Paleo Diet
Options
Replies
-
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
0 -
New to the forums and seeing a lot of hateful people all here for the same thing, to lose weight and get healthier.
Are the non-hateful people here for a different reason? What?What does it matter to you personally if someone wants to diet a different way than you? I think I'll stay out of these forums.
Nothing in the discussion here has suggested that people shouldn't diet however they like. It's mostly been about labels lately. I AM curious why legumes shouldn't be part of a healthy diet, if someone enjoys legumes and feels good after eating them. I'm asking that
question here because the paleo diet excudes legumes on the basis that they are bad for us. I'm not at all suggesting that someone who doesn't want to eat legumes should eat them--that seems to be your misunderstanding. For example, as mentioned upthread, I rarely eat bread or rice, because they aren't worth the calories to me. But the difference is that I don't claim that including bread or rice in a healthy diet is impossible or that they are inherently unhealthy. Clearly they can contribute to a healthy diet. Many extremely healthy traditional diets are based in large part on grains and legumes.0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
This thread started because the OP told everyone to do paleo, so people quite reasonably asked why. Similarly, there are a thread or two going on now because the OP is evangelizing veganism (or 80-10-10 or some such and being sanctimonious about how everyone else will get heart disease) and there's usually a thread or 5 about how eating sugar will kill you or make you a junkie and how "eating clean" makes you healthier than everyone else, even though no one know what it means and the people who claim to do it don't seem to eat any differently than people who don't "eat clean."
I'm pretty clear that I think different diets work for different people, and that there's a huge range that can be both heathy and work for someone, depending on that person's issues, and that in some cases that may be doing low carb or cutting out food items.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
Ha! Good one.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
Ha! Good one.
Agreed.
It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
Ha! Good one.
Agreed.
It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
So adhering to science is "evangelizing" now? Curious world you live in.0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
Ha! Good one.
Agreed.
It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
nice strawman about eating "cake and cookies all day" and that is not IIFYM ..
it might help to understand these things before making blanket comments about them..0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
Hmm. I don't think that's accurate. First of all, no one claims to eat cake and cookies all day long. That's a strawman that "clean" eaters like to claim about people who favor moderation. Eating cake and cookies all day long is simply not moderate.
Second, I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to be one of the mean people who "attacks" those who try to eat healthy, so I have a personal interest here, and in that I (a) eat healthy, (b) say quite often that I favor eating healthy and even trying things like low carb and cutting out trigger foods, (c) also am quite open about the fact that I personally have found it helpful to cut out foods from time to time, and (d) say often that everyone cuts down on or limits foods when dieting, I am pretty sure that your account of these conversations here is not accurate.
And while I say to people who seem to be struggling because they assume one must diet by cutting out numerous foods that that's not necessary, that's not evangelizing what I do at all. For example, I don't do low carb or paleo, but I've said in this very thread that I think it can work for people. I just argue when people claim it's the One True Way to eat healthy or assert that not being vegan or eating sugar or whatever is inherently less healthy. I don't know why you give those posts a pass while getting upset when others simply say that they lost weight while eating whatever, so it doesn't have to be so hard.
And to be clear, I think a lot of people come here with assumptions (supported by our cultural ideas of dieting) that a successful diet requires extreme restrictions or following some specific plan and with the idea that they will have to be deprived while eating diet food. I think a sustainable plan can't be based on the idea of eating foods you don't like or deprivation, although again I also think eating healthy is a positive change. That's one thing I like about paleo done well--I think it tends to help people get enthusiastic about what they are eating (even if I think it's silly for most to exclude things like legumes).
0 -
I love that this post has just gone on and on and on. The person that started the post is a total troll. Left a random VAF (vague as F***) comment and then left the convo lol0
-
loveandchampagne wrote: »I love that this post has just gone on and on and on. The person that started the post is a total troll. Left a random VAF (vague as F***) comment and then left the convo lol
Welcome to MFP.
0 -
Ha!
I'm actually finding parts of it a pretty interesting conversation, though (although as I said before I'm weirdly interested in paleo).0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Ha!
I'm actually finding parts of it a pretty interesting conversation, though (although as I said before I'm weirdly interested in paleo).
It's actually been one of the most well behaved and level discussions I've seen on a Paleo thread.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
Hmm. I don't think that's accurate. First of all, no one claims to eat cake and cookies all day long. That's a strawman that "clean" eaters like to claim about people who favor moderation. Eating cake and cookies all day long is simply not moderate.
Second, I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to be one of the mean people who "attacks" those who try to eat healthy, so I have a personal interest here, and in that I (a) eat healthy, (b) say quite often that I favor eating healthy and even trying things like low carb and cutting out trigger foods, (c) also am quite open about the fact that I personally have found it helpful to cut out foods from time to time, and (d) say often that everyone cuts down on or limits foods when dieting, I am pretty sure that your account of these conversations here is not accurate.
And while I say to people who seem to be struggling because they assume one must diet by cutting out numerous foods that that's not necessary, that's not evangelizing what I do at all. For example, I don't do low carb or paleo, but I've said in this very thread that I think it can work for people. I just argue when people claim it's the One True Way to eat healthy or assert that not being vegan or eating sugar or whatever is inherently less healthy. I don't know why you give those posts a pass while getting upset when others simply say that they lost weight while eating whatever, so it doesn't have to be so hard.
And to be clear, I think a lot of people come here with assumptions (supported by our cultural ideas of dieting) that a successful diet requires extreme restrictions or following some specific plan and with the idea that they will have to be deprived while eating diet food. I think a sustainable plan can't be based on the idea of eating foods you don't like or deprivation, although again I also think eating healthy is a positive change. That's one thing I like about paleo done well--I think it tends to help people get enthusiastic about what they are eating (even if I think it's silly for most to exclude things like legumes).
There are a people on this site that will attack diets they don't agree with whether or not a post "evangelizes" or "demonizes" anything. If you look at some of these posts objectively, you must know this.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
Hmm. I don't think that's accurate. First of all, no one claims to eat cake and cookies all day long. That's a strawman that "clean" eaters like to claim about people who favor moderation. Eating cake and cookies all day long is simply not moderate.
Second, I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to be one of the mean people who "attacks" those who try to eat healthy, so I have a personal interest here, and in that I (a) eat healthy, (b) say quite often that I favor eating healthy and even trying things like low carb and cutting out trigger foods, (c) also am quite open about the fact that I personally have found it helpful to cut out foods from time to time, and (d) say often that everyone cuts down on or limits foods when dieting, I am pretty sure that your account of these conversations here is not accurate.
And while I say to people who seem to be struggling because they assume one must diet by cutting out numerous foods that that's not necessary, that's not evangelizing what I do at all. For example, I don't do low carb or paleo, but I've said in this very thread that I think it can work for people. I just argue when people claim it's the One True Way to eat healthy or assert that not being vegan or eating sugar or whatever is inherently less healthy. I don't know why you give those posts a pass while getting upset when others simply say that they lost weight while eating whatever, so it doesn't have to be so hard.
And to be clear, I think a lot of people come here with assumptions (supported by our cultural ideas of dieting) that a successful diet requires extreme restrictions or following some specific plan and with the idea that they will have to be deprived while eating diet food. I think a sustainable plan can't be based on the idea of eating foods you don't like or deprivation, although again I also think eating healthy is a positive change. That's one thing I like about paleo done well--I think it tends to help people get enthusiastic about what they are eating (even if I think it's silly for most to exclude things like legumes).
There are a people on this site that will attack diets they don't agree with whether or not a post "evangelizes" or "demonizes" anything. If you look at some of these posts objectively, you must know this.
Attacking posts is a hobby if not a semi-profession for some, yes. Some people seem to have triggers they like to key in on right away for whatever reason. In the overall it is really the grease in the gears that keeps things moving along. As much as it can get annoying or tiresome it does, in the end, keep things more interesting than a compeltely factual site. So in the end it's the way it should be as long as everyone remembers that it's not life or death but just differences in oppionons.0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »I hate to continue reading this thread but Hornsby's comment is spot-on. Why does everybody need a label for diet? How about just being "healthy"? Why does it have to be a buzzword like "Paleo", or "Atkins", or "Mediterranean"; how about "healthy"? Everything doesn't need to be a buzzword or prefaced with a lowercase "e" or "i" to be good.
This is how I feel. I don't understand the desire for special named diets.
Well, I guess I'm somewhat convinced by Matt Fitzgerald's argument in Diet Cults.
I am in favor of eating a healthy diet, and try to do that.
Because "healthy" is also a label for a diet. According to all the posts that I've seen on the board any way.
Eh, there are a million different possible healthy diets, so I disagree.
I get that but what I consider to be a healthy diet might not be the same as what someone else considers healthy and because my view is different then I am therefore wrong. I've seen it a billion times on here.
I think generally-speaking so long as someone doesn't evangelize how their diet is the one everyone must follow (or ask for help in following some restriction, granted), that no one cares.
Ha! Good one.
Agreed.
It doesn't matter whether or not someone "evangelizes" what they want to do. If someone uses words phrases like "eating healthier" or "cutting down/out sugar" the mob comes out to lynch them and states how they've lost weight without eliminating anything and in fact eat cake and cookies all day long and they're still losing weight because "IIFYM!" And in a way are evangelizing what they do and how it's the best.
So what you are saying is that you actually have no idea of what IIFYM is?0 -
-
There are people who do anything. I don't know why this matters. If you think you see it, call it out when you see it, but that's not been happening here and it's not something I do.
I think people sometimes misread what's going on (for example, this idea that anyone claims to eat cookies and cake all day long), but pointing it out when you see it instead of arguing about it on some other thread would be nice.
It would also be nice if you'd acknowledge that a lot of times the arguments start because of posts like the OP's here--where people question assertions made generally about how everyone should eat, which seems not personal and a valid topic to discuss.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions