Define "healthy" food...
Replies
-
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
diannethegeek 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.
Pineapple and cream cheese pizza.
Pepperoni would be my second choice.
chicken, feta, pineapple, black olives, sliced tomato ….BOOM …
OMG, add banana peppers and I'm in love!0 -
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...0 -
Yes, it does,
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.
just because you LOL something does not making it funny.
If you have some scholarly interest, go study the subject. Then you'll know whether or not she's right and won't have to ask People Who Google for information. No links will need to posted. No "My link is better than your link!", "Nuh-uh! My link is better than your link! It's Science!" conversation will need to take place.
The poster made a claim about a study linking sugar to heart disease. Some of us would like to see said study as we are curious if this is a study about obese people, average people, in shape people, study methods etc…
It is not our job to go find said study when the other person is making the assumption ..
here I will put five smile faces to make you feel better
and an LOL so you feel like we are laughing together…LOL
She already posted her ideas and her links and was mocked and insulted. If she feels no need to repeat the process, I don't blame her.
Whether she's right or wrong, she isn't deserving of being mocked or insulted.
ummm no that person posted a link to google, not a link to the specific study..
it has nothing to about saying "my study is better than yours", it is a genuine interest in the methods used and what the conclusion were. But you would not care about because you are too busy supporting the downtrodden of MFP 0 -
Yes, it does,
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.
just because you LOL something does not making it funny.
If you have some scholarly interest, go study the subject. Then you'll know whether or not she's right and won't have to ask People Who Google for information. No links will need to posted. No "My link is better than your link!", "Nuh-uh! My link is better than your link! It's Science!" conversation will need to take place.
The poster made a claim about a study linking sugar to heart disease. Some of us would like to see said study as we are curious if this is a study about obese people, average people, in shape people, study methods etc…
It is not our job to go find said study when the other person is making the assumption ..
here I will put five smile faces to make you feel better
and an LOL so you feel like we are laughing together…LOL
She already posted her ideas and her links and was mocked and insulted. If she feels no need to repeat the process, I don't blame her.
Whether she's right or wrong, she isn't deserving of being mocked or insulted.
Nope, no link has been posted in this thread. Nor has she posted a link the thread where the link was supposedly posted.
Oh, and "white knight" bingo box is now covered, people.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Could quite possibly win for derp comment of the year. And are only 6 days in.EvgeniZyntx wrote: »call it heretical if you will, but figs, olives, caper berries, preserved lemons, and even apricots are welcome on my pizzas.
I felt something.
Well, except for capers. Those are pickled monkey snot.
And I'm behind, but I'm glad I had my pizza. And it had fresh peppers, and I believe I personally added some E116b directly. I like cumin.
Lol @ person telling Sara to educate herself.
The year is young and I expect MFP will rise to the occasion.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
Could quite possibly win for derp comment of the year. And are only 6 days in.EvgeniZyntx wrote: »call it heretical if you will, but figs, olives, caper berries, preserved lemons, and even apricots are welcome on my pizzas.
I felt something.
Well, except for capers. Those are pickled monkey snot.
And I'm behind, but I'm glad I had my pizza. And it had fresh peppers, and I believe I personally added some E116b directly. I like cumin.
Lol @ person telling Sara to educate herself.
The year is young and I expect MFP will rise to the occasion.
MFP: The Rise of the Derp < has a catchy ring to it0 -
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.0 -
food that doesnt have commercials on tv0
-
-
^^
so does peanut butter, greek yogurt, salad, frozen vegetables....0 -
I did look. Found nothing concrete.
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.
I even asked two people who practice medicine if they knew what people were referring to when they used the phrase. They did not. They understood "markers", but that isn't how the phrase is used here. They figured it was kind of what you said, "cholesterol and whatnot" and that it meant nothing.
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".0 -
-
I did look. Found nothing concrete.
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.
I even asked two people who practice medicine if they knew what people were referring to when they used the phrase. They did not. They understood "markers", but that isn't how the phrase is used here. They figured it was kind of what you said, "cholesterol and whatnot" and that it meant nothing.
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".
so you already asked a dr in ten minutes..that is impressive..
it is generally understood to be a term dealing with general blood work and cholesterol levels….0 -
http://www.dietdoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Numbers.png
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".0 -
-
Gotcha.
I did look. Found nothing concrete.
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.
I even asked two people who practice medicine if they knew what people were referring to when they used the phrase. They did not. They understood "markers", but that isn't how the phrase is used here. They figured it was kind of what you said, "cholesterol and whatnot" and that it meant nothing.
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".
so you already asked a dr in ten minutes..that is impressive..
it is generally understood to be a term dealing with general blood work and cholesterol levels….
I've been trying to get a definition for a while. It isn't that impressive, even if I did just ask now, lol.
0 -
Gotcha.
I did look. Found nothing concrete.
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.
I even asked two people who practice medicine if they knew what people were referring to when they used the phrase. They did not. They understood "markers", but that isn't how the phrase is used here. They figured it was kind of what you said, "cholesterol and whatnot" and that it meant nothing.
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".
so you already asked a dr in ten minutes..that is impressive..
it is generally understood to be a term dealing with general blood work and cholesterol levels….
or had you previously asked and you had a preconceived notion in your head and you were trying to be sneaky ….??
some people are so easy to read...0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
cackling....this is just so wrong...gag0 -
Liftng4Lis wrote: »
http://www.dietdoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Numbers.png
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".
Even better and thanks! 0 -
Calliope610 wrote: »imho, there is no "bad" food, just bad eating decisions - like eating an entire bag of chips or box of Twinkies in one sitting. Chips and Twinkies aren't bad by definition; Eating the entire bag is. Of course, this also applies to eating the entire bag of those "healthy" nuts.
Yes, I agree.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I did look. Found nothing concrete.
I'm not asking about the Twinkie diet.
When you say "health markers", what, exactly do you mean?So you're telling me if someone wanted to gain weight they could eat at McDonald's every day and still be healthy? Wash down their grease infested fries down with coke and ice cream and still be healthy?? Sounds like a one way ticket to a heart attack. No sir, that's not healthy. Your diet does matter.
google the "twinkie diet"
guy ate nothing but twinkies maintained a calorie deficit, lost weight, and had better health markers..
so yea, you can eat mcdonalds and lose weight …however, it would not be best option for body comp purposes but for fat loss it would work.
I keep asking this, people keep not telling me, lol.
I assume you mean blood tests. Which tests, specifically, constitute "health markers"?
blood work ..cholesterol and what not …
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
go ahead and read for yourself...
I'm asking if this "health markers" phrase has some kind of agreed upon definition. "Cholesterol and whatnot" would lead me to believe it does not. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
go look it up yourself…I gave you the tools…
besides, you would benefit from educating yourself about these things.
I even asked two people who practice medicine if they knew what people were referring to when they used the phrase. They did not. They understood "markers", but that isn't how the phrase is used here. They figured it was kind of what you said, "cholesterol and whatnot" and that it meant nothing.
Markers and bands and such are generally fairly specific. They have their own names, etc.
"Health markers" - I'm starting to think it really has no meaning at all, not even to the people who use it.
Maybe it's another thing that has no meaning and everyone gets to choose for themselves what it means. Like "healthy".
There is no standard set measure of "health markers" but in general terms what might be included are
Blood pressure
BF%
urine albumin
LDL/HDL
fasting plasma glucose
A1c
HbA1c
CRP
and things like VO2 max, HR return to resting, etc...
Those used in a study are defined in a protocol - if your two friends are unable to at least mention three then they don't read many articles involving health markers. The term is used in the literature.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions