Clean Eating Question
Options
Replies
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.0 -
Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
0 -
I personally believe that it is easier to learn moderation than to quit anything cold turkey, but I can accept I could be wrong.
I used to think so, too. Then one my best friends ended up in drug rehab - which completely changed my perspective.
There are people for whom "moderation" is the best possible advice. But there are also a lot of people for whom that is the worst possible advice.Regardless, it IS the truth that they don't HAVE to give up anything.
Depends on the person. So, no, it is not a universal truth.
I do understand where you are coming from, I know people who have gone to rehab too
but we are talking about food here, not physically addictive substances. so the comparison is a bit fallacious. but my intent in saying this is not to turn this into a "sugar addiction" thread. that is just my opinion on the matter
I don't believe the evidence support "sugar addiction".
But there is *plenty* of evidence that a very large proportion of the population manages better with elimination rather than restriction.
I always assumed the opposite but that is an interesting point0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
0 -
Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
Here's a thought....
If consumers are being told to shop the perimeter of the grocery store because that's where the healthy foods are, and everyone knows (at least I do) that companies can pay for placement in the stores, why wouldn't Big Processed Food pay to just put Evil Easy Mac and Horrific Hamburger Helper on the edges, and turn that whole theory upside down...
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
Here's a thought....
If consumers are being told to shop the perimeter of the grocery store because that's where the healthy foods are, and everyone knows (at least I do) that companies can pay for placement in the stores, why wouldn't Big Processed Food pay to just put Evil Easy Mac and Horrific Hamburger Helper on the edges, and turn that whole theory upside down...
your logic is *kitten* terrifying0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
Here's a thought....
If consumers are being told to shop the perimeter of the grocery store because that's where the healthy foods are, and everyone knows (at least I do) that companies can pay for placement in the stores, why wouldn't Big Processed Food pay to just put Evil Easy Mac and Horrific Hamburger Helper on the edges, and turn that whole theory upside down...
your logic is *kitten* terrifying
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
Here's a thought....
If consumers are being told to shop the perimeter of the grocery store because that's where the healthy foods are, and everyone knows (at least I do) that companies can pay for placement in the stores, why wouldn't Big Processed Food pay to just put Evil Easy Mac and Horrific Hamburger Helper on the edges, and turn that whole theory upside down...
The perimeter of our store got microwaveable hamburgers and hotdogs and all that stuff. It's refrigerated, so...0 -
stevencloser wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Every time when I read a thread like this I walk away confused after staements like " I don't eat anything that comes in a wrapper or package ".
I wonder where the people who make such statements live. Or don't they eat rice, beans, pasta, legumes and don't they add spices or herbs to your cooking, or use non-processed flour to bake the occasional " clean " cake ? I have lived in 11 countries so far and in my experience beans usually come in a bag, as does rice and flour, pasta is usually sold in a package or bag. Spices and herbs come in a container. Anything else would be against the sanitation laws of many countries. Even when I bought and still buy bulk stuf, it's still put in a bag and not just poured into my pants pocket.
I just don't get why the absence of packaging should make a food item more natural, or better. When I read the above mentioned statement, I always imagine people carrying their stuff home in cupped hands, because any kind of packaging would otherwise make food " bad ".
Processing and packaging are two different things.
Which is why when you question people, or use the example that lemurcat did up thread about eggs coming in a carton or beef coming in a package - people get defensive and say, "You know what I meant". No, clearly we don't. And fine, but maybe you should say what you mean then... instead of assuming it is implied.
It's the same problem that we run into when people say that you should only shop the perimeter of the grocery store. It sounds good, and I get the basic intention, but anyone who actually tried to stick with that would miss a whole lot of really great (and traditionally clean) foods. And we've seen enough crazy things on these forums to know that someone is out there who will take this advice and try to apply it 100%.
Here's a thought....
If consumers are being told to shop the perimeter of the grocery store because that's where the healthy foods are, and everyone knows (at least I do) that companies can pay for placement in the stores, why wouldn't Big Processed Food pay to just put Evil Easy Mac and Horrific Hamburger Helper on the edges, and turn that whole theory upside down...
The perimeter of our store got microwaveable hamburgers and hotdogs and all that stuff. It's refrigerated, so...
Now that I think about it, the perimeter of my grocery store has the pudding. I could get behind this idea.
0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
You guys are all idiots who obviously have nothing better to do lmao. And I was being a smart *kitten* when I posted the stuffing my face part. I wasn't saying that anyone actually said it. Just that you guys are saying it's not junk food and my opinion is that it is JUNK FOOD
Keep telling yourself it's not TROLL. Actually read your post and thought Wow one of the few posts to actually be nice and get it. lol guess I was wrong. You are all the same on here. Trying to rip people apart. But I won't be teetered. I have lost weight before and will again. I don't care what anybody else's perspective on clean eating is. I didn't ask for that. I was asking if I ate clean till I reached my goal if I'd gain back if I went back to eating what I wanted as long as I was within maintaining calorie range. Instantly people started getting their panties in a wad thinking I actually care how they eat. So if I ask for advise people should atleast give advice on what was asked. And I'm done reading the forum. Not many have nice things to say and I'm obviously not learning anything. I will never post another forum just so I can subject myself to all the laughs and ridicule
Do you see any irony at all in the fact that you are upset because you thought people were laughing at you, ridiculing you, and attacking you (which they were not) and yet you are the one who calls people idiots and trolls?0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
You guys are all idiots who obviously have nothing better to do lmao. And I was being a smart *kitten* when I posted the stuffing my face part. I wasn't saying that anyone actually said it. Just that you guys are saying it's not junk food and my opinion is that it is JUNK FOOD Keep telling yourself it's not TROLL. Actually read your post and thought Wow one of the few posts to actually be nice and get it. lol guess I was wrong. You are all the same on here. Trying to rip people apart. But I won't be teetered. I have lost weight before and will again. I don't care what anybody else's perspective on clean eating is. I didn't ask for that. I was asking if I ate clean till I reached my goal if I'd gain back if I went back to eating what I wanted as long as I was within maintaining calorie range. Instantly people started getting their panties in a wad thinking I actually care how they eat. So if I ask for advise people should atleast give advice on what was asked. And I'm done reading the forum. Not many have nice things to say and I'm obviously not learning anything. I will never post another forum just so I can subject myself to all the laughs and ridicule
classy
you got plenty of good advice
there is no such thing as junk food. but you didn't want to listen to our advice you just wanted people to agree with what you think
if your method of losing weight worked so well before then why are you back here trying to lose weight again0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
You guys are all idiots who obviously have nothing better to do lmao. And I was being a smart *kitten* when I posted the stuffing my face part. I wasn't saying that anyone actually said it. Just that you guys are saying it's not junk food and my opinion is that it is JUNK FOOD Keep telling yourself it's not TROLL. Actually read your post and thought Wow one of the few posts to actually be nice and get it. lol guess I was wrong. You are all the same on here. Trying to rip people apart. But I won't be teetered. I have lost weight before and will again. I don't care what anybody else's perspective on clean eating is. I didn't ask for that. I was asking if I ate clean till I reached my goal if I'd gain back if I went back to eating what I wanted as long as I was within maintaining calorie range. Instantly people started getting their panties in a wad thinking I actually care how they eat. So if I ask for advise people should atleast give advice on what was asked. And I'm done reading the forum. Not many have nice things to say and I'm obviously not learning anything. I will never post another forum just so I can subject myself to all the laughs and ridicule
Do you see any irony at all in the fact that you are upset because you thought people were laughing at you, ridiculing you, and attacking you (which they were not) and yet you are the one who calls people idiots and trolls?
I was wording Troll because the one I tagged in it called you all trolls when he is now acting like the rest of you. Not really me saying it. I was putting his words back out there. Idiots was all me. I'm not just going to sit back and let you all say whatever you want and not defend myself. People should atleast give advice based on what I asked it for on the forum. Not putting opinions in I didn't ask for0 -
asflatasapancake wrote: »I definitely eat junk when getting stuff from the local gas station. I eat packaged hard boiled eggs, pineapple, and salads there all the time. Pure junk.
Don't forget the pickles and jerky0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Now that I think about it, the perimeter of my grocery store has the pudding. I could get behind this idea.
Perimeter of mine has the bakery, the deli, the cheese, some pasta that's kept cold, some cookie dough.
The veggies are actually kind of in the middle, not the perimeter, but not the part with shelves. (They are basically what you walk into, though.)
Lots of other whole foods not on the perimeter.
Also it's got a drug store part, so that messes it up--at the moment I believe the perimeter includes sun screen.0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
That's how it's done right there0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
You guys are all idiots who obviously have nothing better to do lmao. And I was being a smart *kitten* when I posted the stuffing my face part. I wasn't saying that anyone actually said it. Just that you guys are saying it's not junk food and my opinion is that it is JUNK FOOD Keep telling yourself it's not TROLL. Actually read your post and thought Wow one of the few posts to actually be nice and get it. lol guess I was wrong. You are all the same on here. Trying to rip people apart. But I won't be teetered. I have lost weight before and will again. I don't care what anybody else's perspective on clean eating is. I didn't ask for that. I was asking if I ate clean till I reached my goal if I'd gain back if I went back to eating what I wanted as long as I was within maintaining calorie range. Instantly people started getting their panties in a wad thinking I actually care how they eat. So if I ask for advise people should atleast give advice on what was asked. And I'm done reading the forum. Not many have nice things to say and I'm obviously not learning anything. I will never post another forum just so I can subject myself to all the laughs and ridicule
Do you see any irony at all in the fact that you are upset because you thought people were laughing at you, ridiculing you, and attacking you (which they were not) and yet you are the one who calls people idiots and trolls?
I was wording Troll because the one I tagged in it called you all trolls when he is now acting like the rest of you. Not really me saying it. I was putting his words back out there. Idiots was all me. I'm not just going to sit back and let you all say whatever you want and not defend myself. People should atleast give advice based on what I asked it for on the forum. Not putting opinions in I didn't ask for
Just curious. Have you gone back and reread the entire thread from the beginning? I know sometimes it is easy to get caught up in things in the heat of the moment, not sure who was posting what, misunderstanding what someone meant, applying tone where there really wasn't tone, remembering it differently the next day. If you go back and re-read this, or even just the first two pages, do you really think that people attacked you? Yes, people asked you for sources. That is how forums work. If you make a claim that something is unhealthy, you need to have scientific data to back it up. If you take that little exchange out, where you were asked for sources and you got really defensive, do you really think the rest of this thread is filled with idiots and trolls and that no one was giving you helpful advice?
I re-read your original post. You did not seem sure that this approach was right for you. You said your neighbor was doing it and you just weren't sure about it, or that maybe you could do it for a while but then do something different when you reached maintenance. All people were doing was telling you that there are options, that clean eating is not the end all be all, that what matters for weight loss is a calorie deficit and that many people find moderation to be a way to adopt habits that can be sustained long after you reach your weight loss goals. That's it.
0 -
BabyPhat90713 wrote: »BabyPhat90713 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I just don't understand why that is so hard for people to understand and why "it's ok to eat chips and ice cream" turns into "you eat nothing but chips and ice cream".
This is really the most puzzling part of this discussion.
No one ever says "eat only chips and ice cream" (or donuts and Twinkies, etc.) and yet we are constantly accused of saying that just for saying it's okay to eat anything in moderation within a balanced, nutrient-rich diet. It's so frustrating and disingenuous.
I am not accusing of that in anyway. If you read the whole forum you would see that.
You were the one who inferred that people saying there is nothing inherently unhealthy about potato chips or ice cream is equivalent to telling you to stuff your face with them, which is why I think you made this post:BabyPhat90713 wrote: »
Thank you. I feel like I'm being attacked. I never claimed to be an expert. I just want advice. I just don't think stuffing my face with chips and icecream is what they should be telling me
BOOM
thanks for going back and finding that because I didn't feel like digging through all 9 pages but I knew it was there lol
You guys are all idiots who obviously have nothing better to do lmao. And I was being a smart *kitten* when I posted the stuffing my face part. I wasn't saying that anyone actually said it. Just that you guys are saying it's not junk food and my opinion is that it is JUNK FOOD Keep telling yourself it's not TROLL. Actually read your post and thought Wow one of the few posts to actually be nice and get it. lol guess I was wrong. You are all the same on here. Trying to rip people apart. But I won't be teetered. I have lost weight before and will again. I don't care what anybody else's perspective on clean eating is. I didn't ask for that. I was asking if I ate clean till I reached my goal if I'd gain back if I went back to eating what I wanted as long as I was within maintaining calorie range. Instantly people started getting their panties in a wad thinking I actually care how they eat. So if I ask for advise people should atleast give advice on what was asked. And I'm done reading the forum. Not many have nice things to say and I'm obviously not learning anything. I will never post another forum just so I can subject myself to all the laughs and ridicule
Funny that the idiots have this game figured out, and those in the know about the junk are seeking the reason they haven't.0 -
I say if giving up high calorie foods works for you, than do it. I am giving up those foods while losing weight, then plan to incorporate them back in when maintaining weight. Hopefully I will be able to eat them in moderation and not go overboard.
So far, this is working for me.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions