What is a "Snack," Exactly?

I'm on a bus, stuck in traffic. And, boy, am I wishing I'd packed a snack. You know, like some almonds, a banana, some apples with peanut butter?

At least, that's what I always thought a snack was. But, this week, I've come across a couple of articles that have me wondering if maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I don't know exactly what a snack is anymore.

First, there was this Zagat piece, listing among other things, Baltimore's sinfully-rich, cloyingly sweet Berger cookie as one of the 12 Best Regional Snack Foods. I don't know about you, but I think I'd call that a dessert. Then, there's this piece from USA Today, which explains the eating habits of Americans, and reveals that only about 10% of people eat three square meals a day. The rest of the population? Apparently, they're chronic snackers.

But, the article goes on to explain that these snacks constitute nearly anything: chicken nuggets, a cupcake, a bowl of cereal, a big bowl of rice. Are these really snacks?

The dictionary definition of "snack" is as follows: a small amount of food eaten between meals. So, I guess technically, any of the above could be described as such. But, aren't some of them actually meals in and of themselves? A bowl of cereal is breakfast, and could theoretically be lunch or a really depressing dinner. Rice is a side dish. And, again, a cupcake is a dessert.

So, I can't help but wonder: am I just a big food prude? Can a snack really be anything? Could it be a porterhouse steak? An order of chocolate mousse? Maybe for some. But, whatever it is, it's definitely not a Berger cookie. Because any food that requires several hours of recovery time after just a few bites is what I'd call a serious time investment. And that's the antithesis of "on the go."