Curiously Addictive Roasted Garbazno Beans

I am a grazer. A muncher. A snacker. I would rather eat a little bit here and there than 3 huge meals a day. Although what usually happens is that I munch and graze AND eat 3 nice-sized meals a day, which wouldn't be so bad except I tend to graze on the not-so-healthy stuff. Halloween candy? Check. Cupcakes and cookies? Check. In times of desperation, chocolate or peanut butter chips? Check. Oh I try and keep healthy things around like apples or grapes or even applesauce, but I either forget about them or my sweet tooth is screaming so loud I can't hear myself think.

So what am I to do? I decided to try my hand at making my own snacks, rather than spending a small fortune on those 100 calorie packs. I started off by buying a bag of cashews to make Caramelized Cashews with Cayenne. But my oven decided to hate me that day and my hard work ended up with burnt nuts and me frantically running around trying to open windows and doors and turn on fans before my smoke detector went off. Pretty amusing if you ask me. Not being one to give up so easily, I headed back to the store and came home with a $0.79 can of chickpeas and got ready to raid my spice stash.

Curiously Addictive Roasted Garbanzo Beans
Adapted from: The Meat and Potatoes Foodie

1 (14 ounce) can of garbanzo beans, drained
1 teaspoon kosher or sea salt, divided
1/4 teaspoon fennel seeds
1/8 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1/8 teaspoon coriander
1/8 teaspoon garlic powder
1/2 teaspoon cumin
2 teaspoons olive oil

Preheat oven to 400 degrees F.

Rinse the beans in a large colander, then pat dry with paper towels. Transfer to a medium mixing bowl. Sprinkle 3/4 teaspoon salt and remaining ingredients over beans. Toss to completely coat the beans. Once coated, spread beans out on a large, rimmed baking sheet.

Roast beans for 15 minutes, shake the pan, then continue to roast another 12-15 minutes. Beans should be shrunken, dark brown in places, and have a crispy texture. Remove from oven and sprinkle with remaining 1/4 teaspoon salt while still hot. Allow to cool completely before serving.

Makes: 4 snack-sized servings

Where does the "curiously addictive" part come from? Well these garbanzo beans don't shout "I AM AMAZING!" when you first try them. But then you have a couple more, and a couple more, and before you know it the whole bowl is gone and you're asking yourself "how did that happen?".

These may not be the lowest snack ever in the calorie department, but the fiber content in one serving puts a Fiber One bar to shame.

I know there are many variations of these out there, have you tried any? Which is your favorite?

Nutrition Facts
Amount per serving
Calories 383	Calories from fat 75
% Daily Value
Total Fat 8.3g	13%
Saturated Fat 0.9g	5%
Trans Fat 0.0g
Cholesterol 0mg	0%
Sodium 375mg	53%
Total Carbs 60.5g	20%
Dietary Fiber 17.4g	70%
Sugars 10.6g
Protein 19.2g
Vitamin A 1%	Vitamin C 7%
Calcium 11%	Iron 36%

Get Up and Move Challenge Day 5: I've noticed "fat burning zones" and "cardio zones" based on my heart rate on treadmills, ellipticals, and bicycles at the gym. Do I have to work out in the "fat burning zone" to lose weight and will working out in the "cardio zone" not provide the same amount of weight loss?

Oooo this is a biggie, and he's the quick and to the point answer: The belief that working out in the "fat burning zone" as the way to lose the most weight is FALSE.

Now that I've probably shocked you, let's start at the beginning. What exactly are "fat burning zones" and "cardio zones"? These zones are based on your Age-Adjusted Maximum Heart Rate, which for most of the equipment the equation looks like this: 220-Age = AAMHR. Nice and simple. The "fat burning zone" is typically placed at 40-60% of your AAMHR (also classified as moderate-intensity exercise by the ACSM [1]). The "cardio zone" is placed at 60-80/85% of your AAMHR (also known as vigorous-intensity by the ACSM [1]).

"Wait, wait, wait" you say. "I know a thing or two about exercising, and I know that you burn FAT at a lower intensity and CARBS at a higher intensity." For the most part, that's correct. At lower intensities, your body uses Free Fatty Acids as its main fuel source. As the intensity increases, more and more glucose (a carbohydrate) is needed. So if you burn up more of those free fatty acids (which come from your fat cells) you should lose more weight than if you burn carbohydrates, right? Wrong.

In the end your body doesn't care where it's fuel comes from. What really matters is how many overall calories you burn. When people who exercise at a moderate intensity are compared to those who exercise at a vigorous intensity, with both groups burning the same amount of calories, there is no difference in weight loss [2]. Now, keep in mind that the group performing moderate-intensity exercise has to work longer to burn the same amount of calories.

Short and sweet? Work out at whatever intensity you want and ignore those fancy "ranges" on the machine. (They should be removed or changed as it is false advertising.) Just remember that if you are working out at a lower intensity, you will have to work out a little bit longer to burn as many calories compared to a higher intensity. (And for goodness sakes please ignore how many calories the machine tells you that you burned, especially females! They have a tendency to overestimate. By a lot.)

[1] American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2010.

[2] Grediagin A, Cody M, Rupp J, Benardot D. & Shern R. Exercise intensity does not effect body composition change in untrained, moderately overfat women. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995;95(6):661-5.