Fed Up Documentary
Replies
-
On another note, it is killing me not being able to post my weight loss yet, because my official weigh-in day isn't until Saturday. But...I hit ONDERLAND!!
0 -
herrspoons wrote: »
Very few fall into the former group. In my experience they generally are well educated and versed in analysis.herrspoons wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
One thing I have learned over the years is that some people respond to polite, well thought out arguments and others just need a good kicking.
So it goes.
Most need a boot.
Pretty much. Most of the ones who take offence are the perpetual failures and people who are looking for excuses, and, let's face it, they'll never be convinced by any form of argument, so why waste the time?
I usually only take offense when people promote misinformation and refuse to back down, or tell me I'm "doing it wrong," unsolicited, mind you, even though I continue to be successful.
I wish I could like this, but MFP doesn't gve us that opion. Maybe I will flag it in place of a like?
Just your quote makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. 0 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »
What a great article. I've been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it.
0 -
-
GingerbreadCandy wrote: »I have enormous trouble with the "I can't believe people are that dumb" part. I have to state here – I don't live in the US, and although I knew that a lot of junk food is consumed in the states, Fed Up! was the first documentary I saw on the matter, and I was shocked by what is served in food cantines.
This actually explains a lot, since I think it's probably easier to believe rather extreme examples presented as normal from outside the US. I get the impression that crazy US stuff is rather enjoyed by some in other countries (at least we aren't like them!) in the way that, perhaps, some in the US like embarrassing reality shows about certain segments of the population. Doesn't necessarily make it actually that representative or people actually as dumb as those they found to focus on (or as they are willing to act to be in a movie or on TV).Let's take a personal example – I consider a breakfast of bread-based products and something nutella as a perfectly healthy part of an everyday meal.
Now, I know that nutella is high-calorie not the healthiest food on the market, but if I didn't know better, I would most likely keep it in my diet even if I was trying to lose wight, because it just appears to be healthy to me. Even better – my grandmother, would routinely cook us fried chicken breasts and serve it with fried eggplants, for example, because in her mind it was good, filling food for growing children. 
Hmm. I could buy this if we were just talking about traditional food items, like cereal for breakfast or, say, bacon, but even so people are capable of understanding the distinction between so-called healthy cereal (I hate cereal, and it was forced on me as a kid, so am prejudiced here) and super sugary kid's cereals. I actually have never found anyone who claims to be unaware that the latter is not the best choice (not that it can't be part of an overall balanced diet in moderation if you like it, of course).
Same, really, with fried foods--people might not think they are "unhealthy," but they sure know they are high in calories (or "fattening," as my own grandmother would have said).What I am saying is that I guess the issue is not stupidity, but just plain ignorance. Nutrition, to my knowledge, is not something taught in school, and in any case most definitely wasn't 40-50 years ago, when the parents of these obese kids were in school.
Hmm. At a certain point one has to try hard to be so incredibly ignorant, though, and that's where it becomes either unbelievable or unsympathetic to me, certainly not a basis for public policy choices.
Also, I'm 44 (more the age of the parents, although some could easily be younger), and back when I was in school nutrition WAS taught (not super well, but what a balanced diet was, the four food groups, so on). It was taught more when my mom was in school (she had to take home ec, I did not, although it was offered), but even more important, in her generation and even mine one just grew up having a sense of what proper nutrition was based on ideas about how one ate, what a meal was. I think nutrition is probably taught more now, but I get the sense that for many families the standard traditions about what proper meals are (including vegetables and all that) are gone. People love to mock the traditional American diet that I grew up with, and certainly it assumed meat and had plenty of starch, and the veggies weren't always well cooked and were frequently canned, but looking back the essence of it was reasonably healthy and it's not surprising that few kids were overweight (and not even that many adults) back then. There also may have been more activity, although a lot of the changes related to that had already occurred, I think.Also, at the time, eating fat, calorie-heavy foods made sense as there was a lot more manual labour and thus energy needed to be restored. In the case of my grandparents, there is and ben more subtle reason: they just were not very rich people and could not afford tons of food. So pimping up the meals with lots of fat helped them get their daily calorie-intake. Neither situations, however, apply today.
I largely agree with this, except I don't think fat is the problem even now, and I'd say that my grandparents (for similar reasons--also they lived on a farm in one case and one generation removed in the other, both sets had necessarily active lifestyles) also ate far more starchy foods (grains and potatoes) than I do or even than I grew up with, and for the same reasons that didn't lead to the same consequences as if they were sedentary. (My greatgrandparents even had a mill, so clearly my family is to blame for the obesity epidemic, since they processed all that wheat and such!)
We aren't going to agree on food addiction, so I'll leave it. The conflation of liking/wanting something pleasurable and addiction tends to bug me more than it probably should.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Thanks!! I am doubly motivated now!0 -
herrspoons wrote: »
Very few fall into the former group. In my experience they generally are well educated and versed in analysis.herrspoons wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
One thing I have learned over the years is that some people respond to polite, well thought out arguments and others just need a good kicking.
So it goes.
Most need a boot.
Pretty much. Most of the ones who take offence are the perpetual failures and people who are looking for excuses, and, let's face it, they'll never be convinced by any form of argument, so why waste the time?
As a cynic, I agree, and suggest the basic approach of validate or ignore. People don't need that though, even though they crave it. (Like Brawndo.)0 -
oedipa_maas wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »
What a great article. I've been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it.
Probably an article entirely funded by Big Sugar™ (or a more far-reaching conspiracy, Big Food™).0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »oedipa_maas wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »
What a great article. I've been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it.
Probably an article entirely funded by Big Sugar™ (or a more far-reaching conspiracy, Big Food™).
Don't forget the ultimate conspiracy: Big™ -- it's really, really, really Big™!0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »This actually explains a lot, since I think it's probably easier to believe rather extreme examples presented as normal from outside the US. I get the impression that crazy US stuff is rather enjoyed by some in other countries (at least we aren't like them!) in the way that, perhaps, some in the US like embarrassing reality shows about certain segments of the population. Doesn't necessarily make it actually that representative or people actually as dumb as those they found to focus on (or as they are willing to act to be in a movie or on TV).
Oh, do not worry, I most certainly do not generalise three families to the entire US population.
I think the thing with your extremes is that they tend to go miles beyond our own extremes, so when we see them, we have a natural "How the **** does that happen?" reaction. Moreover, I think Europe is generally more socialist than the US; so I think many of us tend to see it as a reflection of the country in terms of "What does it say about a country, which is supposedly one of the most advanced in the world, but then allows these things to happen?"Hmm. At a certain point one has to try hard to be so incredibly ignorant, though, and that's where it becomes either unbelievable or unsympathetic to me, certainly not a basis for public policy choices.
You'd be surprised... (And I am not talking just about the US here)
Maybe, but then, if the problem grows so out of hand that it weighs on the country as a whole, doesn't it become a matter of public policy? Not in terms of restrictions, but at least solid information campaigns?Also, I'm 44 (more the age of the parents, although some could easily be younger), and back when I was in school nutrition WAS taught (not super well, but what a balanced diet was, the four food groups, so on). It was taught more when my mom was in school (she had to take home ec, I did not, although it was offered), but even more important, in her generation and even mine one just grew up having a sense of what proper nutrition was based on ideas about how one ate, what a meal was.
Oh ok, I had no idea. I am pretty sure it was a very recent introduction here.I think nutrition is probably taught more now, but I get the sense that for many families the standard traditions about what proper meals are (including vegetables and all that) are gone. People love to mock the traditional American diet that I grew up with, and certainly it assumed meat and had plenty of starch, and the veggies weren't always well cooked and were frequently canned, but looking back the essence of it was reasonably healthy and it's not surprising that few kids were overweight (and not even that many adults) back then.
Agreed completely on this. And I think this is what leads to the ignorance and over-consumption in junk food: If you do not have a concept of what a proper meal is, you will not be able to change your dietary habits. I think this is what I meant. In fact, based on general from perception (I don't have a statistic on it), the countries in Europe that consume the greatest amount of fast food and convenience food, are also those which have the weakest cooking tradition.
In countries like France and Italy, on the other hand, which have very strong traditional cuisine and just about everyone has at least basic cooking skills, there is a rather low consumption of fast food. Whenever we did go for fast food in France, we literally called "aller faire les gros," which roughly translates to "let's be fat people for a day". (Which, before some one takes it the wrong way, was not an attack on overweight people but a recognition of how bad fast food was for us.)
I actually have no idea what a traditional American diet is.
All we get here from America is fast food, American diners serving burgers and fries, and the occasional steak house. Literally the only element of American cuisine I have in my cooking arsenal are pancakes. 
I largely agree with this, except I don't think fat is the problem even now, and I'd say that my grandparents (for similar reasons--also they lived on a farm in one case and one generation removed in the other, both sets had necessarily active lifestyles) also ate far more starchy foods (grains and potatoes) than I do or even than I grew up with, and for the same reasons that didn't lead to the same consequences as if they were sedentary. (My greatgrandparents even had a mill, so clearly my family is to blame for the obesity epidemic, since they processed all that wheat and such!)
