There are 'BAD' foods
Options
Replies
-
alstin2015 wrote: »lol. you guys are pretty funny. yes, my standards are subjective and not scientific at all. yes, i prefer butter to sucking a cows' teet. yes i cook meat and know that this is processing. chopping vegetables is processing, etc. i mean common sense stuff. (what is common sense? i know i know). making a pizza at home vs little caesars, home made burgers with grass fed beef on freshly baked bakery bread and tomatoes and onion from your own garden vs. Mcdonald. is this so unreasonable an idea?
so people that don't have gardens because they live in the city are doomed to a shortened life of eating processed foods...?
Also, if we are supposed to only eat stuff we grew in our own garden, I guess I won't be eating lots of vegetables this month, or next, or next... I can grow some stuff on my rooftop, even in the city, but not a lot is in season now, at least not here in the northern midwest.0 -
alstin2015 wrote: »ok then. everything that has not been proven to be harmful is good to eat. you guys have convinced me. thanks. ( on my way to buy hot cheetos, coke, mcdonalds, kfc, and everything in the frozen isle) lol
Ah, yes. Demonic frozen vegetables. My favorite when I feel like ditching nature and embracing the artificial. Try the broccoli, it's a hedonistic experience that will require weeks of detoxing before your chi rebalances.0 -
alstin2015 wrote: »ok then. everything that has not been proven to be harmful is good to eat. you guys have convinced me. thanks. ( on my way to buy hot cheetos, coke, mcdonalds, kfc, and everything in the frozen isle) lol
You seem to be missing some key information which is this:
Hundreds of millions of people have eaten these things and come to no harm.
We're not talking about finding random things in the dirt and eating them to see if they'll kill you. We're talking about things that have been eaten by the trainload already and you come along saying "Stop! Don't eat that! It's poison!"
Experience demonstrates that the assertions made about these foods are incorrect.
If we're already eating it without harm, it's silly to say "Don't eat that, it might hurt you" because we already know that it won't.
Now, if all of a sudden we see evidence that people who eat hot cheetos develop a condition where their left eye turns green and their hearing fails and we see from research that the powdered cheese is the cause, then sure, we'll stop eating them.0 -
alstin2015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »i know that anything can be considered processing,(chopping, cooking, baking). i mean the heavy processing with tons of chemicals and additives that you wouldnt normally put on the food that you would cook at home, (McDonalds, cheetos, coke, candy, hot dogs)
Most (probably all) knew what you meant.
of course they do. they're just trying to out witty each other. some questions are probably genuine, but mostly people out for a laugh, which is ok with me
I just get frustrated when people use "processed" or "not natural" as if they meant bad or were on their face bad things. Technological advancements and doing what's not natural (like carting veg in from elsewhere or freezing them) seems to me a huge advantage for those of us in climates that wouldn't have fresh veg available much of the year. It's a sincere point. Same with making lots more fish available to people who live where I do, so on.
I draw lines myself as to what I will eat and not (I don't eat McD's, although to me the issue is taste and the specific make-up of the foods not being what I want, as I can cook a more delicious (to me) burger for fewer calories, more meat, less fats I don't want (I'm not anti fat in general), etc.). But I don't think it makes sense to claim McD's isn't food or that the problem with McD's is that it's "processed" as if "processed" were a bad word. (It reminds me of certain politicians using the term "socialism" as if it meant "bad things.")0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »the lesser the processing, the better.
I've always found cooking meat to be an improvement over gnawing it right off the bone in the middle of the forest.
I also enjoy butter more than sucking milk straight from a cow's teat and swishing it around in my mouth until it's churned into a consistency that I can then spit onto my food.
...but then again, butter's probably one o' them there "Bad Foods".
Used to be, but it's back out of bad food jail on parole. Now margarine (the healthy alternative) is the bad guy.
What's wrong with margarine?
Because something something transfats according to people apparently.
I would agree that trans fats are bad, but there numerous trans fat free margarines available.
Fun fact about margarine (according to multiple grandparents): when it was first invented, it was pink and called oleo or oleo-margarine. The FDA (or whatever powers that were) demanded that it be dyed pink, so people knew it wasn't a real food. Over time, the margarine lobbyists won the fight to have it colored like butter, so people would consider it comparable to butter. The old-timers in my life swear up and down that butter and rendered fats (beef fat, duck fat, pork fat, etc.) are totally great for you and that things like margarine are terrifying. They were, however, also a little slow to believe in olive oil.
Anyway, enjoy this debate that never, ever seems to go away from MFP. I'm glad it isn't getting old for anyone but me.0 -
This is from Wikipedia, so hate all you want, but at least it makes me feel a little confirmation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margarine#Legal_issues
In 1877, New York became the first US state to attempt legal restriction of the sale of oleomargarine through compulsory labeling. The law, "to prevent deception in sales of butter," required retailers to provide customers with a slip of paper that identified the "imitation" product as margarine. This law proved ineffective, as it would have required an army of inspectors and chemists to enforce it. By the mid-1880s, the US federal government had introduced a tax of two cents per pound, and manufacturers needed an expensive license to make or sell the product. The simple expedient of requiring oleo manufacturers to color their product distinctively was, however, left out of early federal legislation. But individual states began to require the clear labeling of margarine. The color bans, drafted by the butter lobby, began in the dairy states of New York and New Jersey. In several states, legislatures enacted laws to require margarine manufacturers to add pink colorings to make the product look unpalatable, despite the objections of the oleo manufacturers that butter dairies themselves added annatto to their product to imitate the yellow of mid-summer butter.[67]0 -
JustinAnimal wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »the lesser the processing, the better.
I've always found cooking meat to be an improvement over gnawing it right off the bone in the middle of the forest.
I also enjoy butter more than sucking milk straight from a cow's teat and swishing it around in my mouth until it's churned into a consistency that I can then spit onto my food.
...but then again, butter's probably one o' them there "Bad Foods".
Used to be, but it's back out of bad food jail on parole. Now margarine (the healthy alternative) is the bad guy.
What's wrong with margarine?
Because something something transfats according to people apparently.
I would agree that trans fats are bad, but there numerous trans fat free margarines available.
Fun fact about margarine (according to multiple grandparents): when it was first invented, it was pink and called oleo or oleo-margarine. The FDA (or whatever powers that were) demanded that it be dyed pink, so people knew it wasn't a real food. Over time, the margarine lobbyists won the fight to have it colored like butter, so people would consider it comparable to butter. The old-timers in my life swear up and down that butter and rendered fats (beef fat, duck fat, pork fat, etc.) are totally great for you and that things like margarine are terrifying. They were, however, also a little slow to believe in olive oil.
Anyway, enjoy this debate that never, ever seems to go away from MFP. I'm glad it isn't getting old for anyone but me.
People don't know that oleo and margarine are the same thing? Oh that makes me feel old.0 -
A lot of places have secret ingredients in their food that aren't disclosed to the public. I have my doubts that beef, salt, and pepper are the only ingredients in McDonald's beef patties.I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Because i prefer my food to be made of food
What part of the 100% beef McDonald's patty is not food? The beef or the beef?
lol. i used to sell natures harvest bread. 100% whole wheat. here are the ingredients
Whole wheat flour, water, cracked wheat, yeast, wheat gluten, sugar, wheat bran, soybean oil, honey, molasses, raisin juice concentrate, salt, mono- and diglycerides, datum, calcium propionate (preservative), grain vinegar, calcium sulfate, monocalcium phosphate, cornstarch, soy lecithin, citric acid, whey, soy flour, nonfat milk.
how is that 100% whole wheat? well, the whole wheat that is in it is 100% whole wheat. lol im sure that the beef in the mcdonalds patty is 100% beef. that doesnt mean its not full of other things
Actually it's just beef, salt and pepper.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »JustinAnimal wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »the lesser the processing, the better.
I've always found cooking meat to be an improvement over gnawing it right off the bone in the middle of the forest.
I also enjoy butter more than sucking milk straight from a cow's teat and swishing it around in my mouth until it's churned into a consistency that I can then spit onto my food.
...but then again, butter's probably one o' them there "Bad Foods".
Used to be, but it's back out of bad food jail on parole. Now margarine (the healthy alternative) is the bad guy.
What's wrong with margarine?
Because something something transfats according to people apparently.
I would agree that trans fats are bad, but there numerous trans fat free margarines available.
Fun fact about margarine (according to multiple grandparents): when it was first invented, it was pink and called oleo or oleo-margarine. The FDA (or whatever powers that were) demanded that it be dyed pink, so people knew it wasn't a real food. Over time, the margarine lobbyists won the fight to have it colored like butter, so people would consider it comparable to butter. The old-timers in my life swear up and down that butter and rendered fats (beef fat, duck fat, pork fat, etc.) are totally great for you and that things like margarine are terrifying. They were, however, also a little slow to believe in olive oil.
Anyway, enjoy this debate that never, ever seems to go away from MFP. I'm glad it isn't getting old for anyone but me.
People don't know that oleo and margarine are the same thing? Oh that makes me feel old.
Many of the handwritten recipes I have of my mother's call for Oleo. One calls for Milnot. One calls for Hydrox cookies. I love those recipes.0 -
alstin2015 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »lol. you guys are pretty funny. yes, my standards are subjective and not scientific at all. yes, i prefer butter to sucking a cows' teet. yes i cook meat and know that this is processing. chopping vegetables is processing, etc. i mean common sense stuff. (what is common sense? i know i know). making a pizza at home vs little caesars, home made burgers with grass fed beef on freshly baked bakery bread and tomatoes and onion from your own garden vs. Mcdonald. is this so unreasonable an idea?
so people that don't have gardens because they live in the city are doomed to a shortened life of eating processed foods...?
Also, if we are supposed to only eat stuff we grew in our own garden, I guess I won't be eating lots of vegetables this month, or next, or next... I can grow some stuff on my rooftop, even in the city, but not a lot is in season now, at least not here in the northern midwest.
lol. i never said you cant eat store bought veggies. just wash em well. i just trust my veggies that i plant and harvest myself more than some from another source. sorry for being so irrational
I mostly get vegetables in season from a local farm plus the green market, not because I don't trust other vegetables to be safe (that seems odd) or think they are healthier, but because I like eating seasonally and getting ideas about things I might not think to buy in the store (or which aren't as likely to be in the store), like supporting local farmers, and imagine they taste better (sometimes they actually do, when they aren't as likely to be picked unripe or more varieties that I like are available -- makes a huge difference with both strawberries and tomatoes, IMO). I garden a bit, but have to do it in pots on my rooftop, so I'm limited in what and how much I can grow.
I don't think I eat less healthfully in the winter when there would be no vegetables available if I had to rely on those I grow myself, and really I think that's taking it too far, but of course we all should make our own decisions about these things.0 -
alstin2015 wrote: »i ojanejellyroll wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »ok then. everything that has not been proven to be harmful is good to eat. you guys have convinced me. thanks. ( on my way to buy hot cheetos, coke, mcdonalds, kfc, and everything in the frozen isle) lol
Ah, yes. Demonic frozen vegetables. My favorite when I feel like ditching nature and embracing the artificial. Try the broccoli, it's a hedonistic experience that will require weeks of detoxing before your chi rebalances.
you guys are too funny. yes i obviously meant frozen vegetables lol. TV dinners, hot pockets, etc.
By now the point should be obvious.
The simplistic binary black/white, good/bad, healthy/unhealthy, etc thinking is what most of us are discussing against. People (not just you) try to arbitrarily put things into one of two boxes. It's common...we see it every day here.
The point I'm trying to make, is to try letting go of the simple yes/no thinking. To boil everything to a set of arbitrary rules that define either a "yes" or "no" answer don't work in science and nutrition.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »i know that anything can be considered processing,(chopping, cooking, baking). i mean the heavy processing with tons of chemicals and additives that you wouldnt normally put on the food that you would cook at home, (McDonalds, cheetos, coke, candy, hot dogs)
Most (probably all) knew what you meant.
of course they do. they're just trying to out witty each other. some questions are probably genuine, but mostly people out for a laugh, which is ok with me
I just get frustrated when people use "processed" or "not natural" as if they meant bad or were on their face bad things. Technological advancements and doing what's not natural (like carting veg in from elsewhere or freezing them) seems to me a huge advantage for those of us in climates that wouldn't have fresh veg available much of the year. It's a sincere point. Same with making lots more fish available to people who live where I do, so on.
Not sure how freezing food is not natural. But I think it's just frustrating when people act as if all foods are equal.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »JustinAnimal wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »the lesser the processing, the better.
I've always found cooking meat to be an improvement over gnawing it right off the bone in the middle of the forest.
I also enjoy butter more than sucking milk straight from a cow's teat and swishing it around in my mouth until it's churned into a consistency that I can then spit onto my food.
...but then again, butter's probably one o' them there "Bad Foods".
Used to be, but it's back out of bad food jail on parole. Now margarine (the healthy alternative) is the bad guy.
What's wrong with margarine?
Because something something transfats according to people apparently.
I would agree that trans fats are bad, but there numerous trans fat free margarines available.
Fun fact about margarine (according to multiple grandparents): when it was first invented, it was pink and called oleo or oleo-margarine. The FDA (or whatever powers that were) demanded that it be dyed pink, so people knew it wasn't a real food. Over time, the margarine lobbyists won the fight to have it colored like butter, so people would consider it comparable to butter. The old-timers in my life swear up and down that butter and rendered fats (beef fat, duck fat, pork fat, etc.) are totally great for you and that things like margarine are terrifying. They were, however, also a little slow to believe in olive oil.
Anyway, enjoy this debate that never, ever seems to go away from MFP. I'm glad it isn't getting old for anyone but me.
People don't know that oleo and margarine are the same thing? Oh that makes me feel old.
People who do crossword puzzles do.0 -
JustinAnimal wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »the lesser the processing, the better.
I've always found cooking meat to be an improvement over gnawing it right off the bone in the middle of the forest.
I also enjoy butter more than sucking milk straight from a cow's teat and swishing it around in my mouth until it's churned into a consistency that I can then spit onto my food.
...but then again, butter's probably one o' them there "Bad Foods".
Used to be, but it's back out of bad food jail on parole. Now margarine (the healthy alternative) is the bad guy.
What's wrong with margarine?
Because something something transfats according to people apparently.
I would agree that trans fats are bad, but there numerous trans fat free margarines available.
Fun fact about margarine (according to multiple grandparents): when it was first invented, it was pink and called oleo or oleo-margarine. The FDA (or whatever powers that were) demanded that it be dyed pink, so people knew it wasn't a real food. Over time, the margarine lobbyists won the fight to have it colored like butter, so people would consider it comparable to butter. The old-timers in my life swear up and down that butter and rendered fats (beef fat, duck fat, pork fat, etc.) are totally great for you and that things like margarine are terrifying. They were, however, also a little slow to believe in olive oil.
Anyway, enjoy this debate that never, ever seems to go away from MFP. I'm glad it isn't getting old for anyone but me.
That's awesome. I did not know that so read up on it after you mentioned it. I guess only a few states did it and last one to end the "pink" was Wisconsin in 1967. Honestly, I had no idea that margarine was such a controversy at all and did not know it was dyed to make it yellow.
0 -
As for preservatives and other additives that commercial companies add to foods, there is no guarantee that over the course of one's lifetime, absolutely no DNA damage will occur. Meaning, there is no 100% certainty that with the processing the body has to do with that stuff, eventually some cells may become a bit damaged. That's not to say that one's lifespan would be drastically affected, but you can't guarantee that there's no harm at all being done.0
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
A lot of places have secret ingredients in their food that aren't disclosed to the public. I have my doubts that beef, salt, and pepper are the only ingredients in McDonald's beef patties.I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Because i prefer my food to be made of food
What part of the 100% beef McDonald's patty is not food? The beef or the beef?
lol. i used to sell natures harvest bread. 100% whole wheat. here are the ingredients
Whole wheat flour, water, cracked wheat, yeast, wheat gluten, sugar, wheat bran, soybean oil, honey, molasses, raisin juice concentrate, salt, mono- and diglycerides, datum, calcium propionate (preservative), grain vinegar, calcium sulfate, monocalcium phosphate, cornstarch, soy lecithin, citric acid, whey, soy flour, nonfat milk.
how is that 100% whole wheat? well, the whole wheat that is in it is 100% whole wheat. lol im sure that the beef in the mcdonalds patty is 100% beef. that doesnt mean its not full of other things
Actually it's just beef, salt and pepper.
Secret ingredients? Care to elaborate? What are they, who uses them, how do you know? Just a hunch? I don't think a company like McDonald's would risk the lawsuit by lying to their billions of customers world wide.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
A lot of places have secret ingredients in their food that aren't disclosed to the public. I have my doubts that beef, salt, and pepper are the only ingredients in McDonald's beef patties.I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Because i prefer my food to be made of food
What part of the 100% beef McDonald's patty is not food? The beef or the beef?
lol. i used to sell natures harvest bread. 100% whole wheat. here are the ingredients
Whole wheat flour, water, cracked wheat, yeast, wheat gluten, sugar, wheat bran, soybean oil, honey, molasses, raisin juice concentrate, salt, mono- and diglycerides, datum, calcium propionate (preservative), grain vinegar, calcium sulfate, monocalcium phosphate, cornstarch, soy lecithin, citric acid, whey, soy flour, nonfat milk.
how is that 100% whole wheat? well, the whole wheat that is in it is 100% whole wheat. lol im sure that the beef in the mcdonalds patty is 100% beef. that doesnt mean its not full of other things
Actually it's just beef, salt and pepper.
There's no way that wouldn't have been discovered and them sued, and they know that.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
A lot of places have secret ingredients in their food that aren't disclosed to the public. I have my doubts that beef, salt, and pepper are the only ingredients in McDonald's beef patties.I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »I_Will_End_You wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Because i prefer my food to be made of food
What part of the 100% beef McDonald's patty is not food? The beef or the beef?
lol. i used to sell natures harvest bread. 100% whole wheat. here are the ingredients
Whole wheat flour, water, cracked wheat, yeast, wheat gluten, sugar, wheat bran, soybean oil, honey, molasses, raisin juice concentrate, salt, mono- and diglycerides, datum, calcium propionate (preservative), grain vinegar, calcium sulfate, monocalcium phosphate, cornstarch, soy lecithin, citric acid, whey, soy flour, nonfat milk.
how is that 100% whole wheat? well, the whole wheat that is in it is 100% whole wheat. lol im sure that the beef in the mcdonalds patty is 100% beef. that doesnt mean its not full of other things
Actually it's just beef, salt and pepper.
I tend to avoid the tin foil hat theories of science and nutrition personally. But whatever works for you!0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »As for preservatives and other additives that commercial companies add to foods, there is no guarantee that over the course of one's lifetime, absolutely no DNA damage will occur. Meaning, there is no 100% certainty that with the processing the body has to do with that stuff, eventually some cells may become a bit damaged. That's not to say that one's lifespan would be drastically affected, but you can't guarantee that there's no harm at all being done.
If you're advocating that we should avoid all things that don't come with a 100% guarantee of safety, then I can only say I strongly disagree with that.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »alstin2015 wrote: »i know that anything can be considered processing,(chopping, cooking, baking). i mean the heavy processing with tons of chemicals and additives that you wouldnt normally put on the food that you would cook at home, (McDonalds, cheetos, coke, candy, hot dogs)
Most (probably all) knew what you meant.
of course they do. they're just trying to out witty each other. some questions are probably genuine, but mostly people out for a laugh, which is ok with me
I just get frustrated when people use "processed" or "not natural" as if they meant bad or were on their face bad things. Technological advancements and doing what's not natural (like carting veg in from elsewhere or freezing them) seems to me a huge advantage for those of us in climates that wouldn't have fresh veg available much of the year. It's a sincere point. Same with making lots more fish available to people who live where I do, so on.
Not sure how freezing food is not natural. But I think it's just frustrating when people act as if all foods are equal.
I haven't seen anyone suggesting that foods are all the same (or equal). Saying no foods are inherently "bad" as I think of them doesn't mean that I think they are equal. They are quite different.
Whether they are "processed" or not doesn't seem to me an important difference given how diverse the group of foods that are "processed" is.
And having asparagus easily available in January, at least where I live, whether frozen or carted in from elsewhere, is not "natural" to the extent that "natural" as any real meaning at all (human nature is to figure out how to do stuff like that, after all). It is a positive thing, IMO.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 982 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions