There are 'BAD' foods
Replies
-
0 -
-
queenliz99 wrote: »
You pretty much nailed it...then I saw this one and LOL'd.0 -
0 -
0
-
I'm addicted to bad foods.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »
My wife struggles with Worcestershire sauce.
Instead of "worce-ster-shire," it'll come out "wor-Chester-shire" if she doesn't stop to think about it.0 -
It remember the first time I heard the proper pronunciation for quinoa. Why is the poutine angry?FunkyTobias wrote: »
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »
I love that the more educated you are, the more variety you can eat. Though I'm really irked that I can't eat Croatian food. That shiz is hard!0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Do I need to go back to page 7 and read from where I left off or can I assume I know how this went
Highlights reel anyone ?
There was some interesting talk, imo, about the nature of words and how we talk about things somewhere around page 17. But no one wanted to talk about that. Mostly it's the same old arguments again and again just like every other thread like this.
For what it's worth, I fully appreciated what you had to say there. I just didn't feel I could said anything to make it better.
Well...except the m&m up dad's nose. And I don't think that story really got the love it deserved.
Oh well.
I was heavy into the unpopular "nature of words" sub-thread, but I nonetheless found your story quite wonderful. Kinda glad I grew up in a lower-drama bunch, though. (NB: Banana allusion sort of intentional.)0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Do I need to go back to page 7 and read from where I left off or can I assume I know how this went
Highlights reel anyone ?
There was some interesting talk, imo, about the nature of words and how we talk about things somewhere around page 17. But no one wanted to talk about that. Mostly it's the same old arguments again and again just like every other thread like this.
For what it's worth, I fully appreciated what you had to say there. I just didn't feel I could said anything to make it better.
Well...except the m&m up dad's nose. And I don't think that story really got the love it deserved.
Oh well.
I was heavy into the unpopular "nature of words" sub-thread, but I nonetheless found your story quite wonderful. Kinda glad I grew up in a lower-drama bunch, though. (NB: Banana allusion sort of intentional.)
Lol yeah that drama was hardly standard.
Dad's goofiness was standard though. Lol0 -
If you see food as good and bad, you have yourself an eating disorder. You should see food as food. Obviously, you'll get fat if you eat too much food. The only food that are bad are foods that are spoiled.0
-
Heh, I can pronounce all those, but only bc my subculture was an early adopter re quinoa, so I've been able to be judge re mispronunciations for years, and when I drank a bunch of wine I also studied up on it.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
My wife struggles with Worcestershire sauce.
Instead of "worce-ster-shire," it'll come out "wor-Chester-shire" if she doesn't stop to think about it.
I went to college in MA. They have even more whacked out ways of pronouncing it. Wiister.
It's basically wouster or maybe worster.0 -
Some people may feel there are no "bad" foods but there is a difference in the amount of food you can eat, bad vs good. I believe that yes some foods are better for you than others, doesn't matter if they fit within your calories or not. But everyone has the right to their opinion and everyone can eat what they want. rhttp://shareably.net/this-is-what-200-calories-of-food-looks-like/0
-
allaboutthefood wrote: »Some people may feel there are no "bad" foods but there is a difference in the amount of food you can eat, bad vs good.
So lower cals=good; high cals=bad.
Hmm.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
My wife struggles with Worcestershire sauce.
Instead of "worce-ster-shire," it'll come out "wor-Chester-shire" if she doesn't stop to think about it.
I went to college in MA. They have even more whacked out ways of pronouncing it. Wiister.
It's basically wouster or maybe worster.
I'm from MA. I was thinking that. Wousta. And Peabody is peabuddy, but said very quickly.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't know if you read that study, but there were prediabetics included in it. So if we are going to discuss it, that must be taken into account.ForecasterJason wrote: »
When applying this study to those that don't have defective genes for glucose metabolism (diabetes genes) in the first place, I can understand your point. But for those that do have these genes, an unusually high surge after meals is problematic.Wetcoaster wrote: »This is an interesting study
http://news.meta.com/2015/11/19/cell-nutrition-is-personal-identical-foods-produce-healthy-and-unhealthy-responses-in-different-individuals/
Nutrition is personal. A high degree of variability exists in the responses of different people to the same food.
The collected observations further revealed both an individual’s responses to the same food were reproducible, and that there exists a high levels of variability in the responses of different individuals to the same foods. The researchers found that the food associated with an individual’s highest glucose response varied greatly between individuals. Foods that induced a “healthy” response in one individual might induce an “unhealthy” response in another. In a particularly compelling figure, the researchers showed an example where two participants had opposite responses to cookies and bananas
I don't feel this study really makes a case why normal blood sugar fluctuations following meals are unhealthy in and of themselves, particularly as their illustrated levels look well within established post-meal guidelines. The R-value correlations with obesity and H1CA levels, never mind actual disease, are unconvincing in establishing a causal effect. Thus labeling the fluctuations in blood glucose "healthy" and "unhealthy" seems a long stretch here.
pretty sure nothing in this thread is about anyone with a medical condition ….
we understand that some people may need to avoid insulin spikes due to medical condition, but every single post on this board does not need that disclaimer.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't pre-diabetes a catch all term to define those at risk of developing diabetes due to all possible factors eg those without a genetic marker but with obesity? And haven't many with pre diabetes effectively become non pre diabetic by dropping weight?0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I don't know if you read that study, but there were prediabetics included in it. So if we are going to discuss it, that must be taken into account.
- Pre-diabetes means "you are at risk for getting diabetes". It is not itself a disease state. It also isn't a very good predictor of disease state (15%-30% of people will develop diabetes? that means somewhere between 70-85% won't).
- I haven't seen anything convincing that any and all blood glucose spikes in response to eating are bad for anyone. Not even diabetics. Only excessively high spikes ( >180 mg/dL)
- In diabetics, insulin response is borked, so you frequently see unmodulated spikes of >300 mg/dL right after meals.
- None of the data in this study as released suggested the individuals studied were having massive blood sugar spikes; they were all well within the 180 mg/dL recommendation.
- Redefining "bad" blood sugar spikes as those above 115 (which the article doesn't do but the press release does through graphs) requires a quite a bit of justification, which is entirely lacking.
Strike the Spike - Diabetes Self-Management
Checking Your Blood Glucose - American Diabetes Association
Management of Hyperglycemia in Type2 Diabetes - A Patient Centered Approach (Diabetes Care 2012)
Turns page
Right that does it ...you are now on my official cerebral crush list0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Heh, I can pronounce all those, but only bc my subculture was an early adopter re quinoa, so I've been able to be judge re mispronunciations for years, and when I drank a bunch of wine I also studied up on it.
I get to EAT ALL THE THINGS. (Languages are my gravy.)
I did pronounce it kinOa for years.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
My wife struggles with Worcestershire sauce.
Instead of "worce-ster-shire," it'll come out "wor-Chester-shire" if she doesn't stop to think about it.
I went to college in MA. They have even more whacked out ways of pronouncing it. Wiister.
It's basically wouster or maybe worster.
I grew up in western MA. (Thankfully. I cannot stand Boston speak.) It's Wistah. No "R" in the Boston language, apparently. And Gloucester is Glostah.
In SC we have a county called Horry county and the first time I pronounced it at work after I moved here, everyone laughed at me (in fun, they weren't meanies). Apparently, the "H" is silent, so it's pronounced Orry.
I took some paper, wrote down Worcester and Gloucester and asked them to pronounce them. Who's laughing now? LOL0 -
I remember asking where LEO-minster was when I was up there years ago. When folks said do you mean "LEN mistah" I had no idea what the hell they were saying.0
-
I love odd ways to pronounce words
Try and do Featherstonehaugh :bigsmile:0 -
-
Morning turtle
It's Fanshaw by the way .. chuckles0 -
-
Don't use government pronouncements as a basis for foods that are "good", "bad", or otherwise.
Those statements are not based on science, they are based in Politics. Everything they say and do is the result of a lobbyist writing a check.
THIS! Read Health at Every Size and you'll quickly realise how much of the 'healthy guidelines' we're given is complete crap.0 -
Health at every size
oh nm0 -
Don't use government pronouncements as a basis for foods that are "good", "bad", or otherwise.
Those statements are not based on science, they are based in Politics. Everything they say and do is the result of a lobbyist writing a check.
THIS! Read Health at Every Size and you'll quickly realise how much of the 'healthy guidelines' we're given is complete crap.
Health at Any Size. Take a look at this. Obesity rates are lower for people over 65+ than those 45-64 and in many cases lower than those 26-44. Did all the 65+ suddenly decide to watch their diet and start exercising or are the obese dying off faster? Early death is usually not a sign of good health.
http://stateofobesity.org/obesity-by-age/0 -
allaboutthefood wrote: »Some people may feel there are no "bad" foods but there is a difference in the amount of food you can eat, bad vs good. I believe that yes some foods are better for you than others, doesn't matter if they fit within your calories or not. But everyone has the right to their opinion and everyone can eat what they want. rhttp://shareably.net/this-is-what-200-calories-of-food-looks-like/
calorie dense does not equal bad, it just means it has more calories.
what matter is ones overall diet and meeting micro, macro, and calorie targets.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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K 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