Hmm, I guess it is the same principle with different foods, and what it boils down to in both cases is calorie intake vs. active life.
Thinking about it, by that logic the entire Italian population should be obese, considering all the wheat-based products we consume. And YET, our traditional diet is ranked among the healthiest. We aren't going to agree on food addiction, so I'll leave it. The conflation of liking/wanting something pleasurable and addiction tends to bug me more than it probably should.
I am fine with that. To be honest, I have not done enough research on the subject anyhow to have formed a proper opinion. I am just very interested in the concept and whenever that happens, I tend to obsess over it for a while until I am satisfied with the information I have. Maybe I will change my mind and then get back to you when I will. Or maybe I won't, and then, if you are up for it, I will gladly have a proper debate. (I like having debates, I find that you learn a lot from them regardless of whether you agree on the matter or not) 0 -
oedipa_maas wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »
What a great article. I've been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it.
:flowerforyou:
Science Based Medicine is usually my first stop when health claims are made. It's a solid site.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
-1 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen. -1 -
christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
-1 -
herrspoons wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
One thing I have learned over the years is that some people respond to polite, well thought out arguments and others just need a good kicking.
So it goes.
You mark yourself as a violent person when you say things like that. I would be careful--this is the internet after all.
-3 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Are you always in the habit of calling people liars? I would imagine that gathers more than a small amount of trouble for you. *Santemulberry takes out her notebook and pen* and says to Run_fit, "Tell me, why do you have this apparent need to taunt people and call them liars? Is it because someone in your early life lied to you?"
0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Are you always in the habit of calling people liars? I would imagine that gathers more than a small amount of trouble for you. *Santemulberry takes out her notebook and pen* and says to Run_fit, "Tell me, why do you have this apparent need to taunt people and call them liars? Is it because someone in your early life lied to you?"
I only call people who lie, liars.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Are you always in the habit of calling people liars? I would imagine that gathers more than a small amount of trouble for you. *Santemulberry takes out her notebook and pen* and says to Run_fit, "Tell me, why do you have this apparent need to taunt people and call them liars? Is it because someone in your early life lied to you?"
I only call people who lie, liars.
Since I am not lying, I can only assume that you bear ill-will toward those who do not immediately honor your every demand. That is unreasonable in the extreme. Good day to you, sir. Have a nice life.
0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Are you always in the habit of calling people liars? I would imagine that gathers more than a small amount of trouble for you. *Santemulberry takes out her notebook and pen* and says to Run_fit, "Tell me, why do you have this apparent need to taunt people and call them liars? Is it because someone in your early life lied to you?"
I only call people who lie, liars.
Since I am not lying, I can only assume that you bear ill-will toward those who do not immediately honor your every demand. That is unreasonable in the extreme. Good day to you, sir. Have a nice life.
Nope, I just call it as I see it. Multiple people have requested proof of your success, and you've denied them everytime. I'm hardly the only one who has called you out on this. If you want to prove you're not a liar, post pictures of your success. I've recently lost 125 lbs, and I couldn't wait to show the world my pictures. This being reluctant to prove your success only confirms to me that there is no success at all.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
:huh: Um...no. I think that's all on you and what you decide to notice, not what actually happens.
-1 -
PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
:huh: Um...no. I think that's all on you and what you decide to notice, not what actually happens.
Exactly! I think she's a man-hater, lol.
-1 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion.SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »Quite stunned still to have read this comment and not seeing others respond to the fallacies it presents to the readers:
You can't count it successful, if you quickly regain what was lost as soon as you leave the low calorie plan. And the reason why many people leave the low calorie plan is because they are malnourished from only paying attention to "calories in - calories out".
It is so annoying to see people spout opinions based on their own misinformed collection of thoughts and try to present themselves as informed.
Firstly, CICO does not equal low calorie. Secondly, people do not quickly regain because they were malnourished from only paying attention to CICO. One can be entirely well-nourished, following a moderate deficit, CICO and IIFYM and still regain once they hit their magical goal because they are not eating at maintenance - they are eating in surplus. What causes them to eat at a suprlus? A whole list of things that are entirely individual and one could spend days discussing them.
You want to eat a certain way because it works for you? Great. You want to share what works for you? Awesome. But please - stop demonizing and misinforming others with your incorrect conclusions and opinions and trying to present them as factual. The use of words like 'generally' and 'often' does not actually make your statements any less wrong.
Yes, it does mean low calorie for some people. And I have evaluated the diet of a great many of my friends on MFP as well as looked at the diets of other people. And it is mostly older women I am speaking of. They tend to be deficient in protein, vitamins, minerals, and even fat. I have one friend who is obsessed with eating low fat. I keep telling her that she needs at least 45 grams of fat per day to stay healthy. She eats a lot of junk (including booze). She runs a lot--until she has an injury. And then she stops and gains weight in spite of eating even less than she was eating before. She has had many health problems and I can't help but feel that she would be healthier if she would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
The recommendation sounds very similar to IIFYM!
No. She has so completely messed up her health and metabolism from eating (and drinking) whatever--"as long as it fits in her macros" that she now gains weight on eating practically nothing (when she is laid up because of an injury). She just recently had to have achilles tendon surgery. She is very flabby and sickly looking and thinks that all she has to do is run more and that will fix everything. It's NOT working.
That's not what Sara was commenting on. THIS is what she was saying sounds familiar to IIFYM -...would follow a more sensible diet and exercise program.
Do you really understand/know what IIFYM is? Please take a read at the following link because I really don't think you get it.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1
Yes, yes--I understand that the THEORY is to take care of your nutritional needs first and then, if you have any calories left over, indulge your appetite. BUT, when I examine the food diaries of many people, I see that THEY interpret IIFIYM to mean that they can eat whatever crap diet they want to eat as long as they fall under on their calories.
Since you want to be so critical of everyone else and have excuses for everything, why don't you opt your page and diary so that we can see how it's done. Every time someone comes along being all high and mighty about what they eat and trashing their own friends, their diaries are closed.
Also, you are doing a pretty pathetic job of backing up all your claims. It's apparent the are just opinions not facts. And you've back peddled pretty well I must say.
Open your diary if you feel it's necessary to trash others. Don't be a hypocrite.
I make no excuses--I have taken my health in my hands and it's all good. I have much personal information on my page that I do not open to everyone on the internet--sorry. I have posted pages of my food diaries before. If I feel like it, I will but I only give access to those I choose. I have NEVER "back-pedalled" by the way. I remain of the same opinions as those I had when I began this "discussion". You reveal your mindset when you speak of others "...being all high and mighty...". My diary is open to my friends and I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would select you for a friend. Sit on it.
Me want to be friends with you? Yea, never has or will ever cross my mind.. I like strong friends that don't post nonsense using age, hormones, gender etc as a crutch.
Me thinking I'm high and mighty? Maybe, maybe not. I'm no where near the best on this site but I think I'm pretty f'ing awesome for sure. I love me some me!!!!
LOL--now that is amusing!
I can't believe that you actually posted this:
"...Then if you're not going to open yourself to be criticized by others on your eating habits then you have no right to criticize others' eating habits here in the discussion..."
Since when do you get to set the rules for what anyone comments about the eating habits of others? LOL!
Then we reserve the right to call you a hypocrite on top of being someone full of excuses.
Carry on.
You can call me anything you like but that doesn't make it true. And on the matter of excuses--I have no need of them because I have been successful in losing 66 pounds and will keep it off permanently.
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Are you always in the habit of calling people liars? I would imagine that gathers more than a small amount of trouble for you. *Santemulberry takes out her notebook and pen* and says to Run_fit, "Tell me, why do you have this apparent need to taunt people and call them liars? Is it because someone in your early life lied to you?"
I only call people who lie, liars.
Since I am not lying, I can only assume that you bear ill-will toward those who do not immediately honor your every demand. That is unreasonable in the extreme. Good day to you, sir. Have a nice life.
Nope, I just call it as I see it. Multiple people have requested proof of your success, and you've denied them everytime. I'm hardly the only one who has called you out on this. If you want to prove you're not a liar, post pictures of your success. I've recently lost 125 lbs, and I couldn't wait to show the world my pictures. This being reluctant to prove your success only confirms to me that there is no success at all.
Think what you like--it is not true but you are welcome to your delusions. I have already explained why I have not posted pictures of myself. I am not you. I don't know how to prove my weight loss other than pictures, so you'll just have to take my word for it...or not. Suit yourself. If I posted pictures, you would likely say that it wasn't me or some other foolishness. I choose not to respond to such.
0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
:huh: Um...no. I think that's all on you and what you decide to notice, not what actually happens.
Exactly! I think she's a man-hater, lol.
Another foolish accusation. I have been married to the same man for 42 blissful years.
0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.
The meanest attacks always come from youngish men. I read a fair bit of forum postings, even if I don't respond personally and that has always been my observation. That is why I rarely participate in the forums anymore--I really don't have the time to spend. I have spent far too much time on this thread as it is. I will do a statistical analysis of the number of attacks on character and the gender of those who make them--when I get the time. That might be interesting. You have been very polite in your responses, even though you don't agree and I appreciate that, Sara.
-2 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.
The meanest attacks always come from youngish men. I read a fair bit of forum postings, even if I don't respond personally and that has always been my observation. That is why I rarely participate in the forums anymore--I really don't have the time to spend. I have spent far too much time on this thread as it is. I will do a statistical analysis of the number of attacks on character and the gender of those who make them--when I get the time. That might be interesting. You have been very polite in your responses, even though you don't agree and I appreciate that, Sara.
And anyone who points out inconsistencies and such are attacking you? Now is the time for my notebook (you aren't the only one with counselling experience) so how long have you had these persecutory issues?0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.
The meanest attacks always come from youngish men. I read a fair bit of forum postings, even if I don't respond personally and that has always been my observation. That is why I rarely participate in the forums anymore--I really don't have the time to spend. I have spent far too much time on this thread as it is. I will do a statistical analysis of the number of attacks on character and the gender of those who make them--when I get the time. That might be interesting. You have been very polite in your responses, even though you don't agree and I appreciate that, Sara.
And anyone who points out inconsistencies and such are attacking you? Now is the time for my notebook (you aren't the only one with counselling experience) so how long have you had these persecutory issues?
Well, it would be good if you would learn to spell "counseling" if you want me to take you seriously. Second, had you read my post carefully (it is always important to make sure you understand exactly what is actually being said), you would have seen that I rarely participate in the forums anymore because I don't have the time to get embroiled. But I did say that I READ them and have made observations. There has been at least one attack on my character in this thread. I have been called a liar for no other reason than failing to post a picture of myself. Other posters have constantly belittled over what is essentially a difference of opinion--since they (you) offered no more proof of their (your) position than I did--probably less since I actually posted links to legitimate studies. Good day to you, sir.
-7 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.
The meanest attacks always come from youngish men. I read a fair bit of forum postings, even if I don't respond personally and that has always been my observation. That is why I rarely participate in the forums anymore--I really don't have the time to spend. I have spent far too much time on this thread as it is. I will do a statistical analysis of the number of attacks on character and the gender of those who make them--when I get the time. That might be interesting. You have been very polite in your responses, even though you don't agree and I appreciate that, Sara.
You have not been polite nor considerate yourself, ma'am. You have been rude, snarky and have made some pretty belittling comments. Just above you attacked someone for not spelling counseling correctly. You're not a victim, so quit playing the victim card, lady.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Yeah I know, but no one is backing down and you all are just going round and round in circles.
What bothers me most is that some people appear to be taking great pleasure in ridiculing and putting others down
Yeah--that appears to be the name of the game around here. Ever wonder why it mostly seems to be men who do that? I do.
I have not noticed any disparity between genders in this regard and therefore, no, I do not wonder.
The meanest attacks always come from youngish men. I read a fair bit of forum postings, even if I don't respond personally and that has always been my observation. That is why I rarely participate in the forums anymore--I really don't have the time to spend. I have spent far too much time on this thread as it is. I will do a statistical analysis of the number of attacks on character and the gender of those who make them--when I get the time. That might be interesting. You have been very polite in your responses, even though you don't agree and I appreciate that, Sara.
And anyone who points out inconsistencies and such are attacking you? Now is the time for my notebook (you aren't the only one with counselling experience) so how long have you had these persecutory issues?
Well, it would be good if you would learn to spell "counseling" if you want me to take you seriously. Second, had you read my post carefully (it is always important to make sure you understand exactly what is actually being said), you would have seen that I rarely participate in the forums anymore because I don't have the time to get embroiled. But I did say that I READ them and have made observations. There has been at least one attack on my character in this thread. I have been called a liar for no other reason than failing to post a picture of myself. Other posters have constantly belittled over what is essentially a difference of opinion--since they (you) offered no more proof of their (your) position than I did--probably less since I actually posted links to legitimate studies. Good day to you, sir.
TBH if you want to be taken more seriously you should learn to behave more professionally and conduct yourself in the manner in which you wish to be treated. Social mirror theory is something you should know very well if you are what you say you are. I'm not saying it's all on your side but you it seems you are provocative in many of your posts.
BTW counselling.net/jnew/ theravive.com/cities/on/counselling-ottawa.aspx seems my spelling is fine but I have seen it spelled both ways.
Good day to you as well as I wish you no ill and won't attack but will point out what I have observed.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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