I called oatmeal cookies unhealthy and I got blasted - why?
Replies
-
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
And that is fine. We all have to do whats best for ourselves. For me, I find balance between health and enjoyment because life is way to short to not enjoy foods you love because they aren't as nutrient dense.
0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
If you think that is what people are saying then you aren't comprehending what people are typing.
No I get it, you are saying no food should be labelled bad because it is really about the diet as a whole, portions, total calories etc.
Yes, but your replacements would make your diet as a whole unbalanced as far as macros. Everyone (as far as I can tell) who says "nothing is unhealthy" stipulates that you still need to hit your macros.
You can't replace a salad + chicken with equal calories of bread and butter and expect to hit the same macros at the end of the day. I know that if I completely cut protein out of my lunch, I wouldn't be able to hit my protein macro.
I could however replace my salad + chicken with a cheeseburger and then adjust my dinner accordingly and still hit my macros.
It's about balance. Your argument is a strawman.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
If you think that is what people are saying then you aren't comprehending what people are typing.
No I get it, you are saying no food should be labelled bad because it is really about the diet as a whole, portions, total calories etc.
Yes, but your replacements would make your diet as a whole unbalanced as far as macros. Everyone (as far as I can tell) who says "nothing is unhealthy" stipulates that you still need to hit your macros.
You can't replace a salad + chicken with equal calories of bread and butter and expect to hit the same macros at the end of the day. I know that if I completely cut protein out of my lunch, I wouldn't be able to hit my protein macro.
I could however replace my salad + chicken with a cheeseburger and then adjust my dinner accordingly and still hit my macros.
It's about balance. Your argument is a strawman.
There it is!!!!
0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »No I get it, you are saying no food should be labelled bad because it is really about the diet as a whole, portions, total calories etc. And you are saying it is okay to have these foods. Which I totally agree with but I still think they need a label. Its just annoying on MFP because I have posted something previously also and got a bunch of rude comments about how there is no such thing as clean food or unhealthy food or whatever. I just think realistically different food groups need different labels.
My pediatrician actually said pretty much the bolded part. Yes, there is a difference between soda and milk, yes there is a difference between broccoli and cookies. But labeling a food bad, or forbidding it, can increase the desire for kids ("this is bad/forbidden? I wonder why. I must find out what it is all about").
Does that mean I let my kids drink all the soda they want? No, I teach them that one is plenty and leave room for other things. I also don't let my kids drink all the milk they want (1-2 glasses a day, plus the cheese and yogurt and such, is sufficient, more than that begins replacing other needed foods). And, I do have to teach them to moderate the broccoli, too! (Yeah, I'm lucky that way). Otherwise, my boys would fill up on nothing but steamed broccoli and miss out on the protein of the meat ... which teenage boys desperately need!
Labeling foods? Okay: Fruits, vegetables, protein, sweets, nutrient-dense, calorie-dense, etc. Nothing wrong with that.
Labeling foods "bad" or "unhealthy" ... can become problematic!!0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories.
Who said this? Please quote. You seem to be having a really hard time comprehending pretty simple and clear posts. Why do you think that is?And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
Does your bread and butter have the same macro and micronutrients as the chicken and salad? Mine does not, but maybe yours is special. Does it have the same effect on YOU? Do you enjoy it as much? If all of those are true, sure, they are interchangeable. If not, they aren't. Which is why in some cases you might reasonably choose bread and butter (not me, I'm not that into bread and butter as a meal/snack) and in other cases you would choose something else.Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent.
No one has said that. Please stop making things up.0 -
A protein bar and a cookie are a better comparison by their nutritional profiles. One cannot label one as healthy and the other not.0
-
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
You keep missing the point. Life is too short not to have treats once in a while. Eating healthy and only eating more "healthy" doesn't make you more healthy. Your body can only absorb so much "healthy".0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »I just think realistically different food groups need different labels.
They have different labels. English has many words that fit that purpose and that have the added benefit of being actually accurate (unlike "clean" or "unhealthy").
For example, broccoli is "a vegetable."0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
Nope. Eat what makes you happy.
But don't label stuff as "bad."
Just because you don't want them, and you seem to not want to understand that one cookie isn't bad in an otherwise healthy diet, doesn't mean that you are better educated or more healthy or whatever it is.
0 -
Really? That's what you got?WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
Why do you have to wait until you are craving something to have it. I would hazard to guess there are times you just simply want something. You can eat whatever you want, you just can't always eat as much as you want...
0 -
This is too much for me. I'm off to start a thread about regional craft beer.0
-
enterdanger wrote: »This is too much for me. I'm off to start a thread about regional craft beer.
LOL
Reading comprehension is hard for some,
0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
Do you have anything to offer besides labels, deliberate misrepresentation of what others say, reductio ad absurdum, and strawman arguments?0 -
Circular reasoning and begging the question, but those aren't so hot, either.brianpperkins wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
Do you have anything to offer besides labels, deliberate misrepresentation of what others say, reductio ad absurdum, and strawman arguments?
0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
Preferring to choose more nutrient dense foods than ice cream to meet your entire calorie goal is obviously fine. (Ice cream isn't that low in nutrients, though -- I might eat a bit less cheese or choose a leaner meat vs. a fattier one to fit it in or have a smaller serving of pasta, as the toppings are what I like best about pasta, not the pasta itself, and I think it's largely a wash. In any event, I tend to eat ice cream last so am unlikely to cook up more chicken and asparagus instead of having the ice cream.)
What I personally am objecting to is your being judgmental about others choosing to include lower nutrient foods in our overall healthy diets and, in particular, your claim that ice cream is inherently "unhealthy" or a poor choice.
"Unhealthy" reasonably means "will affect your health negatively," and I don't see how a moderate amount of ice cream in the context of a healthy diet does that. In fact, I think overall it affects my health positively. (Eating a whole pint on the other hand would not be smart, at least not for someone of my size (5'3) and at my calorie goal.)0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one said this.
Why do you keep lying about what others have said. Do you think we are so incredibly dumb that that would actually be a convincing argument? Because it's not, and it's extremely disrespectful also.0 -
CharonCharon wrote: »I stated they had butter, white sugar, flour, chocolate chips, ect.
I consider all these things unhealthy.
But a couple of people say everything is healthy.
Is my wording wrong?
What would be unhealthy to those people in a cookie?
BTW - I like to eat in volumes.
I have never been able to do portion control in my entire life.
Oatmeal is a food I can eat and be full and be happy without guilt.
I never saw the particular conversation you are referring to, so I can't speak to that. This is a really long thread, so I did not read anything else. However, let me ask you.....
What is unhealthy about butter, sugar, flour, chocolate chips, and the "etc"?
That oatmeal cookie provides carbs, fat, and protein, and it tastes darn good too!!
Oatmeal is good too, but I put peanut butter, fruit, and milk on it. I also add Stevia because I really like it and it has no calories.
As for portion control--if you're losing weight you are doing portion control, even if it's unconsciously, because you stop eating when you're full. Your perception of healthy is for you only and really cannot be extrapolated to fit everyone else.0 -
I don't label foods as nutrient dense or not either. I label them as Fruits, Vegetables, Grains, Protein, Treats.0
-
Something about being easier to overeat than broccoli, I think.CharonCharon wrote: »I stated they had butter, white sugar, flour, chocolate chips, ect.
I consider all these things unhealthy.
But a couple of people say everything is healthy.
Is my wording wrong?
What would be unhealthy to those people in a cookie?
BTW - I like to eat in volumes.
I have never been able to do portion control in my entire life.
Oatmeal is a food I can eat and be full and be happy without guilt.
I never saw the particular conversation you are referring to, so I can't speak to that. This is a really long thread, so I did not read anything else. However, let me ask you.....
What is unhealthy about butter, sugar, flour, chocolate chips, and the "etc"?
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions