Guide to making claims based on research
Replies
-
Yeah, I agree with all that, lemurcat.
Since I'm not willing to read the whole 1000 post thread on 'trash', I'll stop putting in two cents worth, also.
0 -
I think a lot of what Freud said was nutty but I wouldn't say that me feeling that way discredits the whole field of psychology, even for me.
Yup, because intake of ground deer antler is a legit therapy for impotence.WalkingAlong wrote: »I could say the same for the reaction to anything from alternative medicine. If you think it's quackery, that's fine, but you can't really speak like it's a foregone conclusion that anyone who gives it the tiniest consideration would be considered an idiot by anyone. Maybe in your circle it is, but not worldwide.
If one is an idiot and doesn't understand the difference between myth and reality.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I think a lot of what Freud said was nutty but I wouldn't say that me feeling that way discredits the whole field of psychology, even for me.
Yup, because intake of ground deer antler is a legit therapy for impotence.WalkingAlong wrote: »I could say the same for the reaction to anything from alternative medicine. If you think it's quackery, that's fine, but you can't really speak like it's a foregone conclusion that anyone who gives it the tiniest consideration would be considered an idiot by anyone. Maybe in your circle it is, but not worldwide.
If one is an idiot and doesn't understand the difference between myth and reality.
I used to live over a chinese apothecary when I lived in San Francisco. Psychology as a field is pretty legit. Chinese ground antler and tiger teste tea is a legitimate way to throw away money.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I think a lot of what Freud said was nutty but I wouldn't say that me feeling that way discredits the whole field of psychology, even for me.
Yup, because intake of ground deer antler is a legit therapy for impotence.WalkingAlong wrote: »I could say the same for the reaction to anything from alternative medicine. If you think it's quackery, that's fine, but you can't really speak like it's a foregone conclusion that anyone who gives it the tiniest consideration would be considered an idiot by anyone. Maybe in your circle it is, but not worldwide.
If one is an idiot and doesn't understand the difference between myth and reality.
I used to live over a chinese apothecary when I lived in San Francisco. Psychology as a field is pretty legit. Chinese ground antler and tiger teste tea is a legitimate way to throw away money.
Freud might be a bad example since he is mostly only discussed from a "history of psychology" standpoint in many universities now. Psychology, as a whole and particularly when it comes to research, no longer views case studies or much of what Freud did as legitimate.0 -
It is important to note that KFC IS NOT the best tasting chicken ever!
0 -
Popeye's chicken is the shiznit.0
-
I have a couple of friends who met in college (are now married) and one worked at Popeye's, one at KFC. They joked about their love being forbidden, but even now there are still debates whenever they want fried chicken, though I've been told usually Popeye's for the chicken and KFC for the sides is how it works out.0
-
I think you should probably post whatever the hell you want on MFP, enjoy the discussion/debate to whatever degree it amuses you and ignore the rest.
Perhaps this, and the competing thread, do less to lay down "guidelines" to posting and more highlight that some of us take this board far, far too seriously.
13 damn pages on how to properly put in a claim? What is this, Obamacare?0 -
I dunno, some people will actually benefit from Obama/Romnutcare.0
-
-
Look at my unspoken statement.
0 -
I invite them to perform a fairly pleasurable act upon a part of my anatomy.EatsNotTreats wrote: »What do u do when a random person comes up to u in real life and tells u what u should be doing?
0 -
Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
Ah, interesting.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »Additionally i'll add that lecturer is a position, as in an adjunct, or a short term/contract position. Means they are not tenure track, and generally have fewer responsibilities in a department.
It does not denote a difference in educational degree, as in Master's vs. PhD.
It's a little different in Australia. We have 5 levels, Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Prof and Prof. All are tenured positions, although some ALs may be on contract initially. In my area (medical science), all 5 levels must have a PhD. I don't know of any Masters who teach, except as sessional staff in labs or tutorials.
I believe it's different in other disciplines though.
I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
Anyway...off topic, sorry..
In my wife's field which is Biology, I've only seen PhD holders in position of lecturer or higher. Other schools may be different of course, but generally from what I've seen, lecturer is an intinerant educator, moving from town to town to bring knowledge to the unenlightened, and packing up afterwards to move on into the sunset. I personally think it's a terrible misuse of quality educators, but I'm not involved in the business of education for revenue.
Once you're on the tenure track, you are an assistant professor, then associate, then full. somewhere down the line you can become an emeritus. Then there are the named professorships. I keep telling her, that if I ever get in the position that I can give her Uni a large donation, I'll do it with the requirement that she becomes a named professor, named after me since she refused to take on my name when we got married.
However, in the studio art area, I have several friends who are MFA holders who teach. I know several MBA holders who teach in the business school, etc.
As for Hawaii, I almost went to UoH@Manoa for a DBA, but determined that research was not as profitable as just an mba and a personalized set of morals. I'd go to Hawaii in a second though, although the stipend during the DBA program was $18k, I'm sure a lecturer position for an MBA holder would pay much better. That stipend though would have been horrid there in the land of $6 gallons of milk (when at the time the mainland was 50% cheaper.)
Similar to our phd stipends, even though they're 25k tax free, they're too hard to live on without other work. I'm probably better off sticking to holidays in Hawaii, because I would want to live on the north shore and then it would be almost impossible driving off to work every day...lol
Not. Tax. Free. >_<
It's so poorly low because here in the US we prefer bombing over knowledge. We're stupid, and loving rolling around in the muck and mire in a race to be the least knowledge focused country on the planet. At least it's profitable for our gentry and politicians.
There's a little shrimp truck on the north shore that I would just happily live at.
Oh! Not tax free!
When I did mine I got 18k tax free paid by the university, plus around 10 hrs per week of lab/tute teaching or admin work which paid at around $30 per hour and was taxed at a minimal rate.
Maybe you and mrs dbmata need to come to Australia for a few years.
....and now I'm drooling about the shrimp plate from the haliewa shrimp truck......
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
The problem is there's no clear cut American system. There's a standard way that tenure track works at major universities and academically-oriented colleges, but there are a huge variety of other kinds of institutions and part-time/non-tenure-track jobs and so on.
I know a few people who are kind of permanently ABD but still teach at local colleges/universities. Just not the particular local universities that I considered attending.
At other schools (like professional programs) the requirements are different still.
Ah, ok. We mostly have universities and tafe colleges. The tafe colleges are for trades. There are private colleges, but as far as I'm aware, students can't gain more than a diploma without spending some time at university.
There really aren't a huge amount of options for PhDs here. Most of my fellow candidates did post docs in the USA and many years later, they're still there. I stepped into a 50% tenured AL job which was extremely lucky! I was contract for 1 year and it was a baptism of fire with the amount of teaching hours I had (along with research expectations), but I survived and was moved to permanent. I've since moved up the ranks and now have a fair load. I was extremely fortunate though.
0 -
It very much was a pile on. It was less "We'd like to correct what we believe is incorrect" and much more "Let's all make fun of this woman!"WalkingAlong wrote: »
I just read around page 9-16 and it was painful. Seemed to me like MFP at its worst-- a pile-on. One poster who passionately believes in her way of eating is eviscerated for trying to defend it. No, her logic wasn't really sound but she seemed to mostly be phrasing things as opinions and as "this is what works for me and my family". And others deciding that they need to be seen as RIGHT and to do that they must get her to admit her beliefs are wrong before this morsel of untruth spreads like ebola and millions die from lack of junk food intake.Lourdesong wrote: »
It was the "If eating trash makes us sick.." threadI remember the KFC thing, but she'd been arguing about that for quite a long time before the baking soda thing popped up.
I wish I could remember what thread it was.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10020547/if-eating-trash-makes-us-sick-why-do-we-keep-eating-it/p16
Yep! That's it! Page 16 has the baking soda post. I stopped reading shortly thereafter and missed the rest.
There are as many beliefs about food and eating as there are about god and religion. If your beliefs are RIGHT for you based on your background and reading and results, maybe respect that others might have a different RIGHT for them. And that them sharing what's right for them doesn't always mean your right is wrong.
The baking soda thing was funny, though. I was like, "Where in the hell did that come from?" It piqued my interest, for sure. But it never came to anything and I quit reading a page or two later. That could've been interesting.
She is as entitled to her beliefs as anyone, though, and did not deserve what she got.0 -
I just always assumed it was fairly standard for most adults to do whatever the hell they want.
heh heh good one.lemurcat12 wrote: »To suggest that somehow the commercialized versions of food are more overwhelmingly palatable and impossible to turn down--addictive--as that baking soda woman and many others at MFP do seems to me insane. KFC is the most delicious chicken ever and therefore food companies force us to eat it, really? I mean, I might expect that claim from Colonel Sanders, but no one else.
AAAAAANnnnnnnddddddd, now I'm sucked back in.
It's me! It's me!
======>>>>>>>
I am suggesting that some foods for some people are impossible to turn down (with the caveat that it's not just commercialized foods -- home cooked foods can also be a trigger).
<<<<<<<<<==============
I am a binge eater. When I eat certain foods, I CANNOT stop eating them. It's got nothing to do with hunger or with satiety or with eating until I'm stuffed -- I never get stuffed during a binge. I never say "I can't eat another bite" during a binge. I can eat pounds of food during a binge. I will eat until the food is all gone, and if my body isn't over the binge, then I will get in my car, go to the grocery store (or two or three) and buy more and eat it until I am totally anesthetized. If I don't give in to the binge, then I'm moody, depressed, and vicious until I do give in.
I know hundreds of people just like me. I can go to any city and find meetings full of people just like me. I've had people on this very website PM me and thank me for talking about this because they are too afraid to bring it up in the forums because they don't want to be made fun of.
Do I have cites to prove the existence of food addiction? No. I don't know of any studies that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that food addiction exists.
However, I do have a couple of cites to people who are attempting to understand the nature of binging and the possibility of food addiction.
There's Kay SHeppard, who has written several books about food addiction and how to overcome it.
There's the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, which had a Food Addiction conference to discuss the issue of food addiction and also has a checklist for people who might suffer from binge eating.
There's a bunch of meetings for people who think they might have food addiction.
Here's a paper summarizing the findings from a food addiction symposium.
And etc.
You are certainly welcome to refute every one of these sources, (let me help! Here's a whole bunch of links to studies that suggest food addiction is in fact not real).
In my experience, my binging was caused by certain foods. I stopped eating those foods 10 years ago, and I no longer binge. I also no longer have food cravings. I get hungry, I eat. I don't sit around thinking "I really want to eat X" or "I'm really craving Y." Other people have also experience binging and have cut out their trigger food, to find that they don't binge or crave any more.
Of course personal anecdote does not equal double-blind peer reviewed research studies and of course correlation does not always equal causation.
But double-blind peer reviewed research studies exist because of personal anecdote and observed correlations.
People conduct research because they observe something and want to understand the science and causation behind it. Someone's personal experience is the foundation upon which most of our scientific knowledge is based. I am communicating with you right now because Ben Franklin tied a key to a kite.
And in the final instance, science or no, food addiction or no, I no longer binge. What I did worked for me and is sustainable for me.
So if someone comes into these forums and asks "I binge on certain foods. Do you think it could be the food?" I will 100% say "Yes, it could be the food. I used to binge, and when I cut out my trigger foods, I stopped binging and lost 75 pounds."
For a binger, that information is much more helpful than "it's not the food, it's you. you lack will power."
Well, no *kitten*. That's what a binge is -- the total lack of willpower. Where do they go from there? My solution -- "This is what worked for me" -- seems to be a tad more helpful than merely telling the binger he or she is insane to believe the food might be the problem.
eta: and I totally get what the "insane" bit is getting at -- that trying to hang onto a magical talisman instead of understanding science is what is insane. But telling someone to "just eat the food in moderation" is also insane when they are telling you they can't eat the food in moderation.0 -
People who say KFC and baking powder are poison? And, they don't have peer reviewed cites to show this? Is that what I read?
I love the KFC chicken tenders.
I just made Irish soda bread--it has both baking powder and baking soda.
All is well in La-la land. 0 -
EatsNotTreats wrote: »
I invite them to perform a fairly pleasurable act upon a part of my anatomy.EatsNotTreats wrote: »What do u do when a random person comes up to u in real life and tells u what u should be doing?
Fair enough, some consider it foreplay then
As long as my mission and goals are fulfilled, they can call it dog walking for all I care. lol.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I just always assumed it was fairly standard for most adults to do whatever the hell they want.
heh heh good one.lemurcat12 wrote: »To suggest that somehow the commercialized versions of food are more overwhelmingly palatable and impossible to turn down--addictive--as that baking soda woman and many others at MFP do seems to me insane. KFC is the most delicious chicken ever and therefore food companies force us to eat it, really? I mean, I might expect that claim from Colonel Sanders, but no one else.
AAAAAANnnnnnnddddddd, now I'm sucked back in.
It's me! It's me!
======>>>>>>>
I am suggesting that some foods for some people are impossible to turn down (with the caveat that it's not just commercialized foods -- home cooked foods can also be a trigger).
<<<<<<<<<==============
I am a binge eater. When I eat certain foods, I CANNOT stop eating them. It's got nothing to do with hunger or with satiety or with eating until I'm stuffed -- I never get stuffed during a binge. I never say "I can't eat another bite" during a binge. I can eat pounds of food during a binge. I will eat until the food is all gone, and if my body isn't over the binge, then I will get in my car, go to the grocery store (or two or three) and buy more and eat it until I am totally anesthetized. If I don't give in to the binge, then I'm moody, depressed, and vicious until I do give in.
I know hundreds of people just like me. I can go to any city and find meetings full of people just like me. I've had people on this very website PM me and thank me for talking about this because they are too afraid to bring it up in the forums because they don't want to be made fun of.
Do I have cites to prove the existence of food addiction? No. I don't know of any studies that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that food addiction exists.
However, I do have a couple of cites to people who are attempting to understand the nature of binging and the possibility of food addiction.
There's Kay SHeppard, who has written several books about food addiction and how to overcome it.
There's the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, which had a Food Addiction conference to discuss the issue of food addiction and also has a checklist for people who might suffer from binge eating.
There's a bunch of meetings for people who think they might have food addiction.
Here's a paper summarizing the findings from a food addiction symposium.
And etc.
You are certainly welcome to refute every one of these sources, (let me help! Here's a whole bunch of links to studies that suggest food addiction is in fact not real).
In my experience, my binging was caused by certain foods. I stopped eating those foods 10 years ago, and I no longer binge. I also no longer have food cravings. I get hungry, I eat. I don't sit around thinking "I really want to eat X" or "I'm really craving Y." Other people have also experience binging and have cut out their trigger food, to find that they don't binge or crave any more.
Of course personal anecdote does not equal double-blind peer reviewed research studies and of course correlation does not always equal causation.
But double-blind peer reviewed research studies exist because of personal anecdote and observed correlations.
People conduct research because they observe something and want to understand the science and causation behind it. Someone's personal experience is the foundation upon which most of our scientific knowledge is based. I am communicating with you right now because Ben Franklin tied a key to a kite.
And in the final instance, science or no, food addiction or no, I no longer binge. What I did worked for me and is sustainable for me.
So if someone comes into these forums and asks "I binge on certain foods. Do you think it could be the food?" I will 100% say "Yes, it could be the food. I used to binge, and when I cut out my trigger foods, I stopped binging and lost 75 pounds."
For a binger, that information is much more helpful than "it's not the food, it's you. you lack will power."
Well, no *kitten*. That's what a binge is -- the total lack of willpower. Where do they go from there? My solution -- "This is what worked for me" -- seems to be a tad more helpful than merely telling the binger he or she is insane to believe the food might be the problem.
eta: and I totally get what the "insane" bit is getting at -- that trying to hang onto a magical talisman instead of understanding science is what is insane. But telling someone to "just eat the food in moderation" is also insane when they are telling you they can't eat the food in moderation.
This is a very powerful, spot on post.
And actually helpful. This is the kind of perspective that can have real, lasting impact on somebody's life.
It's not about being anti-science or pro-experience. It's about what works. And this kind of raw honesty has the potential to impact, anecdotally evidence and all.
0 -
Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
Ah, interesting.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »Additionally i'll add that lecturer is a position, as in an adjunct, or a short term/contract position. Means they are not tenure track, and generally have fewer responsibilities in a department.
It does not denote a difference in educational degree, as in Master's vs. PhD.
It's a little different in Australia. We have 5 levels, Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Prof and Prof. All are tenured positions, although some ALs may be on contract initially. In my area (medical science), all 5 levels must have a PhD. I don't know of any Masters who teach, except as sessional staff in labs or tutorials.
I believe it's different in other disciplines though.
I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
Anyway...off topic, sorry..
In my wife's field which is Biology, I've only seen PhD holders in position of lecturer or higher. Other schools may be different of course, but generally from what I've seen, lecturer is an intinerant educator, moving from town to town to bring knowledge to the unenlightened, and packing up afterwards to move on into the sunset. I personally think it's a terrible misuse of quality educators, but I'm not involved in the business of education for revenue.
Once you're on the tenure track, you are an assistant professor, then associate, then full. somewhere down the line you can become an emeritus. Then there are the named professorships. I keep telling her, that if I ever get in the position that I can give her Uni a large donation, I'll do it with the requirement that she becomes a named professor, named after me since she refused to take on my name when we got married.
However, in the studio art area, I have several friends who are MFA holders who teach. I know several MBA holders who teach in the business school, etc.
As for Hawaii, I almost went to UoH@Manoa for a DBA, but determined that research was not as profitable as just an mba and a personalized set of morals. I'd go to Hawaii in a second though, although the stipend during the DBA program was $18k, I'm sure a lecturer position for an MBA holder would pay much better. That stipend though would have been horrid there in the land of $6 gallons of milk (when at the time the mainland was 50% cheaper.)
Similar to our phd stipends, even though they're 25k tax free, they're too hard to live on without other work. I'm probably better off sticking to holidays in Hawaii, because I would want to live on the north shore and then it would be almost impossible driving off to work every day...lol
Not. Tax. Free. >_<
It's so poorly low because here in the US we prefer bombing over knowledge. We're stupid, and loving rolling around in the muck and mire in a race to be the least knowledge focused country on the planet. At least it's profitable for our gentry and politicians.
There's a little shrimp truck on the north shore that I would just happily live at.
Oh! Not tax free! When I did mine I got 18k tax free paid by the university, plus around 10 hrs per week of lab/tute teaching or admin work which paid at around $30 per hour and was taxed at a minimal rate.
Maybe you and mrs dbmata need to come to Australia for a few years.
....and now I'm drooling about the shrimp plate from the haliewa shrimp truck......
Well, it's indicative of just how dimly the US views the importance of education.
Luckily, after her post-doc she got into a good tenure track position in a state I like, even though we're on the "special" side of it. heh. I wouldn't mind her getting nomadic after getting tenure, but who knows.
and yup, you probably know the truck I'm thinking about. lol.0 -
I read once that KFC changed their name because they don't use chicken anymore.0
-
I didn't read further in the article, the column next to it had an update on batboy, so I read that instead.0
-
Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
The problem is there's no clear cut American system. There's a standard way that tenure track works at major universities and academically-oriented colleges, but there are a huge variety of other kinds of institutions and part-time/non-tenure-track jobs and so on.
I know a few people who are kind of permanently ABD but still teach at local colleges/universities. Just not the particular local universities that I considered attending.
At other schools (like professional programs) the requirements are different still.
Ah, ok. We mostly have universities and tafe colleges. The tafe colleges are for trades. There are private colleges, but as far as I'm aware, students can't gain more than a diploma without spending some time at university.
There really aren't a huge amount of options for PhDs here. Most of my fellow candidates did post docs in the USA and many years later, they're still there. I stepped into a 50% tenured AL job which was extremely lucky! I was contract for 1 year and it was a baptism of fire with the amount of teaching hours I had (along with research expectations), but I survived and was moved to permanent. I've since moved up the ranks and now have a fair load. I was extremely fortunate though.
I only just learned, due to your post and wiki, that the term college is used differently in our countries. In the US a college may be part of an overall university (college of arts and sciences, say) or, as I meant it, a stand alone school that generally serves undergrads only and doesn't have various grad or professional programs. Many excellent tenure-track jobs are at colleges and many will pretty much only hire PhDs, especially since they don't have grad students doing the teaching, but I suppose some don't like those jobs as they are more teaching focused which probably makes fitting in the research and publications more challenging.
But I suppose we digress. ;-)0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I just always assumed it was fairly standard for most adults to do whatever the hell they want.
heh heh good one.lemurcat12 wrote: »To suggest that somehow the commercialized versions of food are more overwhelmingly palatable and impossible to turn down--addictive--as that baking soda woman and many others at MFP do seems to me insane. KFC is the most delicious chicken ever and therefore food companies force us to eat it, really? I mean, I might expect that claim from Colonel Sanders, but no one else.
AAAAAANnnnnnnddddddd, now I'm sucked back in.
It's me! It's me!
======>>>>>>>
I am suggesting that some foods for some people are impossible to turn down (with the caveat that it's not just commercialized foods -- home cooked foods can also be a trigger).
<<<<<<<<<==============
I am a binge eater. When I eat certain foods, I CANNOT stop eating them. It's got nothing to do with hunger or with satiety or with eating until I'm stuffed -- I never get stuffed during a binge. I never say "I can't eat another bite" during a binge. I can eat pounds of food during a binge. I will eat until the food is all gone, and if my body isn't over the binge, then I will get in my car, go to the grocery store (or two or three) and buy more and eat it until I am totally anesthetized. If I don't give in to the binge, then I'm moody, depressed, and vicious until I do give in.
I know hundreds of people just like me. I can go to any city and find meetings full of people just like me. I've had people on this very website PM me and thank me for talking about this because they are too afraid to bring it up in the forums because they don't want to be made fun of.
Do I have cites to prove the existence of food addiction? No. I don't know of any studies that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that food addiction exists.
However, I do have a couple of cites to people who are attempting to understand the nature of binging and the possibility of food addiction.
There's Kay SHeppard, who has written several books about food addiction and how to overcome it.
There's the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, which had a Food Addiction conference to discuss the issue of food addiction and also has a checklist for people who might suffer from binge eating.
There's a bunch of meetings for people who think they might have food addiction.
Here's a paper summarizing the findings from a food addiction symposium.
And etc.
You are certainly welcome to refute every one of these sources, (let me help! Here's a whole bunch of links to studies that suggest food addiction is in fact not real).
In my experience, my binging was caused by certain foods. I stopped eating those foods 10 years ago, and I no longer binge. I also no longer have food cravings. I get hungry, I eat. I don't sit around thinking "I really want to eat X" or "I'm really craving Y." Other people have also experience binging and have cut out their trigger food, to find that they don't binge or crave any more.
Of course personal anecdote does not equal double-blind peer reviewed research studies and of course correlation does not always equal causation.
But double-blind peer reviewed research studies exist because of personal anecdote and observed correlations.
People conduct research because they observe something and want to understand the science and causation behind it. Someone's personal experience is the foundation upon which most of our scientific knowledge is based. I am communicating with you right now because Ben Franklin tied a key to a kite.
And in the final instance, science or no, food addiction or no, I no longer binge. What I did worked for me and is sustainable for me.
So if someone comes into these forums and asks "I binge on certain foods. Do you think it could be the food?" I will 100% say "Yes, it could be the food. I used to binge, and when I cut out my trigger foods, I stopped binging and lost 75 pounds."
For a binger, that information is much more helpful than "it's not the food, it's you. you lack will power."
Well, no *kitten*. That's what a binge is -- the total lack of willpower. Where do they go from there? My solution -- "This is what worked for me" -- seems to be a tad more helpful than merely telling the binger he or she is insane to believe the food might be the problem.
eta: and I totally get what the "insane" bit is getting at -- that trying to hang onto a magical talisman instead of understanding science is what is insane. But telling someone to "just eat the food in moderation" is also insane when they are telling you they can't eat the food in moderation.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with my post.
Of course I believe in binge eating and that its a problem--although not that it has anything to do with addictive qualities of the foods themselves. If you want to say binge eating is akin to a psychological addiction I don't really disagree (pretty sure there's a recent thread where I discussed this along with some others). If you want to claim flour is addictive I think you are wrong, but I said nothing on the topic here and there's certainly some other thread where that's being discussed.
None of that relates to my point here which was that KFC is not magically (or technologically) more tasty than home cooked food or therefore more impossible to resist.
That's just goofy.0 -
I will say, though I'm not a huge fried chicken fan, I've never seen the wet-fried texture of the KFC batter replicated in any home cooked fried chicken I've ever had.
But the real KFC winner is the awesome grilled chicken. My damn I'm surprised I rarely have it because the stuff is like crack.0 -
You know, I noticed, I haven't seen many flags being left lately.
Has the passive aggressive storm passed?-1 -
-
diannethegeek wrote: »
and here I thought folks leveled up and got that iron skin +2 bonus.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »I know. But you do read some of that 'engineered to rope us in' stuff in legitimate sources, too. I think Michael Pollan goes there.
I don't think it 'addicts us' but I do think companies make food to sell the most food at the highest profit. That means adding salt, sugar and fat because they improve palatability and they're cheap-- win/win. Except for health. Not that I see anything wrong with salt, sugar and fat. But if all the food is really tasty, cheap and high calorie, it's enticing and easy to overeat.
We may not see eye to eye on many posts/threads, but I do agree with this. Its business, and food companies are going to make food that is highly palatable and quick and convenient - and many of these foods are calorie dense (and not so nutrient dense).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25398751
^^no claims or conclusions, just a recognition it existing and the need for further study.
There are a lot more, but just posting this one as its new and I saw it today and remembered your post.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions