If eating trash makes us sick, why do we keep eating it?
Replies
-
Hmmm for me I think it is a bit similar. This was my favorite ice cream growing up. It is delicious. Now you will have me on the hunt for butter brickle too dangit!
Is that like Butter Brickle? I am on a mission to find Butter Brickle, the ice cream of my childhood... Some brand made a seasonal version, but I didn't have that anywhere near me.
Edit: after doing a google search, yes they seem to be about the same thing. OMG that Blue Bunny butter brickle looks amazing!0 -
andrejjorje wrote: »+1
I think this is the correct answer to the OP's question.andreavan28 wrote: »the carbs and crap in the food actually make you crave more of it, it is a vicious cycle.
It doesn't impact everyone in such a manner. You are responsible for your own actions at the end of the day.0 -
I so want butter brickle ice cream now... I don't think we have a Friendly's either. Just checked. Nope. The search continues...0
-
Must admit I haven't read the thread and just did a very quick flick through and one of the things that struck me was the comments "just don't eat it!" or "haven't you heard of willpower?." etc etc
Now I know a lot of wonderful strong minded people who are busy and active but are still fat. So I know it is not that easy. I saw through the thread the familiar "calories in - calories out plus exercise and there you have it - a solution." But I know from a lifetime of watching people go on strict diets and hit the gym five days a week that it does not work. I have also been along that track myself in my younger days but found eventually life gets in the way. Too busy, too tired, it's raining, it's too hot, kids are sick, I'mmmm SICK!! Any excuse and this theory goes down the drain.
I came across this article by Dr. Arya M. Sharma, MD/PhD, FRCPC is Professor of Medicine & Chair in Obesity Research and Management at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. (I hope his credentials are up to MFP's high standards as I haven't done a credibility check on him.)
Obesity Is Not About Lack Of Willpower
Feb 2014 "As I prepare to spend the rest of this week educating health professionals in Ontario on how to better manage obesity in their practice, it is perhaps appropriate to remind ourselves that Canada is not alone in attempting to tackle this problem.
Indeed, we need to look no further than the Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Overweight and Obesity in Adults, Adolescents and Children for a succinct summary of reasons just why obesity management is so difficult:
- Regulation of body weight involves complicated feedback systems that result in changes in appetite, energy intake and energy expenditure.
- While excess weight in individuals usually results from a prolonged period of energy imbalance, the causes of overweight and obesity are complex.
- Diet and physical activity are central to the energy balance equation, but are directly and indirectly influenced by a wide range of social, environmental, behavioural, genetic and physiological factors—the relationships between which are not yet fully understood.
- Individuals may be at greater risk of weight gain at particular stages in their lives.
The guidelines remind practitioners of the fact that body weight underlies tight regulation through a complex homeostatic system:
“While this system defends against weight gain as well as weight loss under normal circumstances, energy balance cannot be maintained when an energy surplus is sufficiently large and sustained. Weight gain will begin and usually continue until a new weight results in increased energy expenditure and energy balance is re-established. The same physiological mechanisms then seek to maintain energy balance at the higher weight, and will defend against weight loss by increasing appetite and reducing energy expenditure) if there is an energy deficit. As a result, most overweight and obesity results from upward resetting of the defended level of body weight, rather than the passive accumulation of excess body fat.”
This acknowledgement is a vast step forward from previous simplistic views of obesity which falsely view it as just a matter of “calories in” and “calories out”, which falsely imply that individuals should be able to achieve any desired weight simply by volitionally changing this balance through willpower alone.
Indeed, the reality is that the vast majority of individual attempting this “balance” approach to weight management will fail miserably only to gain the weight back.
Thus, the Australian guidelines are not shy about declaring a better need for pharmacological treatments and promoting the more extensive use of bariatric surgery for individuals with severe obesity related health problems.
A clear reminder to all of us that current treatments for obesity are insufficient and better, safer and more accessible treatments are urgently needed".
DrSharma
Toronto, ON
So anyway I believe weight is not about "willpower," people are not good or bad people because of their weight, and shaming overweight or obese people in hopes of changing their behaviour isn't just cruel; it's completely ineffective. I believe we are on the brink of a revolution to change the way people think about food as, certainly here in Australia, people are looking more and more at the types of food they eat and are starting to turn their backs on processed food because they are concerned about the additives and chemicals that are in that food.
And in answer to OP's original question - For me, I think andreavan28 nailed it "the carbs and crap in the food actually make you crave more of it, it is a vicious cycle."0 -
I'm not a junk food person, I've always just been a too much food person. I can't remember having a can of coke because I wanted it. I've never really bought sweets since leaving home and 'growing up' I'm from a house that was always super busy. we ate take out a lot and junk food even more but I don't feel the need to buy it for myself. I'm just trying to eat 500 cals less than need for a little while.0
-
-
andrejjorje wrote: »+1
I think this is the correct answer to the OP's question.andreavan28 wrote: »the carbs and crap in the food actually make you crave more of it, it is a vicious cycle.
But OP said nothing about craving. OP's question is actually a classic one--is knowing the good sufficient to cause people to do the good (or, perhaps, how can we know the good and yet not do it or even do the bad). "Good" here referring to either what is good for us, what will make us happy, or what is right.
My impression is that those who argue that we must only act in ways that seem contrary to good sense/our own interest if we are "addicted" or have been "brain-washed" (so are misled about what is good for us) or the like are in denial about how human beings are. We act in ways that are not strictly rational all the time, not only (or mostly) because we have been deprived of all volition or are delusional regarding the truth, but because we aren't always all that rational creatures. We have trouble balancing competing desires, especially when there's a long term vs. short term problem or we don't easily consequences due to remoteness.0 -
back.[/b]
I believe we are on the brink of a revolution to change the way people think about food as, certainly here in Australia, people are looking more and more at the types of food they eat and are starting to turn their backs on processed food because they are concerned about the additives and chemicals that are in that food.
."
really?
I havent noticed people in Australia doing that.
0 -
We have been biologically programed from the beginning of time to be attracted to the easy fast calories and not to expend calories on tasks that is not needed for survival. Fast forward to this generation where food is easy to get, high in calories, and hits our pleasure centers and you have the perfect storm. Everything we eat and think has memory and those memories have a way of programing us to return to those easy pleasurable events.-1
-
Honeymoon100 wrote: »We have been biologically programed from the beginning of time to be attracted to the easy fast calories and not to expend calories on tasks that is not needed for survival. Fast forward to this generation where food is easy to get, high in calories, and hits our pleasure centers and you have the perfect storm. Everything we eat and think has memory and those memories have a way of programing us to return to those easy pleasurable events.
Am I a computer? Am I a computer program? Why do people keep saying I've been "programmed"? I'm having South Park anxiety now0 -
trinatrina1984 wrote: »So I have learnt that KFC isn't actually chicken, and I am not to blame for eating all the fast food (phew!) but what I am still not sure on is the whole cocaine / sugar /bicarb soda thing and which of these is best with chicken.
I don't know why everyone is dissing cocaine. I mean if you REALLY want to lose weight...coke is it!
But first you have to steal it from the Devil. That's the tricky part, the rest should be smooth sailing.
0 -
Honeymoon100 wrote: »We have been biologically programed from the beginning of time to be attracted to the easy fast calories and not to expend calories on tasks that is not needed for survival. Fast forward to this generation where food is easy to get, high in calories, and hits our pleasure centers and you have the perfect storm. Everything we eat and think has memory and those memories have a way of programing us to return to those easy pleasurable events.
You watch too much TV0 -
-
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/
Seeing as ischemic heart disease (heart attack) is directly related to diet the majority of the time, I would say so.0 -
WillLift4Tats wrote: »Honeymoon100 wrote: »We have been biologically programed from the beginning of time to be attracted to the easy fast calories and not to expend calories on tasks that is not needed for survival. Fast forward to this generation where food is easy to get, high in calories, and hits our pleasure centers and you have the perfect storm. Everything we eat and think has memory and those memories have a way of programing us to return to those easy pleasurable events.
Am I a computer? Am I a computer program? Why do people keep saying I've been "programmed"? I'm having South Park anxiety now
Inputs. Inputs.
Programming!
PRINT DAMN YOU PRINT!
PC Load letter? wth does that mean?0 -
trinatrina1984 wrote: »So I have learnt that KFC isn't actually chicken, and I am not to blame for eating all the fast food (phew!) but what I am still not sure on is the whole cocaine / sugar /bicarb soda thing and which of these is best with chicken.
I don't know why everyone is dissing cocaine. I mean if you REALLY want to lose weight...coke is it!
But first you have to steal it from the Devil. That's the tricky part, the rest should be smooth sailing.
0 -
Doesnt sound absurd to me. In fact seems quite logically the case.
Although diet is only one factor in many diseases, there is little doubt that obesity (caused by over eating, ie diet) is a major factor in diseases like heart disease, diabetes, renal failure etc.
Even if one removed cases of the above known to have no lifestyle factor,eg congenital heart disease and Type 1 diabetes, then the number of people dying from cardiac disease and complications of diabetes would still be far more than those who die from cocaine use.
Of course this isnt saying cocaine use is safer than being obese - any more than, say, jumping off Sydney Harbour Bridge is safer than being obese - but it is still a numerical fact that far more people in Australia (for example) die from diseases in which obesity is a major factor, than who die from jumping off the bridge.
0 -
Wow, this thread is still going? LOL, page 23 now!
I think the overall lesson from it is, there is no one size fits all.
I mentioned KFC as being bad, If I eat too much, I will get fat. Then someone aged 25 will reply, "I eat KFC all the time and I don't get fat".
So, yeah, there is no magic formula that works for everyone. Everyone is different but I think the best, overall message that I'm sure we can possibly agree on? would be the word 'moderation' That covers everything.
Interesting how people pick up on something and twist and change it, take it out of context, rearrange it and come back with something completely different.
I mentioned KFC, that was meant as a generalisation of whats commonly described as fast food or junk food. Not my words.
That little thing I said was blown up, dissected, changed and turned into 'toxic chicken'.
Someone else mentioned baking soda, again, derision and mockery. (Not sure what the baking soda thing was about but I'm sure it was meant in a very different way than it was interpreted.)
LOL. Of course, easier to deride and mock rather than deal with the real issues being raised.
No one has the true, definitive answers and as this thread shows, there are so many opinions, truths, half truths and lies as well as a few genuine facts.
One thing that is pretty certain, Governments around the world are seeing what they call, an obesity epidemic. People are getting fatter and sicker and some countries (Denmark stands out here) are trying to get a grip on it all and sort it.
Sadly for me, that means eat more fruit and vegetables but I will still be eating the odd KFC from time to time
(Right, now, to help all the flamers, Trolls and people who just have nothing better to do, In the post I put the word 'lies'.
To give you a head start and help you along a little, I suggest you take that word 'lies' make a post saying, "I said everything everyone has said is lies". There, off you go, have fun)-1 -
I think the overall lesson from it is, there is no one size fits all.
I mentioned KFC as being bad, If I eat too much, I will get fat. Then someone aged 25 will reply, "I eat KFC all the time and I don't get fat".
KFC gives me the runs. It might make me lose weight...but I'd much rather eat Hardee's, or Pollards...and not have the runs.
Anyone remember Po'folks? I miss their chicken and biscuits.
0 -
Wow, this thread is still going? LOL, page 23 now!
I think the overall lesson from it is, there is no one size fits all.
I mentioned KFC as being bad, If I eat too much, I will get fat. Then someone aged 25 will reply, "I eat KFC all the time and I don't get fat".
So, yeah, there is no magic formula
Well, yes there is: eat less than you burn, ie eat at a calorie deficit.
This is the magic formula that works for everyone.
KFC is no more bad than anything else in that respect - if you eat too much you will get fat.
- If a 25 year old, or anybody of any age for that matter, ate KFC every day but kept to a deficit, they would not get fat.
And, yes, the poster who started the baking soda kerfuffle really did say baking soda was toxic; except she used the chemical name.
Look back and you will find exactly that.
0 -
paperpudding wrote: »Wow, this thread is still going? LOL, page 23 now!
I think the overall lesson from it is, there is no one size fits all.
I mentioned KFC as being bad, If I eat too much, I will get fat. Then someone aged 25 will reply, "I eat KFC all the time and I don't get fat".
So, yeah, there is no magic formula
Well, yes there is: eat less than you burn, ie eat at a calorie deficit.
This is the magic formula that works for everyone.
KFC is no more bad than anything else in that respect - if you eat too much you will get fat.
- If a 25 year old, or anybody of any age for that matter, ate KFC every day but kept to a deficit, they would not get fat.
And, yes, the poster who started the baking soda kerfuffle really did say baking soda was toxic; except she used the chemical name.
Look back and you will find exactly that.
OK, yeah, fair enough, you wouldn't get fat but you probably wouldn't be very healthy either.
I think people get a bit hung up on Calorie intake v Health.
Of course, being overweight isn't healthy but for me, personally it's about health as well.
I can lose the weight but I also want to be more healthy.
Thin people still die from being unhealthy.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
What most people here say is very simple. Don't label foods. Example is through all the 23 pages. The main premise is to have a healthy attitude towards food. And by food I mean all food including so called junk trash etc. Taking personal responsibility for your choices. And stop blaming food, corporation s and government for your bad choices. People need to educate themselves regarding nutrition from credible sources. Not from the food documentaries that propogate fear mongering.paperpudding wrote: »Wow, this thread is still going? LOL, page 23 now!
I think the overall lesson from it is, there is no one size fits all.
I mentioned KFC as being bad, If I eat too much, I will get fat. Then someone aged 25 will reply, "I eat KFC all the time and I don't get fat".
So, yeah, there is no magic formula
Well, yes there is: eat less than you burn, ie eat at a calorie deficit.
This is the magic formula that works for everyone.
KFC is no more bad than anything else in that respect - if you eat too much you will get fat.
- If a 25 year old, or anybody of any age for that matter, ate KFC every day but kept to a deficit, they would not get fat.
And, yes, the poster who started the baking soda kerfuffle really did say baking soda was toxic; except she used the chemical name.
Look back and you will find exactly that.
OK, yeah, fair enough, you wouldn't get fat but you probably wouldn't be very healthy either.
I think people get a bit hung up on Calorie intake v Health.
Of course, being overweight isn't healthy but for me, personally it's about health as well.
I can lose the weight but I also want to be more healthy.
Thin people still die from being unhealthy.
0 -
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/
Seeing as ischemic heart disease (heart attack) is directly related to diet the majority of the time, I would say so.
That's interesting, let's look at the risk factors. Risk factors (dietary) include high blood pressure, high cholesterol and or triglycerides, diabetes and obesity. That's interesting because it's the obesity that is most directly related to high blood pressure. May or may not be related to cholesterol. Definetely related to diabetes. Food in and of itself does not make us obese though, over-eaitng and sedentary lifestyle (no exercise) make us obese.
Other risk factors: tobacco use, age, family history, lack of physical activity, stress, illegal drug use, preeclampsia, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. None related to diet...
So I would say heart attack is not directly related to diet at all...0 -
paperpudding wrote: »
Doesnt sound absurd to me. In fact seems quite logically the case.
Although diet is only one factor in many diseases, there is little doubt that obesity (caused by over eating, ie diet) is a major factor in diseases like heart disease, diabetes, renal failure etc.
Even if one removed cases of the above known to have no lifestyle factor,eg congenital heart disease and Type 1 diabetes, then the number of people dying from cardiac disease and complications of diabetes would still be far more than those who die from cocaine use.
Of course this isnt saying cocaine use is safer than being obese - any more than, say, jumping off Sydney Harbour Bridge is safer than being obese - but it is still a numerical fact that far more people in Australia (for example) die from diseases in which obesity is a major factor, than who die from jumping off the bridge.
Then we get back to what makes us fat? Certain foods, macros etc or just plain old overeating and sedentary lifestyle?
0 -
Agree with me or not I don't care I just think some people need to stop looking for so many reasons to why they got fat or who's fault it is and instead maybe go out for a jog.
I agree with you. It's bizarre that people look for deeper reasons that they overeat and are sedentary, as opposed to seeing overeating and a sedentary lifestyle as the reasons that they're overweight.
The reason I overeat is, and the reason for that reason, and the reason for those reasons, and cuz reasons times infinity.
How fruitless. And seeking out deeper reasons for why we do anything, along with having a ring of scapegoating to it, also has an uncanny resemblance to stalling...dilly dallying...farting around...
0 -
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/
Seeing as ischemic heart disease (heart attack) is directly related to diet the majority of the time, I would say so.
That's interesting, let's look at the risk factors. Risk factors (dietary) include high blood pressure, high cholesterol and or triglycerides, diabetes and obesity. That's interesting because it's the obesity that is most directly related to high blood pressure. May or may not be related to cholesterol. Definetely related to diabetes. Food in and of itself does not make us obese though, over-eaitng and sedentary lifestyle (no exercise) make us obese.
Other risk factors: tobacco use, age, family history, lack of physical activity, stress, illegal drug use, preeclampsia, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. None related to diet...
So I would say heart attack is not directly related to diet at all...
Then you're fooling yourself.0 -
This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions