Questions about sugar
Options
Replies
-
Goodness gracious. Snickers has Calcium (2%) and an Apple has Vitamin A.0
-
I think Chrysalid2014 is little hangry, according to her diary.
For someone who keeps talking about nutrition, she hardly meets her nutrition.
I am just curious to know where she is finding foods that, individually, meet the USDA guidelines for healthy food and provide an ideal balance of macros. Because apparently that is what you need.0 -
I'm starting to see Snickers in other threads now, the dastardly insulins will get everywhere.0
-
janejellyroll wrote: »I think Chrysalid2014 is little hangry, according to her diary.
For someone who keeps talking about nutrition, she hardly meets her nutrition.
I am just curious to know where she is finding foods that, individually, meet the USDA guidelines for healthy food and provide an ideal balance of macros. Because apparently that is what you need.
Pizza? I had some for lunch - pretty sure it was a good mix of nutrients. Pretty sure I'm no healthier than I if I had eaten the bread, meat, and fruit separately.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I think Chrysalid2014 is little hangry, according to her diary.
For someone who keeps talking about nutrition, she hardly meets her nutrition.
I am just curious to know where she is finding foods that, individually, meet the USDA guidelines for healthy food and provide an ideal balance of macros. Because apparently that is what you need.
Pizza? I had some for lunch - pretty sure it was a good mix of nutrients. Pretty sure I'm no healthier than I if I had eaten the bread, meat, and fruit separately.
Pizza. Truly the wonderfood.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
I really, really want you to answer my question.Chrysalid2014 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »
However, it still doesn't change the fact that you were wrong in saying that the percentages would be the same.
It still doesn't change the fact that you're not answering the question.
I said the percentages would be IN THE SAME PROPORTION TO ONE ANOTHER. Not "the same".
Do you really, really want me to do the calculations for you?
Here you go. Your macros are significantly different than the default MFP ones but even so the cost calorie wise of this item does not equate to the nutirional benefits.
Calories 13%
Carbs 18%
Fat 34%
Protein 2%
Now, if your macros were set up so that you were on a low protein, high sugar, low fibre diet candy would be the perfect food for you!
Did you consider what he might have eaten the rest of the day?
Does every individual food you eat meet your macro balance goals in specific proportion?
Apparently everything we eat has to be completely balanced. Don't ever eat an apple because the carbs are too high while the fat and protein count is low to non existent.
You'll be on a high carb high sugar diet then!!!
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
Apparently everything we eat has to be completely balanced. Don't ever eat an apple because the carbs are too high while the fat and protein count is low to non existent.
Apples are nutrient-dense. Candy bars are not.
Whether something is nutrient dense is expressed by calculating the amount of nutrients in proportion to the number of calories in a serving/set weight.
People on restricted calorie diets, e.g. the original poster, would do well to choose nutrient dense foods, e.g. fruits, in preference to 'empty-calorie' foods such as candy.
That is all.
What part of carbohydrates, fat, and protein don't you understand?
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »No one is asking about nutrient density. Stop with the straw man holocaust.
We're ENTIRELY talking about nutrient density. That's what we're talking about!
(For the record, I'm currently procrastinating dealing with my horrible tax return.)
Looks at the calendar... looks at Lemurcat...
You like living on the edge!
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
Apparently everything we eat has to be completely balanced. Don't ever eat an apple because the carbs are too high while the fat and protein count is low to non existent.
Apples are nutrient-dense. Candy bars are not.
Whether something is nutrient dense is expressed by calculating the amount of nutrients in proportion to the number of calories in a serving/set weight.
People on restricted calorie diets would do well to choose nutrient dense foods.
That is all.
So my cutting calories are 1950 will it take the entire 1950 calories to get in my nutrients? Is it possible for me to reach my nutrient requirements with 1700 calories?
I can hit mine (macro and micro... can't reliably tell on potassium since it's not always in the data base or food labels) at anywhere from 950-1000. I'm sometimes lower on fat, sometimes lower or a bit over on carb, but I usually hit protein or go over.
My 80 calorie Snickers bar? Totally doable.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
So my cutting calories are 1950 will it take the entire 1950 calories to get in my nutrients? Is it possible for me to reach my nutrient requirements with 1700 calories?
I have no idea what your nutrient requirements are, but your comment raises another question. Research has shown that reducing calories to below the recommended daily intake leads to better health and longevity. In other words, they are suggesting if you want to live long and be healthy, don't squander those extra 250 calories (if they are indeed extra) on candy.
But we shall have to save that discussion for another day, as I'm off for the evening now. Night night all!
That makes no sense and is another example of you using faulty logic to conclusion jump to bolster your opinion that candy bars = ebil.
0 -
Today the components of my breakfast I think, would do a hipster proud. 100% natural probiotic yogurt, chia, pumpkin, walnuts, blueberries, and puffed millet. Pumpernickel and "no sugar, no salt added" peanut butter. It was delish. (Of course, there's a hipster born every minute that could "improve" on this. I am obviously unconcerned about the intimate daily molestation of dairy cows, and hydrogenation...please? Just because I don't like lumpy peanut butter?)
For morning snack, an all-white Betty Crocker cupcake with low-fat dream whip.
But in context of the overall diet.....
That is VERY hipster.
I like pumpkin with cottage cheese and pumpkin pie spice and extra cinnamon. It tastes like pumpkin cheesecake to me. I have it for breakfast a lot.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »No one is asking about nutrient density. Stop with the straw man holocaust.
We're ENTIRELY talking about nutrient density. That's what we're talking about!
(For the record, I'm currently procrastinating dealing with my horrible tax return.)
Looks at the calendar... looks at Lemurcat...
You like living on the edge!
I'm procrastinating doing an estimate and writing a check so I can get my extension.
Sigh.0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
So my cutting calories are 1950 will it take the entire 1950 calories to get in my nutrients? Is it possible for me to reach my nutrient requirements with 1700 calories?
I have no idea what your nutrient requirements are, but your comment raises another question. Research has shown that reducing calories to below the recommended daily intake leads to better health and longevity. In other words, they are suggesting if you want to live long and be healthy, don't squander those extra 250 calories (if they are indeed extra) on candy.
But we shall have to save that discussion for another day, as I'm off for the evening now. Night night all!
[yoovieblink.gif]
It really is mind boggling how she strings two statements together and pretends they somehow follow from each other.
0 -
-
That's OK - maybe it'll just be a fun size.0
-
janejellyroll wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
Let's suppose someone is on a 1230 calorie diet according to the default MFP nutrition goals:
So from this one item, towards their recommended daily amount, they are getting:
21% of their calories!
42% of their carbs!
29% of their fat!
Only 6% of their protein...
So, the calorie "cost" (21%) is not in line with the other "costs" so therefore it's common sense to choose something else.
The screenshot clearly shows that the person posting this isn't on 1,230 calories. They are on 1,980.
They also somehow managed to get over 200 grams of protein even though the snickers only gave them 4. Shocking, it's almost as if context is important or something.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
Apparently everything we eat has to be completely balanced. Don't ever eat an apple because the carbs are too high while the fat and protein count is low to non existent.
Apples are nutrient-dense. Candy bars are not.
Whether something is nutrient dense is expressed by calculating the amount of nutrients in proportion to the number of calories in a serving/set weight.
People on restricted calorie diets, e.g. the original poster, would do well to choose nutrient dense foods, e.g. fruits, in preference to 'empty-calorie' foods such as candy.
That is all.
I'll ask again because you have never answered: Assuming the overall diet meets nutrient needs, why should those on restricted calorie diets make 100% of their food "nutrient dense"? Are you just going to repeat your argument or can you actually demonstrate your point?
I really think we are just being trolled. No one can be that lost.
Well, maybe, maybe not. Were you on the vinegar thread?
People who believe strongly in food as medicine march to the beat of their own drums.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 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
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions