There are 'BAD' foods
Replies
-
suziecue20 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »TheBeachgod wrote: »So it is something that works for you. Great! But there are no bad foods.
Exactly. It's one thing to say "it's a mind game that works for me because I can't help myself from bingeing". It's quite something else to insist that everybody else think in the same mind frame.
Bingo. I don't care if someone wants to use it personally, but this thread is an argument that there is some reason everyone should accept the term for themselves. Even apart from the serious concerns that diannethegeek brings up, I think it can be extremely counterproductive for many, as it may interfere with them thinking logically and unemotionally about food or in some cases may make foods more alluring (the whole forbidden fruit thing).
I cringe when other women feel compelled to say "being naughty" when ordering a baked good in front of me in line for coffee, and part of why is that my mother used to do that and would tell my sister and I not to tell my dad if we all stopped for a treat or lunch out, and I think the urge to hide what you are eating and to feel guilty about it which the language encourages -- yes, for some people, not all -- was not unrelated to her overeating or the overeating of others I know. It's also related to many bingeing conditions -- guilt, shame, restrictiveness, excess, the feeling that you are bad and ruined everything, so might as well eat more.
I really think that logical, unemotional thinking about food is something to be encouraged. From that perspective, I just don't understand what's wrong with eating some ice cream in appropriate portions, so the "bad" language for it makes no sense to me.
You are reading far too much into things - the women you refer to are just acknowledging they are knowingly going to eat something naughty - nothing shameful in that and they are like millions and millions of other people in real life.
I have known LOTS of women who struggle with feeling shame around food choices, and it seems to be unhelpful (as it would be for me). So no, at least in some cases it's something that happens.
"Naughty" to me is a childish word (other than the sexual implications usage). I would never say something was "naughty." Maybe that's a language difference thing, though.0 -
Bad food. Good food. Whatever. When I want something, I want it, and I will not tell myself no just because it's basically sugar flavored chemicals.0
-
WinoGelato wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »Why do people have to black and white about this? All food is good. All of it.
You haven't tasted vegemite.
or cottage cheese, celery, avocados, olives
I was starting to like you
but now, without these foods 
life is incomplete without olives. They really aren't the pits.
Olive you.
I feel like an extra virgin...*blushing*
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »longlostyeti wrote: »lets stop labeling foods good or bad and lets just enjoy life YOLO..
I've lived long enough to know I can do both.
So I just haven't lived long enough is what you're saying. Holy dismissive posts, Batman.
IF you think no one can label foods good or bad and live a happy life, then yes.0 -
suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
And want you to purchase their products.
Totally missed the point!
No I didn't. They label things as "bad" so you feel guilty for eating it, and instead buy their product. You only feel bad because you're told to. I eat pizza and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat a candybar and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat fried chicken and I love it, I don't feel bad about it.
I felt bad when I OVERINDULGED on those (and any other) things. Not the food, the act.0 -
MommyL2015 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »Why do people have to black and white about this? All food is good. All of it.
Unless it has mold growing on it, or smells like something died. Or fell on the floor and is now covered in dog fur.
2 out of 3 would be cheese of some sort. Where is Andrew Zimmern when you need him?0 -
sunandmoons wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
Let me lay this out a second time. When I was at my strictest with weight loss and foods, I was regularly breaking into tears in restaurants while I was out with my family. I was regularly having breakdowns in my friends' driveways because I didn't know what kind of snacks they had laid out or did and knew that I couldn't moderate myself well with them. I was not in a good place and dieting, good/bad foods, were seriously affecting my mental health.
Fortunately, my therapist saw it and insisted that I stop the diet for a while until we could work through what was going on. We also worked out some things so that I could continue losing weight without it becoming a full blown eating disorder (closing my diary at the time and accepting the foods that I eat as being neutral rather than good or bad).
I was completely convinced by the dieting industry and posts like this one that what I was going through was normal and I would just have to suffer through it until the end. If not for my therapist, I would have continued down that path. Knowing my history, I likely would have killed myself along the way.
Every time you put down or belittle people for not believing that foods are good or bad (and many people in this thread have made it a point to do so) this is what you believe is a healthy thing for me.
Stop it.
I haven't belittled anyone. I'm sorry you have issues with your relationship with food and if I missed a previous post of yours please accept my apologies but it has been a bit busy on here.
And you love the attention OP. YOU are the one who has food relationship issues.
I get castigated for missing and not answering posts and castigated by you for answering them...hmmm
0 -
TheBeachgod wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »susan100df wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I have no problem admitting it. I call foods good and bad all the time. Bad, crap, junk. I've never had anyone IRL ask we what I meant by those terms. They know. We all know.
Only on MFP have I encountered the militant phenomenon of "no food is bad". I think it's whacky thinking. Not determining that some foods are bad is how I got into this predicament to begin with. And if I have a prayer of maintaining my loss, I have to continue thinking that some foods are bad for me.
Are there obese people that gained their weight via vegetables? I've never met one.
I don't typically quiz the obese people I meet on how they gained their weight. How would I know?
That said, if someone eats vegetables as part of a diet that exceeds their energy consumption they will gain weight. If I burn 2,000 calories a day and eat 2,200, it isn't like my body is turning specific foods to fat. I gain weight because my total energy consumption is less than what I'm eating. It isn't like the vegetables are "free" foods. It's all contributing.
Speak to a doctor or nutritionist about the food log of their obese patients. I doubt they would respond any of the logs they reviewed would show the patient got to that state eating too many fruits ir vegetables.
Too many Cokes cakes, chips, Cookies coupled with too little activity will be the cause.
No it won't be. Consuming too many calories was the cause. acaloriecounter.com/blog/why-am-i-not-losing-weight/
Agreed. My mother never drank soda and loathed junk food. Ate nothing but lean meats (she hates bacon, FYI), fruits, veggies, whole grains ... And she's been obese her entire life because she's an emotional/binge eater.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?
I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?
There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.
I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.
So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I do agree with you. You're more specific. But you mean the same thing as everyone who says "there are no bad foods" since all they mean is that eating a little to some of it as part of an overall balanced and healthy diet is fine.
I still call them bad though because I differentiate between my main daily diet and my 'naughty' snacks.
Serious question, why do you have to label them naughty? Why not just "snacks"? And what is naughty about it if it fits in your day and doesn't keep you from eating your nutritious foods?
Valid question -Because if I didn't Steven I would eat too much of them too many times and my MFP plan would go flying out of the window - truthful answer.
So calling a food "naughty" is simply a way to keep yourself from over-eating it? It has no meaning beyond that?
I could easily over-eat pineapple if I didn't set goals for myself -- I find it so delicious. Does that mean you'd agree that it's accurate to call pineapple a "naughty" food?
If I felt I could over-eat pineapple [which I actually can take or leave] then yes to me it would be naughty.
If I called every food I could over-eat "naughty" then the only "nice" foods left would be completely unpalatable to me, and the "naughtiest" foods out there would be milk and cheese.
I'm the same way.
We started with the statement that everyone knows some foods are naughty, but it's okay to eat them occasionally.
Now anything you can overeat is naughty.
So my dinner last night -- roasted chicken breast, sweet potatoes, beets, cauliflower (with some olive oil) -- is all naughty, because I only choose to eat foods I think are tasty. (I also avoid overeating by choosing to be mindful as to how much I eat.)
The claim that "naughty"=anything you can overeat is inconsistent with the claim that we should only eat "naughty" foods occasionally. Unless the idea is that we should strive to eat mostly not palatable foods and if so, no thanks.0 -
GuitarJerry wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »Why do people have to black and white about this? All food is good. All of it.
Oh and I suppose your statement isn't black and white.
No it's not.
It's not black and white to say all food is good.
You don't understand nutrition of you think there are bad foods.
That last sentence isn't black and white at all.
0 -
suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?
I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?
There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.
I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.
So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
"Full fat cheese" is not "bad" by any means. Eaten in moderation, it can fit very easily into a well-balanced, low-calorie diet. And the fat helps you feel full longer, so you eat fewer overall calories.
You seem to have a poor understanding of nutrition if you think cheese falls into the same category as cookies. And, no, they aren't "bad." They just aren't something you should pig out on. Everything in moderation.
Full fat cheese is a no no for me on doctor's orders - my OH eats loads of it
OK. But how does that make it a "bad food"?
You're like someone with celiac deciding gluten is evil for everyone because he or she can't eat it.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Ok, maybe not everyone I know would use the term "bad food". But I'm pretty sure people I know who buy mostly organic and non-GMO food would refer to foods such as pop tarts and other artificially colored foods as being "bad". And I'm also pretty sure I know a lot of people who would use the term "junk food" as well.stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
This 100%. I too don't think I know anyone IRL who would argue against the idea that bad foods exist.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
But as I also previously stated, I've never had anyone IRL argue with it or even question what it meant. Never.stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »TheBeachgod wrote: »I am absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could be so naive as to say there are bad foods.
LOL And I feel the exact opposite.
I am absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could be so naive as to say there are not bad foods.
So which foods are bad? Name them and there's a thousand people who don't feel that way and another thousand who will tell you some of the foods you think are "good" are bad.
The fact we can argue about this for so many pages, with a good dose of woo in here too to argue for "bad" foods, shows there is no such thing. It's just as arbitrary as clean and all that other stuff where ten people will have ten different ideas of what it means.
Did you see my post about people using two different meanings of "bad" and talking past each other.
I'm curious if you think everyone would agree that foods fall in the second meaning, which is what is being rejected. (I'd personally give you transfats, which I avoid.)
Obviously everyone agrees that some foods aren't that nutritious. To me, that doesn't make them bad. They might be very good in the right circumstances, in fact (if they are tasty).
Or my argument that most people just don't care enough to start an argument on the street about this kind of stuff.
I think most of society believes in the "good food"/"bad food" divide. I just think it's a very unhelpful way of looking at food, because actual nutrition is more complex than that. You can eat "good food" and have an extremely unhealthy diet - orthorexia being an extreme example - and you can make "bad food" fit into a healthy diet.
And so much of the problem is that "good food"/"bad food" doesn't take into context the rest of the diet. For example, if you go somewhere and you can get either a burger or a salad, which one is healthier is entirely dependent on context. If your diet is low on calories, protein, vitamin B12, or vitamin B3, the burger is the healthier choice. If your diet is low in fiber or vitamins K or A, the salad is probably healthier. One isn't "good" and the other "bad", they are better or worse depending on the overall diet.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »susan100df wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I have no problem admitting it. I call foods good and bad all the time. Bad, crap, junk. I've never had anyone IRL ask we what I meant by those terms. They know. We all know.
Only on MFP have I encountered the militant phenomenon of "no food is bad". I think it's whacky thinking. Not determining that some foods are bad is how I got into this predicament to begin with. And if I have a prayer of maintaining my loss, I have to continue thinking that some foods are bad for me.
Are there obese people that gained their weight via vegetables? I've never met one.
Eating too much is how I got fat.
And I gained lots of weight eating foods most would not call bad (and which I continue to eat in better quantities). This includes by adding butter and/or olive oil to vegetables (I have always eaten lots of veg), but also just basically meat, starchy carbs (generally homemade), stuff like that. It's easy to made foods high cal.
I started gaining weight, in fact, when on a "all natural" food kick, where I didn't worry about how much I ate but was super picky about making everything from scratch. I probably bought into the "some foods are bad" the most at that time.
Now I think the issue isn't the food, but how much you eat, although I mostly eat in a similar way because I like cooking and eating lots of veg, etc. I don't understand why thinking ice cream is bad (or bad for me) is necessary or even helpful to not gaining weight. I don't overeat ice cream, but even if I did I'd simply have to understand that eating too much ice cream is bad for me.
(As is eating too much of anything. Some things just don't have that many calories, so are hard to overeat. Well, unless you load them up with higher cal ingredients.)
At my thinnest, I was subsisting on McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, pizza and Little Debbie snacks! Maybe I should cut out the fruits and veggies and go back to that ...0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?
I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?
There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.
I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.
So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I do agree with you. You're more specific. But you mean the same thing as everyone who says "there are no bad foods" since all they mean is that eating a little to some of it as part of an overall balanced and healthy diet is fine.
I still call them bad though because I differentiate between my main daily diet and my 'naughty' snacks.
Serious question, why do you have to label them naughty? Why not just "snacks"? And what is naughty about it if it fits in your day and doesn't keep you from eating your nutritious foods?
Valid question -Because if I didn't Steven I would eat too much of them too many times and my MFP plan would go flying out of the window - truthful answer.
So calling a food "naughty" is simply a way to keep yourself from over-eating it? It has no meaning beyond that?
I could easily over-eat pineapple if I didn't set goals for myself -- I find it so delicious. Does that mean you'd agree that it's accurate to call pineapple a "naughty" food?
If I felt I could over-eat pineapple [which I actually can take or leave] then yes to me it would be naughty.
If I called every food I could over-eat "naughty" then the only "nice" foods left would be completely unpalatable to me, and the "naughtiest" foods out there would be milk and cheese.
I'm the same way.
We started with the statement that everyone knows some foods are naughty, but it's okay to eat them occasionally.
Now anything you can overeat is naughty.
So my dinner last night -- roasted chicken breast, sweet potatoes, beets, cauliflower (with some olive oil) -- is all naughty, because I only choose to eat foods I think are tasty. (I also avoid overeating by choosing to be mindful as to how much I eat.)
The claim that "naughty"=anything you can overeat is inconsistent with the claim that we should only eat "naughty" foods occasionally. Unless the idea is that we should strive to eat mostly not palatable foods and if so, no thanks.
If the bolded is going to be the criteria, then raw salmon (sashimi) is one of the "naughtiest" foods on the face of the earth, despite being rich in protein and packed with Omega-3s. Because I could easily sit down and scarf two pounds of it without blinking an eye!0 -
suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
And want you to purchase their products.
Totally missed the point!
No I didn't. They label things as "bad" so you feel guilty for eating it, and instead buy their product. You only feel bad because you're told to. I eat pizza and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat a candybar and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat fried chicken and I love it, I don't feel bad about it.
I felt bad when I OVERINDULGED on those (and any other) things. Not the food, the act.
Well for me its the other way around. I eat pizza and chocolate - they are bad foods to me but I don't feel bad about eating them - my choice.
0 -
suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
And want you to purchase their products.
Totally missed the point!
No I didn't. They label things as "bad" so you feel guilty for eating it, and instead buy their product. You only feel bad because you're told to. I eat pizza and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat a candybar and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat fried chicken and I love it, I don't feel bad about it.
I felt bad when I OVERINDULGED on those (and any other) things. Not the food, the act.
Well for me its the other way around. I eat pizza and chocolate - they are bad foods to me but I don't feel bad about eating them - my choice.
And I think we are done here...0 -
Guys, please! The Goblin King is dead. I'm pretty sure nothing else matters.0
-
suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
And want you to purchase their products.
Totally missed the point!
No I didn't. They label things as "bad" so you feel guilty for eating it, and instead buy their product. You only feel bad because you're told to. I eat pizza and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat a candybar and I love it, I don't feel bad about it. I eat fried chicken and I love it, I don't feel bad about it.
I felt bad when I OVERINDULGED on those (and any other) things. Not the food, the act.
Their products are REALLY bad.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »susan100df wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I have no problem admitting it. I call foods good and bad all the time. Bad, crap, junk. I've never had anyone IRL ask we what I meant by those terms. They know. We all know.
Only on MFP have I encountered the militant phenomenon of "no food is bad". I think it's whacky thinking. Not determining that some foods are bad is how I got into this predicament to begin with. And if I have a prayer of maintaining my loss, I have to continue thinking that some foods are bad for me.
Are there obese people that gained their weight via vegetables? I've never met one.
Eating too much is how I got fat.
And I gained lots of weight eating foods most would not call bad (and which I continue to eat in better quantities). This includes by adding butter and/or olive oil to vegetables (I have always eaten lots of veg), but also just basically meat, starchy carbs (generally homemade), stuff like that. It's easy to made foods high cal.
I started gaining weight, in fact, when on a "all natural" food kick, where I didn't worry about how much I ate but was super picky about making everything from scratch. I probably bought into the "some foods are bad" the most at that time.
Now I think the issue isn't the food, but how much you eat, although I mostly eat in a similar way because I like cooking and eating lots of veg, etc. I don't understand why thinking ice cream is bad (or bad for me) is necessary or even helpful to not gaining weight. I don't overeat ice cream, but even if I did I'd simply have to understand that eating too much ice cream is bad for me.
(As is eating too much of anything. Some things just don't have that many calories, so are hard to overeat. Well, unless you load them up with higher cal ingredients.)
At my thinnest, I was subsisting on McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, pizza and Little Debbie snacks! Maybe I should cut out the fruits and veggies and go back to that ...
The very fact that you mention these foods in such a response suggests that you consider them bad.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
Let me lay this out a second time. When I was at my strictest with weight loss and foods, I was regularly breaking into tears in restaurants while I was out with my family. I was regularly having breakdowns in my friends' driveways because I didn't know what kind of snacks they had laid out or did and knew that I couldn't moderate myself well with them. I was not in a good place and dieting, good/bad foods, were seriously affecting my mental health.
Fortunately, my therapist saw it and insisted that I stop the diet for a while until we could work through what was going on. We also worked out some things so that I could continue losing weight without it becoming a full blown eating disorder (closing my diary at the time and accepting the foods that I eat as being neutral rather than good or bad).
I was completely convinced by the dieting industry and posts like this one that what I was going through was normal and I would just have to suffer through it until the end. If not for my therapist, I would have continued down that path. Knowing my history, I likely would have killed myself along the way.
Every time you put down or belittle people for not believing that foods are good or bad (and many people in this thread have made it a point to do so) this is what you believe is a healthy thing for me.
Stop it.
Once upon a time, I was a 12 year old boy whose mother was on WW. I retrieved an unopened bag of M&Ms from the cabinet and proceeded to attempt to open them. Watching me struggle to get the bag open, my mom became agitated at the thought that she wouldn't be allowed to have any of those M&Ms. As I continued to struggle, she became furious that I was making "such a big show" about opening a bag of something delicious that she couldn't have. So she snatched the bag out of my hand, ripped it open and said "and if you say one word about how good they are I'll shove one up your nose! It's bad enough I can't have any and here you are putting on a show about opening the bag."
Dad, sitting next to me at the table, says "Hey, Carlos, let me have one of those." Then my dad, crazy lunatic that he is, popped the M&M into his mouth and says, "Mmm, this is sooo goooood!!"
My mother then grabbed my dad by the face and literally shoved an M&M up his nose.
I was about to give up returning to this thread, but this post made it well worth it. Your dad sounds amazing. I hope it wasn't too hard for him to retrieve the M&M. I do feel a bit saddened for the 12 year old you though (in relation to your mother's reaction to you opening the bag).0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »susan100df wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I have no problem admitting it. I call foods good and bad all the time. Bad, crap, junk. I've never had anyone IRL ask we what I meant by those terms. They know. We all know.
Only on MFP have I encountered the militant phenomenon of "no food is bad". I think it's whacky thinking. Not determining that some foods are bad is how I got into this predicament to begin with. And if I have a prayer of maintaining my loss, I have to continue thinking that some foods are bad for me.
Are there obese people that gained their weight via vegetables? I've never met one.
Eating too much is how I got fat.
And I gained lots of weight eating foods most would not call bad (and which I continue to eat in better quantities). This includes by adding butter and/or olive oil to vegetables (I have always eaten lots of veg), but also just basically meat, starchy carbs (generally homemade), stuff like that. It's easy to made foods high cal.
I started gaining weight, in fact, when on a "all natural" food kick, where I didn't worry about how much I ate but was super picky about making everything from scratch. I probably bought into the "some foods are bad" the most at that time.
Now I think the issue isn't the food, but how much you eat, although I mostly eat in a similar way because I like cooking and eating lots of veg, etc. I don't understand why thinking ice cream is bad (or bad for me) is necessary or even helpful to not gaining weight. I don't overeat ice cream, but even if I did I'd simply have to understand that eating too much ice cream is bad for me.
(As is eating too much of anything. Some things just don't have that many calories, so are hard to overeat. Well, unless you load them up with higher cal ingredients.)
At my thinnest, I was subsisting on McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, pizza and Little Debbie snacks! Maybe I should cut out the fruits and veggies and go back to that ...
The very fact that you mention these foods in such a response suggests that you consider them bad.
Or it suggests that we're constantly bombarded with the message that they are and that we're perpetually inundated with questions like "I at McDonald's today. Will I gain weight if I was still under my calories?"0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I don't normally eat donuts, but I do sometimes when they're provided as refreshments at my church. I don't necessarily feel bad about eating it, but even still I don't think of them as being "good" for me. They're a source of calories that doesn't feel me up much (which is good since a lot of the foods I eat are fairly filling and I'm trying to maintain on the higher end of my calorie maintenance). But otherwise, nutritionally I don't think they're any good for me (well, I'd say anyone but I guess that's a whole different point).
Well, I should hope not...in church and all.
0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »susan100df wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I have no problem admitting it. I call foods good and bad all the time. Bad, crap, junk. I've never had anyone IRL ask we what I meant by those terms. They know. We all know.
Only on MFP have I encountered the militant phenomenon of "no food is bad". I think it's whacky thinking. Not determining that some foods are bad is how I got into this predicament to begin with. And if I have a prayer of maintaining my loss, I have to continue thinking that some foods are bad for me.
Are there obese people that gained their weight via vegetables? I've never met one.
Eating too much is how I got fat.
And I gained lots of weight eating foods most would not call bad (and which I continue to eat in better quantities). This includes by adding butter and/or olive oil to vegetables (I have always eaten lots of veg), but also just basically meat, starchy carbs (generally homemade), stuff like that. It's easy to made foods high cal.
I started gaining weight, in fact, when on a "all natural" food kick, where I didn't worry about how much I ate but was super picky about making everything from scratch. I probably bought into the "some foods are bad" the most at that time.
Now I think the issue isn't the food, but how much you eat, although I mostly eat in a similar way because I like cooking and eating lots of veg, etc. I don't understand why thinking ice cream is bad (or bad for me) is necessary or even helpful to not gaining weight. I don't overeat ice cream, but even if I did I'd simply have to understand that eating too much ice cream is bad for me.
(As is eating too much of anything. Some things just don't have that many calories, so are hard to overeat. Well, unless you load them up with higher cal ingredients.)
At my thinnest, I was subsisting on McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, pizza and Little Debbie snacks! Maybe I should cut out the fruits and veggies and go back to that ...
The very fact that you mention these foods in such a response suggests that you consider them bad.
Or it suggests that we're constantly bombarded with the message that they are and that we're perpetually inundated with questions like "I at McDonald's today. Will I gain weight if I was still under my calories?"
Fair point. But it at least suggests the general understanding of what is meant by 'bad foods'.0 -
MaternalCopulator wrote: »The terms you're using as 'proof' for your claim are marketing terms.
People are told to indulge themselves and that they 'deserve to be pampered', just buy this artisan chocolate, or this decadent ice cream.
Congratulations, you bought the marketing hook line and sinker.
I'd liked to live in peaceful harmony. With a smile.....and a coke for everyone. Anybody have a hillside in Cali we can film an ad? I have an incredible idea.
0 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »Weightloss businesses such as Weightwatchers and Slimming World have no problem defining some foods as 'bad' - Slimming World by categorising some calorie dense foods as 'syns' [sin = bad]. The new Weightwatchers plan by penalising the dieter by upping the points on foods they deem undesirable [bad]. I am sure both these organisations employ qualified nutritionists.
Let me lay this out a second time. When I was at my strictest with weight loss and foods, I was regularly breaking into tears in restaurants while I was out with my family. I was regularly having breakdowns in my friends' driveways because I didn't know what kind of snacks they had laid out or did and knew that I couldn't moderate myself well with them. I was not in a good place and dieting, good/bad foods, were seriously affecting my mental health.
Fortunately, my therapist saw it and insisted that I stop the diet for a while until we could work through what was going on. We also worked out some things so that I could continue losing weight without it becoming a full blown eating disorder (closing my diary at the time and accepting the foods that I eat as being neutral rather than good or bad).
I was completely convinced by the dieting industry and posts like this one that what I was going through was normal and I would just have to suffer through it until the end. If not for my therapist, I would have continued down that path. Knowing my history, I likely would have killed myself along the way.
Every time you put down or belittle people for not believing that foods are good or bad (and many people in this thread have made it a point to do so) this is what you believe is a healthy thing for me.
Stop it.
Once upon a time, I was a 12 year old boy whose mother was on WW. I retrieved an unopened bag of M&Ms from the cabinet and proceeded to attempt to open them. Watching me struggle to get the bag open, my mom became agitated at the thought that she wouldn't be allowed to have any of those M&Ms. As I continued to struggle, she became furious that I was making "such a big show" about opening a bag of something delicious that she couldn't have. So she snatched the bag out of my hand, ripped it open and said "and if you say one word about how good they are I'll shove one up your nose! It's bad enough I can't have any and here you are putting on a show about opening the bag."
Dad, sitting next to me at the table, says "Hey, Carlos, let me have one of those." Then my dad, crazy lunatic that he is, popped the M&M into his mouth and says, "Mmm, this is sooo goooood!!"
My mother then grabbed my dad by the face and literally shoved an M&M up his nose.
I was about to give up returning to this thread, but this post made it well worth it. Your dad sounds amazing. I hope it wasn't too hard for him to retrieve the M&M. I do feel a bit saddened for the 12 year old you though (in relation to your mother's reaction to you opening the bag).
Lol it wasn't traumatizing. I just took it as mom "being in a mood" or "having a moment." I always had a good relationship with my parents.
And yeah, Dad is great. lol0 -
vivmom2014 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I don't normally eat donuts, but I do sometimes when they're provided as refreshments at my church. I don't necessarily feel bad about eating it, but even still I don't think of them as being "good" for me. They're a source of calories that doesn't feel me up much (which is good since a lot of the foods I eat are fairly filling and I'm trying to maintain on the higher end of my calorie maintenance). But otherwise, nutritionally I don't think they're any good for me (well, I'd say anyone but I guess that's a whole different point).
Well, I should hope not...in church and all.
I saw that too but left it alone. lol0 -
ClicquotBubbles wrote: »poison mushrooms- that's a bad food. Some berries can poison you and I suppose anything that has fur growing on it that looks sort of bluey green could be classed as a bad food. Apart from that I cant think of anymore...
Kiwi?!? OMG.....I'm going to die at some point. Damn fur.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Fair point. But it at least suggests the general understanding of what is meant by 'bad foods'.
Understanding what someone means when they use that terminology is not the same as agreeing with that mindset.
There are foods that are generally considered bad, but if you have a healthy relationship with food there's no reason to categorize them as such. Of course I understand some people need to or find it beneficial, but guilt and added stress because you feel bad every time you've eaten something "bad" sounds very counter productive. Life's too short to have such a negative view of tasty things that can still be a part of a healthy diet.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »vivmom2014 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I don't normally eat donuts, but I do sometimes when they're provided as refreshments at my church. I don't necessarily feel bad about eating it, but even still I don't think of them as being "good" for me. They're a source of calories that doesn't feel me up much (which is good since a lot of the foods I eat are fairly filling and I'm trying to maintain on the higher end of my calorie maintenance). But otherwise, nutritionally I don't think they're any good for me (well, I'd say anyone but I guess that's a whole different point).
Well, I should hope not...in church and all.
I saw that too but left it alone. lol
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »suziecue20 wrote: »I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?
I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?
There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.
I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.
So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.
I do agree with you. You're more specific. But you mean the same thing as everyone who says "there are no bad foods" since all they mean is that eating a little to some of it as part of an overall balanced and healthy diet is fine.
I still call them bad though because I differentiate between my main daily diet and my 'naughty' snacks.
Serious question, why do you have to label them naughty? Why not just "snacks"? And what is naughty about it if it fits in your day and doesn't keep you from eating your nutritious foods?
Valid question -Because if I didn't Steven I would eat too much of them too many times and my MFP plan would go flying out of the window - truthful answer.
So calling a food "naughty" is simply a way to keep yourself from over-eating it? It has no meaning beyond that?
I could easily over-eat pineapple if I didn't set goals for myself -- I find it so delicious. Does that mean you'd agree that it's accurate to call pineapple a "naughty" food?
If I felt I could over-eat pineapple [which I actually can take or leave] then yes to me it would be naughty.
If I called every food I could over-eat "naughty" then the only "nice" foods left would be completely unpalatable to me, and the "naughtiest" foods out there would be milk and cheese.
I'm the same way.
We started with the statement that everyone knows some foods are naughty, but it's okay to eat them occasionally.
Now anything you can overeat is naughty.
So my dinner last night -- roasted chicken breast, sweet potatoes, beets, cauliflower (with some olive oil) -- is all naughty, because I only choose to eat foods I think are tasty. (I also avoid overeating by choosing to be mindful as to how much I eat.)
The claim that "naughty"=anything you can overeat is inconsistent with the claim that we should only eat "naughty" foods occasionally. Unless the idea is that we should strive to eat mostly not palatable foods and if so, no thanks.
If the bolded is going to be the criteria, then raw salmon (sashimi) is one of the "naughtiest" foods on the face of the earth, despite being rich in protein and packed with Omega-3s. Because I could easily sit down and scarf two pounds of it without blinking an eye!
Good Lord, yes! I love salmon sashimi. Especially with pickled ginger.
It's a good thing it's so expensive because when I eat it, it's like it falls into another dimension. It never so much as takes the edge off of hunger for me.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions