There are 'BAD' foods

Options
1…1819212324…56

Replies

  • longlostyeti
    longlostyeti Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    lets stop labeling foods good or bad and lets just enjoy life YOLO.. o:)
  • suziecue20
    suziecue20 Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    VeryKatie 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.

  • suziecue20
    suziecue20 Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    rml_16 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
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Options
    longlostyeti wrote: »
    lets stop labeling foods good or bad and lets just enjoy life YOLO.. o:)

    I've lived long enough to know I can do both.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    longlostyeti wrote: »
    lets stop labeling foods good or bad and lets just enjoy life YOLO.. o:)

    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.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2016
    Options
    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.)
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    VeryKatie 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?
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    VeryKatie 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.

    But if you don't exceed your calorie goals, what makes them naughty?
  • suziecue20
    suziecue20 Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    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.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    I'm always interested in these types of threads which comments are acknowledged and which aren't. The OP seems to want nothing to do with my contributions in favor of arguing with others and we've covered the cancer meats pretty heavily already. Going around in circles.

    I was feeling the same way. Oh, well. ;-)
  • Clobern80
    Clobern80 Posts: 714 Member
    Options
    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.
  • TheBeachgod
    TheBeachgod Posts: 825 Member
    Options
    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.

    You'd think wrong then since WW has Zero Points foods.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    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.

    The discussion is silly because people just mean different things by "bad food."

    Some seem to mean "low in nutrients/high in calories" (the usual understanding of junk food).

    Others mean "actively harmful or foods I should always avoid."

    To me "bad" suggests more the latter, but if people want to use the term for the former I get it and don't care.

    What I find puzzling is OP's statement that we all know we should not eat bad foods. I don't think foods in the first category are foods I should not eat, and don't aspire to have a "perfect" diet in that sense. I wouldn't want to not ever want to eat some higher cal/lower nutrient foods.

    I do think it's best not to have a bad diet--by which I mean a diet that lacks nutrients overall or causes weight gain or loss that is inappropriate.
  • suziecue20
    suziecue20 Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    stevencloser wrote: »
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    VeryKatie 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.

  • suziecue20
    suziecue20 Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    VeryKatie 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.

    But if you don't exceed your calorie goals, what makes them naughty?

    See my answer to StevenCloser Carlos.
  • ClicquotBubbles
    ClicquotBubbles Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    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...
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    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.
  • TheBeachgod
    TheBeachgod Posts: 825 Member
    Options
    So it is something that works for you. Great! But there are no bad foods.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    edited January 2016
    Options
    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 it's a universal truth and everybody else needs to think in the same mind frame.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    suziecue20 wrote: »
    VeryKatie 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.

    Maybe I'm different, but there's a lot of foods I could easily blow my calories on, sweets, fastfood, but also fruits and homemade meals. I'm making a curry right now, all good fresh ingredients but also high in calories.
    The only thing all these things have in common is that I find them delicious. Their nutrition is all over the place but I could overeat on any of them.

Categories