The joys of office broscience - misguided food/nutrition advice
Replies
-
Totally off topic, but I instantly knew you were from Edmonton from the bolded comment lolChrysalid2014 wrote: »Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
As my mother would say, "If your friends jumped off the High Level bridge, would you do it too?" Just because it's popular right now does not mean it's good science. Or even good. We have three macro-nutrients and many, many micro-nutrients. I won't find many people who would argue over the necessity of a micro-nutrient, say, Vitamin D. So why do people think that the answer to their diet woes is to eliminate an entire macro-nutrient?
Besides, chances are they'll get it wrong. They'll cut breads and pastas but keep eating yams and fruit. And wonder why their carb numbers are still so high.
When I was diabetic, a well-meaning bunkmate at a women's retreat brought me a big bag of "sugar free" candies. I took one look at the nutrition label and rejected them. First ingredient? Glucose. Her nose was seriously out of joint. Oh well. I wasn't going to flake out on a sugar high just so she wouldn't be offended in her ignorance.
Ha, me too!0 -
BrianKMcFalls wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »
AGREED!
Jaw literally dropped.
Please continue to share your broscience stories. They are providing excellent entertainment! I'm still shocked by the story about the girl who doesn't eat meat because muscle weighs more than fat. That still has to be the winner!
Yeah, agreed on the muscle in meat story as the winner so far. I find myself hoping that the poster actually made it up, just so I don't lose all faith in the human species, but it's probably true.
I often use the phrase "That's awesome!" In these situations. Most people are unaware the word can also mean overwhelming fear, and that level of stupid is definitely scary.
This just made me think of a quote from my favorite author OF ALL TIME Terry Pratchett (RIP ). So, because I'm a huge nerd and bookworm I'll just share it here for no very good reason, lol.
“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.”
Sorry, now back to your regularly scheduled programming!0 -
Not at work but in the gym sauna. Had a naked lady sit beside me and proceed to tell me that I wasn't really overweight, my body was just full of yeast and if I just cut out yeast and did some kind of cleanse I would be miraculously trim and fit! Ya, ok, I don't need anyone's junk in my face while they spout crap at me while I'm trying to relax.0
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »As far as I know no-one has ever been diagnosed with "carbohydrate deficiency".
So Ketosis is a good thing now? Why do you think carbohydrates are listed as a macronutrient?
@BinkyBonk , @pinklotus_56 , LOL. Inside joke. Drove through the High Level Bridge last week. It's looking a little worse for wear. Surely it's due for repainting? Basic black, of course.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »As far as I know no-one has ever been diagnosed with "carbohydrate deficiency".
So Ketosis is a good thing now? Why do you think carbohydrates are listed as a macronutrient?
@BinkyBonk , @pinklotus_56 , LOL. Inside joke. Drove through the High Level Bridge last week. It's looking a little worse for wear. Surely it's due for repainting? Basic black, of course.
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you? Yes, ketosis is a good thing. That's why it's been medically prescribed for over 100 years. It's why millions of diabetics have managed to go medication free, why epileptics have stopped having seizures, and why millions of more can control their inflammation without medication. It's why millions of women with PCOS have finally been able to lose weight and even get pregnant. Unless you think there's some magic fairy dust that makes it only work with people who have one of many unrelated medical condtions, and if someone without one tries it, the carbs have magically transformed into a CICO defying substance, why do you care if it works for other people? Nobody has ever said your weight loss is invalid or that you must do it too.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
0 -
KatieJane83 wrote: »BrianKMcFalls wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »
AGREED!
Jaw literally dropped.
Please continue to share your broscience stories. They are providing excellent entertainment! I'm still shocked by the story about the girl who doesn't eat meat because muscle weighs more than fat. That still has to be the winner!
Yeah, agreed on the muscle in meat story as the winner so far. I find myself hoping that the poster actually made it up, just so I don't lose all faith in the human species, but it's probably true.
I often use the phrase "That's awesome!" In these situations. Most people are unaware the word can also mean overwhelming fear, and that level of stupid is definitely scary.
This just made me think of a quote from my favorite author OF ALL TIME Terry Pratchett (RIP ). So, because I'm a huge nerd and bookworm I'll just share it here for no very good reason, lol.
“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.”
Sorry, now back to your regularly scheduled programming!
Terry Pratchett made the world a sillier, more relatable place.
0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »eboniivoried wrote: »My cube neighbor mentioned eliminating all carbs from her diet. I tried explaining that it's an important macronutrient and that carbs are not the devil. I cannot be too harsh on her though; I subscribed to the same philosophy as her at one point in my life.
Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
So question... we have three macros (carbs, protein, fat). If "lots of people eliminate carbs" does that mean eliminating protein wouldn't qualify as "Broscience" either? What about fat?
I am ABSOLUTELY NOT arguing with you! I eat carbs because I'm a runner, love my macros, and think they provide essential fuel when balanced correctly. However, I do know people who eat low-carb diets (never met anyone who has eliminated carbs completely...) and it seems to work for them. I am more curious as your opinion of macros in general and if they are interchangeable as "non-broscience"0 -
shrinkingletters wrote: »Here, I made an astrology dietary restrictions for y'all:
Aries: Can only eat food they've won in a street fight.
Taurus: Can only eat animal proteins from animals that do not exceed 35mph at full speed.
Gemini: Can only eat food scavenged from self-help group craft tables.
Cancer: Can only eat food from neglected cans and boxes in the back of the very top shelf in the kitchen.
Leo: Can only eat foods that can be arranged into a self-portrait.
Virgo: Can only eat foods that can slide easily through the chute under the door.
Libra: Can only eat foods that compliment their accessories.
Scorpio: Can only eat foods that can hold their own in a staring match.
Sagittarius: Can only eat foods from countries they cannot pronounce.
Capricorn: Can only eat foods that their employer agrees to write off as a tax deduction.
Aquarius: Can only eat foods that make it through their teleportation device without fusing to a nasty housefly.
Pisces: Can only eat foods that remind them of that time their mother forgot to pick them up from soccer practice.
This is hilarious - I wish I were a Leo! Haha!!
0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/0 -
Low carb or no carb? And it still comes with risks.0
-
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »shrinkingletters wrote: »Here, I made an astrology dietary restrictions for y'all:
Aries: Can only eat food they've won in a street fight.
Taurus: Can only eat animal proteins from animals that do not exceed 35mph at full speed.
Gemini: Can only eat food scavenged from self-help group craft tables.
Cancer: Can only eat food from neglected cans and boxes in the back of the very top shelf in the kitchen.
Leo: Can only eat foods that can be arranged into a self-portrait.
Virgo: Can only eat foods that can slide easily through the chute under the door.
Libra: Can only eat foods that compliment their accessories.
Scorpio: Can only eat foods that can hold their own in a staring match.
Sagittarius: Can only eat foods from countries they cannot pronounce.
Capricorn: Can only eat foods that their employer agrees to write off as a tax deduction.
Aquarius: Can only eat foods that make it through their teleportation device without fusing to a nasty housefly.
Pisces: Can only eat foods that remind them of that time their mother forgot to pick them up from soccer practice.
This is hilarious - I wish I were a Leo! Haha!!
Self help craft tables? Like glue?0 -
KatieJane83 wrote: »BrianKMcFalls wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »
AGREED!
Jaw literally dropped.
Please continue to share your broscience stories. They are providing excellent entertainment! I'm still shocked by the story about the girl who doesn't eat meat because muscle weighs more than fat. That still has to be the winner!
Yeah, agreed on the muscle in meat story as the winner so far. I find myself hoping that the poster actually made it up, just so I don't lose all faith in the human species, but it's probably true.
I often use the phrase "That's awesome!" In these situations. Most people are unaware the word can also mean overwhelming fear, and that level of stupid is definitely scary.
This just made me think of a quote from my favorite author OF ALL TIME Terry Pratchett (RIP ). So, because I'm a huge nerd and bookworm I'll just share it here for no very good reason, lol.
“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.”
Sorry, now back to your regularly scheduled programming!
This makes me want to read Terry Pratchett-- I haven't ever.0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.0 -
andympanda wrote: »I once heard never stick with one diet more that a month so one's body doesn't have time to adapt to the diet.
I thought the blood type diet was a Transylvania thing, or is that just eating certain blood types.
That must be the Borg diet. Change tactics before you are assimilated.
0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Well okay then.... wow. I never said it was scary, never said anyone was wrong, literally used the word "confused". We don't do that at our hospital or clinics and I have never heard of a 0 carb diet as a prescription from a doctor. I know you are upset with someone but I don't think its me.0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Well okay then.... wow. I never said it was scary, never said anyone was wrong, literally used the word "confused". We don't do that at our hospital or clinics and I have never heard of a 0 carb diet as a prescription from a doctor. I know you are upset with someone but I don't think its me.
Never said I was upset with you. Sorry if that's how it read to you.0 -
You could call hypoglycemia that if you wanted. Of course that isn't caused by not eating enough carbs though.Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
As far as I know no-one has ever been diagnosed with "carbohydrate deficiency".
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »eboniivoried wrote: »My cube neighbor mentioned eliminating all carbs from her diet. I tried explaining that it's an important macronutrient and that carbs are not the devil. I cannot be too harsh on her though; I subscribed to the same philosophy as her at one point in my life.
Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
So question... we have three macros (carbs, protein, fat). If "lots of people eliminate carbs" does that mean eliminating protein wouldn't qualify as "Broscience" either? What about fat?
I am ABSOLUTELY NOT arguing with you! I eat carbs because I'm a runner, love my macros, and think they provide essential fuel when balanced correctly. However, I do know people who eat low-carb diets (never met anyone who has eliminated carbs completely...) and it seems to work for them. I am more curious as your opinion of macros in general and if they are interchangeable as "non-broscience"
Depends on what we mean by "broscience"--stuff promoted by a typical "bro" (which could include low fat or low carb*) or simply goofy ideas behind approaches to weight loss/health. In this thread we've been using the latter, but I would say that eliminating protein can't be broscience, since being into protein is one of the hallmarks of a bro approach.
This does make me worry that I have to find a separate term for the more raw vegan, "plant based" food leanings (when mixed with silly justifications, that is--I have no problem with ethical veganism), which is based in part on the idea that we are all sick because we eat too much protein. Woo-science?
*For the record, I don't think low carb is necessarily bro science at all (I think it's an approach that works well for a subset of people and addresses some of the difficulties they have in losing/maintaining weight), but there certainly can be broscience arguments for it and approaches to it.0 -
Totally off topic, but I instantly knew you were from Edmonton from the bolded comment lolChrysalid2014 wrote: »Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
As my mother would say, "If your friends jumped off the High Level bridge, would you do it too?" Just because it's popular right now does not mean it's good science. Or even good. We have three macro-nutrients and many, many micro-nutrients. I won't find many people who would argue over the necessity of a micro-nutrient, say, Vitamin D. So why do people think that the answer to their diet woes is to eliminate an entire macro-nutrient?
Besides, chances are they'll get it wrong. They'll cut breads and pastas but keep eating yams and fruit. And wonder why their carb numbers are still so high.
When I was diabetic, a well-meaning bunkmate at a women's retreat brought me a big bag of "sugar free" candies. I took one look at the nutrition label and rejected them. First ingredient? Glucose. Her nose was seriously out of joint. Oh well. I wasn't going to flake out on a sugar high just so she wouldn't be offended in her ignorance.
Me too lol0 -
I'm enjoying all the Edmontonians identifying each other through the use of High Level Bridge. Ha ha!0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »eboniivoried wrote: »My cube neighbor mentioned eliminating all carbs from her diet. I tried explaining that it's an important macronutrient and that carbs are not the devil. I cannot be too harsh on her though; I subscribed to the same philosophy as her at one point in my life.
Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
So question... we have three macros (carbs, protein, fat). If "lots of people eliminate carbs" does that mean eliminating protein wouldn't qualify as "Broscience" either? What about fat?
I am ABSOLUTELY NOT arguing with you! I eat carbs because I'm a runner, love my macros, and think they provide essential fuel when balanced correctly. However, I do know people who eat low-carb diets (never met anyone who has eliminated carbs completely...) and it seems to work for them. I am more curious as your opinion of macros in general and if they are interchangeable as "non-broscience"
Depends on what we mean by "broscience"--stuff promoted by a typical "bro" (which could include low fat or low carb*) or simply goofy ideas behind approaches to weight loss/health. In this thread we've been using the latter, but I would say that eliminating protein can't be broscience, since being into protein is one of the hallmarks of a bro approach.
This does make me worry that I have to find a separate term for the more raw vegan, "plant based" food leanings (when mixed with silly justifications, that is--I have no problem with ethical veganism), which is based in part on the idea that we are all sick because we eat too much protein. Woo-science?
*For the record, I don't think low carb is necessarily bro science at all (I think it's an approach that works well for a subset of people and addresses some of the difficulties they have in losing/maintaining weight), but there certainly can be broscience arguments for it and approaches to it.
Makes sense to me. There's nothing inherently Bro-ey about a low carb diet. On the other hand, "Don't eat those carbs Bro, they'll ruin your cut. Let's go grab a couple 24oz ribeyes instead." is all Bro.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »eboniivoried wrote: »My cube neighbor mentioned eliminating all carbs from her diet. I tried explaining that it's an important macronutrient and that carbs are not the devil. I cannot be too harsh on her though; I subscribed to the same philosophy as her at one point in my life.
Lots of people eliminate carbs; that doesn't qualify as "broscience".
So question... we have three macros (carbs, protein, fat). If "lots of people eliminate carbs" does that mean eliminating protein wouldn't qualify as "Broscience" either? What about fat?
I am ABSOLUTELY NOT arguing with you! I eat carbs because I'm a runner, love my macros, and think they provide essential fuel when balanced correctly. However, I do know people who eat low-carb diets (never met anyone who has eliminated carbs completely...) and it seems to work for them. I am more curious as your opinion of macros in general and if they are interchangeable as "non-broscience"
Depends on what we mean by "broscience"--stuff promoted by a typical "bro" (which could include low fat or low carb*) or simply goofy ideas behind approaches to weight loss/health. In this thread we've been using the latter, but I would say that eliminating protein can't be broscience, since being into protein is one of the hallmarks of a bro approach.
This does make me worry that I have to find a separate term for the more raw vegan, "plant based" food leanings (when mixed with silly justifications, that is--I have no problem with ethical veganism), which is based in part on the idea that we are all sick because we eat too much protein. Woo-science?
*For the record, I don't think low carb is necessarily bro science at all (I think it's an approach that works well for a subset of people and addresses some of the difficulties they have in losing/maintaining weight), but there certainly can be broscience arguments for it and approaches to it.
^^ Yes. There are broscience approaches to low-carb but when applied and monitored correctly it works for a subset of people. You said it so eloquently!
0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Question... what do you even eat on a 0 carb diet? Totally serious. EVERYTHING YUMMY HAS CARBS!
I think there is also a different between "don't want to do it" and "don't NEED to do it". Low-carb is not necessary for everyone. For example, friends with refractory epilepsy, it has worked well for some and not others. Friends who are lazy and not willing to just try CICO, probably not the first option I would recommend haha.0 -
Yesterday one of my coworkers told me she has to eat every two hours because she is RAVENOUS after two hours.0
-
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »BrianKMcFalls wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »
AGREED!
Jaw literally dropped.
Please continue to share your broscience stories. They are providing excellent entertainment! I'm still shocked by the story about the girl who doesn't eat meat because muscle weighs more than fat. That still has to be the winner!
Yeah, agreed on the muscle in meat story as the winner so far. I find myself hoping that the poster actually made it up, just so I don't lose all faith in the human species, but it's probably true.
I often use the phrase "That's awesome!" In these situations. Most people are unaware the word can also mean overwhelming fear, and that level of stupid is definitely scary.
This just made me think of a quote from my favorite author OF ALL TIME Terry Pratchett (RIP ). So, because I'm a huge nerd and bookworm I'll just share it here for no very good reason, lol.
“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.”
Sorry, now back to your regularly scheduled programming!
This makes me want to read Terry Pratchett-- I haven't ever.
OMG, you totally should. He died last month and I cried. Fortunately, he has a huge body of work that I can keep re-reading forever!
0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Question... what do you even eat on a 0 carb diet? Totally serious. EVERYTHING YUMMY HAS CARBS!
I think there is also a different between "don't want to do it" and "don't NEED to do it". Low-carb is not necessary for everyone. For example, friends with refractory epilepsy, it has worked well for some and not others. Friends who are lazy and not willing to just try CICO, probably not the first option I would recommend haha.
On a real 0 carb diet you'd have meat, meat and, uh... meat. All veggies and fruit have carbs and dairy does too. Eggs and cheese are close to 0 but not exactly.0 -
I don't practice a ketogenic diet and never will, but I think it's important to mention in this discussion that there is a difference between ketosis and other drastic macro-reducing diets -- namely that the body (absent medical issues preventing this, of course) will fairly readily adapt to generate energy from protein/fat sources instead of carbs, but will not adapt (again, in general, though I understand there are extreme-circumstance studies showing otherwise) to build muscle out of only carbs and fat or generate brain function with only carbs and protein. In this one instance, it isn't as simple as "carbs are a macronutrient, therefore vital."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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions