CALORIE QUALITY
Replies
-
Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.0 -
Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
IKR. That's a low blow.
0 -
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
0 -
UltimateEscape wrote: »"At Harvard Medical School, Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, an associate professor of medicine and epidemiology whose research was cited by experts in the film, said that the long-held idea that we get fat solely because we consume more calories than we expend is based on outdated science.
He has studied the effects that different foods have on weight gain and said that it is true that 100 calories of fat, protein and carbohydrates are the same in a thermodynamic sense, in that they release the same amount of energy when exposed to a Bunsen burner in a lab. But in a complex organism like a human being, he said, these foods influence satiety, metabolic rate, brain activity, blood sugar and the hormones that store fat in very different ways."
Source:
The New York Times
Are All Calories Equal?
May 9, 2014
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/?_r=0
Anyone else having Joanie Munitz flashbacks with these posts?0 -
i am not even going to bother reading this thread since i can already guess what has already been said
anyway. If I filled my calorie allowance every day of my life with 'less healthy options' I would feel gross and also pretty hungry most of the time. So I find having one or two treats a day and then filling the rest of my day with equally as tasty but probably more healthy foods makes me feel much better
also not completely restricting the more *junky* things is nice and has helped me no longer binge muchanymore
sometimes i can have more indulgent days where i maybe over do it on some things but whatever thats life0 -
"Quality matters too, and it matters on both sides of the energy-balance equation.
Calories go out in three ways: we burn them to survive (resting energy expenditure); we burn them to work (physical exertion); and we waste them (thermogenesis or heat loss). The quality of the fuel we consume can affect both resting energy expenditure, and thermogenesis. Is this surprising? Not at all. We can make fire with wood, or coal; coal burns hotter. Protein, fats, and low-glycemic foods seem to burn a bit "hotter" than simple and refined carbohydrates, a fact corroborated by a recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Source:
U.S. News & World Report HEALTH
Fathoming the Calorie
Why both the quality and quantity of calories count.
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2012/07/11/fathoming-the-calorie0 -
That's basically eating moderation, am I right??salembambi wrote: »i am not even going to bother reading this thread since i can already guess what has already been said
anyway. If I filled my calorie allowance every day of my life with 'less healthy options' I would feel gross and also pretty hungry most of the time. So I find having one or two treats a day and then filling the rest of my day with equally as tasty but probably more healthy foods makes me feel much better
also not completely restricting the more *junky* things is nice and has helped me no longer binge muchanymore
sometimes i can have more indulgent days where i maybe over do it on some things but whatever thats life
0 -
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
Yeah.... That explanation just makes it seem even worse.0 -
UltimateEscape wrote: »"Quality matters too, and it matters on both sides of the energy-balance equation.
Calories go out in three ways: we burn them to survive (resting energy expenditure); we burn them to work (physical exertion); and we waste them (thermogenesis or heat loss). The quality of the fuel we consume can affect both resting energy expenditure, and thermogenesis. Is this surprising? Not at all. We can make fire with wood, or coal; coal burns hotter. Protein, fats, and low-glycemic foods seem to burn a bit "hotter" than simple and refined carbohydrates, a fact corroborated by a recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Source:
U.S. News & World Report HEALTH
Fathoming the Calorie
Why both the quality and quantity of calories count.
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2012/07/11/fathoming-the-calorie
Can you please stop posting links like this if you're not willing to discuss the actual content? People are responding to you.0 -
Was this some kind of S&M thing?
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
I know. It is so weird that all those moderation people aren't just saying "you can have a cookie if you want instead of avoiding it." I don't get why they have to say bizare things like "you're wrong for not eating cookies. You're totally nuts for not eating it, and I'm going to shove them down your throat to make you mentally better." People are weird, aren't they?
0 -
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
Yeah.... That explanation just makes it seem even worse.
I'm not trying to make it seem better, lol. So, you and I won't be friends. You don't approve of what I said. It's okay by me.
The point is that you can choose to eat differently than someone else and not dislike the person for it.
What you eat isn't who you are. It doesn't make you better or worse.0 -
UltimateEscape wrote: »"At Harvard Medical School, Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, an associate professor of medicine and epidemiology whose research was cited by experts in the film, said that the long-held idea that we get fat solely because we consume more calories than we expend is based on outdated science.
He has studied the effects that different foods have on weight gain and said that it is true that 100 calories of fat, protein and carbohydrates are the same in a thermodynamic sense, in that they release the same amount of energy when exposed to a Bunsen burner in a lab. But in a complex organism like a human being, he said, these foods influence satiety, metabolic rate, brain activity, blood sugar and the hormones that store fat in very different ways."
Source:
The New York Times
Are All Calories Equal?
May 9, 2014
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/?_r=0
Anyone else having Joanie Munitz flashbacks with these posts?
YES!0 -
Was this some kind of S&M thing?
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
I know. It is so weird that all those moderation people aren't just saying "you can have a cookie if you want instead of avoiding it." I don't get why they have to say bizare things like "you're wrong for not eating cookies. You're totally nuts for not eating it, and I'm going to shove them down your throat to make you mentally better." People are weird, aren't they?
No. Actual S&m does not include torturing of animals.0 -
-
I have yet to see anyone say they're going to shove cookies down anyone's throat, but the rest is apt.
I know. It is so weird that all those moderation people aren't just saying "you can have a cookie if you want instead of avoiding it." I don't get why they have to say bizare things like "you're wrong for not eating cookies. You're totally nuts for not eating it, and I'm going to shove them down your throat to make you mentally better." People are weird, aren't they?
We said much, much worse, lol. Most of it couldn't be typed out on this board. You should hear the ways in which he said he was going to torture my cat, lol. It would make some people's blood run cold. But he didn't mean it. He was teasing.Some people get so worked up others eating things that give them pleasure in the context of a balanced diet. It's so puritanical. They'd love to brand them with a scarlet S for having a cookie.
Not me! I enjoy many foods. I'm every bit as delighted to eat a bowl of fruit as almost any cookie. No Ss here.
I sure hope that you don't think everyone who chooses, say, fruit, over a cookie derives no pleasure from the fruit. I eat many, many very tasty things that are also healthy.
Furthermore, I support the choice to eat cookies and wouldn't label anyone as anything because they choose to eat them. Nor do I think that eating or not eating a cookie has anything to do with what kind of a person one is.
I have known and loved people who ate nothing that was good for them. The smartest, kindest, funniest, most honest and generous person I've ever known almost never ate anything that was good for him. When he'd tease me about cooking possum and eating rabbit food, I'd tease back and say, "I know, you don't like the healthy food. And you've got the heart attacks to prove it!" And we were still best friends.
I don't know why anyone makes judgements about others based on their diet. Small minds, I guess. But the, "My WOE is better than your WOE" is ridiculous.
Wow...... If any of my friends said anything like this, joking or not, we would very quickly no longer be friends. What a horrible thing to say to someone.
And we weren't just best friends. We were related, so there was no getting rid of each other. But we were very, very close. It was a unique relationship, to be sure.
He ate almost nothing that was good for him, ever. He had four heart attacks and the last one killed him. Still never wanted to eat anything healthy. I supported that choice and didn't think less of him for it.
It's just ridiculous to think more or less of someone because they do or don't eat cookies. What you eat has nothing to do with what you are.
0 -
I don't think many people do that. It's just when people insist that you must include junk food OR ELSE that people are like, "No, you don't have to include it."
Moderation is great. I support it 100%.
Could you explain what you mean by "justify"? I'm NOT picking on grammar - I'd be the last one to do so as mine is often just about as bad as it can be. I'm not picking on diction! I just truly don't understand what you mean there and am trying to clarify.
This idea that junk food is required in a diet because excluding it makes binging a foregone conclusion...it's so very wrong.snickerscharlie wrote: »3stepsahead wrote: »Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?
Guy B because he will have lost weight.
Guy A gave up on his restrictive diet and binged, went waaay over on his calories and actually *gained* weight.
Moderation is key. Incorporating some of the foods you love into your daily 'budget' is the way most people manage to lose weight, stay healthy *and* keep their sanity. It's a balance.
The idea that a person who doesn't eat junk food is insane...it's not just wrong, it's a little over the top.
One can eat healthy foods, not binge and remain sane. I swear. People have done it.
You really don't have to eat junk food to lose weight.
It doesn't really justify to call any food 'junk food'. If a person it eating a well-balanced diet, and wants to have some chips, and is still within a calorie deficit, that's just fine. And healthy.
Why do people (a lot of people) get hung up on the terms 'healthy food' and 'junk food'? It's not the food that makes it healthy or unhealthy. It's the balance of food, and the amount of calories consumed, that can make the person unhealthy. The food is neither healthy nor unhealthy.
I'm not hung up on words like "healthy, junk, clean," etc. I don't care who uses what words.
As you know, since we've discussed it before, I do believe that some foods are bad for us. I do not believe that a carrot will undo the trans fats in something else. I also know that you do not believe that some foods are bad for us, but that if your overall diet is good, no food can be harmful.
We have disagreed about this before, so it's clear that we disagree. There is really no reason to go over it all again, IMO.
You're entitled to your beliefs and I'm entitled to mine.
It's clear what I meant, reading the post, I think. I meant it's not justified to use like 'junk' to describe food. Your post used the words 'junk food' and 'healthy food', so to say you aren't hung up on them is a bit.... odd, when you just finished say people should eat healthy and not eat junk.
As I said, if people are eating a well-balanced diet, eating a food that might be labeled by some as 'bad' isn't going to make a person unhealthy. I know I'm not the only person here (as I've discussed with many others who do the same as I do) who have excellent numbers at the doctor. I eat a well-balanced diet and I eat things like cookies and chips and ice cream in moderation regularly. I have low blood pressure, low cholesterol, all my blood work is good, and my body fat is 17%. I'm in excellent cardiac health. Food isn't the problem and labeling is dangerous. It's misleading to people who are learning how to eat correctly and lose weight.
I agree labeling food is dangerous. I don't think any food is evil, and if someone wants their diet to be all hamburgers and candy, that's their deal. But I do still call some things 'junk food' because that defines the category they fall into: high calorie, little to no nutrition. I would never say don't eat junk food! Be kinda hypocritical seeing as how much ends up in my diet! XD But that category of food is one you don't want to base your whole diet on. Think of the food pyramid: you have your basic food groups and you should have some of all of them every day to get the nutrition your body needs. Junk food is a different type of food group, and adding it to your diet is perfectly fine. I don't term it 'evil' or 'to be avoided' because food is food. It's not it can make it's own moral choices after all. But you have to balance your food groups to be healthy, which can mean cutting back on less nutritional choices for ones that are better for your body. The whole point is MODERATION, which is what so many people don't see in what a lot of people here say. I see a lot of these types of posts, and they tend to look at food as black and white: eat this, never eat this. If that works for you, fine, but most people will do just fine with eating less 'junk food' and more from the groups with better nutrition, not just cutting out all 'junk food'.
It's when people say that everyone has to include junk food OR ELSE that it gets ridiculous. It's always ORE ELSE:
You will fail.
You will binge
You will be unhappy
You will be insane...
...and none of it is true for everyone.
If a person feels that they will fail, binge, be unhappy or insane, then they should OF COURSE include whatever food food prevents those behaviors or unpleasant feelings. But that stuff is not a foregone conclusion for everyone.
True. I couldn't cut out junk food because then I would backslide quickly! Being able to have junk food, even if it's smaller amounts, is much more emotionally satisfying to me. But there are people that believe they have to cut out all junk food, and if it works for them, that's great. I think it depends on your relationship with food and how you view it as to whether or not you can work it into your diet or you need to cut it out completely, even if temporarily. If you want to do that, that's fine, it's just that you don't HAVE to. There are ways to work in junk food if you really want it, that's what a lot of people don't understand.
I agree with this. There's a weird false dichotomy where when someone says a person doesn't have to give up treats, it gets reinterpreted as saying a person must eat treats. Having done strict elimination plans before, I know what ultimately led me to fall off. Many other people here did, too. That's valuable experience that can help someone who is just starting down that road with a head full of fad diet rules, I wish a resource like MFP had been available when I first started down that path.
Having a plan that allows for flexibility isn't the only way, but it's one of the most versatile tools in the weight loss toolbox.
The issue of insanity doesn't just come up in this thread. It comes up a lot. This "I include treats because I like to be *sane*..." stuff is the problem. That's not a verbatim quote from this thread, so I know nobody said it in this thread.
Simply telling someone who is confused that it isn't necessary...I do that, too. Arguing that they must OR ELSE is the issue.
no one says that.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »So, in case anyone was wondering, that's slightly more than 4.04 pounds of raw broccoli. ~1770.05 grams, to be precise. I would die.
I bet this would be an AWESOME cleanse, though.
And the broccoli farts would be epic.
You get to cleanse yourself and the neighbourhood at the same time!0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »UltimateEscape wrote: »"Quality matters too, and it matters on both sides of the energy-balance equation.
Calories go out in three ways: we burn them to survive (resting energy expenditure); we burn them to work (physical exertion); and we waste them (thermogenesis or heat loss). The quality of the fuel we consume can affect both resting energy expenditure, and thermogenesis. Is this surprising? Not at all. We can make fire with wood, or coal; coal burns hotter. Protein, fats, and low-glycemic foods seem to burn a bit "hotter" than simple and refined carbohydrates, a fact corroborated by a recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Source:
U.S. News & World Report HEALTH
Fathoming the Calorie
Why both the quality and quantity of calories count.
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2012/07/11/fathoming-the-calorie
Can you please stop posting links like this if you're not willing to discuss the actual content? People are responding to you.
Exactly. Noone cares about your google-fu skills. If you are going to present information into a conversation, be prepared to discuss said information. Otherwise, your contribution is worthless.0 -
^^^So much this.0
-
Agree.tincanonastring wrote: »UltimateEscape wrote: »"Quality matters too, and it matters on both sides of the energy-balance equation.
Calories go out in three ways: we burn them to survive (resting energy expenditure); we burn them to work (physical exertion); and we waste them (thermogenesis or heat loss). The quality of the fuel we consume can affect both resting energy expenditure, and thermogenesis. Is this surprising? Not at all. We can make fire with wood, or coal; coal burns hotter. Protein, fats, and low-glycemic foods seem to burn a bit "hotter" than simple and refined carbohydrates, a fact corroborated by a recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Source:
U.S. News & World Report HEALTH
Fathoming the Calorie
Why both the quality and quantity of calories count.
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2012/07/11/fathoming-the-calorie
Can you please stop posting links like this if you're not willing to discuss the actual content? People are responding to you.
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I lost 121 pounds eating 80% healthy and 20% treat foods, I have totally reverse my heart disease and my blood work is near perfect.
Ice cream has good nutrition in it calcium, protein, etc.
How is pizza considered junk, it has veggies, meat, cheese, tomatoes, fruit sometimes, etc. it bogs my mind why people think pizza is junk. LOL
Why do people think pizza is junk? Well, for one thing, the USDA has labeled it empty calories.
http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/empty-calories.html
So pizza is "junk" because it contains cheese? Because that's what your argument says.
Even if cheese is "empty calories," there is a distinction between IS empty calories (as you incorrectly claimed the USDA had said about pizza) and "contains empty calories."
If your argument were correct, every food containing saturated fat (which is the stated problem here with pizza) would be "junk food."
Do you really wish to defend that claim? I would not.
And the pizza I eat, again, is NOT empty calories (although it does include some cheese, as did my vegetable omelet this morning, which thus also must be junk food, I guess). Instead, it includes lots of vegetables, tomatoes, usually olives, ideally some lean meat, and of course olive oil and herbs. If I make it at home (although I'm not as good at it as the Italian place I like), it generally has a whole wheat crust also.
Seems weird to call it "junk food." YMMV about the merits of vegetables, etc, though, or perhaps you have a more phobic attitude toward cheese.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Maybe it was the liver. Maybe it needed a good detox.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I lost 121 pounds eating 80% healthy and 20% treat foods, I have totally reverse my heart disease and my blood work is near perfect.
Ice cream has good nutrition in it calcium, protein, etc.
How is pizza considered junk, it has veggies, meat, cheese, tomatoes, fruit sometimes, etc. it bogs my mind why people think pizza is junk. LOL
Why do people think pizza is junk? Well, for one thing, the USDA has labeled it empty calories.
http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/empty-calories.html
So pizza is "junk" because it contains cheese? Because that's what your argument says.
Even if cheese is "empty calories," there is a distinction between IS empty calories (as you incorrectly claimed the USDA had said about pizza) and "contains empty calories."
If your argument were correct, every food containing saturated fat (which is the stated problem here with pizza) would be "junk food."
Do you really wish to defend that claim? I would not.
And the pizza I eat, again, is NOT empty calories (although it does include some cheese, as did my vegetable omelet this morning, which thus also must be junk food, I guess). Instead, it includes lots of vegetables, tomatoes, usually olives, ideally some lean meat, and of course olive oil and herbs. If I make it at home (although I'm not as good at it as the Italian place I like), it generally has a whole wheat crust also.
Seems weird to call it "junk food." YMMV about the merits of vegetables, etc, though, or perhaps you have a more phobic attitude toward cheese.
Y'all are missing my point, which is that considering pizza to be junk food shouldn't be surprising given that the USDA features pizza among "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories for Americans". Is it really such a stretch to imagine people mentally shortening "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories" to "junk food"?0 -
-
kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I lost 121 pounds eating 80% healthy and 20% treat foods, I have totally reverse my heart disease and my blood work is near perfect.
Ice cream has good nutrition in it calcium, protein, etc.
How is pizza considered junk, it has veggies, meat, cheese, tomatoes, fruit sometimes, etc. it bogs my mind why people think pizza is junk. LOL
Why do people think pizza is junk? Well, for one thing, the USDA has labeled it empty calories.
http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/empty-calories.html
So pizza is "junk" because it contains cheese? Because that's what your argument says.
Even if cheese is "empty calories," there is a distinction between IS empty calories (as you incorrectly claimed the USDA had said about pizza) and "contains empty calories."
If your argument were correct, every food containing saturated fat (which is the stated problem here with pizza) would be "junk food."
Do you really wish to defend that claim? I would not.
And the pizza I eat, again, is NOT empty calories (although it does include some cheese, as did my vegetable omelet this morning, which thus also must be junk food, I guess). Instead, it includes lots of vegetables, tomatoes, usually olives, ideally some lean meat, and of course olive oil and herbs. If I make it at home (although I'm not as good at it as the Italian place I like), it generally has a whole wheat crust also.
Seems weird to call it "junk food." YMMV about the merits of vegetables, etc, though, or perhaps you have a more phobic attitude toward cheese.
Y'all are missing my point, which is that considering pizza to be junk food shouldn't be surprising given that the USDA features pizza among "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories for Americans". Is it really such a stretch to imagine people mentally shortening "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories" to "junk food"?
Yes, because I read WHY it is said to be a large contributor to "empty calories"--basically saturated fat. There are tons of other foods (including cheese itself) that contain lots of saturated fat that aren't alleged to be "junk foods," and many of those are much less likely to actually deliver vegetables and olive oil--foods the USDA seems to smile upon.
Maybe I'm naive in expecting more.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Had them last night for dinner. They sure are a pita to prepare, but delicious. Even without the Chianti.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I lost 121 pounds eating 80% healthy and 20% treat foods, I have totally reverse my heart disease and my blood work is near perfect.
Ice cream has good nutrition in it calcium, protein, etc.
How is pizza considered junk, it has veggies, meat, cheese, tomatoes, fruit sometimes, etc. it bogs my mind why people think pizza is junk. LOL
Why do people think pizza is junk? Well, for one thing, the USDA has labeled it empty calories.
http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/empty-calories.html
So pizza is "junk" because it contains cheese? Because that's what your argument says.
Even if cheese is "empty calories," there is a distinction between IS empty calories (as you incorrectly claimed the USDA had said about pizza) and "contains empty calories."
If your argument were correct, every food containing saturated fat (which is the stated problem here with pizza) would be "junk food."
Do you really wish to defend that claim? I would not.
And the pizza I eat, again, is NOT empty calories (although it does include some cheese, as did my vegetable omelet this morning, which thus also must be junk food, I guess). Instead, it includes lots of vegetables, tomatoes, usually olives, ideally some lean meat, and of course olive oil and herbs. If I make it at home (although I'm not as good at it as the Italian place I like), it generally has a whole wheat crust also.
Seems weird to call it "junk food." YMMV about the merits of vegetables, etc, though, or perhaps you have a more phobic attitude toward cheese.
Y'all are missing my point, which is that considering pizza to be junk food shouldn't be surprising given that the USDA features pizza among "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories for Americans". Is it really such a stretch to imagine people mentally shortening "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories" to "junk food"?
I agree; Americans are grossly misinformed because in the age of click bait they can't be bothered to read more than 6 words and glance at a picture.
And it gets worse when someone links to something and then misrepresent what's on the page to try and warp it to their point.0 -
I got the point.kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I lost 121 pounds eating 80% healthy and 20% treat foods, I have totally reverse my heart disease and my blood work is near perfect.
Ice cream has good nutrition in it calcium, protein, etc.
How is pizza considered junk, it has veggies, meat, cheese, tomatoes, fruit sometimes, etc. it bogs my mind why people think pizza is junk. LOL
Why do people think pizza is junk? Well, for one thing, the USDA has labeled it empty calories.
http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/empty-calories.html
So pizza is "junk" because it contains cheese? Because that's what your argument says.
Even if cheese is "empty calories," there is a distinction between IS empty calories (as you incorrectly claimed the USDA had said about pizza) and "contains empty calories."
If your argument were correct, every food containing saturated fat (which is the stated problem here with pizza) would be "junk food."
Do you really wish to defend that claim? I would not.
And the pizza I eat, again, is NOT empty calories (although it does include some cheese, as did my vegetable omelet this morning, which thus also must be junk food, I guess). Instead, it includes lots of vegetables, tomatoes, usually olives, ideally some lean meat, and of course olive oil and herbs. If I make it at home (although I'm not as good at it as the Italian place I like), it generally has a whole wheat crust also.
Seems weird to call it "junk food." YMMV about the merits of vegetables, etc, though, or perhaps you have a more phobic attitude toward cheese.
Y'all are missing my point, which is that considering pizza to be junk food shouldn't be surprising given that the USDA features pizza among "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories for Americans". Is it really such a stretch to imagine people mentally shortening "foods and beverages that provide the most empty calories" to "junk food"?
Of course pizza falls into the junk food category. Ask friends, relatives or coworkers what their favorite junk food is and someone is going to say, "Pizza!" I don't get everyone's love for it. Even when I made no attempt at eating a healthy diet, I still had pizza near the bottom of the list of things I liked to eat. But people love pizza. It's got to be one of the most popular junk foods in America.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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