Paradox: Unhealthy food is often easier to track.
Options
Replies
-
I worked at a fast-food chain and I can tell you there is no way the nutritional info is accurate. Depending on who is preparing the burger, the amount of sauce and stuff is completely different. Even the same person will do things differently because we cannot be consistent (we have to go fast!!).
Even for meat... we are supposed to let the grease drain a bit, but you have to be really fast so it goes into the bun right away and the grease goes with it.
And one serving of fries isn't always the same weight (we don't weigh it and again have to be fast).
So... yeah... not accurate.0 -
There are no unhealthy/healthy foods. There is just food.
Untrue IMHO. There are calories that are nutrient-dense, and calories that are nutrient-empty.
What's true is that there's no "good" food or "bad" food. But if I'm trying to get a balanced nutritious diet into 1300 calories, I'd prefer not to waste them on "empty" foods wherever possible.0 -
I worked at a fast-food chain and I can tell you there is no way the nutritional info is accurate
Such an important point, thank you!
I do think, though, that at least it gives you a starting point with which to estimate. If the nutritional info is off by 20% or so, it's closer than the total pie-in-the-sky guess of trying to log a restaurant meal where you have zero information to go on.0 -
I have found that once you get into the healthy eating routine and it becomes a habit, then logging in healthy food is just as easy as unhealthy food. I weigh it or measure it. When I go out to eat at a local restaurant I've gotten pretty good at finding comparable foods on restaurants that publish their nutritional information. Since I weigh and measure a lot at home, I've gotten pretty good at eye balling what 4 oz. of meat looks like or 2-3 cups of salad looks like. You can ask for dressing on the side or even ask for substitutions that are more healthy than what comes with the meal. Waiters are usually very accomodating. I have entered a lot of homemade recipes on MFP and that really makes it easy.0
-
I worked at a fast-food chain and I can tell you there is no way the nutritional info is accurate
Such an important point, thank you!
I do think, though, that at least it gives you a starting point with which to estimate. If the nutritional info is off by 20% or so, it's closer than the total pie-in-the-sky guess of trying to log a restaurant meal where you have zero information to go on.
See, this is where I disagree with you. If you blindly accept a restaurants counts because it seems easier, then you are willingly accepting a 20% variance and telling yourself it's ok, which may lead to eating out more. On the other hand, if you order a 6oz steak, side salad and a baked potato, you can get pretty close by logging each item separately. Obviously, this is harder to do with a lot of other dishes but, then, if you are out for a nice dinner just go for it within reason and get back on track the next day.0 -
I agree with you! I try and choose frozen entrees from the "health food" aisle. Amy's, Dr Praegers, Quorn, American Flatbread pizzas, and some other brands have become my go to. Not sure how much better it is but it can't be worse than what is in the regular section!0
-
No, if I buy fresh fruits and veggies from the farmer's market, they don't have bar codes. If I buy fresh cheese from my local cheese shop, it doesn't have a bar code (or if it does, it's just an in-store code and not a UPC). If I eat my mom's cooking, it doesn't come with a bar code.
I think this advice is similar to the "shop the edges" advice of tacking a grocery store. The healthiest stuff -- fruits, veggies, fresh foods -- tend to be on the edges, while the unhealthy cookies and high sugar and trans fat content processed foods tend to be in the centre aisles. Not true of every store, of course, but you get the idea. The whole point is that cutting back on processed foods and eating more "real" food (for lack of a better term) tends to be more filling and nutritious.0 -
yes- being smart about nutrients and macros can help. But it's not FAKE food otherwise- there is no reason to be arbitrary lables on stuff- you're over complicating it.
lower calorie food- with a macro pay off that leaves you full is a win- but that doesn't make my Red Baron frozen pizza "fake"
it's a choice- life is about making choices. Sometimes you can buy the nice coat and sometimes you can buy the old navy fleecy so I can go watch a movie later with my BF. I mostly buy the old navy fleecy to save money for other things. but sometimes- it's worth buying the high end coat.
You just have to know how to spend your calories and what works for sustainability- calling it real/fake/processed/whole/clean/pure or otherwise doesn't teach people that.0 -
Sorry, I knew when I was typing that that it would open a can of worms. That's why I said 'for lack of a better term'.
It's all real food. But some foods are more nutrient-dense than others. That's all I was trying to say.
And I don't judge the food choices that people make. Everything in moderation is all good. If you're craving that Big Mac, go for it.
I'm just pointing out the paradox that I've seen people say that they're going to opt for something with a nutrition label over a (probably healthier) unlabelled alternative just for the ease of logging and tracking it. It strikes me as paradoxical, is all.0 -
There are no unhealthy/healthy foods. There is just food.
Untrue IMHO. There are calories that are nutrient-dense, and calories that are nutrient-empty.
What's true is that there's no "good" food or "bad" food. But if I'm trying to get a balanced nutritious diet into 1300 calories, I'd prefer not to waste them on "empty" foods wherever possible.
There is a difference between nutrient dense and healthy/unhealthy. One food can not be healthy or unhealthy. It's just food.
0 -
Sorry, I knew when I was typing that that it would open a can of worms. That's why I said 'for lack of a better term'.
It's all real food. But some foods are more nutrient-dense than others. That's all I was trying to say.
And I don't judge the food choices that people make. Everything in moderation is all good. If you're craving that Big Mac, go for it.
I'm just pointing out the paradox that I've seen people say that they're going to opt for something with a nutrition label over a (probably healthier) unlabelled alternative just for the ease of logging and tracking it. It strikes me as paradoxical, is all.
sustainability has to be a consideration. I prepare quiet a bit of my own food- I'm a huge advocate for IIFYM- buuuuuuuuut on days like today and tomorrow- I leave before 8 AM- and I get home after 10 PM. Friday- I work 8-5 then I head home change- put my face on and go work dance gigs till midnight- grabbing a quick snack is what it has to be.
I can only carry around so much of my own pre-packed/pre-made food. so I accept that at 8 PM I need a snack- and usually have a hard boiled egg and a pre-packaged food bar. it's easy- it fits my needs and it's heavy calorie wise to get me through another two hours of dance class/rehearsals without making me puke from being a full 'meal'- like more soup- more stir fry etc etc- and it's easy to eat- quickly between classes.
It is not realistic for me to carry my pre-made food ALL day- and then have time to eat it.
So there has to be some sort of trade off in terms of sustainability- and if time is an issue for some people and they can manage themselves on easily scanned food- and it works- more power to them.
I do understand your point- it is significantly more labor intensive to weigh everything and make your own recipes- I am guilty of taking a swag at certain things- and I'm happy to do it- I work 3 jobs- I do not realistically have time to weigh EVER single thing that crosses my mouth. But you over guess food- under guess workouts and do the best you can.
You can't make yourself crazy over every little detail- none of us have that kind of time/stability. You just do the best you can to make this a long term sustainable habit and it's fine.0 -
Not so, I buy all my meat, fish, poultry, bread, cakes/pastries and cheese from places that don't have barcodes.
Of course, a beef pie or shoulder of lamb without a barcode that has been made from pampered animals on a farm 15 miles away has far less calories than the supermarket stuff. It was the smug that made me 104 kg, not the beef you must understand, just the smug.
I don't understand why people get upset when they're going to a restaurant that's not a chain place and can't look up the cals. Again with the smug, I don't get to eat out very often and wouldn't choose Frankie and Benny's or Pizza Express over a local place if it's good. I guess I can see it if you eat out a lot perhaps.
The recipe function is very, very good, as other people have said. Takes a lot of the work out of things. The database also has lots of entries for foods. I've been here 2 1/2 years and have only added 3 foods to the database - all the other ingredients/items have been on there already, so it's no more bother to look for a piece of pineapple than it is a chocolate bar.
Edit to add: my phone seems to be cack at scanning barcodes, it's often actually easier to use the database.0 -
I've seen threads where people have said they don't make "X" anymore because it's too difficult to track, even if X contains pretty much all good, natural stuff and they enjoy X. It's like they're so fixated on the process of tracking that it becomes the only way they look at food.0
-
Most days, I eat the same sorts of food, a list of 50 or so dishes, that I've already calculated. Once that's done, it's not time consuming in the least. It was never hard. When I try a new dish, it adds 4-5 minutes to my day to figure it out and input it. Relatively speaking, that is not a lot of time.0
-
What makes a restaurant chain "far less healthy" than a local chain? How could you possibly know?0
-
redversustheblue wrote: »What makes a restaurant chain "far less healthy" than a local chain? How could you possibly know?
People that can't be bothered to track macros think that individual foods can be unhealthy. If they'd just put some thought into it, they'd realize that no single food can be unhealthy but only whole diets that are poor in nutrients due to poor planning can be unhealthy.0 -
redversustheblue wrote: »What makes a restaurant chain "far less healthy" than a local chain? How could you possibly know?
Depends on what and where, of course. But you can compare individual meals and intuitively guess that, say, a grilled chicken wrap with fresh veggies, avocado, quinoa and a whole wheat tortilla, prepared fresh with local ingredients, is going to be more nutritious than, say, a McDonald's Big Mac. I know that, instinctively, I'd rather eat the former than the latter, and that it's probably better for me. But I wouldn't want to turn into one of those people who chooses the latter out of the convenience of logging it.
It's like that Supreme Court definition of pornography: I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. (Or, in this case, when I feel better eating it.)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions