cardiometabolic benefits of the traditional Mediterranean approach. It emphasizes plant-based foods and limits animal products to promote heart health and reduce inflammation. This diet can also help with weight management, lower the risk of chronic conditions like diabetes, and support environmental sustainability.
Similar to the traditional version, the Green Mediterranean diet also follows the same dietary guidelines:
Women: 1,200–1,400 calories per day
Men: 1,500–1,800 calories per day
Physical activity is also encouraged to maximize benefits. While any plant-focused Mediterranean diet could be considered "green," the official version includes specific foods:
In the green diet, the importance is to on more plant-based foods, which includes:
However while this diet too retains animal-based proteins from the traditional Mediterranean diet, the foods like meat, fish or eggs are limited, More attention is given towards the alternatives like tofu, beans, nuts and quinoa.
The diet minimizes or eliminates:
Start with half a cup of oatmeal with fresh fruit and cinnamon and a cup of green tea as your breakfast.
Moving on to lunch, get a smooth of Mankai duckweed, one cup of fruits or vegetables, and unsweetened plant-based milk.
In between, you can also munch on a handful of walnuts, and another cup of green tea.
Lastly, end your day with grilled salmon with cooked spinach, brown rice and a cup of green tea for your dinner.
Heart Health
Studies show that following the green Mediterranean diet for six months can lower blood pressure and "bad" LDL cholesterol—two key risk factors for heart disease.
Visceral Fat Reduction
Visceral fat, which accumulates around the abdomen, is linked to various health issues. Research found that the green Mediterranean diet led to double the visceral fat loss compared to the standard version over 18 months.
Environmental Benefits
Reducing meat consumption can significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions. Switching to a green Mediterranean diet can be a meaningful step toward protecting the planet.
Credit: Brigham Young University
An international team of 23 nutrition scientists has developed a food pyramid emphasizing plant foods, healthier fats and high-quality carbohydrates, offering an alternative to the Trump administration’s meat-heavy dietary advice.
Published in Advances in Nutrition, the International Food Guide Pyramid synthesizes evidence from more than 250 scientific publications and dietary guidelines from seven countries and regions.
“Despite what people often hear, there’s actually substantial agreement in nutrition science about the foundations of healthy eating,” said Karen Della Corte, a Brigham Young University nutritional scientist who led the team.
The pyramid focuses on three principles:
It encourages plant-based proteins such as beans, lentils, nuts and soy, without excluding fish, poultry, eggs or dairy. The guide can also be adapted for vegetarian and vegan diets.
The EAT-Lancet Commission estimates that adopting its proposed plant-forward diet could prevent approximately 15 million premature deaths annually.
The guide prioritizes whole grains and other high-quality carbohydrates over refined grains and sugary drinks. Carbohydrate quality depends on fiber content, processing, food structure and glycemic index (GI), which measures how carbohydrate-containing foods affect blood glucose.
“For both health and sustainability reasons, carbohydrate-rich foods should provide a substantial share of our energy, so their quality is particularly important,” said Anette Buyken, a professor at Paderborn University in Germany.
Traditional staples such as basmati rice, durum pasta, tortillas, rice noodles and bulgur can fit into a healthy diet, Della Corte said, depending on their glycemic index and preparation.
The pyramid also recommends choosing beans, peas, lentils, fish, poultry or yogurt more often than red and processed meats. It also advises replacing saturated fats, such as butter and animal fats, with unsaturated fats from sources such as olive and canola oils.
Other suggestions include choosing nuts, seeds, fruit or vegetables with hummus instead of processed snacks, whole-grain bread over refined white bread, and water instead of sugary soda.
The international pyramid contrasts with the Trump administration’s updated US dietary guidance, shaped by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) agenda, which has emphasized meat and other animal-based foods.
Rather than prioritizing red meat, the international guide stresses plant proteins, unsaturated oils and higher-quality carbohydrates. It also considers the environmental impact of food production, including greenhouse gas emissions associated with livestock farming.
“Our diet has to be not only for our own health but also for the health of our planet,” said David Jenkins, a University of Toronto professor and creator of the glycemic index.
The guide also highlights the importance of limiting added sugars, particularly from sugary drinks, and favors water or sugar-free alternatives.
Working with the International Carbohydrate Quality Consortium, Della Corte compared dietary guidelines from Canada, Germany, Australia, China, the Netherlands, the United States and the Nordic countries. She also reviewed more than 250 scientific publications and drew on the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet to identify shared principles of healthy eating.
The researchers say healthy eating does not require everyone to follow the same menu. Recommendations can be adapted to local food traditions, availability and budgets.
“When you’re designing a meal, start by thinking about the plant foods you want to emphasize,” Della Corte said. “What vegetables, whole or lower-GI grains, beans or lentils could you include?”
However, affordability and access can make healthier choices difficult.
“We need food environments that make it easy to put the pyramid’s recommendations into practice,” Buyken said, calling for nutrition policies that address food marketing, access and prices.
Credit: AI
Children who consume more ultra-processed foods may show stronger brain responses that could make them crave those foods repeatedly. This helps explain the link between these foods and childhood weight gain, according to a new study.
The research, published in JAMA Network Open, found that kids who ate more ultra-processed foods had greater activity in a brain region that is involved in reward and motivation when they saw tempting pictures of appetising foods. That brain activity was also associated with increase in body fat over the following year.
The findings raise important questions about how eating highly processed foods frequently may affect a developing brain.
Also read: Six To Eight Cups Of Tea A Day Linked To Lower Heart Disease Risk: But Should You Drink More?
The study included 46 children aged 7 to 10 who had a healthy weight at the beginning of the research. Scientists collected data about their diets and used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine brain activity while the children viewed pictures of appetising foods, including cookies and French fries.
The researchers focused on the striatum, a brain region involved in learning, motivation and reward anticipation.
Children who consumed more ultra-processed foods showed stronger responses in the dorsal striatum when viewing food images. Greater activity in this region was also linked with an increase in body mass index (BMI) and body fat percentage one year later.
The researchers found that accounting for differences in brain responses weakened the association between ultra-processed food intake and subsequent increases in BMI by 31% and body fat percentage by 44%. This suggests that brain activity related to reward may help explain part of the relationship.
Senior study author Dr Kathleen A. Page, a professor of medicine and pediatrics at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, said, “This study goes beyond just understanding that UPFs affect weight gain. It actually gives us insight into the neurobiological underpinnings by which these foods may be linked to body composition over time.”
Also read: Peanut Consumption Associated With Lower Type 2 Diabetes Risk: Study Explains
Ultra-processed foods include many packaged snacks, sugary cereals, sweetened drinks, instant meals and other similar products. They are often designed to be convenient, appealing, and have a long shelf life.
The researchers say childhood is an important period for understanding how food habits influence eating patterns and long-term health.
“Children’s brains are still developing, habits are still forming and food preferences are still being made. It’s an important period where the brain is very sensitive to food and the food environment,” Page said.
The research had key limitations. It involved only 46 children, assessed brain activity at a single time point and followed changes in body composition for one year. The observational design means researchers cannot determine whether greater ultra-processed food consumption caused the brain responses or whether other factors contributed to both.
The findings point to existing concerns about children's diets high in ultra-processed foods. Page emphasised the importance of making healthier options more accessible.
“Changing the food environment to help people access healthier, more minimally processed foods is an important part of the solution,” she said.
Families can offer more fruits, vegetables, whole grains, pulses and other minimally processed foods while limiting consumption of sugary drinks and packaged snacks.
Whey protein can help meet daily protein requirements, but research suggests total protein intake matters more than supplement timing for muscle growth. (Image Credits: iStock)
Whey protein is one of the most heavily marketed supplements in the fitness world, but the actual science behind it is more modest than the gym lore suggests.
Muscle is constantly being broken down and rebuilt, and the balance between those two processes over weeks and months determines whether you gain or lose muscle.
Resistance training raises the rate of muscle rebuilding, called muscle protein synthesis, and eating protein raises it further. Whey, the liquid left over when milk becomes cheese, digests quickly and is naturally high in leucine, an amino acid that appears to help trigger that rebuilding process. In short-term lab studies, this gives whey a sharper spike in synthesis compared with slower-digesting proteins like casein.
A short-term spike doesn’t automatically mean more muscle over months, though. What actually matters for long-term gains is a different question: how much total protein someone eats in a day.
A widely cited 2018 meta-analysis in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, led by Robert Morton and colleagues at McMaster University, looked at this directly. Pooling 49 resistance training trials with 1,863 participants, the researchers found that protein supplementation significantly increased gains in strength, muscle mass, and muscle fibre size compared with resistance training alone.
The benefits levelled off once total daily protein intake reached roughly 1.62 grams per kilogram of body weight, the study found. Past that point, extra protein, from whey or any other source, mostly just becomes calories. For an 80-kilogram (176-pound) person, that threshold works out to about 130 grams of protein a day.
Also Read: Is Lemon Water Really Helpful for Preventing Kidney Stones?
The idea of a 30-minute “anabolic window” after a workout has largely fallen out of favour in the research. When studies control for how much protein people ate in total, tight timing around workouts shows little added benefit.
Total daily intake is what predicts outcomes, not whether a shake was consumed within a specific window after training. Spreading protein across three or four meals a day is a reasonable habit, but missing a post-workout shake by an hour or two makes little practical difference.
If someone’s diet already supplies enough protein from food, around that 1.6 g/kg mark, a shake adds little extra benefit. Whey becomes useful mainly as a convenient way to close a gap when a person’s diet otherwise falls short, particularly because of its speed, high leucine content, and long shelf life compared with whole-food protein sources like chicken, eggs, or fish.
A few groups should be cautious. People with kidney disease should talk to a doctor before raising protein intake, and whey, as a dairy product, isn’t suitable for anyone with a milk allergy. People with lactose intolerance may tolerate whey isolate, which has less lactose than concentrate, but should check with a clinician if unsure.
Whey builds muscle the same way other high-quality proteins do: by helping people hit a sufficient total daily protein target alongside resistance training. It isn’t a shortcut or a requirement, just one convenient tool among several for reaching the same number. Training remains the main driver of muscle growth. Protein, whey included, is what supports it.
© $2026 Times Horizon Private Limited