Define "healthy" food...
Replies
-
0
-
jofjltncb6 wrote: »a month of broccoli?
good lord- i would hate to be the plumber for THAT house!!! OIYBecause it is extremely high calorie, high sugar, and high fat for little volume and not a great deal of nutritional value. To be honest I didn't choose the ice cream metaphor, and don't find ice cream to be nearly as unhealthy as, say, a can of coke, but in comparison to a bunch of kale YES ice cream offers less nutritional value.
so much sadness and wrongess here.
also this: kale vs ice cream?
seriously?
no questions- the kales' in the trash- it's rubbish awful food. You want to talk about 'unhealthy' anything that tastes that bad before you put int your pie hole should never be considered healthy- much less a "super food"
PS Eff you women's health for making kale a thing.
seriously. die.
I really like kale....*ducks*
That shiz is horrible. Bleh. Sorry :flowerforyou:
Ha. I know I'm in the minority. I don't like it baked, I only like it raw in a chopped salad. It has more bite and crunch than regular lettuce. But I like arugula and endive too - maybe I just like bitter greens!
I actually like it salted and dehydrated into chips. No, it is nothing like potato chips...but it is strangely tasty.
And I'm glad they haven't implemented the "ignore" feature yet as I'm sure this comment would get me ignored...by at least half of the people on my FL.
LOL. Welcome to the dark side...
Oh, I've been there for years...long before it was a "superfood". I still think its primary role is on a plate with steak and potatoes...to provide a nice splash of decorative green.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
I used to think this, too. Then one of my buddies brought over Hawaiian pizza. I changed my mind.
epic dislike. no way. do.not.like.
canadian bacon usually accompanies pineapple too.
<shudder>
insert dirty joke
I want my pizza loaded with meat.
0 -
That's not what she said. She had a genuine interest. If her interest was in knowledge, she can go get more. There is always more to get.prattiger65 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I am going to step out here and say,. She already knows and would like the other poster to elaborate.
If her interest is in mocking or insulting that poster, she doesn't need a link, lol.
My interest was in seeing this mysterious link. Simple as that.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
I used to think this, too. Then one of my buddies brought over Hawaiian pizza. I changed my mind.
I amped that Hawaiian baby up we add pepperoni, ham, bacon, onions, tomatoes, and pineapple and it's like the creator himself came down from heaven and kissed you on the forehead while angles play harps.
0 -
This just in: JoRocka likes the stuffed crust pizza.0
-
MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
I believe she has already been given far more attention in this thread than her completely unsupported assertion presented as fact deserves.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
Pineapple does not belong anywhere - that shiz is ebil.0 -
That's not what she said. She had a genuine interest. If her interest was in knowledge, she can go get more. There is always more to get.prattiger65 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I am going to step out here and say,. She already knows and would like the other poster to elaborate.
If her interest is in mocking or insulting that poster, she doesn't need a link, lol.
My interest was in seeing this mysterious link. Simple as that.
I think you'll get proof that eating broccoli for 1-2 months will land you in the hospital before you get that link0 -
I do not know her personally. I do not even know what she has said she does. I do not care, not even a little.prattiger65 wrote: »
That's not what she said. She had a genuine interest. If her interest was in knowledge, she can go get more. There is always more to get.prattiger65 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I am going to step out here and say,. She already knows and would like the other poster to elaborate.
If her interest is in mocking or insulting that poster, she doesn't need a link, lol.
Do you know anything of Sara's background? You must not.0 -
ldrosophila wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
I used to think this, too. Then one of my buddies brought over Hawaiian pizza. I changed my mind.
I amped that Hawaiian baby up we add pepperoni, ham, bacon, onions, tomatoes, and pineapple and it's like the creator himself came down from heaven and kissed you on the forehead while angles play harps.
I may or may not have just had an orgasm.
And, on that note, time to go find some food...0 -
You people who put fruit on pizza are sick and need immediate help!
0 -
prattiger65 wrote: »ShinyFuture wrote: »Somebody (I don't know who, it's from a book of quotes) once said "Truth, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder." Same goes for "healthy food". It's whatever it means to the individual.
For me, for example, today I had homemade hummus w/fresh vegetables - I consider that healthy food. I also had peanut m&m's. I consider that unhealthy food. I had room in my calories for it, but it still serves no useful purpose towards *my* overall health or *my* weight loss efforts. So *for me* and *what I eat*, m&m's are not healthy food.
If someone else thinks m&m's are healthy food for them based on how they look at things, that's fine. I learned a long time ago that I can only live my own life.
What confuses me, however, is the constant battle about it. Do you really care that my gauge *for me* is whether it advances *my* overall health and weight loss efforts, and so for me I think m&m's are not healthy?
I could not care less what you eat or think, until you put it on a forum where people are trying to learn about health and fitness. I want to make sure they hear the other side. Peanut M&M's aren't unhealthy if consumed in the context of a balanced diet.
The other side of what? There is no other side to what *I* think is healthy *for me*. I didn't say it's not healthy in general, or not healthy for someone else. Healthy is a personal definition. No amount of arguing will change that basic fact.0 -
ldrosophila wrote: »ShinyFuture wrote: »What confuses me, however, is the constant battle about it. Do you really care that my gauge *for me* is whether it advances *my* overall health and weight loss efforts, and so for me I think m&m's are not healthy?
I care because you hurt little M&M's feelings he cant help it his candy coating has made him unhealthy and sick. He tries to make up for it by putting a little peanut inside, but he just never gets the credit like his big brother chickpea who gets all the kuddos for being able to go into pita bread
snort0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19704096/
Added sugars are not inherently bad... excessive added sugars from any source can be bad...
FIFY0 -
This just in: JoRocka likes the stuffed crust pizza.
actually I'm kind of meh about that- I feel it takes away from my carb load LMAO... I just like sauce- lots of sauce - lightly crusted wtih cheese- and load that puppy up with sausage pepperonie and all bacon if you got it.
Although- stuffed crust makes it more balanced- carbs fats proteins. win win everywhere.
0 -
I do not know her personally. I do not even know what she has said she does. I do not care, even a little.prattiger65 wrote: »
That's not what she said. She had a genuine interest. If her interest was in knowledge, she can go get more. There is always more to get.prattiger65 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I am going to step out here and say,. She already knows and would like the other poster to elaborate.
If her interest is in mocking or insulting that poster, she doesn't need a link, lol.
Do you know anything of Sara's background? You must not.
And that says it all. Perhaps you should do a little research, cause you are making yourself look silly.0 -
This just in: JoRocka likes the stuffed crust pizza.
actually I'm kind of meh about that- I feel it takes away from my carb load LMAO... I just like sauce- lots of sauce - lightly crusted wtih cheese- and load that puppy up with sausage pepperonie and all bacon if you got it.
Although- stuffed crust makes it more balanced- carbs fats proteins. win win everywhere.
AND banana peppers!0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
I believe she has already been given far more attention in this thread than her completely unsupported assertion presented as fact deserves.
I believe that you are correct. Good point, well presented!0 -
I have to take this piece by piece. Please don't think I'm trying to make a huge argument because I'm not. Discussing, not fighting. Not personal.But the problem is that "healthiness"--at least in the way that I am using it, as in "is beneficial to eat" is not an inherent property of food but depends on the circumstances.
We disagree right there. I cannot get on board with the premise that food is different based on thoughts or circumstances. The thoughts and circumstances might influence decisions, but they do not influence the food.
The food of course is not different, but "healthiness" is not an inherent property of food. Whether something has a positive or negative effect (or a neutral one) on our health depends on circumstances. For the most part, one individual food item will have no meaningful effect at all. The overall diet will, which is why a diet can be called healthy or unhealthy, but a specific food cannot. It's the amount and the other foods eaten and so on that determine whether it adds to your overall health.If you've eaten nothing but broccoli for a week, broccoli is not healthy.
The broccoli continues to be broccoli. It's nutritive value doesn't change because you've been eating only broccoli. It remains the same.
No one is saying the broccoli changes. But whether it contributes to your health depends on the circumstances. Usually it does (which is why in casual speech I too might call it healthy), but it is not inherent to the broccoli that it will contribute to health. It depends on context.If you eat only broccoli for a week AND you care about your health AND you're willing to listen to advice about what is better or worse AND you're willing to adjust your diet based on that advice, you should start eating other things.
Yes, because broccoli is not inherently healthy. Instead, it contributes micro nutrients and fiber that are helpful to creating an overall healthy diet. If you don't need those things or have too much already, the broccoli might not be healthy. What is healthy depends on how it actually affects you.
In reality, we are using two different understandings of the term healthy. I think mine makes more sense, but I have grasped yours and am willing to say that both are valid ways of looking at it, even if I think mine is a better way to create an overall diet (but I would, it's mine and what I do). You seem unwilling to even try to understand how I am looking at this, even while maintaining your own preferred way. I don't get that.Whether a food benefits your health or not depends on the overall diet.
Agree and disagree. The food's benefits, per se, won't change. Whether or not it will benefit you is always something that has to be decided. Your overall diet can play a part in your decision-making process, but doesn't actually have any effect on the food.
That's not an agree/disagree. That's no different than what I was saying.The broccoli doesn't become an unhealthy food, per se. You just need to eat other healthy foods to get those nutrients.
The broccoli contributes some things that you need, but not everything. Other foods (which you might call "unhealthy") contribute other things. Whether a diet is healthy or not does not depend on getting the most food with high positive qualities (as if the answer were just to eat "healthy" foods and avoid "unhealthy" one), but in getting the right mix of foods. So if you decide that meat is unhealthy and broccoli healthy and then proceed to eat a very low fat and low protein diet made up mainly of broccoli, you might end up feeling worse than if you ate a better diet with a mix of foods, some super nutrient dense (which you (and even I) might call "healthy") and some with, say, saturated fat and protein. (I'm not saying there aren't perfectly healthy vegetarian diets, of course, but simply that eating only broccoli would not be one.)
This is not because broccoli is unhealthy, but because whether it contributes to health or not depends (although it still has all its specific positive qualities).
Similarly, whether skin-on chicken breast is healthy or not (I'm assuming you might say not) depends on context. IMO, it usually is, so long as you aren't overeating the qualities it has that can be overeaten and are benefitting from the positive qualities it contributes.If we want an "overall healthy diet" then most of our food choices will need to be foods that are healthy.
I might say this casually. But more precisely I'd say that if we want an overall healthy diet than we should include a good variety of foods that are nutrient dense and contribute the correct mix of macros for the person. This generally would include lots of veggies.I compare chicken and green beans based on the fact that I get enough veggies and fruits. In fact, I get too many fruits and not enough chicken, so I need to put some damn chicken on the plate. If I gave in to what I like, I'd eat green beans and some kind of fruit for dinner.
And this is precisely what I mean. It's not that chicken is healthier than green beans. It's that chicken is something that you would want to add to contribute to the overall mix of your diet. If you just focused on healthy or not, that would not be the case. You could say that green beans are more "nutrient dense" than chicken and have less negative outcomes based on broad population studies (say the China Study, although I have issues with it), and thus that it's "healthier" to eat "healthier foods" like green beans and eschew the chicken. That's how I see a lot of the people doing the labeling like that around here approach it. For example, asking what the "best" foods are and eating mostly them as good for a diet or some such or deciding that if they cut out "white carbs" they are eating healthy and don't need to do anything else. That's why I'm arguing against what seems a blinkered way of looking at foods.
You aren't doing that, so I tend to think this is a silly semantic argument.
0 -
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
LOLwut?
:huh:
Well, my day has been made.
Sara, you should trying seeking out, like, you know, knowledge and stuff.
And whatever you do, don't expect someone making a contrary assertion to provide support for it. That's totally unreasonable and just lazy. You should find the source on which they're relying for yourself.0 -
Research on what some person on the Internet says she does? Thanks, no.prattiger65 wrote: »
I do not know her personally. I do not even know what she has said she does. I do not care, even a little.prattiger65 wrote: »
That's not what she said. She had a genuine interest. If her interest was in knowledge, she can go get more. There is always more to get.prattiger65 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I am going to step out here and say,. She already knows and would like the other poster to elaborate.
If her interest is in mocking or insulting that poster, she doesn't need a link, lol.
Do you know anything of Sara's background? You must not.
And that says it all. Perhaps you should do a little research, cause you are making yourself look silly.0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
LOLwut?
:huh:
Well, my day has been made.
Sara, you should trying seeking out, like, you know, knowledge and stuff.
And whatever you do, don't expect someone making a contrary assertion to provide support for it. That's totally unreasonable and just lazy. You should find the source on which they're relying for yourself.
I know, right0 -
chivalryder wrote: »
I'm not reading through the 15 new pages to find out if it's been addressed already, so if carbs are nutrients, why is Coca Cola considered "empty calories"? You specifically didn't state "empty calorie" foods have no nutrients, but I can't find the specific post in this thread that did state it.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
jofjltncb6 wrote: »http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19704096/
Added sugars are not inherently bad... excessive added sugars from any source can be bad...
FIFY
Good catch... TY!
0 -
Lol. She's telling her to go learn. Priceless.
I think she was calling your bluff. You claimed to have a "genuine interest", but you didn't.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
If you did, you would research the issue yourself. It's really not that hard. You obviously have internet access. If you don't care enough to research it, why should I do it for you?MoiAussi93 wrote: »At not wasting my time providing links to people who have no genuine interest in them? Actually, I'm pretty good at that.
But I do have a genuine interest.
Then why did you offer. Again, seems disingenuous.
Also...lulz at the google weak google it yourself ploy. You realize that people can see right through that right? Right?
If you were genuinely interested in anything, you would seek out knowledge on the subject and wouldn't even limit yourself to the Internet, much less a discussion board.
If you do not have enough interest to seek out information on your own, there really is no reason someone else to provide you with it.
If you want to learn, go learn. Nobody can stop you.
I was attempting to help her out, but she insists on looking foolish0 -
chivalryder wrote: »
I'm not reading through the 15 new pages to find out if it's been addressed already, so if carbs are nutrients, why is Coca Cola considered "empty calories"? You specifically didn't state "empty calorie" foods have no nutrients, but I can't find the specific post in this thread that did state it.
I found the specific post:DesdemonaRose wrote: »Wow, are there people who really don't know what a empty calorie is? Soda is a empty calorie, it gives you zero nutrients that your body can use. Depending on what ice-cream you buy, it can have things like protein and calcium (from the dairy). So, some might consider it empty because it's usually seen as a treat, but it's not a completely empty calorie if it has dairy, soy, or something else in it with some nutritional value.
Don't forget genes, they play a pretty big role in how long you live. That is why grandma can smoke till she's 100 but the guy down the street died from lung cancer at 35.
Obviously what is "healthy," is debatable, but if you only ate Doritos for a month you would probably feel a bit *kitten* by the end of the month and might even have a vitamin deficiency or two. If you don't look outside of Western societies where we tend to eat a variety and everything is fortified then it might seem like it doesn't matter. But, take a look at populations with limited food supplies and it matters to them. You really can have a vitamin or nutrient deficiency. There are people in America who die from malnutrition, just not very many. As long as there is some variety in your life then you are probably good, even if that variety is Taco Bell one day and McDonald's the next. There are a lot of studies that show excessive consumption of some things can cause earlier death in some populations. But, of course, genes play a role and the debate of which matters more is still plenty there. Nutrition is a newer science and there are a lot of variables.
Malnutrition Death Rates by Country:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/malnutrition/by-country/0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
I used to believe this...strongly...until one night during busy season when the new staff didn't order enough "actual [effing] pizza like God intended with actual pizza ingredients" and had an entire "are you [effing] kidding me?!? [Effing] fruit [effing] pizza??? You expect me to eat [effing] fruit pizza? And Canadian bacon? Do I sound Canadian to you? You have a problem with american bacon???" that I angrily took a couple of slices of because starved...
...which led to me telling the new staff "hey, this isn't that [effing] bad. Actually, it's really [effing] good. You're still an idiot though."
(20 years ago jof wasn't nearly as chill as current jof.)0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
It's called ingredients that do not have a place in pizza.ForecasterJason wrote: »
You're missing it. If you saw the post I made earlier about the ingredients in Dominoes pizza, maybe it'd be easier for you to understand her point.sweetdixie92 wrote: »sweetdixie92 wrote: »So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?
Yes. Just look at the ingredient list.
Where your nutrients, fat, carbs, etc. are coming from do matter.
oh really??? care to elaborate?
so if my macors are 35p/35c/30 fats and I hit them all with eggs, chicken, rice, bread, etc and then filled in rest of day with ice cream and some cookies, you are saying that is an unhealthy day just because I got 500 - 600 from ice cream and cookies...really?
As I said, look at the ingredients. That is, unless you're going with organic or natural. It's not necessarily the food itself that's the problem. Food colorings and artificial flavors? Preservatives and other chemicals they put in a lot of foods? No thank you.
First, all food has "chemicals" so unless you are drinking pure water you are ingesting *gasp* chemiclas.
That post you made actually made no sense. All you did was list ingredients in a pizza and pick what you thought was unhealthy. Which there was absolutely no reason why it would have been healthy.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was a rule on what belongs in a pizza.
There should be. Pepperoni - NO, pineapple - yes.
you're saying pepperoni doesn't belong on a pizza- but pineapple does?
At no point- outside of sauce- does fruit belong on a pizza.
Ever.
Yuck. no.
meat- cheese- sauce.
yes.
fruit? nope nope nope.
Pineapple does not belong anywhere - that shiz is ebil.
I thought we were friends.
I take back anything good I ever said about her. Those saying she is lazy and not interested in knowledge are totally right. If she was really interested, she would find the study that supports someone else's assertion.
And seriously...DYEL?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions