CI/CO vs Clean Eating

Options
1121315171827

Replies

  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    half_moon wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.

    He lost me at lard. But I'm willing to learn more about this idea... The body is always hungry searching for nutrients, so the human remains hungry. I could roll with that, possibly.
    Obesity has skyrocketed since we were told to replace animal fats with polyunsaturated refined industrial oils. This propaganda was given to us by the manufacturers of refined industrial vegetable oils so they could become rich off our gullibility. If we went back to cooking with butter and lard we would be better off.

    2258345996_a5fe2f9ced.jpg
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.
    Yes, unfortunately, the truth does sound like flame baiting for those who refuse to accept it.

    The truth?

    inigo-montoya_that-word.jpg
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    half_moon wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.

    He lost me at lard. But I'm willing to learn more about this idea... The body is always hungry searching for nutrients, so the human remains hungry. I could roll with that, possibly.
    Obesity has skyrocketed since we were told to replace animal fats with polyunsaturated refined industrial oils. This propaganda was given to us by the manufacturers of refined industrial vegetable oils so they could become rich off our gullibility. If we went back to cooking with butter and lard we would be better off.

    2258345996_a5fe2f9ced.jpg

    LOL: I suppose you actually believe corn oil is good for you?


    It's a fat. It's neither good nor bad. A moderate amount as part of an otherwise varied and balanced diet is not going to end you.
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.
    Yes, unfortunately, the truth does sound like flame baiting for those who refuse to accept it.

    The truth?

    inigo-montoya_that-word.jpg

    Obesity has skyrocketed since we were told to replace animal fats with polyunsaturated refined industrial oils. This is a widely known statistic and therefore undeniably true.

    Oh yeah, correlation totally equals causation right?

    fresh-lemons-imported-to-the-USA-from-mexico-correlates-with-a-decrease-in-the-US-highway-fatality-rate.jpg510.jpg?1364314851
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.
    Yes, unfortunately, the truth does sound like flame baiting for those who refuse to accept it.

    The truth?

    inigo-montoya_that-word.jpg

    Obesity has skyrocketed since we were told to replace animal fats with polyunsaturated refined industrial oils. This is a widely known statistic and therefore undeniably true.

    Oh yeah, correlation totally equals causation right?

    fresh-lemons-imported-to-the-USA-from-mexico-correlates-with-a-decrease-in-the-US-highway-fatality-rate.jpg510.jpg?1364314851
    DENIAL is more than a river in Egypt.

    Hmm, yes - I always turn to puns when my argument falls flat.
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    edited June 2015
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    And you're right that the reality is very likely that "clean" eaters are really eating moderately, and moderate eaters are most likely eating nutritious foods. It's just a preference in terms of *ways of thinking about it*

    I think it relates to how you see your own diet vs. others. Why claim to eat clean unless you are asserting that others who don't are eating "unclean"? Especially if you don't, in fact, eat the way you claim to.

    I find it quite illuminating that so-called "clean" eaters so often tend to assume that everyone not "eating clean" is eating McD's and Twinkies constantly or occasionally donuts, that we don't care about health or nutrition.

    Because that's how people think. In global, imprecise, sometimes inconsistent terms that may or may not reflect what they actually do.

    But I'm asking here why make those assumptions about people who don't eat clean. Why do they always go immediately from someone saying "it's okay to include some less nutrient dense foods in an overall balanced, healthy diet that meets micros and macros and is calorie appropriate" to "they are saying it's the same to eat all donuts as all broccoli!" (For the record both would be stupid choices.) This seems to want to make rather uncharitable and offensive assumptions about other people, simply because they don't self-define as "clean eaters."

    I'm not at all convinced that people who want to pursue what they call "clean eating" judge others; people can hold different standards for themselves than they do for other people, despite whatever readings can be abstracted from what they say about themselves.

    But if they did, I think one reason might be what another poster mentioned earlier - that threads often veer into these polarized meme-for-alls, where people post pictures of monster burgers, those huge donuts I guess, cake, etc. Those images misrepresent the moderate approach. The earlier poster also mentioned that people posting those pics often have a lot more calories to play with than some, who might, you know, resent the cynicism about the kind of care they have to take to meet their macros within their budget, maybe by thinking about "clean eating".

    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I don't disagree with this in general. I don't see how the term "clean" helps particularly vs. the old standby "healthy." It seems to add on either some element of religious thinking or else some effort to create disgust (these two things are related) by thinking of the food the person wants not to want as "dirty" or "unclean." Which again I think tends to be somewhat harmful and also rude when it comes to the characterizations of others.
    And there are also probably variations in who actually responds better to whichever diets.

    I'm not convinced we are really talking about different ways of eating.

    But yeah, I know that the way the term "clean" rubs me the wrong way is kind of like my version of tilting at windmills. ;-)

    "Clean" just has currency right now, it's trendy, that's all. I'm familiar with the purity/disgust axis but again am not sure how many people actually, fully apply this categorization. I think it's just a shorthand for a lot of people. Not saying some don't get religious about it, but for the most part, for those who haven't eaten the way you have, and want to eat healthier (no scare quotes because it just is healthier), it might be an important way of making sense of things, at least initially. I guess this is really an empirical question, though.
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    And you're right that the reality is very likely that "clean" eaters are really eating moderately, and moderate eaters are most likely eating nutritious foods. It's just a preference in terms of *ways of thinking about it*

    I think it relates to how you see your own diet vs. others. Why claim to eat clean unless you are asserting that others who don't are eating "unclean"? Especially if you don't, in fact, eat the way you claim to.

    I find it quite illuminating that so-called "clean" eaters so often tend to assume that everyone not "eating clean" is eating McD's and Twinkies constantly or occasionally donuts, that we don't care about health or nutrition.

    Because that's how people think. In global, imprecise, sometimes inconsistent terms that may or may not reflect what they actually do.

    But I'm asking here why make those assumptions about people who don't eat clean. Why do they always go immediately from someone saying "it's okay to include some less nutrient dense foods in an overall balanced, healthy diet that meets micros and macros and is calorie appropriate" to "they are saying it's the same to eat all donuts as all broccoli!" (For the record both would be stupid choices.) This seems to want to make rather uncharitable and offensive assumptions about other people, simply because they don't self-define as "clean eaters."

    And I've had those assumptions stated about me even after I explained that I think eating with attention to nutrition is important and that I wouldn't call myself a "clean eater" in part because "processed" foods include foods like, well, greek yogurt and bagged spinach.
    In slogans, if you like. We (all of us, humans) take cognitive shortcuts. It makes parsing the environment (e.g. grocery store) & negotiating day-to-day life easier.

    I don't disagree with this in general. I don't see how the term "clean" helps particularly vs. the old standby "healthy." It seems to add on either some element of religious thinking or else some effort to create disgust (these two things are related) by thinking of the food the person wants not to want as "dirty" or "unclean." Which again I think tends to be somewhat harmful and also rude when it comes to the characterizations of others.
    And there are also probably variations in who actually responds better to whichever diets.

    I'm not convinced we are really talking about different ways of eating.

    Oh for the ways of eating we've been talking about until now, yeah I agree. Sorry, should have been more specific - I mean more ways of eating than just that. I do think though that as I mentioned before, some people do have subclinical or undiagnosed issues, try something out, and find they do better with it than they did when they didn't consider food quality (or reduce carbs or increase Omega 3s or whatever). It just works for them in a way other approaches didn't. And they might never actually know why for sure. (Lots of women, in particular, have PCOS or thyroid issues and their docs just don't put the dots together, or ask the right questions, or order the right tests.) Who knows what else could make someone a responder to a given diet and not to another, probably there are
    latent variables.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition

    Nope.

    Once again, I got fat when eating a diet that had adequate protein, plenty of fat (both olives and olive oil and animal fats, including lots of salmon), and lots of veggies.

    Really, it's extremely possible. It's not even hard. I could gain weight even on a low carb diet if I wasn't careful about portions, because I love protein/fat/salt.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.

    *kitten* did I miss some jimmies being rustled??
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    gsR0wLX.png
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    half_moon wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.

    He lost me at lard. But I'm willing to learn more about this idea... The body is always hungry searching for nutrients, so the human remains hungry. I could roll with that, possibly.

    He's goofy, and for me the nutrient thing is not accurate, sadly, but once upon a time I was convinced that cooking with lard was a good thing, and I still think it's not a bad thing. It's just more of a hassle than butter, but as someone interested in the perfect pie crust I'm willing to experiment. Here's one article on the topic (which should not be seen as an endorsement of anything else): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/28/cooking-with-lard-baking_n_5212804.html
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    Options
    draznyth wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.

    *kitten* did I miss some jimmies being rustled??

    oh with the rustled jimmies again
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    tomatoey wrote: »
    draznyth wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    The only problem I have with CICO is that obesity is not caused by excessive caloric intake; it is caused by malnutrition; the poor body is screaming for nutrients which it never gets and therefore the person is never satisfied and always eating. If we all ate properly there would be no reason to count calories. And eating properly is incredibly easy: cook with lard instead of oil and stop using anything refined and white.
















    i

    Oh boy, it's this guy.
    Yes, the guy who tells the truth and refuses to be bullied by misguided public opinion.

    More like the guy who likes to rustle jimmies and flame-bait.

    *kitten* did I miss some jimmies being rustled??

    oh with the rustled jimmies again

    I've been wondering how you have 3k+ posts and no avi

    it's like

    y u do dis :confused: