Moderation
Options
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »mrsnazario1219 wrote: »Holy f$&@"!!! I can't believe that this conversation has gone so left field! Truly the last time I post an article here. I completely forgot how arbitrary people can be on the Internet. How can I take this post down?
I would not worry too much OP. It is just the usual folks that don't understand the concept, and how to apply it to their daily lives, so they have to destroy the concept as something that no one can understand, because they do not understand it.
I absolutely understand the concept and how to apply it in my daily life. My argument is that my definition of moderation is different from yours, and from others, and so "moderation" when it comes to a way of eating is not a useful term.
No, your definition of Moderation is the same as mine. Your application of it within your individual approach to moderation is different.
That's what I've been trying to say. Moderation has a textbook definition (the avoidance of extremes) but the application of it is individualized and variable.
Which is why it doesn't describe anything about the diet in a useful way, or help anyone know what it means when people use it. All it really speaks to is an attitude.
its not a diet...
That's right. It's a religion in these parts. Or a religiofied secular philosophy applicable towards ice cream and cupcakes.
Eh, this is so obviously false.
I think moderation is a nice approach, but I think other approaches are fine too, as I've said several times in this thread.
Some seem to think that it's totally cool for paleo types or low carbers or the rest to try and evangelize their way of eating, but if some of us talk among ourselves about what we like about moderation, that is apparently annoying and "a religion."
Seems weird.
But that's the point people keep trying to make - Paleo, low carb, and moderation are not mutually exclusive ways of eating, yet people are trying to define "moderation" as a way of eating that includes specific foods or macros while still saying that the foods you choose to eat are personal preference. It's contradictory.
It's not a way of eating that includes specific foods, it's a way that can include specific foods if you want to, whereas doing paleo (moreso than lowcarb), you absolutely can't eat the foods that are on the no-no list, or else you're not doing paleo, regardless of you as an individual. No one doing that particular paleo style (lord knows there's dozens with different lists of foods that are okay or not okay), can eat those foods if they want to do that diet, if they want to eat them or not.
If you wouldn't eat them anyway, you're fine. If you would, you want to, and you're beating yourself up over it, there's your extreme and you should consider a different approach to eating.
I don't disagree - if the paleo diet includes all the foods you want to eat (like vegetarian, or vegan, or low carb, etc), then one can still be paleo and practice moderation, correct? Because that's what I'm interpreting your post as saying, but that contradicts what the blog author says and several statements made by users in this thread as to the definition of moderation.
For the record (I know this wasn't addressed to me but I just wanted to chime in), I'm not taking the blog author as the definitive expert on what constitutes moderation, just as I'm not sure I totally agree with other people who are proponents of moderation on their specific interpretation. What I have been saying repeatedly is that the definition is consistent, the actual implementation of moderation is individualized and variable. With that, the interpretation of whether or not someone else considers what I do to be moderation and not extreme, can also be subjective. I personally believe that a person CAN be Paleo and still practice moderation. I also believe that some people who are Paleo are using extreme restriction and therefore would not fit my interpretation of Moderation. That doesn't invalidate the definition of moderation because 5 different people in this thread as well as the blog author have a different interpretation of whether or not it is possible to practice moderation with a Paleo diet.
There is not going to be consensus on whether or not every single way of eating based on medical requirements, ethical reasons, or personal preference is an appropriate application of moderation. The entire point of this is that an individual who practices moderation chooses what the boundaries/extremes are for themselves and they determine where in the middle they want to swim.
I've been focusing on the blog because that's what this thread is about; I don't consider a blogger to be an expert either. We pretty much agree on moderation, and my argument has been that people are taking the definition and applying it inaccurately to meet with their personal views about what is extreme, then declaring that as "fact." The most glaring example being that paleo is not moderation, whereas most of us would say "yes, it can be."
The thing I like about moderation, which I think @lemurcat12 touched on from the blog, is that it is an approach that can be very helpful in dietary adherence and get people away from an "all-or-nothing" mentality when it comes to food choices. As Cookie Monster would say, there are Sometimes Foods.
But what I dislike is people trying to apply moderation in an all-or-nothing way, as in you moderate all foods, or you don't get to say you practice moderation. I think that is wrong. To me, moderation is about the foods you like, want to eat, enjoy, and feel bring some benefit to your life. Those are the foods you moderate. Anything you don't like, enjoy, want to eat, or feel brings some benefit to your life, you can eliminate if you want. Stating that people who follow certain ways of eating can't be practicing moderation because of how they've set their macros or the foods they choose to eat directly contradicts the notion that the individual chooses the boundaries or extremes for themselves - which is what a lot of people here have been trying to explain in their responses, only to be told that they "don't get it."
I think that is why people feel like there are multiple definitions - people are applying it based on their own boundaries and extremes, and are then being told by someone else "no, that's not it," because that person subjectively finds it extreme, or doesn't agree with a decision to eat or not eat a certain way.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Does anyone else see the irony that those saying they don't understand what moderation is because there are variable applications of it, and are pushing for absolute examples.... are sort of employing the antithesis of moderation?
No? Just me? Ok carry on.
I don't know if anyone is saying they don't know what "moderation" means so much as they don't necessarily know what a person means when they use the term in regards to diet. Because, just like other diet terms, people use it to mean different things.
Yes, that's my take as well.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
Better yet, if I eat a cupcake in the woods, do the calories still count because no one is around to see me eat the cupcake?
Pretty sure I would get sick of cupcakes after a while if I ate them everyday and I LOVE cupcakes.
I eat ice cream pretty much every day and I never get tired of that ....0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Does anyone else see the irony that those saying they don't understand what moderation is because there are variable applications of it, and are pushing for absolute examples.... are sort of employing the antithesis of moderation?
No? Just me? Ok carry on.
I don't know if anyone is saying they don't know what "moderation" means so much as they don't necessarily know what a person means when they use the term in regards to diet. Because, just like other diet terms, people use it to mean different things.
Yes, that's my take as well.
it is a pretty simplistic concept that some in this thread have actively chosen to not grasp.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
A cupcake a day wouldn't be moderate for me, but if someone else want to fit a cupcake a day in their macros/micros/calories, I'm not going to take the position that it is not moderate for them.
0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Does anyone else see the irony that those saying they don't understand what moderation is because there are variable applications of it, and are pushing for absolute examples.... are sort of employing the antithesis of moderation?
No? Just me? Ok carry on.
I don't know if anyone is saying they don't know what "moderation" means so much as they don't necessarily know what a person means when they use the term in regards to diet. Because, just like other diet terms, people use it to mean different things.
Yes, that's my take as well.
it is a pretty simplistic concept that some in this thread have actively chosen to not grasp.
It's a concept that some deem simplistic by saying everyone that doesn't it define as I do is wrong.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
I like you0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
I like you
From what I've seen, it's mutual.
/creepy0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »mrsnazario1219 wrote: »Holy f$&@"!!! I can't believe that this conversation has gone so left field! Truly the last time I post an article here. I completely forgot how arbitrary people can be on the Internet. How can I take this post down?
I would not worry too much OP. It is just the usual folks that don't understand the concept, and how to apply it to their daily lives, so they have to destroy the concept as something that no one can understand, because they do not understand it.
I absolutely understand the concept and how to apply it in my daily life. My argument is that my definition of moderation is different from yours, and from others, and so "moderation" when it comes to a way of eating is not a useful term.
No, your definition of Moderation is the same as mine. Your application of it within your individual approach to moderation is different.
That's what I've been trying to say. Moderation has a textbook definition (the avoidance of extremes) but the application of it is individualized and variable.
Which is why it doesn't describe anything about the diet in a useful way, or help anyone know what it means when people use it. All it really speaks to is an attitude.
its not a diet...
That's right. It's a religion in these parts. Or a religiofied secular philosophy applicable towards ice cream and cupcakes.
Eh, this is so obviously false.
I think moderation is a nice approach, but I think other approaches are fine too, as I've said several times in this thread.
Some seem to think that it's totally cool for paleo types or low carbers or the rest to try and evangelize their way of eating, but if some of us talk among ourselves about what we like about moderation, that is apparently annoying and "a religion."
Seems weird.
But that's the point people keep trying to make - Paleo, low carb, and moderation are not mutually exclusive ways of eating, yet people are trying to define "moderation" as a way of eating that includes specific foods or macros while still saying that the foods you choose to eat are personal preference. It's contradictory.
It's not a way of eating that includes specific foods, it's a way that can include specific foods if you want to, whereas doing paleo (moreso than lowcarb), you absolutely can't eat the foods that are on the no-no list, or else you're not doing paleo, regardless of you as an individual. No one doing that particular paleo style (lord knows there's dozens with different lists of foods that are okay or not okay), can eat those foods if they want to do that diet, if they want to eat them or not.
If you wouldn't eat them anyway, you're fine. If you would, you want to, and you're beating yourself up over it, there's your extreme and you should consider a different approach to eating.
I don't disagree - if the paleo diet includes all the foods you want to eat (like vegetarian, or vegan, or low carb, etc), then one can still be paleo and practice moderation, correct? Because that's what I'm interpreting your post as saying, but that contradicts what the blog author says and several statements made by users in this thread as to the definition of moderation.
For the record (I know this wasn't addressed to me but I just wanted to chime in), I'm not taking the blog author as the definitive expert on what constitutes moderation, just as I'm not sure I totally agree with other people who are proponents of moderation on their specific interpretation. What I have been saying repeatedly is that the definition is consistent, the actual implementation of moderation is individualized and variable. With that, the interpretation of whether or not someone else considers what I do to be moderation and not extreme, can also be subjective. I personally believe that a person CAN be Paleo and still practice moderation. I also believe that some people who are Paleo are using extreme restriction and therefore would not fit my interpretation of Moderation. That doesn't invalidate the definition of moderation because 5 different people in this thread as well as the blog author have a different interpretation of whether or not it is possible to practice moderation with a Paleo diet.
There is not going to be consensus on whether or not every single way of eating based on medical requirements, ethical reasons, or personal preference is an appropriate application of moderation. The entire point of this is that an individual who practices moderation chooses what the boundaries/extremes are for themselves and they determine where in the middle they want to swim.
I've been focusing on the blog because that's what this thread is about; I don't consider a blogger to be an expert either. We pretty much agree on moderation, and my argument has been that people are taking the definition and applying it inaccurately to meet with their personal views about what is extreme, then declaring that as "fact." The most glaring example being that paleo is not moderation, whereas most of us would say "yes, it can be."
The thing I like about moderation, which I think @lemurcat12 touched on from the blog, is that it is an approach that can be very helpful in dietary adherence and get people away from an "all-or-nothing" mentality when it comes to food choices. As Cookie Monster would say, there are Sometimes Foods.
But what I dislike is people trying to apply moderation in an all-or-nothing way, as in you moderate all foods, or you don't get to say you practice moderation. I think that is wrong. To me, moderation is about the foods you like, want to eat, enjoy, and feel bring some benefit to your life. Those are the foods you moderate. Anything you don't like, enjoy, want to eat, or feel brings some benefit to your life, you can eliminate if you want. Stating that people who follow certain ways of eating can't be practicing moderation because of how they've set their macros or the foods they choose to eat directly contradicts the notion that the individual chooses the boundaries or extremes for themselves - which is what a lot of people here have been trying to explain in their responses, only to be told that they "don't get it."
I think that is why people feel like there are multiple definitions - people are applying it based on their own boundaries and extremes, and are then being told by someone else "no, that's not it," because that person subjectively finds it extreme, or doesn't agree with a decision to eat or not eat a certain way.
I agree with pretty much all of this and to the bold... Well I would call those people the extreme moderators. Or moderate extremists.
0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Where would "I just don't want to eat cupcakes" fall on the spectrum?0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Where would "I just don't want to eat cupcakes" fall on the spectrum?
It's in there. Just replace "potato chips" with food of choice.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
A cupcake a day wouldn't be moderate for me, but if someone else want to fit a cupcake a day in their macros/micros/calories, I'm not going to take the position that it is not moderate for them.
Do you think it wouldn't be moderate or is it simply not how you choose to practice moderation.
For example, I usually have at least 200 discretionary calories, assuming I am being as active as I should be. So if I found a small cupcake (or baked them), I could fit in a cupcake after dinner most days. I don't, because I'm not that into cupcakes, don't especially want to be baking all the time and so on. I fit in a little ice cream or cheese or include some higher cal meat choices or maybe some chocolate or save calories for meals out, etc. But if I loved cupcakes more than all these other things and so chose to include the cupcakes, why wouldn't that be a form of moderation? I wouldn't thereby go over any sugar or macro goals (and my macro goals are a pretty balanced 40-30-30).0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Excellent list.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
Better yet, if I eat a cupcake in the woods, do the calories still count because no one is around to see me eat the cupcake?
Does the Pope eat cupcakes?0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
A cupcake a day wouldn't be moderate for me, but if someone else want to fit a cupcake a day in their macros/micros/calories, I'm not going to take the position that it is not moderate for them.
Do you think it wouldn't be moderate or is it simply not how you choose to practice moderation.
For example, I usually have at least 200 discretionary calories, assuming I am being as active as I should be. So if I found a small cupcake (or baked them), I could fit in a cupcake after dinner most days. I don't, because I'm not that into cupcakes, don't especially want to be baking all the time and so on. I fit in a little ice cream or cheese or include some higher cal meat choices or maybe some chocolate or save calories for meals out, etc. But if I loved cupcakes more than all these other things and so chose to include the cupcakes, why wouldn't that be a form of moderation? I wouldn't thereby go over any sugar or macro goals (and my macro goals are a pretty balanced 40-30-30).
In a diet of moderation, why wouldn't all calories be discretionary?0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Where would "I just don't want to eat cupcakes" fall on the spectrum?
I'm confused by this, because I don't think anyone has ever said it's extreme to not eat foods you don't want to eat. In a given week all of us don't eat far more foods than we eat. It's just we don't eat them because we don't want to, not because we eliminated them. I never eat McDonalds, but I certainly didn't need to eliminate it. I just don't eat it.
(I am not saying that eliminating foods is inherently non-moderate either, but I really don't think it's moderate to say -- or that anyone is claiming -- that you have to eat foods you don't want to eat. If I have limited food to eat and have to make choices, some foods just won't get chosen.)0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Where would "I just don't want to eat cupcakes" fall on the spectrum?
It's in there. Just replace "potato chips" with food of choice.
I think that's the question that a lot of people are asking though - what about the people who don't want to eat cupcakes, or potato chips, or cookies, or ice cream, etc? What about when the food of choice is fruit salad or frozen mashed banana - is it still moderation when the food of choice isn't a traditionally indulgent "dieting no-no*" foods, or does that make it extreme?
*This is not saying there are bad foods. This is merely acknowledging the existence of dieting myths about what you can or cannot eat on the diet, and it's usually things like cupcakes, cookies, potato chips, etc. The blog author acknowledges this by commenting on viewpoints about hyperpalatable, calorie dense foods and their place in weight loss.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
but if you eat a cupcake a day and it fits within your micors/macros/calories, is that still moderation???
A cupcake a day wouldn't be moderate for me, but if someone else want to fit a cupcake a day in their macros/micros/calories, I'm not going to take the position that it is not moderate for them.
Do you think it wouldn't be moderate or is it simply not how you choose to practice moderation.
For example, I usually have at least 200 discretionary calories, assuming I am being as active as I should be. So if I found a small cupcake (or baked them), I could fit in a cupcake after dinner most days. I don't, because I'm not that into cupcakes, don't especially want to be baking all the time and so on. I fit in a little ice cream or cheese or include some higher cal meat choices or maybe some chocolate or save calories for meals out, etc. But if I loved cupcakes more than all these other things and so chose to include the cupcakes, why wouldn't that be a form of moderation? I wouldn't thereby go over any sugar or macro goals (and my macro goals are a pretty balanced 40-30-30).
In a diet of moderation, why wouldn't all calories be discretionary?
Well, you are going to use a certain minimum amount getting in things that the cupcake does not provide (or that the cheese really doesn't provide or which you could get in fewer cals than the prime rib). So sure, it's all discretionary in a way, but I mean extra in the sense that you aren't really worried about adding to nutrients (beyond calories).0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Moderation is the avoidance of extremes.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
Moderation is ANYTHING that falls between the extremes. Really isn't rocket science.
I'm obnoxiously going to quote myself, but I feel the need to add to my list.
You can never eat cupcakes again or you are a failure as a dieter and human being! - extreme
I don't like cupcakes and would rather spend my calories on potato chips. - moderate
I only eat cupcakes on special occasions, like my birthday or Christmas. - moderate
It's ok to have cupcakes sometimes if it fits your calories and nutritional/macro goals. - moderate
I eat a cupcake every night. It fits my calories and rounds out my fat/carb macros nicely. - moderate
Calories are ALL that matter, so you should only EVER eat cupcakes! It's called the cupcake diet!! - extreme
See, there can be different levels on moderation.
Where would "I just don't want to eat cupcakes" fall on the spectrum?
It's in there. Just replace "potato chips" with food of choice.
I think that's the question that a lot of people are asking though - what about the people who don't want to eat cupcakes, or potato chips, or cookies, or ice cream, etc? What about when the food of choice is fruit salad or frozen mashed banana - is it still moderation when the food of choice isn't a traditionally indulgent "dieting no-no*" foods, or does that make it extreme?
*This is not saying there are bad foods. This is merely acknowledging the existence of dieting myths about what you can or cannot eat on the diet, and it's usually things like cupcakes, cookies, potato chips, etc. The blog author acknowledges this by commenting on viewpoints about hyperpalatable, calorie dense foods and their place in weight loss.
Yes. It's still valid because you can overeat anything and require moderation to keep from gaining weight.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions