The Clean Eating Myth
Replies
-
That's impossible to know just because of modern healthcare and the abundance of food in the western world. Just because they died earlier does not mean there diets were more unhealthy. In the same way just because we live longer does not mean ours are healthier. People died of many things that were totally non diet related disease wise that are now curable or preventable.annaskiski wrote: »
People have been eating 'clean' for millennia, and died of a host of diseases by 40.
Were your grandparents really so much healthier than you?l
0 -
nevermind. i tried to quote then messed up the post and cant delete it now.
0 -
isulo_kura wrote: »
That's impossible to know just because of modern healthcare and the abundance of food in the western world. Just because they died earlier does not mean there diets were more unhealthy. In the same way just because we live longer does not mean ours are healthier. People died of many things that were totally non diet related disease wise that are now curable or preventable.annaskiski wrote: »
People have been eating 'clean' for millennia, and died of a host of diseases by 40.
Were your grandparents really so much healthier than you?l
Her point was that the disease in Iceman was genetic.
A lot of what the clean eaters are presuming to prevent, sadly, comes down to genetics.
0 -
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
lol I remember when my logic instructor told us, "if you present an argument logically, any rational person will be compelled to accept it"
g'luck finding rational people on the internets0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
That's the one I was trying to quote/reply to! What a revelation to find that the repeated terms and methods I see in these threads actually has a source and an outline. It's like cult follower training! Even so, it was pretty educational as far as teaching effective ways to debate.0 -
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
That's the one I was trying to quote/reply to! What a revelation to find that the repeated terms and methods I see in these threads actually has a source and an outline. It's like cult follower training! Even so, it was pretty educational as far as teaching effective ways to debate.
Yes, and that's I think a real missed opportunity with this forum. A debate is good at school, when you're trying to score points and show how clever you are by making the other guy look stupid. It's what politicians do. A dialogue, on the other hand, where people actually freely exchange ideas and extract the good parts from one another's viewpoints to enlarge their own, is so much more useful and stimulating. But that rarely seems to happen here.0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2201280/Calories-Dont-count-calories-itll-just-make-FATTER-Which-foods-really-make-fat.html ok its the daily mail but this discusses that more calories would be burned by digesting food that has not been as processed so this would affect cico?0
-
You people actually think that no one has an education/life outside of the IIFYM website and could possibly have ever learned about logical fallacies any other way?
Too ridiculous to even discuss.
As for debate/discussion? Discussions are productive if they're kept on point and logical. Introducing terminology commonly used in debating does not a debate make. It just keeps things on track.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »Kimberly_Harper wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
That's the one I was trying to quote/reply to! What a revelation to find that the repeated terms and methods I see in these threads actually has a source and an outline. It's like cult follower training! Even so, it was pretty educational as far as teaching effective ways to debate.
Yes, and that's I think a real missed opportunity with this forum. A debate is good at school, when you're trying to score points and show how clever you are by making the other guy look stupid. It's what politicians do. A dialogue, on the other hand, where people actually freely exchange ideas and extract the good parts from one another's viewpoints to enlarge their own, is so much more useful and stimulating. But that rarely seems to happen here.
If that is how you really feel then why are you constantly trying to pant the picture that everyone that says they believe it's about CICO or that they eat processed foods actually eats that all day every day?
She's with Big Dialogue0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Is it time for a tin foil hat picture? I just can't get over the idea that people applying logic in discussions is now presumed by their opponents to be, as a matter of course, from a web site, and that none of those people have any skills, education, or knowledge from any other source.
It's gotta be a conspiracy of IIFYM of brainless sheeple, spouting doctrine. No other possibility could exist.
What the actual...
Let's throw in a heaping dash of irony, considering the fact that clean and Paleo eaters are all spouting dogma gleaned from books, blogs, and websites.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Is it time for a tin foil hat picture? I just can't get over the idea that people applying logic in discussions is now presumed by their opponents to be, as a matter of course, from a web site, and that none of those people have any skills, education, or knowledge from any other source.
It's gotta be a conspiracy of IIFYM of brainless sheeple, spouting doctrine. No other possibility could exist.
What the actual...
Let's throw in a heaping dash of irony, considering the fact that clean and Paleo eaters are all spouting dogma gleaned from books, blogs, and websites.
Dude, you mean you don't attend the weekly IIFYM website party?
I mean, that's where I got all of my learning. About everything. Certainly not from my years of schooling and research-based thesis writing.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »You people actually think that no one has an education/life outside of the IIFYM website and could possibly have ever learned about logical fallacies any other way?
Too ridiculous to even discuss.
As for debate/discussion? Discussions are productive if they're kept on point and logical. Introducing terminology commonly used in debating does not a debate make. It just keeps things on track.
No, that's not what I meant. I never learned about debate and the rules of debate, and don't know the terminology so that link was educational for me, and it was also amusing because a) there exists a page telling people how to debate a certain philosophy of eating, and b) it reads almost as if ndj wrote it himself.
For what its worth IIFYM makes sense to me, but the debate-type posts take all the fun out of just talking about something.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Is it time for a tin foil hat picture? I just can't get over the idea that people applying logic in discussions is now presumed by their opponents to be, as a matter of course, from a web site, and that none of those people have any skills, education, or knowledge from any other source.
It's gotta be a conspiracy of IIFYM of brainless sheeple, spouting doctrine. No other possibility could exist.
What the actual...
Let's throw in a heaping dash of irony, considering the fact that clean and Paleo eaters are all spouting dogma gleaned from books, blogs, and websites.
lol wut0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Is it time for a tin foil hat picture? I just can't get over the idea that people applying logic in discussions is now presumed by their opponents to be, as a matter of course, from a web site, and that none of those people have any skills, education, or knowledge from any other source.
It's gotta be a conspiracy of IIFYM of brainless sheeple, spouting doctrine. No other possibility could exist.
What the actual...
Let's throw in a heaping dash of irony, considering the fact that clean and Paleo eaters are all spouting dogma gleaned from books, blogs, and websites.
Dude, you mean you don't attend the weekly IIFYM website party?
I mean, that's where I got all of my learning. About everything. Certainly not from my years of schooling and research-based thesis writing.
Today's the first day I've seen that page. I had no idea. Teach me the secret handshake?
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
Oh look. Subtle inferences that I am of a lesser intelligence veiled in poorly worded sarcasm. Bish, please.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
Someone's has been lying in wait for the opportunity to spring their cat meme....
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
Oh look. Subtle inferences that I am of a lesser intelligence veiled in poorly worded sarcasm. Bish, please.
Lol it was an implication and it was far from subtle.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
Oh look. Subtle inferences that I am of a lesser intelligence veiled in poorly worded sarcasm. Bish, please.
Bambi likes to bicker...-1 -
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Yes, and the author could really have finished the whole piece off with: "and when all else fails, post up a great big silly picture". Preferably of someone wearing a tin foil hat. In fact, mention tin foil hats whenever you're in doubt.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Is it time for a tin foil hat picture? I just can't get over the idea that people applying logic in discussions is now presumed by their opponents to be, as a matter of course, from a web site, and that none of those people have any skills, education, or knowledge from any other source.
It's gotta be a conspiracy of IIFYM of brainless sheeple, spouting doctrine. No other possibility could exist.
What the actual...
Let's throw in a heaping dash of irony, considering the fact that clean and Paleo eaters are all spouting dogma gleaned from books, blogs, and websites.
Dude, you mean you don't attend the weekly IIFYM website party?
I mean, that's where I got all of my learning. About everything. Certainly not from my years of schooling and research-based thesis writing.
Today's the first day I've seen that page. I had no idea. Teach me the secret handshake?
The password is door guy asks.
SO what is clean eating?
0 -
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »You people actually think that no one has an education/life outside of the IIFYM website and could possibly have ever learned about logical fallacies any other way?
Too ridiculous to even discuss.
As for debate/discussion? Discussions are productive if they're kept on point and logical. Introducing terminology commonly used in debating does not a debate make. It just keeps things on track.
No, that's not what I meant. I never learned about debate and the rules of debate, and don't know the terminology so that link was educational for me, and it was also amusing because a) there exists a page telling people how to debate a certain philosophy of eating, and b) it reads almost as if ndj wrote it himself.
For what its worth IIFYM makes sense to me, but the debate-type posts take all the fun out of just talking about something.
Gotcha. See, I don't have formal debate training, but in general conversation, I've come across people using terminology like "moving the goalposts" and "straw man" before.
I also... and this is not to brag or anything... have a very naturally logical mind. I can spot a logical fallacy even if I don't know how to categorize it. I can feel that it's wrong. I've been like this since I was a kid. Years on the internet have caused me to just look things up to satisfy my curiosity. This is just how I talk.
The thing is though, a lot of the other posters here? Are really highly educated. They're used to thinking that way because their background is ingrained in them.
As I stated earlier, it's not really an attempt to turn things into a formal debate. Pointing out errors in logic in a discussion is an attempt to keep things on point.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
At some point every anti-clean-eating MFP user started parroting the term "straw man" incessantly in these forums, and I couldn't figure out why, until I was forwarded this link.
http://iifym.com/debating-iifym-trolls-on-facebook/
This also probably explains why an "argumentum ab auctoritate" was dropped by someone who didn't give the impression that Latin was in his educational background, lol. Just read these talking points, and go forth into battle, IIFYM warriors
ROFL!!
Do I hear anyone saying: touché!?
I was disappointed that "moving the goalposts" wasn't in that debating guide, it is so relentlessly repeated I am sure that it was inspired by a similar "Debating 101" source. It just shows that sometimes jargon can be mistaken for substance.
Did I miss the part where you added substance to this thread?
And when you say "jargon" do you mean phrases like "anti-clean-eating"?
I'm sure you did miss the substance. It was a nuanced post, and those who were intended to get it got it, sorry.
Oh look. Subtle inferences that I am of a lesser intelligence veiled in poorly worded sarcasm. Bish, please.
Lol it was an implication and it was far from subtle.
You're right. Implication was a better word. It must have been my processed food brain fog.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
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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