CI/CO vs Clean Eating
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Also, the 2012 Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book looks to be stuffed with convenience food ingredients.
Or be a fool who thinks there are special "clean eating" recipes and the rest of us are dumping cream of mushroom soup on our steak* or loads of sugar on our salmon. Because that's how us non-clean eaters roll.
.
Speak for yourself lemurcat! Brown sugar, pineapple juice, soy sauce, and Jack Daniels is my favorite salmon marinade!
Oh, not *white* sugar, so you are okay.0 -
If your sodium intake is high you may retain more water weight than you would have otherwise. CICO is the law of the land. If you burn more than you eat, you will lose weight. The trick is to find what foods you like to eat that keep you full.0
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »I'm personally a proponent of "clean eating" -- but that's because I feel a ton better when I eat whole foods and hit my targets more easily (in fact, MUCH more easily).
Also just want to say there's a huge difference between weight and overall health. A slightly overweight person who eats a balanced, nutritious diet is going to be healthier/happier than a skinny dude who only eats hot pockets. That's just science.
Have you read this thread at all?
Who in here has said to just eat hot pockets?
Round and round we go...
Oh, isn't that what you always tell people? It's the advice I give.
Every time I see one of those "what should I eat" threads I say "only hot pockets." In fact, I recommend doing IIAHP, which stands for "if it's a hot pocket."
*chortle*
I personally live by IIALP (if it's a lean pocket) because Lean Pockets will make you leaner than Hot Pockets. We should argue back and forth about it for pages and pages. I have charts and everything.
Maybe so, but then Hot Pockets make you hotter.
So there!
Edit: Beaten to it! I guess great minds think alike or else perhaps I should catch up in the thread before posting. :-)0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »Or they have looked for recipes and they're not finding what they're looking for because convenience products are what's in the popular cookbooks and recipes that are affordable and readily available to most.
This is simply not true.
For example, one of the cookbooks that is most commonly given to new graduates and others who might want to learn to cook is the Mark Bittman book I often recommend here. It does not rely on convenience products. Nor do most mainstream books. I browse cookbooks all the time. The idea that it's hard to find a normal cookbook that is based around whole foods is just not true, and if people are genuinely looking and unable to find them, they aren't looking at amazon or in bookstores (or in major websites like epicurious, which is free). This is almost as bad as "what can I order at Starbucks" in terms of what causes me to worry about the basic competence of people.Clean is only a pejorative on this website -- everywhere else I've seen the word used it's just a descriptor without connotation.
It's a trendy fad thing, often associated with specific named diets when used in cookbooks. You will almost certainly get a better set of recipes from something like the Bittman book (or Greene on Greens, which I also quite like, or one of numerous other major mainstream cookbooks) than some special "clean diet" cookbook.It's perfectly sensible for people to ask for what they're looking for in terms other like minded people will understand.
Again, this is my point: I don't think cooking from whole foods is something only "clean eaters" have an interest in. It's this rude assumption that if someone doesn't self-identify as a "clean eater" one must not cook (or cooks only with lots of sugar and cream of mushroom soup), and can't have anything of interest to say about good cookbooks or recipes or any interest in nutrition.
I reject the claim that "eating clean" and cutting out whatever things you have defined as "unclean" (which are completely different depending on who you ask anyway) means that your diet is more nutrition-conscious than mine or that I care less about health or overall fitness.
"What I have argued is that NO ONE is so ignorant that they don't know eating veggies is considered healthy"
"Or be a fool who thinks there are special "clean eating" recipes and the rest of us are dumping cream of mushroom soup on our steak* or loads of sugar on our salmon."
"I continue to think that if you think you need to find a special "clean" cookbook to learn to cook without those ingredients you aren't being sensible and have never actually looked at many recipes."
"This is almost as bad as "what can I order at Starbucks" in terms of what causes me to worry about the basic competence of people."
I think your contempt for those looking to improve their diet and have the audacity to use a term you don't approve of while doing so comes through loud and clear. So loud and clear all I can see is your rude assumptions; not those who you are railing against.
I don't think it's warranted from you or anyone else -- even if these so-called-clean-eaters are so stupid as to ask for "clean" recipes when everyone knows all good cookbooks and recipes are "clean" already and readily available to anyone not too stupid to look.
I'm very much done with this topic.0 -
this thread...delivers..?
idk I keep catching up on it and falling asleep halfway through the new posts0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
I think what we are really talking about is some people eat absurd diets (and assume everyone else does) and rather than merely cutting down on sugar or fast food or the like cut it out and of course feel better. And they assume that most people ate like they used to when of course most people do not and most people know what a healthy diet is. There's no real need to go from 100% fast food (or sugar) to none, and if you do chances are you will miss it. I don't eat fast food and don't miss it because I never really ate much and don't like it, but that's why making some big point about cutting it out is not interesting to me. My guess is for those whom that's a big thing it's not a good approach. Similarly, I didn't find cutting out added sugar a big thing, so added it back in. If someone really eats so much that's a big deal, they are going to want it again. (And personally I did, and see no reason not to have it.)
I think the diet you call absurd is more common than you think. A lot of people eat too much food that is low-value/low-satiety/low-nutrient. I think that is why there is an obesity epidemic. It's true that some might gain on what people call "clean" foods, but it's way harder to do that. Check out forums here and elsewhere, where bodybuilders strive to consume as much as possible on a "clean" diet for their gainz. It's simply not as easy to pound down 3000 calories of chicken and broccoli as it is to overindulge on chicken wings and fries, or pasta carbonara (with garlic bread, and a dessert...). Satiety tends to level off when people eat a certain way. I don't even want to give it a name at this point
(Also - I am not saying everyone should eat chicken and broccoli.)
I think we actually agreed that the holy rollers who eat 0% treats are probably few, and that most people wind up doing 80/20, and use these different heuristics to think through their meals and days. I'm not bothered if they're not entirely self-consistent, as long as they're seeing results that promote normal weight (and health). I really haven't noticed rudeness, so I can't speak to that.
Curious: what offends you about people looking for recipes? Or about the idea that some people don't know how to cook? It's a fact, there are people who don't know how to cook. Or people who cooked in ways that didn't serve their goals and now want to learn something else.
[Deleted a bunch of comments because the nested quotes weren't quoting well.]
I agree that bad diets are common, after all, that's why we have the term Standard American Diet.
The Standard American Diet in 3 Simple Charts
US obesity and diabetes rates are among the globe's very highest. Why? On her blog, the NYU nutritionist and food-politics expert Marion Nestle recently pointed (hat-tip, RealFood.org) to this telling chart on how we spend our grocery money, from the USDA's Amber Waves publication:
So, we do a pretty good job eating enough potatoes. But the healthier, more brightly colored vegetables like kale and carrots, no so much. We spend four times the amount on refined grains the USDA thinks is proper, and about a fifth of the target expenditure in whole grains. We spend nearly 14 percent of our at-home food budgets on sugar and candies, and another 8 percent on premade frozen and fridge entrees. Whole fruit barley accounts for less than 5 percent of our grocery bill. And so on—a pretty dismal picture.
That chart deals with at-home expenditures. What about our food choices out in the world? The USDA article has more. This chart shows that we're getting more and more of our sustenance outside of our own kitchens:
And while the article doesn't offer comparable data to the above at-home chart about expenditures outside the home, it does deliver evidence that our eating out habits are pretty dire as well:
Pointless in context of the boards. As is the issue, really, of the general obesity epidemic in this discussion.
Waving SAD around is a strawman in a lot of discussions around here.
If you compare how you eat vs. SAD while you're discussing things with a bunch of other conscientiously dieting people, how exactly are they supposed to interpret your comments?
What does SAD have to do with this whole discussion? What does what the general public eats have to do when it comes down to what to do when it comes to losing fat (which is, after all, the topic of the thread)?
While the regulars may be "conscientiously dieting people," it's a stretch to apply this to all new posters as well, judging from what I see in their diaries and questions.
But see, here's the thing.
I thought you didn't judge.
So why are you even arguing or checking out diaries if it doesn't matter?
Why did you bring obesity and diabetes risks into the discussion? You directly linked it to quality of food consumed then provided your charts, made a judgement about "health" (something you said you don't do, and now you're talking about all the noob's whose diaries you scope out who do all this "dismal" eating.
But you don't judge.
The need for nutrition while practicing CICO has been adequately covered in this discussion, AGES and pages ago. Debating the merits of SAD as an abstract thing outside of the discussion is pointless and derailing.
0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
For some, perhaps. But that has to do with the moderation aspect, and not the fact the Cheetos are "unhealthy" in the context of a balanced diet.
Also, who the eff only eats 2 Cheetos? If I eat Cheetos, I'm going to make them worth my while, and you bet your butt that they'll fit into my day.
0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
I think this side of things gets waaaaaay overlooked. There are people being paid a schwack of money to make these foods / hijack taste buds in order to make owners of those companies even more money.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
For some, perhaps. But that has to do with the moderation aspect, and not the fact the Cheetos are "unhealthy" in the context of a balanced diet.
Also, who the eff only eats 2 Cheetos? If I eat Cheetos, I'm going to make them worth my while, and you bet your butt that they'll fit into my day.
A lot of people will do that and end up hungry because that food tends not to fill a lot of people up. Then some of them might go over cal targets and think something's wrong with them. But nothing's wrong with them that making different choices won't help with.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »I'm personally a proponent of "clean eating" -- but that's because I feel a ton better when I eat whole foods and hit my targets more easily (in fact, MUCH more easily).
Also just want to say there's a huge difference between weight and overall health. A slightly overweight person who eats a balanced, nutritious diet is going to be healthier/happier than a skinny dude who only eats hot pockets. That's just science.
Have you read this thread at all?
Who in here has said to just eat hot pockets?
Round and round we go...
I... I.... used to eat a primarily hot pocket-based diet and I'm not terribly proud of it
. Needless to say radical change was needed.
But would you say that someone who eats a varied and balanced diet which meets nutritional needs, leads an active lifestyle, and occasionally a Hot Pocket, would be less healthy or feel worse than you, who never eats Hot Pockets?
Oh no, of course not. I'm not crazy.
I had one of these a month ago and I'm still happy and healthy:
[yummy doughnut chicken sandwich]
Okay, that is all anyone here on these boards is arguing when we argue moderation. We are saying that you can have a diet that consists mainly of nutrient-dense foods (hate the word clean) and have some "junk" food in moderation and still be perfectly healthy.
That looks delicious, btw.
What I object to is the posts that say "All you need is CICO" and stop there, without making all the good points about moderation and balanced diet that have been made on this thread. I started taking screenshots of these posts because lemurcat and others weren't familiar with them but am in forum jail for posting a screenshot on another thread, so won't be posting screenshots again, but you'll see them if you look.
Oh, how horrible that you can't control what other people say.
The truth is that all you NEED is CICO to lose weight.
Weight management and NUTRITION management are two different issues.
Do I personally believe they should be separated? NO.
Here's the thing YOU don't get. Some newbs? They're overwhelmed. They need baby steps. Getting a handle on simply using a food scale and logging everything is a big step for them. Making one change at a time is all they can handle.
There are plenty of other posts on here emphasizing the importance of nutrition. They'll get the information. They don't need to be hit over the head with a sledgehammer right away. Sometimes? Sure. Someone is ready for everything. Sometimes? Just telling someone to create a deficit so they START SOMEWHERE by taking the first step is just what's needed.
0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
I think this side of things gets waaaaaay overlooked. There are people being paid a schwack of money to make these foods / hijack taste buds in order to make owners of those companies even more money.
I can't believe a snack company would try to make their product taste good....0 -
Fyi though I think I'm out too. Things were going along more or less nicely earlier and meh not so much anymore0
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
For some, perhaps. But that has to do with the moderation aspect, and not the fact the Cheetos are "unhealthy" in the context of a balanced diet.
Also, who the eff only eats 2 Cheetos? If I eat Cheetos, I'm going to make them worth my while, and you bet your butt that they'll fit into my day.
A lot of people will do that and end up hungry because that food tends not to fill a lot of people up. Then some of them might go over cal targets and think something's wrong with them. But nothing's wrong with them that making different choices won't help with.
But see, if I've met my protein/fat goals for the day, or if I combine the Cheetos with a food with protein (such as a tuna salad sandwich on whole grain bread), the Cheetos don't make me hungrier. If I tried to make a meal out of Cheetos themselves, well, I'd have a bad time. Because who wants to eat pure carbs for lunch.
If you sit down in front of the TV with a bag of Cheetos (or popcorn, or container of ice cream, or a huge bowl of cajun roasted chickpeas - whatever), and eat mindlessly until the bag/container is gone, then your issue is with moderation.0 -
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
I think this side of things gets waaaaaay overlooked. There are people being paid a schwack of money to make these foods / hijack taste buds in order to make owners of those companies even more money.
I can't believe a snack company would try to make their product taste good....
See my later reply to you. Anyway yeah outie0 -
I have eaten a healthful diet consisting of whole foods all my life. It's a cultural thing and not nutritional wisdom.
When I started to overeat for about half a dozen of different reasons and started to gain a lot of weight for the first time in my life, I looked just as frumpy and lumpy as the people who got overweight from eating mostly processed foods.
So far I lost 65 pounds and the frumpy and lumpy is disappearing. I would think that the same would happen to a person who lost 65 pounds eating mostly whatever made them fat, just in moderate portions.
In my experience exercise with or after weight loss is what makes us look fit and lean ( of course a healthy diet might help a bit, bit not significantly ) while a healthy diet directly influences our state of health and that in return affects all aspects of life, maybe even the way we look.0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
I think this side of things gets waaaaaay overlooked. There are people being paid a schwack of money to make these foods / hijack taste buds in order to make owners of those companies even more money.
would you eat Cheetos that tasted like crap??? If I told you I had a super nutritious food that would deliver 25% of your micros in one sitting, but it tasted like the inside of a garbage can, would you eat it, because nutrition?0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
Meh. I love Cheetos (well, we get the Trader Joe's version). I dunno. Have I become a special snowflake? I've eaten a single one to taste it and gone on my merry way. I did the same thing with their insanely delicious Baconesque popcorn (which is a white cheddar popcorn with a smoky flavor -- it's seriously yummy).
I'm sure both of these things were designed to be delicious.
However, I am a rational being. I don't particularly ever think of my willpower, but I do think of... I don't know... my sense of ... I don't know how to put this... I know... I mean GROK... how many calories my body needs to achieve a goal I've set out to achieve. Having more of either of those things at that point in time would not have been conducive to achieving my goal, so it wasn't a notion I entertained at all. They're an option to be fit into another day, for sure.
I spent a lot of my life not understanding, on a fundamental level, that my body worked on an energy system. Oh, I knew about calories, but I didn't really GET it. I didn't get how I could manage it like I manage a checkbook. It just never clicked for me.
A lot of us think we are at the mercy of certain hormones and things like that, but after recently reading some research that showed just how easily some of those things are manipulated through even psychological means, I'm more convinced than ever that this is really all a head, habit, planning, and discipline game.
0 -
isulo_kura wrote: »Why do these boards always have to always do extremes? Why can't I follow CICO while mainly eating clean (even though that's a stupid classification)
Maybe you are reading the wrong threads ?
I have been here for over 2 years and no one has ever told me I cannot do both. Eating a healthy diet is great, but for weight loss it also has to be combined with CICO.
There are many people here in MFP whole do exactly that, but they kind of stay in the shadows because many of us are getting tired of being told what to eat and what not.
For example I have not had a chain restaurant hamburger in over 25 years ( personal preference ) yet, I was told often that I should enjoy a decent burger and fries , because they are " oh so, nom, nom, nom " and because it was the only way to eat " sustainably " and was shot down, because frankly I don't want a burger and don't find them · nom " and eat sustainably..
So , don't get upset and save your energy for doing what works for you and if that is CICO and " clean " ( I also dislike that word ) eating then that is what you should do to be successful and to hell with the others.......no disrespect intended.
0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
Extremely good point. You might find this book interesting. It was available in my library system:
Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us
Q. How did you land on salt, sugar, and fat as your way to write about the industry? Why these three ingredients?
A. I’d been investigating a surge in deadly outbreaks of E. coli in meat when an industry source, a microbiologist, suggested that if I wanted to see an even bigger public health hazard, I should look at what food companies were intentionally adding to their products, starting with salt. And sure enough, when I looked at this--by gaining access to high level industry officials and a trove of sensitive, internal records--a window opened on how aggressive the industry was wielding not only salt, but sugar and fat, too. These are the pillars of processed foods, the three ingredients without which there would be no processed foods. Salt, sugar and fat drive consumption by adding flavor and allure. But surprisingly, they also mask bitter flavors that develop in the manufacturing process. They enable these foods to sit in warehouses or on the grocery shelf for months. And, most critically to the industry's financial success, they are very inexpensive.
Q. So, how big is the processed food industry, exactly? What kind of scale are we talking about here?
A. Huge. Grocery sales now top $1 trillion a year in the U.S., with more than 300 manufacturers employing 1.4 million workers, or 12 percent of all American manufacturing jobs. Global sales exceed $3 trillion. But the figure I find most revealing is 60,000: That’s the number of different products found on the shelves of our largest supermarkets.
Q. How did this get so big?
A. The food processing industry is more than a century old--if you count the invention of breakfast cereals--so it’s been steady growth. But things really took off in the 1950s with the promotion of convenience foods whose design and marketing was aimed at the increasing numbers of families with both parents working outside the home. The industry's expansion, since then, has been entirely unrestrained. While food safety is heavily regulated, the government has been industry's best friend and partner in encouraging Americans to become more dependent on processed foods.
Q. What three things should a health-conscious supermarket shopper keep in mind?
A. The most alluring products--those with the highest amounts of salt, sugar and fat--are strategically placed at eye-level on the grocery shelf. You typically have to stoop down to find, say, plain oatmeal. (Healthier products are generally up high or down low.) Companies also play the better-nutrition card by plastering their packaging with terms like "all natural," "contains whole grains," “contains real fruit juice,” and "lean," which belie the true contents of the products. Reading labels is not easy. Only since the 1990s have the manufacturers even been required to reveal the true salt, sugar, fat and caloric loads of their products, which are itemized in a box called the "nutrient facts." But one game that many companies still play is to divide these numbers in half, or even thirds, by reporting this critical information per serving--which are typically tiny portions. In particular, they do this for cookies and chips, knowing that most people can't resist eating the entire three-serving bag. Check it out sometime. See how many “servings” that little bag of chips contains.
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
Extremely good point. You might find this book interesting. It was available in my library system:
Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us
Q. How did you land on salt, sugar, and fat as your way to write about the industry? Why these three ingredients?
A. I’d been investigating a surge in deadly outbreaks of E. coli in meat when an industry source, a microbiologist, suggested that if I wanted to see an even bigger public health hazard, I should look at what food companies were intentionally adding to their products, starting with salt. And sure enough, when I looked at this--by gaining access to high level industry officials and a trove of sensitive, internal records--a window opened on how aggressive the industry was wielding not only salt, but sugar and fat, too. These are the pillars of processed foods, the three ingredients without which there would be no processed foods. Salt, sugar and fat drive consumption by adding flavor and allure. But surprisingly, they also mask bitter flavors that develop in the manufacturing process. They enable these foods to sit in warehouses or on the grocery shelf for months. And, most critically to the industry's financial success, they are very inexpensive.
Q. So, how big is the processed food industry, exactly? What kind of scale are we talking about here?
A. Huge. Grocery sales now top $1 trillion a year in the U.S., with more than 300 manufacturers employing 1.4 million workers, or 12 percent of all American manufacturing jobs. Global sales exceed $3 trillion. But the figure I find most revealing is 60,000: That’s the number of different products found on the shelves of our largest supermarkets.
Q. How did this get so big?
A. The food processing industry is more than a century old--if you count the invention of breakfast cereals--so it’s been steady growth. But things really took off in the 1950s with the promotion of convenience foods whose design and marketing was aimed at the increasing numbers of families with both parents working outside the home. The industry's expansion, since then, has been entirely unrestrained. While food safety is heavily regulated, the government has been industry's best friend and partner in encouraging Americans to become more dependent on processed foods.
Q. What three things should a health-conscious supermarket shopper keep in mind?
A. The most alluring products--those with the highest amounts of salt, sugar and fat--are strategically placed at eye-level on the grocery shelf. You typically have to stoop down to find, say, plain oatmeal. (Healthier products are generally up high or down low.) Companies also play the better-nutrition card by plastering their packaging with terms like "all natural," "contains whole grains," “contains real fruit juice,” and "lean," which belie the true contents of the products. Reading labels is not easy. Only since the 1990s have the manufacturers even been required to reveal the true salt, sugar, fat and caloric loads of their products, which are itemized in a box called the "nutrient facts." But one game that many companies still play is to divide these numbers in half, or even thirds, by reporting this critical information per serving--which are typically tiny portions. In particular, they do this for cookies and chips, knowing that most people can't resist eating the entire three-serving bag. Check it out sometime. See how many “servings” that little bag of chips contains.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Oddly, as I've recently learned, it is pretty important to understand, sugar does not, in fact light up the dopamine receptors, but it looks like it does.
Don't think the science of happiness has done much hot pocket intake effects on depression studies.I'm personally a proponent of "clean eating" -- but that's because I feel a ton better when I eat whole foods and hit my targets more easily (in fact, MUCH more easily).
Also just want to say there's a huge difference between weight and overall health. A slightly overweight person who eats a balanced, nutritious diet is going to be healthier/happier than a skinny dude who only eats hot pockets. That's just science.
The fact that CI/CO ultimately affects weight is kind of irrelevant to overall health, until you're dealing in being overweight or underweight in a way that negatively affects your well-being.
Disclaimer: Well-read on the topic but no background nutrition or science. Grain of salt with things I say (or a lot of salt).
Plus I thought un-clean food activated all those dopamine receptors in the brain, so they must be happy.
no, that is just sugar...because sugar = cocaine...try to keep it all straight man...
0 -
You need that new thermographic microwave that shows hot and cold spots in the food cooking inside it.WinoGelato wrote: »
Don't think the science of happiness has done much hot pocket intake effects on depression studies.I'm personally a proponent of "clean eating" -- but that's because I feel a ton better when I eat whole foods and hit my targets more easily (in fact, MUCH more easily).
Also just want to say there's a huge difference between weight and overall health. A slightly overweight person who eats a balanced, nutritious diet is going to be healthier/happier than a skinny dude who only eats hot pockets. That's just science.
The fact that CI/CO ultimately affects weight is kind of irrelevant to overall health, until you're dealing in being overweight or underweight in a way that negatively affects your well-being.
Disclaimer: Well-read on the topic but no background nutrition or science. Grain of salt with things I say (or a lot of salt).
Plus I thought un-clean food activated all those dopamine receptors in the brain, so they must be happy.
Hot Pockets make me decidedly unhappy if I fail to let them cool before biting into them...
http://www.cnet.com/news/heat-map-microwave-gives-thermal-view-while-nuking-your-food/
0 -
Is a cheeto ever healthy? ... ... If I eat one I eat 20 and want more; vanishing caloric density; it makes me thirsty / hungrier, leading to terrible decisions. The item itself may be fine as part of some CI/CO calculation if I eat two of them and move to a carrot, but it was designed for me really want another making that carrot seem as bland as ever.
That has to factor into any equation about whether or not to eat something, right?
Yes. If you're starving to death, eating a cheeto is pretty darn healthy to eat, just as an extreme example.0 -
This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions