Bread??
Replies
-
I eat lots of bread and lose lots of weight. I even eat sweet egg bread for dessert....with butter. YUM! Just make sure you weigh it like everything else that you eat.0
-
donjtomasco wrote: »And name calling is the next level that people go to, and you are doing a good job of name calling. It just shows that you can't be open to other people being correct about something.
And you think I would do this experiment for you? Wow, narcissistic to the hilt. No, I have kept reading posters and comments about what I thought to be true with me regarding bread and startches, and elected to prove to myself myself yesterday whether I was being sucked into a different line of thinking in some of these forums.
I merely proved what happens to my body when I add bread and starches and fried foods. Not to your body, to mine.
Do you not see the difference between eating a piece of bread a day and eating a whole day's worth of food in fried, salted, bread products?
You never answered my question: Do you think you would have seen the same weight gain had you only eaten one or two slices of bread instead of a day full of bread and salt-covered foods?0 -
tephanies1234 wrote: »I eat lots of bread and lose lots of weight. I even eat sweet egg bread for dessert....with butter. YUM! Just make sure you weigh it like everything else that you eat.
Like French toast?
0 -
donjtomasco wrote: »That is funny Runner. Are u trying to be serious saying that? You just crossed youself in that one comment.
What? Crossed myself?
What's not be be serious about?
Water retention. Maybe extra food in your body. But, that one meal is not going to lead to actual weight gain, and it can only slow your weight loss down if you eat like that often enough to push you closer to your deficit or over your deficit.
Calories in/calories out.
0 -
donjtomasco wrote: »Maid what she said was different and contradicted herself. Quite amazing. You dont see it? Really?
No it doesn't.0 -
donjtomasco wrote: »This mornings weight, 190.2, up 3.4 pounds from Thursday, 3.0 pounds higher then 7 days ago. I think I clearly proved my little point with jelly, maid and runner. For me, eating white bread, starches, french fries, and fried food caused my weight to go up, substantially (for me). But boy was the food good and fun. And it fit inside my daily calorie goal.
So call it what you want, I ate what I wanted, I ate within my calorie goals, and my weight went up. Period. But this is just me.
Oh and by the way, weight going up is even worse then weight not going down as fast. This was a complete reversal. And no, I am not going to mix it up with potato chips, cake, gummy wraps, and tortilla's today. For me I know what the results will be.
Water retention is not the same as fat. You did not increase your fat from that meal, and I'm pretty sure you know that.
The water retention will go down in a few days, I'm sure. 0 -
Sometimes ill have two slices of ezekiel cinnamon bread with butter. Yes butter. I measure it all out and it fits my caloric intake for the day. Its like 280 calories. If bread is a trigger food than i guess it makes sense to worry about it. I have other foods I avoid but bread isnt one of them.0
-
Tomorrow morning he'll make wonderful French Toast. Today it's my peanut butter and jelly sandwich for lunch (on homemade bread), and my afternoon snack is cinnamon homemade bread pudding.tephanies1234 wrote: »I eat lots of bread and lose lots of weight. I even eat sweet egg bread for dessert....with butter. YUM! Just make sure you weigh it like everything else that you eat.
Like French toast?0 -
1.well-designed and well-conducted experiment includes design features that allow researchers to eliminate extraneous variables as an explanation for the observed relationship between the independent and dependent variables-- your experiment didn't have it
2.control group a baseline group that receives no treatment or a neutral treatment-- your experiment didn't have it
3.replication the repetition of an experimental condition so that the variability associated with the phenomenon can be estimated-- your experiment didn't have it
4confounding occurs when the experimental controls do not allow the experimenter to reasonably eliminate plausible alternative explanations for an observed relationship between independent and dependent variables. A problem resulting from the fact that one feature of study subjects has not been separated from a second feature, and has thus been confounded with it, producing a spurious result-- your experiment had it! Sodium and water weight or others
5 plus your experiment was biased
0 -
nancyjay__ wrote: »1.well-designed and well-conducted experiment includes design features that allow researchers to eliminate extraneous variables as an explanation for the observed relationship between the independent and dependent variables-- your experiment didn't have it
2.control group a baseline group that receives no treatment or a neutral treatment-- your experiment didn't have it
3.replication the repetition of an experimental condition so that the variability associated with the phenomenon can be estimated-- your experiment didn't have it
4confounding occurs when the experimental controls do not allow the experimenter to reasonably eliminate plausible alternative explanations for an observed relationship between independent and dependent variables. A problem resulting from the fact that one feature of study subjects has not been separated from a second feature, and has thus been confounded with it, producing a spurious result-- your experiment had it! Sodium and water weight or others
5 plus your experiment was biased
I like it.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
nancyjay__ wrote: »1.well-designed and well-conducted experiment includes design features that allow researchers to eliminate extraneous variables as an explanation for the observed relationship between the independent and dependent variables-- your experiment didn't have it
2.control group a baseline group that receives no treatment or a neutral treatment-- your experiment didn't have it
3.replication the repetition of an experimental condition so that the variability associated with the phenomenon can be estimated-- your experiment didn't have it
4confounding occurs when the experimental controls do not allow the experimenter to reasonably eliminate plausible alternative explanations for an observed relationship between independent and dependent variables. A problem resulting from the fact that one feature of study subjects has not been separated from a second feature, and has thus been confounded with it, producing a spurious result-- your experiment had it! Sodium and water weight or others
5 plus your experiment was biased
Great summary!0 -
I am not surprised at your comments. They follow so well psychologically. This is very enjoyable and a great learning experience and I thank you for all the comments regardless of your intention.0
-
Yes reasonable human beings will ask for more clarification when presented with unreasonable data
0 -
nancyjay__ wrote: »Parkercomom wrote: »The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??
We are all not here for the same reason. And when it comes down to science a different opinion turns into incorrect information that is being passed along. People who debate and go back and forth are trying to keep this site from being another bs unreliable site and you don't have to be an expert to know most of the things discussed. So far they have helped me a lot and I'd like to believe that by not sugar coating things stupid myths are being busted and people are learning the truth and not wasting their money on detox teas or wraps. Plus healthy and weight loss are two different things. And some people can't afford an expert nutritionist. Why come to this site? Because of the passionate people people and well discussed topics. People don't get away with just an answer here if it's not backed up by logic and science someone will correct you and if I can't have an expert opinion why not have 20-30 people discuss it for me and come up with an educated well discussed answer
Since this thread is posted under "weight loss help" I assumed we were all here for the same reason. We all have opinions. We are all adults. If something does not work for someone, are they wrong just because it doesn't meet your "scientific" standards? Scientists and nutritionists don't even agree. I think we can all agree to disagree without the personal attacks.0 -
.0
-
Parkercomom wrote: »nancyjay__ wrote: »Parkercomom wrote: »The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??
We are all not here for the same reason. And when it comes down to science a different opinion turns into incorrect information that is being passed along. People who debate and go back and forth are trying to keep this site from being another bs unreliable site and you don't have to be an expert to know most of the things discussed. So far they have helped me a lot and I'd like to believe that by not sugar coating things stupid myths are being busted and people are learning the truth and not wasting their money on detox teas or wraps. Plus healthy and weight loss are two different things. And some people can't afford an expert nutritionist. Why come to this site? Because of the passionate people people and well discussed topics. People don't get away with just an answer here if it's not backed up by logic and science someone will correct you and if I can't have an expert opinion why not have 20-30 people discuss it for me and come up with an educated well discussed answer
Since this thread is posted under "weight loss help" I assumed we were all here for the same reason. We all have opinions. We are all adults. If something does not work for someone, are they wrong just because it doesn't meet your "scientific" standards? Scientists and nutritionists don't even agree. I think we can all agree to disagree without the personal attacks.
A. Yes to the question
B. Please show me where I attacked anyone personally0 -
Parkercomom wrote: »nancyjay__ wrote: »Parkercomom wrote: »The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??
We are all not here for the same reason. And when it comes down to science a different opinion turns into incorrect information that is being passed along. People who debate and go back and forth are trying to keep this site from being another bs unreliable site and you don't have to be an expert to know most of the things discussed. So far they have helped me a lot and I'd like to believe that by not sugar coating things stupid myths are being busted and people are learning the truth and not wasting their money on detox teas or wraps. Plus healthy and weight loss are two different things. And some people can't afford an expert nutritionist. Why come to this site? Because of the passionate people people and well discussed topics. People don't get away with just an answer here if it's not backed up by logic and science someone will correct you and if I can't have an expert opinion why not have 20-30 people discuss it for me and come up with an educated well discussed answer
Since this thread is posted under "weight loss help" I assumed we were all here for the same reason. We all have opinions. We are all adults. If something does not work for someone, are they wrong just because it doesn't meet your "scientific" standards? Scientists and nutritionists don't even agree. I think we can all agree to disagree without the personal attacks.
I don't know why you put scare quotes around "scientific," but when scientists and nutritionists disagree they still present the science-based evidence for their point of view. That people can disagree on what conclusions to draw from evidence doesn't mean that the rest of us should throw up our hands and say that anything goes and truth is now relative.0 -
Rhye [sic] bread is really god for you, it's filling. You still get an intake if carbs, and it helps even out your sugar levels so you won't crave surgery treats. It's not good to completely cut things out of your diet. For example, carbs make you bloat, but you also need carbs in your diet. So instead of cutting cabs out of yours yet, cut out the unhealthy part, for example don't eat white carbs. So eat brown pasta rice bread in stead of the white pasta rice and bread... Balance is always good xx
I crave rye I think because the carbs absorb slower. Totally anecdotal of course. I find the same with brown bread, brown rice. The extra fiber slows absorption giving me not as sharp an insulin spike. If I eat the bread/rice with some fat and protein, the absorption is even steadier.And why exactly shouldn't we eat white carbs? Why brown rice and not white rice? Suck, no body wanted to answer^^
So that's my response to the "brown is better". Slower absorption, which some people are sensitive to. But I'll still eat white on occasion. More often now that my blood sugars are normalized.0 -
You can remove it ( and all grains) for a period of time and see how your body responds. It's about results!Silversparkle13 wrote: »Whats people's views on bread and weightloss.. Some people say stay clear etc.. Any thoughts?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Since this thread I've read a bunch of articles some broscience some from reputable researchers about how bread is not good for a weight loss diet and they all tiptoe around the question. I've read that bread is higher in calories than another food of the same volume or weight ive read by cutting out the bread you cut out the margarine butters jelly etc. But none of them said that by not eating a bread slice of 80 calories and instead eating oatmeal of 80 calories you will lose more weight.
Bazinga*0 -
Parkercomom wrote: »The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??
We are having a conversation, on things that we may (or may not, it's unclear at this point, as maidentl has pointed out) have different opinions, and on which there is actual factual information.
I don't think people are being ridiculed, and I find it frustrating that some seem to think that disagreeing, even on factual matters, is somehow impolite or improper. I would find these forums tedious and useless in the extreme if all we did was validate every opinion or thing someone read on the internet or in a women's mag or heard from some bodybuilder at the gym.
Sure, there's a mix of information--some hard information that should be supported (and can be)--that bread calories aren't somehow more "fattening" than other calories is one of those; some "this is what worked for me," and some support/encouragement. But the latter alone isn't the only good use of the forum, especially not boards like "Food and Nutrition" but also in "General Weight Loss Help" when someone asks whether bread is something that is inconsistent with weight loss.
Again, whatever happened to the idea that being able to defend an opinion is a good and important thing? That being challenged and hearing disagreement is part of how we sort through competing information and let the good and correct ideas ultimately win out over the bad? Obviously, the first amendment doesn't apply here, but these assertions that it's mean to disagree with people always makes me think of those who see speech something to be protected from, rather than something to encourage, and makes me sad.0 -
donjtomasco wrote: »You said my weight would not be affected the next day, I said it would, and it was.
No, she did not say that.0 -
/\ /\ /\ - that, what lemurcat12 said. spot on.0
-
donjtomasco wrote: »/\ /\ /\ - that, what lemurcat12 said. spot on.
Exactly right. Nobody said your weight wouldn't be affected the next day. What was actually said was that you probably would experience temporary water weight gain after eating a high sodium meal.0 -
well, not the last one, the long one just before. and yes, she did say that, maybe not "word for word" but it is what she said and meant. but i guess we all interpret and hear what we want and need to interpret and hear. which is why i try to find out as close to possible exactly what someone is trying to say before i disagree with them. otherwise, why disagree with a bunch of grey area and vagueness. I got a very simple answer from her and my results proved me correct and her not correct, "JUST" on that one point, and NOT on any global scale. Don't over judge and over analyse and globalize a very simple thing that I have done. It was very concise and precise and I clearly proved "JUST ONE POINT" whether anyone agrees with the point or not, or whether anyone thinks my "PERSONAL" experiment yesterday was "DENSE" or "STUPID" or whatever adjective has been chosen to call me.
I don't think I can be any clearer without getting this down to a sub kindergarden level. It was not and is not scientific. It was just a personal experiment to test what would happen if I ate bread, fried food, and other food that I have excluded in order to lose weight since January 1. It proved that for me these foods need to be avoided. It does not mean that you or anyone else can't lose any amount of weight eating some of these foods, or ALL of these foods, I am sure some of you can. And it is a personal choice. Eating these foods at the "LEAST" slowed down my weight loss (which was the simple question posed to me), and at most "ADDED" weight. Whether it was water retention or pieces of fried oyster stuck in my digestive track along with the hot dog and popcorn and fried okra, or anything else, my weight was negatively affected. The other poster said my weight would NOT be negatively affected.
Only after I have proven that "FOR ME" my weight was negatively affected, now there is the addition of "Well, it is water retention due to sodium". YES, NO KIDDIING!!! Genius comeback with that.
Was my "WEIGHT" affected by the food I ate yesterday, within my daily calorie goals? YES. It is that simple. You can make it as complicated as you want to make yourself feel better. And that is fine with me. We are all here to discuss, learn, read, express opinions and debate it all, like some of you have so astutely commented to. And I think that this is simply all that is being done. 0 -
OK, really? Now you're just making things up. You were told multiple times yesterday before you weighed in this morning that your weight would be up due to water retention. It's absolutely ludicrous to say it was only claimed after the fact. It's right here in black and white, date and time stamped even. Come on! You never once acknowledged that any other element in your meal would contribute to this "weight gain." You have stated repeatedly that it's the bread. Your actual weight was not affected, you're just holding on to water and holding on to the mistaken belief that this has slowed you down somehow.0
-
donjtomasco wrote: »well, not the last one, the long one just before. and yes, she did say that, maybe not "word for word" but it is what she said and meant. but i guess we all interpret and hear what we want and need to interpret and hear. which is why i try to find out as close to possible exactly what someone is trying to say before i disagree with them. otherwise, why disagree with a bunch of grey area and vagueness. I got a very simple answer from her and my results proved me correct and her not correct, "JUST" on that one point, and NOT on any global scale. Don't over judge and over analyse and globalize a very simple thing that I have done. It was very concise and precise and I clearly proved "JUST ONE POINT" whether anyone agrees with the point or not, or whether anyone thinks my "PERSONAL" experiment yesterday was "DENSE" or "STUPID" or whatever adjective has been chosen to call me.
I don't think I can be any clearer without getting this down to a sub kindergarden level. It was not and is not scientific. It was just a personal experiment to test what would happen if I ate bread, fried food, and other food that I have excluded in order to lose weight since January 1. It proved that for me these foods need to be avoided. It does not mean that you or anyone else can't lose any amount of weight eating some of these foods, or ALL of these foods, I am sure some of you can. And it is a personal choice. Eating these foods at the "LEAST" slowed down my weight loss (which was the simple question posed to me), and at most "ADDED" weight. Whether it was water retention or pieces of fried oyster stuck in my digestive track along with the hot dog and popcorn and fried okra, or anything else, my weight was negatively affected. The other poster said my weight would NOT be negatively affected.
Only after I have proven that "FOR ME" my weight was negatively affected, now there is the addition of "Well, it is water retention due to sodium". YES, NO KIDDIING!!! Genius comeback with that.
Was my "WEIGHT" affected by the food I ate yesterday, within my daily calorie goals? YES. It is that simple. You can make it as complicated as you want to make yourself feel better. And that is fine with me. We are all here to discuss, learn, read, express opinions and debate it all, like some of you have so astutely commented to. And I think that this is simply all that is being done.
You are not correctly determining what people wrote and what they mean.
Nobody ever denied that eating a meal high in sodium would result in temporary water weight gain. In fact, after you announced your "study," some of the first comments were that you would probably have water weight gain the next day. This was not an addition. You simply ignored these comments yesterday.
At issue was your statement that eating bread, in and of itself, would cause a stall in weight loss.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Parkercomom wrote: »The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??
We are having a conversation, on things that we may (or may not, it's unclear at this point, as maidentl has pointed out) have different opinions, and on which there is actual factual information.
I don't think people are being ridiculed, and I find it frustrating that some seem to think that disagreeing, even on factual matters, is somehow impolite or improper. I would find these forums tedious and useless in the extreme if all we did was validate every opinion or thing someone read on the internet or in a women's mag or heard from some bodybuilder at the gym.
Sure, there's a mix of information--some hard information that should be supported (and can be)--that bread calories aren't somehow more "fattening" than other calories is one of those; some "this is what worked for me," and some support/encouragement. But the latter alone isn't the only good use of the forum, especially not boards like "Food and Nutrition" but also in "General Weight Loss Help" when someone asks whether bread is something that is inconsistent with weight loss.
Again, whatever happened to the idea that being able to defend an opinion is a good and important thing? That being challenged and hearing disagreement is part of how we sort through competing information and let the good and correct ideas ultimately win out over the bad? Obviously, the first amendment doesn't apply here, but these assertions that it's mean to disagree with people always makes me think of those who see speech something to be protected from, rather than something to encourage, and makes me sad.
I absolutely agree. I took some contrary feedback from this thread and used it to increase (and change) my understanding. It would be great if some people that have good information to spare wouldn't sprinkle it with derogatory comments, but that seems to be the nature of public forums. I take the good stuff no matter where it comes from and ignore bad stuff.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
- 232.5K 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