Sharing my motivation/views
Replies
-
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
What tastes amazing or not amazing is preference only.
To some a cookie taste amazing, while broccoli tastes amazing to another person. Then there are some of us who think both taste wonderful.
The broccoli has cheese, yeah?0 -
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
What tastes amazing or not amazing is preference only. To some a cookie taste amazing, while broccoli tastes amazing to another person. Then there are some of us who think both taste wonderful.
Obviously...
Thanks for the cute gif, but I'm not sure you understand that I'm saying no food is good or bad, it's just food. 0 -
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
What tastes amazing or not amazing is preference only. To some a cookie taste amazing, while broccoli tastes amazing to another person. Then there are some of us who think both taste wonderful.
Obviously...
THANksThanks food the cute gif, but I'm not sure you understand that I'm saying no food is good or bad, it's just food.
Yep, I don't get it either.0 -
@PrizePopple, absolutely!0
-
@PrizePopple, absolutely!
I'd be disappointed if you said it didn't.0 -
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
What tastes amazing or not amazing is preference only. To some a cookie taste amazing, while broccoli tastes amazing to another person. Then there are some of us who think both taste wonderful.
Obviously...
Thanks for the cute gif, but I'm not sure you understand that I'm saying no food is good or bad, it's just food.
I assumed it signified confusion over your statement. I'm mean, come on, of course there is evil food!
0 -
Beth, here's my take: 80/20 all the way.
I agree that if most of your previous diet involved the kinds of rich or prefab foods that can trick you into eating more (like chips - I dare anyone to say chips aren't moreish and designed to be that way), including more veg and fruit and stuff is definitely going to help you stay on track. And it's great for you, so it's of course fine to have more of that.
But
1) You shouldn't hate the food you're eating! That sucks! Food IS a pleasure, we evolved to like it. And we've improved food in many ways, since our ancestors were around, and some of those improvements are magnificent.
We're also social creatures, and food is part of social life.
Saying you should only eat food that's good for you is like saying you should only watch documentaries about world issues, ever, no matter what mood you're in. I like documentaries, but honestly watching 5 in a row is pretty grim. You need something fun in the mix. Or I do, and so do most people, probably.
Learn some new recipes to make some of that food more appetizing to you, at least.
2) Chips are moreish, but having some now and again won't throw you off course. Some people need to be more careful about how they do it than others. Like me - if I have chips a bunch of days in a row, I know I'm going to want them even more often. So instead of getting a party-sized bag and bringing it into the house to torment me, I might get a small bag when I'm out, and go for another kind of treat the next day. But not EVER eating chips again would be sad. If your diet is balanced, one small bag won't make you gain ten pounds, and it won't make you ill.
80:200 -
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
Why?? Unless you intend to derive pleasure from eating.
0 -
Beth, here's my take: 80/20 all the way.
I agree that if most of your previous diet involved the kinds of rich or prefab foods that can trick you into eating more (like chips - I dare anyone to say chips aren't moreish and designed to be that way), including more veg and fruit and stuff is definitely going to help you stay on track. And it's great for you, so it's of course fine to have more of that.
But
1) You shouldn't hate the food you're eating! That sucks! Food IS a pleasure, we evolved to like it. And we've improved food in many ways, since our ancestors were around, and some of those improvements are magnificent.
We're also social creatures, and food is part of social life.
Saying you should only eat food that's good for you is like saying you should only watch documentaries about world issues, ever, no matter what mood you're in. I like documentaries, but honestly watching 5 in a row is pretty grim. You need something fun in the mix. Or I do, and so do most people, probably.
Learn some new recipes to make some of that food more appetizing to you, at least.
2) Chips are moreish, but having some now and again won't throw you off course. Some people need to be more careful about how they do it than others. Like me - if I have chips a bunch of days in a row, I know I'm going to want them even more often. So instead of getting a party-sized bag and bringing it into the house to torment me, I might get a small bag when I'm out, and go for another kind of treat the next day. But not EVER eating chips again would be sad. If your diet is balanced, one small bag won't make you gain ten pounds, and it won't make you ill.
80:20
I think this is a nice post.
I just want to add that for a lot of us (and I expect tomatoey too), eating food that's good for you and taking pleasure in the food you eat is not at all at odds. When I'm keeping a deficit I find it even more important to enjoy the food I'm eating, AND I focus on eating a healthful, nutritious diet, because it's a priority to prepare my foods so that I really enjoy them, and like most people I enjoy healthful foods. And I include some foods that are more just for fun (especially right now during the holidays) and just make sure they fit in. "Diet food" is not something I'm interested in eating, period. I want a diet of delicious and nutrient dense foods, with some extras (including some cheese and chocolate) that is something I will be happy eating for life.
And I can't imagine I would have lost faster if I'd approached it differently, as when I was trying to lose I lost as fast or faster as recommended and decided to intentionally slow it down toward the end, to make sure I didn't start losing muscle mass. Now I've decided to lose a bit more, and am going to try to do it slowly, while training for some athletic stuff, so it's not at all hard to fit in a range of foods in my diet.0 -
Calliope610 wrote: »That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
Why?? Unless you intend to derive pleasure from eating.
Yeah, if food isn't for pleasure, why do you care whether it tastes amazing or not? It's just fuel, right?0 -
I'm with @AllonsYtotheTardis on this whole thread and youth. There's a lot to be said for being 53 and having dieted on and off for 40 years.
You sort of learn what matters and what doesn't. Or you can if you apply yourself. I've seen some folks who are up there in years on these boards... but I digress.
I enjoy everything I eat. From veggies to cheesecake to big bowls of popcorn. I love exercise. I enjoy the balance of food and activity in my life. I've lost 72 pounds and I'm not done yet.
I think I've got this figured out.
Oh, and I weigh daily. It's just data. And discipline. I have my own reasons for doing it; avoiding the scale for years was a tactic I used to hide from my previous weight gain. I will not fall into that trap again.
So that's my story. Take from it what you will. My previous attempts at dieting started with the super strict, no treat allowed, very small portions diet fashioned for me by my mother when I was 13. I've done paleo, Atkins, raw vegan, Nutri-System, the Cambridge Diet, and more bouts of super restriction.
The bouts of super-restriction all ended in me going crazy on the foods I denied myself.
Food for thought. I finally got it through my head that the best way to learn to deal with those foods was to, well, deal with them. In moderation. It's a freeing concept.
Another freeing concept? To love myself when I was fat. A diet wasn't punishment for being fat. That was something that was sort of conveyed to me and was why I was always drawn to restriction/elimination diets. Grasping the idea that energy balance was really a matter of the size of my body and math took emotion out of the equation and made it all a matter of math.
My body, a certain age/height/activity level requires X amount of calories. It's a simple fact. I can manipulate that information to lose weight or maintain my weight. That was a powerful realization for me. It's how I know I'll maintain my weight loss.
0 -
Where's the like button, ffs?
Well said, Carol!
0 -
That's cool. Just saying, just because someone chooses to cut out certain foods, doesn't mean that they feel like they are being punished- because it's not that serious.
Just saying, just because somebody prefers to eat a balanced, varied, enjoyable diet and not arbitrarily cut out certain foods doesn't mean that they can't be very successful - because it's not that serious.
I see a lot of people here on MFP who have very, very unhealthy relationships with food. It's compounded by the fact that they know virtually nothing about nutrition other than what they've read in magazines or seen on Dr. Oz, so they live by, and perpetuate, myths and old wives' tales. There's no need to suffer or torture yourself to achieve your weight loss goals. IMO, thinking that food shouldn't be pleasurable or enjoyable is a sign of an unhealthy relationship with food and leads toward (or exhibits) disordered eating. Saying that food should be regarded solely as fuel is akin to the Puritans who say that sex should be solely for procreation, nothing more, and you shouldn't derive even the slightest enjoyment from it.
But did I say they couldn't be successful? And I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories.
What tastes amazing or not amazing is preference only. To some a cookie taste amazing, while broccoli tastes amazing to another person. Then there are some of us who think both taste wonderful.
Obviously...
Thanks for the cute gif, but I'm not sure you understand that I'm saying no food is good or bad, it's just food.
It confused me as to why you would state such obvious things, some people like cookies some people like broccoli.
Im allergic to peaches anything that I'm allergic to I would consider bad for me. Because it can kill me.
Anything that makes my body feel crappy, I'd consider bad for me.
Okay, fair enough. I was using those foods as examples only because of this:I said food shouldn't for pleasure, to a certain extent. If I'm putting calories in my body, they are going to be amazing tasting calories
To me, this statement implies that food for pleasure fits in one category and those amazing tasting calories fit into another. Am I reading it wrong in the context of the conversation that has been going on here?
Where did food allergies come into play? That's not what the conversation is about. It's a given that it's a poor choice to eat foods you are allergic or intolerant to. 0 -
Derail: what is wrong with the silly quote function??
Back on track: @PeachyCarol, so well said. I relate 100%!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions