CI/CO vs Clean Eating
Replies
-
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)
Yep. And while I agree that it's a stupid classification, my understanding is that mostly eating "clean" with various treats within an appropriate calorie goal IS what all the moderate eaters are promoting. So called "eating clean" is the claim that there's some detriment from including even a small amount of treats (or lower nutrient foods or highly processed foods or foods in packages or whatever the person is on about) even after meeting nutrition goals and without going over calories.0 -
TrailBlazinMN wrote: »It all depends on how good you want to feel. I've eaten super clean foods (by my definition) and I feel awesome. Endless energy, no caffeine needed, feeling amazing, etc. People don't realize how good they can feel when they get rid of the foods that affect their body, mind, and attitude.
If you want, just experiment. For dinner, have a few slices of pizza and a big bowl of ice cream for dinner and see how you feel in the morning. Wait a few days and have the same foods you ate during the day when you had pizza and ice cream but instead of pizza and ice cream, eat a massive salad with your choice of protein (lean meat, beans, quinoa, etc) along with some tea and see how you feel the following morning.
Some people can get away with the whole "everything in moderation" when it comes to "junk food". Other people can't. Just like a former alcoholic can't just have a sip or a former cocaine addict can't just have one line.
The same is true for me. A few months ago, I cleaned up my diet and increased exercise and feel as good as I did when I was taking phen/fen in the 90s.
(For anyone unfamiliar with phen/fen: Phentermine has a pharmacology similar to amphetamine and because of the way Fenfluramine increased seratonin, it worked like a happy pill for me.)0 -
IsaackGMOON wrote: »Thread is gonna go off in 3... 2... 1...
No, your weight would not suffer. Because losing weight and gaining boils down to calories in vs calories out. It doesn't come down to whether you eat 'clean'.- If you eat in a caloric deficit, you will lose weight
- If you eat in a caloric surplus, you will gain weight
I suppose to extend that answer -- what about body composition? Scale aside, would a clean CI/CO eater look fit and active while a non clean CI/CO eater look frumpy and heavier?
Can what you eat affect body composition? I haven't seen the studies on this and would be interested, but I expect so. In particular, I expect that eating adequate protein, and getting adequate nutrients will have a positive effect on the whole, and especially that they will often effect how good you feel which will affect exercise and so on.
But if you compare two people who exercise similar amounts and the only difference is one includes treats (or highly processed foods from time to time) but both do meet nutrient goals and stay within their calories, I don't think there will be any difference at all, which is one reason why the debates on this topic are so silly. No one recommends that people eat in such a way that they are low on protein or missing out on nutrients. Instead there tend to be claims that eating some bread or some ice cream within the context of a healthy balanced diet will have some inexplicable BAD effect.
Interestingly, IMO the main difference in how you look/body composition is going to come from exercise not diet (outside pretty wide differences that, again, are not recommended by anyway).0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »TrailBlazinMN wrote: »It all depends on how good you want to feel. I've eaten super clean foods (by my definition) and I feel awesome. Endless energy, no caffeine needed, feeling amazing, etc. People don't realize how good they can feel when they get rid of the foods that affect their body, mind, and attitude.
If you want, just experiment. For dinner, have a few slices of pizza and a big bowl of ice cream for dinner and see how you feel in the morning. Wait a few days and have the same foods you ate during the day when you had pizza and ice cream but instead of pizza and ice cream, eat a massive salad with your choice of protein (lean meat, beans, quinoa, etc) along with some tea and see how you feel the following morning.
Some people can get away with the whole "everything in moderation" when it comes to "junk food". Other people can't. Just like a former alcoholic can't just have a sip or a former cocaine addict can't just have one line.
The same is true for me. A few months ago, I cleaned up my diet and increased exercise and feel as good as I did when I was taking phen/fen in the 90s.
Phentermine has a pharmacology similar to amphetamine and because of the way Fenfluramine increased seratonin, it worked like a happy pill for me.
Not really sure what the chemical composition of phentermine has to do with this thread.
I eat salads. I eat pizza. I don't feel any different when I eat either of those foods (aside from maybe being more satisfied after the pizza, amirite?). Then again, I look at foods objectively - I have no bias either way.
If I am already inclined to believe that spinach, brown rice, and baked chicken breast would make me feel better because someone told me it was "healthier" than a grilled chicken sandwich from McDonald's (possibly similar macros, with maybe a bit more fat if you don't hold the mayo), then yes, my confirmation bias will likely make me say "See? I told you that "clean" meal would make you feel better than eating that processed sandwich from evil McDonald's!" When really, neither of those foods is truly better than the other. They're both just food.0 -
I'm sorry.
RIP, draznyth.0 -
0
-
The ideal diet is to watch your intake of calories and limit the sugar, carbs, etc. that those calories comprise.
I see very often on these boards, however, that so long as people are going by the Calories In/Calories Out rule, you can really eat whatever you want.
If you are exercising and following a CI/CO with deficit, how does *what* you eat change your results?
So, if I was netting 1,300 calories a day, but everything I ate did not fall under a "Clean" diet, would my weight suffer? My body composition? Inviting anyone with experience, insight, or science to help explain.
The ideal diet is the one you can stick with that fulfils your macro and micro needs and leaves you emotionally and physically satisfied
The strawman extrapolation nature of this thread and the "I eat clean food so I am better" attitude of some makes it difficult to see this conversation yet again ...particularly without those who were always willing to take it on
Clean has no adequate definition in my opinion
I have hit goal, maintained, got fitter, stronger and more awesome simply by cico and an eye on my protein and fats ...eating clean never comes into it. I have a balanced nutritious diet and if I want a damn sausage or pizza or ice cream I will have one with no wringing of hands or feeling that I'm going off plan. In fact we just went for curry for Father's Day ...and I had a fab ice lolly with rainbow sprinkles on it for pudding
Works for me
I want to join the happy sparkling rainbow unicorn welcome crew, I do, I do
Only this is my unicorn
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I have hit goal, maintained, got fitter, stronger and more awesome simply by cico and an eye on my protein and fats ...eating clean never comes into it. I have a balanced nutritious diet and if I want a damn sausage or pizza or ice cream I will have one with no wringing of hands or feeling that I'm going off plan.
Sounds pretty "clean" to me!
:drinker:
The whole discussion is just further proof that people can turn literally anything into a religious argument. Personally I don't give two squirrel poops about what other people eat...
0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »TrailBlazinMN wrote: »It all depends on how good you want to feel. I've eaten super clean foods (by my definition) and I feel awesome. Endless energy, no caffeine needed, feeling amazing, etc. People don't realize how good they can feel when they get rid of the foods that affect their body, mind, and attitude.
If you want, just experiment. For dinner, have a few slices of pizza and a big bowl of ice cream for dinner and see how you feel in the morning. Wait a few days and have the same foods you ate during the day when you had pizza and ice cream but instead of pizza and ice cream, eat a massive salad with your choice of protein (lean meat, beans, quinoa, etc) along with some tea and see how you feel the following morning.
Some people can get away with the whole "everything in moderation" when it comes to "junk food". Other people can't. Just like a former alcoholic can't just have a sip or a former cocaine addict can't just have one line.
The same is true for me. A few months ago, I cleaned up my diet and increased exercise and feel as good as I did when I was taking phen/fen in the 90s.
Phentermine has a pharmacology similar to amphetamine and because of the way Fenfluramine increased seratonin, it worked like a happy pill for me.
What does phentermine have to do with this discussion?
I was agreeing with the poster who said "It all depends on how good you want to feel. I've eaten super clean foods (by my definition) and I feel awesome. Endless energy, no caffeine needed, feeling amazing, etc. People don't realize how good they can feel when they get rid of the foods that affect their body, mind, and attitude."
I said "A few months ago, I cleaned up my diet and increased exercise and feel as good as I did when I was taking phen/fen in the 90s."
And then I explained what Phentermine and Fenfluramine were in case there were people not familiar with them.
I went back and edited my post to clear that up.
0 -
I have hit goal, maintained, got fitter, stronger and more awesome simply by cico and an eye on my protein and fats ...eating clean never comes into it. I have a balanced nutritious diet and if I want a damn sausage or pizza or ice cream I will have one with no wringing of hands or feeling that I'm going off plan.
Sounds pretty "clean" to me!
:drinker:
The whole discussion is just further proof that people can turn literally anything into a religious argument. Personally I don't give two squirrel poops about what other people eat...
What about a whole jar of squirrel poops?
0 -
TrailBlazinMN wrote: »It all depends on how good you want to feel. I've eaten super clean foods (by my definition) and I feel awesome. Endless energy, no caffeine needed, feeling amazing, etc. People don't realize how good they can feel when they get rid of the foods that affect their body, mind, and attitude.
If you want, just experiment. For dinner, have a few slices of pizza and a big bowl of ice cream for dinner and see how you feel in the morning. Wait a few days and have the same foods you ate during the day when you had pizza and ice cream but instead of pizza and ice cream, eat a massive salad with your choice of protein (lean meat, beans, quinoa, etc) along with some tea and see how you feel the following morning.
Some people can get away with the whole "everything in moderation" when it comes to "junk food". Other people can't. Just like a former alcoholic can't just have a sip or a former cocaine addict can't just have one line.
Pizza and ice cream is every Friday night (3 slices of a small, 1-2 servings of ice cream depending on what I have), and I feel no different on Saturday mornings than I do when I eat "clean".0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »TrailBlazinMN wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The answer is no, no they will not.
If someone eats healthily all day long, meets their macro- and micro-nutrient goals for the day, and lives an active and healthy lifestyle, a bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies at the end of the day is going to have zero effect on health or performance.
@Alyssa_Is_LosingIt -I think it's pretty awesome you know how food affects every single person in this world. By the way, not everyone can just have one bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies. There is reason why some people need to eat "super clean", just like alcoholics can't have a sip and drug users can't just have one hit/line/etc.slideaway1 wrote: »On a personal level I agree with this. I physically feel different (usually the day after) between getting my Carb Source from something like a sweet potato (Complex Carb) and veg, to eating Pizza the night before. Some people might not be as sensitive to this though.
This. I agree that some people might not be as sensitive to this but I think those people are far and few. On the other hand, I have realized the higher quality of food someone eats, the more their body rejects lower quality foods. It's like their body doesn't want to tolerate lower quality foods and only wants the good stuff.
That's not what I said.
Also, if someone can't have just one bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies, then their problem is with the ability to moderate their intake. That is something that they need to learn to do, and cutting those foods out completely forever is likely not going to teach them anything. Are we really expected to go the rest of our lives without eating another piece of birthday cake? Without eating out at a restaurant with friends or on a date? That's just not realistic.
I guarantee you that anyone (barring a medical reason that requires them to avoid any particular food/ingredient) who is healthy, active, and who eats mostly nutrient-dense foods is not going to have any negative effects from having something sweet or some "junk" food evrery now and then. You don't get extra credit for eating nothing but "clean" foods 100% of the time.
Why to the above bolded...
Why do you think that everyone has to learn to moderate a certain food if they are willing to give it up.
I have never and probably never will be able to moderate peanut butter M&Ms...I have given the up. I am okay with that. I still think about them sometimes but it has been over two years since I have eaten them.
I can live without them...I can not however learn to just eat 1 of those little guys.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »TrailBlazinMN wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The answer is no, no they will not.
If someone eats healthily all day long, meets their macro- and micro-nutrient goals for the day, and lives an active and healthy lifestyle, a bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies at the end of the day is going to have zero effect on health or performance.
@Alyssa_Is_LosingIt -I think it's pretty awesome you know how food affects every single person in this world. By the way, not everyone can just have one bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies. There is reason why some people need to eat "super clean", just like alcoholics can't have a sip and drug users can't just have one hit/line/etc.slideaway1 wrote: »On a personal level I agree with this. I physically feel different (usually the day after) between getting my Carb Source from something like a sweet potato (Complex Carb) and veg, to eating Pizza the night before. Some people might not be as sensitive to this though.
This. I agree that some people might not be as sensitive to this but I think those people are far and few. On the other hand, I have realized the higher quality of food someone eats, the more their body rejects lower quality foods. It's like their body doesn't want to tolerate lower quality foods and only wants the good stuff.
That's not what I said.
Also, if someone can't have just one bowl of ice cream or a couple of cookies, then their problem is with the ability to moderate their intake. That is something that they need to learn to do, and cutting those foods out completely forever is likely not going to teach them anything. Are we really expected to go the rest of our lives without eating another piece of birthday cake? Without eating out at a restaurant with friends or on a date? That's just not realistic.
I guarantee you that anyone (barring a medical reason that requires them to avoid any particular food/ingredient) who is healthy, active, and who eats mostly nutrient-dense foods is not going to have any negative effects from having something sweet or some "junk" food evrery now and then. You don't get extra credit for eating nothing but "clean" foods 100% of the time.
Why to the above bolded...
Why do you think that everyone has to learn to moderate a certain food if they are willing to give it up.
I have never and probably never will be able to moderate peanut butter M&Ms...I have given the up. I am okay with that. I still think about them sometimes but it has been over two years since I have eaten them.
I can live without them...I can not however learn to just eat 1 of those little guys.
Just my opinion. If I enjoy something that much, I'd like to be able to fit them in from time to time for my own mental health rather than give them up completely. I think it's a healthy approach, and it proves that a specific food does not control you. You have the power to eat the food, and you alone have the power to stop eating the food. I don't want to give that food the power.
Plus, moderation is a handy skill to have for every aspect in life. I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.0 -
I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?0 -
The ideal diet is to watch your intake of calories and limit the sugar, carbs, etc. that those calories comprise.
I see very often on these boards, however, that so long as people are going by the Calories In/Calories Out rule, you can really eat whatever you want.
If you are exercising and following a CI/CO with deficit, how does *what* you eat change your results?
So, if I was netting 1,300 calories a day, but everything I ate did not fall under a "Clean" diet, would my weight suffer? My body composition? Inviting anyone with experience, insight, or science to help explain.
The ideal diet is the one you can stick with that fulfils your macro and micro needs and leaves you emotionally and physically satisfied
The strawman extrapolation nature of this thread and the "I eat clean food so I am better" attitude of some makes it difficult to see this conversation yet again ...particularly without those who were always willing to take it on
Clean has no adequate definition in my opinion
I have hit goal, maintained, got fitter, stronger and more awesome simply by cico and an eye on my protein and fats ...eating clean never comes into it. I have a balanced nutritious diet and if I want a damn sausage or pizza or ice cream I will have one with no wringing of hands or feeling that I'm going off plan. In fact we just went for curry for Father's Day ...and I had a fab ice lolly with rainbow sprinkles on it for pudding
Works for me
I want to join the happy sparkling rainbow unicorn welcome crew, I do, I do
Only this is my unicorn
All are welcome. Many eons ago, segregation of calories was abolished by our Supreme Leader Pegasus. Calories were declared equal. Pizza was allowed to walk side by side with sweet potato, even though they were TOTALLY different foods with much different macros.
-The Happy Rainbows and Unicorn Sparkles MFP Welcome Crew
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »I think it's a healthy approach...
There is no one "healthy" approach. If anything, it is unhealthy to be adamant that there is One True Way.
Some people do much better giving up completely, others do better restricting significantly (ie, occasional cheat), others can work it as moderation.
People need to figure out which works best for *them*. The "right" way is the way that works best for *them*.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »I think it's a healthy approach...
Stop with this already. There is no one "healthy" approach. If anything, it is unhealthy to be adamant that there is One approach.
Some people do much better giving up completely, others do better restricting significantly, others can work it as moderation.
People need to figure out which works best for *them*.
Notice I said "a" healthy approach, not "the" healthy approach.
And as I've said before, I don't care what someone chooses to or not to put in his or her mouth. I do care when people come on here and act like they are somehow healthier for eating "clean" than someone who practices IIFYM.
I also am not a proponent of demonizing food.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You know full well eating too much food and substance abuse are two different things.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You just did...
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You know full well eating too much food and substance abuse are two different things.
I went there because you said "everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything."
Also:
Sweet preference, sugar addiction and the familial history of alcohol dependence: shared neural pathways and genes.
Contemporary research has shown that a high number of alcohol-dependent and other drug-dependent individuals have a sweet preference, specifically for foods with a high sucrose concentration. Moreover, both human and animal studies have demonstrated that in some brains the consumption of sugar-rich foods or drinks primes the release of euphoric endorphins and dopamine within the nucleus accumbens, in a manner similar to some drugs of abuse. The neurobiological pathways of drug and "sugar addiction" involve similar neural receptors, neurotransmitters, and hedonic regions in the brain. Craving, tolerance, withdrawal and sensitization have been documented in both human and animal studies. In addition, there appears to be cross sensitization between sugar addiction and narcotic dependence in some individuals. It has also been observed that the biological children of alcoholic parents, particularly alcoholic fathers, are at greater risk to have a strong sweet preference, and this may manifest in some with an eating disorder. In the last two decades research has noted that specific genes may underlie the sweet preference in alcohol- and drug-dependent individuals, as well as in biological children of paternal alcoholics. There also appears to be some common genetic markers between alcohol dependence, bulimia, and obesity, such as the A1 allele gene and the dopamine 2 receptor gene.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You just did...
Ok? Thanks. I wanted to let her know what my stance on the matter was. Nothing that she says or links me to is going to change my mind, and I'll likely not change hers.0 -
Sugar = drug addiction comparison.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You know full well eating too much food and substance abuse are two different things.
I went there because you said "everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything."
Also:
Sweet preference, sugar addiction and the familial history of alcohol dependence: shared neural pathways and genes.
Contemporary research has shown that a high number of alcohol-dependent and other drug-dependent individuals have a sweet preference, specifically for foods with a high sucrose concentration. Moreover, both human and animal studies have demonstrated that in some brains the consumption of sugar-rich foods or drinks primes the release of euphoric endorphins and dopamine within the nucleus accumbens, in a manner similar to some drugs of abuse. The neurobiological pathways of drug and "sugar addiction" involve similar neural receptors, neurotransmitters, and hedonic regions in the brain. Craving, tolerance, withdrawal and sensitization have been documented in both human and animal studies. In addition, there appears to be cross sensitization between sugar addiction and narcotic dependence in some individuals. It has also been observed that the biological children of alcoholic parents, particularly alcoholic fathers, are at greater risk to have a strong sweet preference, and this may manifest in some with an eating disorder. In the last two decades research has noted that specific genes may underlie the sweet preference in alcohol- and drug-dependent individuals, as well as in biological children of paternal alcoholics. There also appears to be some common genetic markers between alcohol dependence, bulimia, and obesity, such as the A1 allele gene and the dopamine 2 receptor gene.
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
what are the stats on the success rates of those programs?
I googled around for a bit but didn't find anything easily
if anyone has access to that info I'd be interested to know though0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
what are the stats on the success rates of those programs?
I googled around for a bit but didn't find anything easily
if anyone has access to that info I'd be interested to know though
My point in bringing up 12 step programs was that the suggestion that people learn moderation for everything is irresponsible and unkind.
0 -
I think that from now on every time someone suggests peanut butter, I'm going to ask, "What about the allergic people? Won't it kill them?" Because, apparently, it's vitally important on this site to really hammer home the edge cases, in case people didn't know that a daily diet of 1300 calories of cake might be suboptimal or that people with eating disorders don't deal with food the same way others do or that IIFYM with protein == 0 might not work well.
How people consistently, and I mean in every thread in which the topic arises, can bolt at light speed from "What if I have some ice cream" to "You can't eat just ice cream" and think it is insightful, helpful, or even relevant, I have no idea.0 -
Sugar = drug addiction comparison.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
You are comparing apples to oranges. This argument has been debated before in these types of threads and I'm not going to engage in this discussion with you.
You know full well eating too much food and substance abuse are two different things.
I went there because you said "everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything."
Also:
Sweet preference, sugar addiction and the familial history of alcohol dependence: shared neural pathways and genes.
Contemporary research has shown that a high number of alcohol-dependent and other drug-dependent individuals have a sweet preference, specifically for foods with a high sucrose concentration. Moreover, both human and animal studies have demonstrated that in some brains the consumption of sugar-rich foods or drinks primes the release of euphoric endorphins and dopamine within the nucleus accumbens, in a manner similar to some drugs of abuse. The neurobiological pathways of drug and "sugar addiction" involve similar neural receptors, neurotransmitters, and hedonic regions in the brain. Craving, tolerance, withdrawal and sensitization have been documented in both human and animal studies. In addition, there appears to be cross sensitization between sugar addiction and narcotic dependence in some individuals. It has also been observed that the biological children of alcoholic parents, particularly alcoholic fathers, are at greater risk to have a strong sweet preference, and this may manifest in some with an eating disorder. In the last two decades research has noted that specific genes may underlie the sweet preference in alcohol- and drug-dependent individuals, as well as in biological children of paternal alcoholics. There also appears to be some common genetic markers between alcohol dependence, bulimia, and obesity, such as the A1 allele gene and the dopamine 2 receptor gene.
[deleted snarky picture]
As someone who used to do many things to excess, I can tell you that the cravings felt exactly the same.
Thank God for yoga. Signing off to go practice.
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
what are the stats on the success rates of those programs?
I googled around for a bit but didn't find anything easily
if anyone has access to that info I'd be interested to know though
My point in bringing up 12 step programs was that the suggestion that people learn moderation for everything is irresponsible and unkind.
it's not really irresponsible and unkind if 12 step programs don't actually work
that's why I'm wondering just how effective they are
if they work then yes you are def right0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
what are the stats on the success rates of those programs?
I googled around for a bit but didn't find anything easily
if anyone has access to that info I'd be interested to know though
My point in bringing up 12 step programs was that the suggestion that people learn moderation for everything is irresponsible and unkind.
I guess I should've put a disclaimer: "Unless you are a victim of substance abuse". Sorry for thinking that would be common sense.
On a side note, I think that arguing semantics in that way and saying that suggesting moderation is "irresponsible and unkind" is rather pedantic and overly sensitive.
Just my two cents there.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I don't see why it would be controversial to suggest that everyone should learn moderation. Not only with food, but with everything.
Would you say this to alcoholics or people in 12 step programs for drugs or gambling?
what are the stats on the success rates of those programs?
I googled around for a bit but didn't find anything easily
if anyone has access to that info I'd be interested to know though
My point in bringing up 12 step programs was that the suggestion that people learn moderation for everything is irresponsible and unkind.
it's not really irresponsible and unkind if 12 step programs don't actually work
that's why I'm wondering just how effective they are
They have huge failure rates. However...
...they still have higher success rates than any form of weight loss plan.
0
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