A Calorie REALLY ISN'T a Calorie

Options
13468926

Replies

  • aelunyu
    aelunyu Posts: 486 Member
    Options
    "...As a disclaimer, hamburgers and cake and cookies are not bad. They are bad if they lead to only hamburgers and cakes and cookies. I think we can both agree on this point..."

    This is, of course is a bit off the OP but it is important to point out that many seriously obese people (and there are a number of members here who are in the 350+ category) eat ONLY calorie-dense, low-nutrient, low fiber foods when they are in binge mode. For them, it is every bit as important for them to avoid those foods as it is for an alcoholic to avoid alcohol. Telling them that they don't have to give up those foods is a cruel joke.

    extra lean ground beef
    100 calorie sandwich thins
    2% cheese
    ketchup
    mustard
    pickles

    its less than 400 calories.

    come at me bro

    This hamburger just makes me want a real hamburger...tomorrow, I feast on Five Guys.
  • SanteMulberry
    SanteMulberry Posts: 3,202 Member
    Options
    "...As a disclaimer, hamburgers and cake and cookies are not bad. They are bad if they lead to only hamburgers and cakes and cookies. I think we can both agree on this point..."

    This is, of course is a bit off the OP but it is important to point out that many seriously obese people (and there are a number of members here who are in the 350+ category) eat ONLY calorie-dense, low-nutrient, low fiber foods when they are in binge mode. For them, it is every bit as important for them to avoid those foods as it is for an alcoholic to avoid alcohol. Telling them that they don't have to give up those foods is a cruel joke.

    extra lean ground beef
    100 calorie sandwich thins
    2% cheese
    ketchup
    mustard
    pickles

    its less than 400 calories.

    come at me bro

    Yes--I was tempted to leave out hamburgers as I never saw those on a food addict's list of binge foods. They are more apt to binge on ice cream, cookies, cheesecake, etc. They will occasionally eat an entire large pizza for lunch but, in general, their food choices are for sugar-laden, high-fat, high salt items, because that is typically what they are hooked on. They can pack an incredibly (and nauseatingly) enormous number of calories away in a day. I saw the food diary of someone who was 550+ and that person ate only pizza, cookies, cheesecake, soda pop (about a gallon a day) sweet rolls, doughnuts and ice cream three times a day. :sick:
  • DatMurse
    DatMurse Posts: 1,501 Member
    Options
    "...As a disclaimer, hamburgers and cake and cookies are not bad. They are bad if they lead to only hamburgers and cakes and cookies. I think we can both agree on this point..."

    This is, of course is a bit off the OP but it is important to point out that many seriously obese people (and there are a number of members here who are in the 350+ category) eat ONLY calorie-dense, low-nutrient, low fiber foods when they are in binge mode. For them, it is every bit as important for them to avoid those foods as it is for an alcoholic to avoid alcohol. Telling them that they don't have to give up those foods is a cruel joke.

    extra lean ground beef
    100 calorie sandwich thins
    2% cheese
    ketchup
    mustard
    pickles

    its less than 400 calories.

    come at me bro

    This hamburger just makes me want a real hamburger...tomorrow, I feast on Five Guys.

    I like lean ground beef better so I can eat more. its like getting a reduced calorie twinkie
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    Options
    I think I have read too many topics in the forums. I swear this covers at least three or four topics I have read here before.

    Your definition of "processing" pretty much means cooking and preparing food in anyway, and not the standard definition of "processing" that clean eaters refer to as being prepared at a factory with additives. Therefore, I don't really feel like this study supports your position.

    Unless your concept of clean-eating means to eat only raw food?

    I think the idea here is that the more processing a food goes through (be it mechanical, cooking, chewing...etc.), the more calories you absorb from it. So, you'll like absorb nearly 100% of the calories in an oreo, but not as much in a steak that you cooked medium rare. If you want to absorb even less calories from your steak, eat it raw. This is just my interpretation of the information.

    As Sidesteel pointed out, your body will absorb 100% of the calories regardless... however, your body might use some of those calories in the process of digesting the food (depending upon how processed it is). An Oreo requires some energy for digestion, but a raw potato requires more. It's a bad study that only weakly supports the OP's position.

    Not everyone absorbs 100% of calories eaten regardless of the source of the calories.

    Starfish do but that's only because their *kitten* is vestigial.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,018 Member
    Options
    "...As a disclaimer, hamburgers and cake and cookies are not bad. They are bad if they lead to only hamburgers and cakes and cookies. I think we can both agree on this point..."

    This is, of course is a bit off the OP but it is important to point out that many seriously obese people (and there are a number of members here who are in the 350+ category) eat ONLY calorie-dense, low-nutrient, low fiber foods when they are in binge mode. For them, it is every bit as important for them to avoid those foods as it is for an alcoholic to avoid alcohol. Telling them that they don't have to give up those foods is a cruel joke.

    extra lean ground beef
    100 calorie sandwich thins
    2% cheese
    ketchup
    mustard
    pickles

    its less than 400 calories.

    come at me bro

    This hamburger just makes me want a real hamburger...tomorrow, I feast on Five Guys.

    I like lean ground beef better so I can eat more. its like getting a reduced calorie twinkie
    Who wants diet food, give me the full monty. and I'm a happy guy.:smile:
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    Options
    There's certainly more than one way to skin a cat. Some people can't handle the range of freedom IIFYM offers, others hate the restriction of eating low carb, low sugar, low anything. IIFYM has its downfalls. people ignore micronutrients, fiber requirements all the time. So here's the thing. You cannot follow IIFYM and get enough fiber, without eating some moderately healthy things. Pizza, wings, burgers, and hot dogs have a combined fiber content of nil. They offer the micronutrient density of a paper plate. So the real question is...for you IIFYM guys, how are you achieving overall health not just in the weight loss department, but omega-3s, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc..? There's no case in which the sensible IIFYM macro follower is not eating moderately healthy foods anyways. Just like there's no way a sensible "clean eater" isn't enjoying a burger once in a while.

    Why are you polarized?

    You do not know what IIFYM means. The whole point of IIFYM is to get all of your macros and micros and THEN add other foods. It's not about eating only pizza, bacon, beer and nachos. I'm sad that people still think this is what IIFYM means.
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    This isn't about IIFYM vs anything else.

    It's that demonizing certain foods as unhealthy, unclean, or otherwise incompatible with a healthy lifestyle is counterproductive.
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    Options
    This is a really great thread...except for those who get so mad with others disagreeing with them. That ruins every thread.

    We must have read different threads. I saw a lot of spirited debate and found it all fascinating. Disagreement allows the showcasing of different points of view and that's a good thing. You really want a thread where everyone simply agrees? You really think that's the best way to learn anything?
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I think I have read too many topics in the forums. I swear this covers at least three or four topics I have read here before.

    Your definition of "processing" pretty much means cooking and preparing food in anyway, and not the standard definition of "processing" that clean eaters refer to as being prepared at a factory with additives. Therefore, I don't really feel like this study supports your position.

    Unless your concept of clean-eating means to eat only raw food?

    I think the idea here is that the more processing a food goes through (be it mechanical, cooking, chewing...etc.), the more calories you absorb from it. So, you'll like absorb nearly 100% of the calories in an oreo, but not as much in a steak that you cooked medium rare. If you want to absorb even less calories from your steak, eat it raw. This is just my interpretation of the information.

    mmmmm yummy :sick: I like medium rare but raw is not an option.

    Raw steak, liver and hamburger is good.
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    Options
    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    Avoiding foods that trigger binging is not an ED.

    We're talking about demonizing, not avoiding foods. There's a huge difference.

    Demonize:

    - Portray as wicked and threatening.
    - to mark out or describe as evil or culpable

    Last I checked a food or a food group couldn't be culpable or have evil intent. You're arguement is to turn food into a villian which is just shifting the blame to someone other than oneself. The food made them do it.

    Avoidance is another issue.

    My argument is avoiding foods that trigger binging works better for some people than trying to incorporate those foods into a sensible eating plan. For some people, avoiding ice cream is a better idea than trying to eat just a little bit.

    People who can't avoid foods lack willpower. People who can't avoid overeating foods also lack willpower. One of these paths may be easier to meet objectives with. Depends on the person. If you can eat foods and meet objectives, good for you. If you can avoid foods and meet objectives, good for you.

    The problem I have is with people who willfully ignore or advocate against avoidance as a reasonable option.

    This shouldn't even be controversial, and you're trying to categorize it as an ED.

    Again, it is the demonizing of food, preaching and try to convince others that a food is evil that I am categorizing as an ED. Avoiding a food because it makes it easier for you, personally, I don't really care. If that works for you, great.

    It's not just me. EDNOS, Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, which the stark demonizing and preaching the evil of processed foods or any group of food clearly meets the criteria.

    http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=65849
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    Options
    Demonizing any specific food or group of food doesn't help anything or anyone.

    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    How? I avoid trans fats, should I stop doing that? What about grains and starches? If I eat those, my blood glucose shoots up and that's not healthy. Should I eat those foods as to not appear to have an eating disorder?

    See response above. Avoidance and demonizing are completely different.

    I demonize the foods that make me unhealthy. I avoid the foods I demonize. When I avoid those foods, it helps me out tremendously. Do I have an eating disorder?

    In response to this:
    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You said
    You're essentially promoting an ED.


    What?

    See response above. Cliffs: http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=65849
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    So the moral of the story is that processed foods are more efficient at delivering nutrients and therefore superior, while unprocessed whole raw foods are inefficient and inferior and should be avoided.

    Might be true if the processed foods in question had any nutrients to begin with. I wonder if artificially injected micro nutrients in processed foods have the same benefits.

    The nutrients in fortified foods are barely absorbed, if they are absorbed at all.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    The worst thing you can do for people trying to lose weight is make them focus on the wrong things.

    Why do you find this to be true? Do you think that the majority of processed foods provide as much nutrients as whole "less-processed foods"?

    Because demonizing foods they love, but are "unhealthy" or "processed" like ice cream, Pop-tarts, Taco Bell, etc, makes them feel like a failure when they finally give in and eat those foods. That sends them into a downward spiral that results in yo-yo dieting.

    It's infinitely more important to teach them to focus on appropriate nutrients, like protein, fat, and fiber, so that they can fit the foods they crave and love into their diets in sustainable healthy ways.

    Pegging certain foods as "worse" or "unhealthy" or some foods as "clean" and "good" is the absolute wrong approach. It's not individual foods that are clean or good or healthy, it's the overall diet. A good, healthy diet can include ice cream and McDonald's.

    You must work for Monsanto, Cargill or one of those companies.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    Demonizing any specific food or group of food doesn't help anything or anyone.

    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    Wow, really??? Because I don't want to eat fast food, boxed, frozen, packaged foods it makes me have an eating disorder??

    REALLY???? This is nonsense and totally irrational thoughts.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    Demonizing any specific food or group of food doesn't help anything or anyone.

    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    How? I avoid trans fats, should I stop doing that? What about grains and starches? If I eat those, my blood glucose shoots up and that's not healthy. Should I eat those foods as to not appear to have an eating disorder?

    LOL, I know right???

    I guess we should go buy oodles of oreos and Taco Bell as to fit in with the Sheeples.
  • VeinsAndBones
    VeinsAndBones Posts: 550 Member
    Options
    @paleopath4lyf Smells like a paleo-person >.>
  • cilu90
    cilu90 Posts: 31
    Options
    I know I've mentioned this before but I'm 70 pages or so into the book 'Cooked' and I'm really enjoying it. I'm in the science and evolution part. That of course was just after the Whole Hog BBQ part of the book. Good stuff. It does talk about calories and energy needed to run various "energy hogs" within our systems.


    I'm a M. Pollan fan. Really enjoyed both "In Defense of Food" and Omnivore's Dilemma". Have not read the new one. Sounds like you enjoyed it, though? Never thought I would enjoy books about food (other than cookbooks) as much as I enjoy his.
  • Carnivor0us
    Carnivor0us Posts: 1,752 Member
    Options
    Demonizing any specific food or group of food doesn't help anything or anyone.

    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    How? I avoid trans fats, should I stop doing that? What about grains and starches? If I eat those, my blood glucose shoots up and that's not healthy. Should I eat those foods as to not appear to have an eating disorder?

    See response above. Avoidance and demonizing are completely different.

    I demonize the foods that make me unhealthy. I avoid the foods I demonize. When I avoid those foods, it helps me out tremendously. Do I have an eating disorder?

    In response to this:
    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You said
    You're essentially promoting an ED.


    What?

    See response above. Cliffs: http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=65849

    What has that got to do with anything? Restricting a food group for health reasons is NOT courting an ED.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    "...As a disclaimer, hamburgers and cake and cookies are not bad. They are bad if they lead to only hamburgers and cakes and cookies. I think we can both agree on this point..."

    This is, of course is a bit off the OP but it is important to point out that many seriously obese people (and there are a number of members here who are in the 350+ category) eat ONLY calorie-dense, low-nutrient, low fiber foods when they are in binge mode. For them, it is every bit as important for them to avoid those foods as it is for an alcoholic to avoid alcohol. Telling them that they don't have to give up those foods is a cruel joke.

    extra lean ground beef
    100 calorie sandwich thins
    2% cheese
    ketchup
    mustard
    pickles

    its less than 400 calories.

    come at me bro

    This hamburger just makes me want a real hamburger...tomorrow, I feast on Five Guys.

    I like lean ground beef better so I can eat more. its like getting a reduced calorie twinkie
    Who wants diet food, give me the full monty. and I'm a happy guy.:smile:

    Give me a grass fed burger with full fat raw milk cheddar, onions, mustard and pickles on a bed of lettuce and I am a happy girl.
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    Demonizing any specific food or group of food doesn't help anything or anyone.

    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You're essentially promoting an ED.

    How? I avoid trans fats, should I stop doing that? What about grains and starches? If I eat those, my blood glucose shoots up and that's not healthy. Should I eat those foods as to not appear to have an eating disorder?

    See response above. Avoidance and demonizing are completely different.

    I demonize the foods that make me unhealthy. I avoid the foods I demonize. When I avoid those foods, it helps me out tremendously. Do I have an eating disorder?

    In response to this:
    Unless avoidance of said specific food or group of food leads to a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.

    You said
    You're essentially promoting an ED.


    What?

    See response above. Cliffs: http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=65849

    What has that got to do with anything? Restricting a food group for health reasons is NOT courting an ED.

    There's no "health" reason to completely abstain from, say, pizza or Whoppers.