There are 'BAD' foods
Replies
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
True, I don't have conclusive evidence, but based on the foods being eaten I think it's still a reasonable statement to say that many are coming short.nutmegoreo wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
If they aren't listed on the label, then the diary entries are inaccurate. So you really can't go off of that.
True, but most people eat for adherence and long term goals. So unless you view the diary daily you aren't really sure. Maybe they are logging a select few items for other reasons.
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
True. But again, it seems to me that many people on here aren't eating enough fruits and vegetables (even on a mostly regular basis) to meet those particular RDAs.stevencloser wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
There's plenty vegetables and fruits that provide you with the RDA and then some for small portions. It is not hard to get 100% by a long stretch even on smaller calorie intakes. And what rankinsect said, it's not necessary to get 100 of everything daily forever.
How do you know this?0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods. I'm not at all saying one can't be healthy in general eating a balanced diet and including a small amount of pop tarts, but most likely you won't find too many people who get 100% of all vitamins and minerals and still eat low nutrient dense food. So, since this is not something that is easily achievable, I'd say it makes pop tarts unhealthy in this regard.Carlos_421 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Because the foods I think of as being unhealthy are either very low in micronutrients and/or loaded with ingredients that I don't think belong in food. In the context of a balanced diet that supplies all of the micronutrients in recommended amounts, I don't think there's much harm in eating those other foods in moderation. But to me, that doesn't change the fact that the food itself (such as poptarts) doesn't provide much nutritional value (from a micronutrient standpoint), and is loaded with other "stuff". Foods like that I'd call unhealthy, although when eaten in moderation I agree that it doesn't make the diet itself unhealthy.Carlos_421 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »I support the notion that some foods are unhealthy.
To be honest, my answer is yes. At my church, we pack food for kids at the local elementary school who have little to no food to eat on the weekends. Because of the nature of this undertaking (most of the food is processed and packaged), most of the food they're getting from us is low in nutrients. They're getting fed from a macronutrient standpoint, which is the most important thing, but that food is not doing much good from a micronutrient standpoint.Since these discussions always go to the extremes, let me ask this.
If there is a starving child that hasn't eaten in 3 days, are there any foods that are bad for them?
How does that in any way demonstrate that any given food, in context of appropriate portions and balanced overall diet, is bad or unhealthy in and of itself?
You're still not demonstrating why those foods are unhealthy in and of themselves.
Just because you say so? Why is a low micronutrient profile unhealthy (read: shouldn't be eaten)?
And what is this "other stuff" in pop tarts and how are they bad for me?
Also, food dyes have been shown to have negative consequences in some cases.
Nope. If someone eats chicken or a serving of fish, some dark leafy greens and a potato they are nailing quite a few RDA's with plenty of calories left for other stuff. Eat the rainbow as best you can each *day*, eat nutrient dense foods for your goals, blah blah blah
*edit0 -
OP I'm with you. I'm not going to pretend that a Keebler cookie is not 'bad' food. Doesn't mean I won't eat it, doesn't mean I feel guilty about it either (as long as I only eat one or two), but I'd be in denial if I didn't realize that there could be better choices.
Why would a Keebler cookie be a "bad" food if you've eaten a balanced diet all day, are within your calorie goals, have hit/come reasonably close to your macro goals, and are having that cookie as a snack because you have room under your calorie limit for it and it sounds good at the moment?
Context and dosage. No such thing as bad foods, but there is such a thing as a bad diet/eating habits overall. A Keebler cookie, or a bowl of ice cream, or a Big Mac or french fries or whatever aren't "bad" within the context of an overall balanced diet. Subsisting mostly or entirely upon those items would be a bad idea, just as subsisting entirely upon a diet of broccoli or kale or fresh fruits or chicken would be.
Driving through a school zone at 40 mph at 7:30 am on a weekday would be bad. Driving through a school zone at 40 mph at 1:00 am on a Saturday wouldn't carry the same risks. Context.
A-fricking-men.
I just think there are two views on this issue and I doubt anyone here is going to change anyone else's mind. Bottom line? I think the right attitude for this whole site is "do what works for you." If labeling something as 'bad' helps you? Terrific. Others, like me, might not agree, but what does that matter? Do what works as long as you aren't hurting yourself.0 -
I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
Your diary is closed, you go first.0 -
So, what else does a potato provide? Any other micronutrients? Your starting to remind me of someone who talks of all the vitamins and micros in butter. I can get 100% of some vitamins from butter...if I eat a 1,000 calories of it. Why do you need 100% potassium? Create your own diary entries for your own variable/concerns/for diet. Give it a try and get back to us with your findings. Good luck.ForecasterJason wrote: »I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
0 -
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.
Essentially, yes, there are bad foods and good foods. Many of the foods on your 'bad' list above are on my 'good' list and that is no problem as it is just a simplified label based on my food values and priorities. I lost a bunch of weight and improved health and function by finally correctly identifying my personal bad foods and minimizing or eliminating them from my diet.0 -
Of course highly processed foods filled with chemicals are bad. What idiot would argue with that?0
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
As far as I know there is no RDA or RDI for potassium. You have specific references for 4700 mg??0 -
GoldenLuv23 wrote: »Of course highly processed foods filled with chemicals are bad. What idiot would argue with that?
Possibly you?0 -
GoldenLuv23 wrote: »Of course highly processed foods filled with chemicals are bad. What idiot would argue with that?
Can you list the chemicals?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
Potassium doesn't even have an RDA in the US.
According to the Mayo Clinic, the reason potassium is not included on nutritional labels and has no RDA is because deficiency is extremely uncommon. Potassium is found in almost all foods, and pretty much all meat, some dairy (milk and yogurt), and many fruits and vegetables have good amounts of potassium.
Magnesium is another one that is typically hard to actually be deficient in, since your body can stockpile excess in your bones, and the kidneys are good at moderating the amount of magnesium that is excreted in your urine.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
Again, with the labels and therefore the entries being inaccurate, you really don't know.0 -
I admit I read page 1, 2, and 7. Just wondering. Has anyone asked if there is such a thing as "bad" children? I think the same rule applies. Demonise a food and you may fail to see the good. Take avocados for instance. When fat was "bad" avocados were, too. But there are so many good things about avocados.
How about snails fed champagne?
Raw oysters?
A valentine Twinkie colored with Red food dye no. 2?0 -
I admit I read page 1, 2, and 7. Just wondering. Has anyone asked if there is such a thing as "bad" children? I think the same rule applies. Demonise a food and you may fail to see the good. Take avocados for instance. When fat was "bad" avocados were, too. But there are so many good things about avocados.
How about snails fed champagne?
Raw oysters?
A valentine Twinkie colored with Red food dye no. 2?
Your list is probably nearing the naughty list. Except the avocado.....then again.....
0 -
I admit I read page 1, 2, and 7. Just wondering. Has anyone asked if there is such a thing as "bad" children? I think the same rule applies. Demonise a food and you may fail to see the good. Take avocados for instance. When fat was "bad" avocados were, too. But there are so many good things about avocados.
How about snails fed champagne?
Raw oysters?
A valentine Twinkie colored with Red food dye no. 2?
No one used the 'bad" children analogy, you're good.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I singled out magnesium and potassium for a reason. A medium banana has 8% of the RDA for magnesium along with 9% of the RDA for potassium. A medium baked potato with the skin has 12% magnesium and 20% potassium. Unless you're basically going out of your way to get in as much potassium and magnesium as you can, it's just not that easy to get to 100% (particularly potassium). I'd love to see a diary of someone who is getting in 4700 mg of potassium from food alone.
Unless you have kidney problems or are on certain diuretics, you don't actually need anything like 4700 mg per day. The 4700 mg was not the amount of potassium you need to avoid deficiency, which is much, much lower - it was the "optimal' amount of potassium for its positive effects on blood pressure.
Your body recycles potassium very efficiently, and only about 200 mg are lost per day through urine and other environmental loss. At a minimum you must at least replace that.
0 -
GoldenLuv23 wrote: »Of course highly processed foods filled with chemicals are bad. What idiot would argue with that?
Solid contribution, thanks for joining the conversation.0 -
RDAs for nutrients are listed here http://www.thirdplanetfood.com/rda.htm
I already know I don't get 100% of the RDA for potassium and magnesium, and this is with eating numerous foods made from scratch and less processed than many of the foods I see in others' diaries.
I don't think that most people are necessarily deficient in these micros, but rather eating the RDA would provide more optimal health. I'm not saying that people need to be eating more than the RDA, but again my point is that I don't think most people are getting the RDA for these two nutrients.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
Potassium doesn't even have an RDA in the US.
According to the Mayo Clinic, the reason potassium is not included on nutritional labels and has no RDA is because deficiency is extremely uncommon. Potassium is found in almost all foods, and pretty much all meat, some dairy (milk and yogurt), and many fruits and vegetables have good amounts of potassium.
Magnesium is another one that is typically hard to actually be deficient in, since your body can stockpile excess in your bones, and the kidneys are good at moderating the amount of magnesium that is excreted in your urine.
I've never read anywhere that it is hard to be deficient in magnesium, in fact completely the opposite is said routinely. Where are you getting your info on magnesium deficiency as I could not locate anything stating that it is hard to be deficient in !magnesium.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
Potassium doesn't even have an RDA in the US.
According to the Mayo Clinic, the reason potassium is not included on nutritional labels and has no RDA is because deficiency is extremely uncommon. Potassium is found in almost all foods, and pretty much all meat, some dairy (milk and yogurt), and many fruits and vegetables have good amounts of potassium.
Magnesium is another one that is typically hard to actually be deficient in, since your body can stockpile excess in your bones, and the kidneys are good at moderating the amount of magnesium that is excreted in your urine.
I've never read anywhere that it is hard to be deficient in magnesium, in fact completely the opposite is said routinely. Where are you getting your info on magnesium deficiency as I could not locate anything stating that it is hard to be deficient in !magnesium.
From the NIH:
"Symptomatic magnesium deficiency due to low dietary intake in otherwise-healthy people is uncommon because the kidneys limit urinary excretion of this mineral [3]. However, habitually low intakes or excessive losses of magnesium due to certain health conditions, chronic alcoholism, and/or the use of certain medications can lead to magnesium deficiency."0 -
. If they are not meeting their nutritional needs, it is because they chose not to. [/quote]
Or they don't have the tools, knowledge, and means to do so.
0 -
There are foods I consider treats and foods I consider "not worth it". Pretty much everything else is fair game to be consumed as long as I like the taste of it.
When I'm actively dieting a lot more foods cross into the treats/not worth it column.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »RDAs for nutrients are listed here http://www.thirdplanetfood.com/rda.htm
I already know I don't get 100% of the RDA for potassium and magnesium, and this is with eating numerous foods made from scratch and less processed than many of the foods I see in others' diaries.
I don't think that most people are necessarily deficient in these micros, but rather eating the RDA would provide more optimal health. I'm not saying that people need to be eating more than the RDA, but again my point is that I don't think most people are getting the RDA for these two nutrients.
Those aren't RDAs, site author states that in parathesis she's substituted other values (AI) for these. Not the same thing. At all.
AIs generally represent what an average individual may get on a ref diet. Not a need.0 -
a lot of people justify their unhealthy habits and weights by stating that there are no bad foods, lifting heavy is all you need etc etc.....i think it is more than anything else just an effort to justify in their own minds their suboptimal choices regarding food and exercise. results don't lie though so visually you are able to see who is who.0
-
a lot of people justify their unhealthy habits and weights by stating that there are no bad foods, lifting heavy is all you need etc etc.....i think it is more than anything else just an effort to justify in their own minds their suboptimal choices regarding food and exercise. results don't lie though so visually you are able to see who is who.
Yea, it has nothing to do with the perfect health markets and high fives from my doctor...
#proofisinthepudding
0 -
.If they are not meeting their nutritional needs, it is because they chose not to.
Or they don't have the tools, knowledge, and means to do so.
With the exception of people living in poverty, I find it hard to believe that people who are using this site are unable to access the information needed to make informed choices. Trying to sort though the excessive amounts of misinformation is another thing altogether though.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As for the multivitamin, yes that is true, although one would miss out on other components that certain foods (particularly fruits and vegetables) provide.rankinsect wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »Aside from those with very high calorie requirements (over 3500 calories a day), it's extremely difficult to get 100% of every single micronutrient and still eat those foods.
Well, firstly you could just take a multivitamin and be done with it - that is pretty much assured to get you to your RDAs on vitamins and minerals.
Secondly, though, it's not nearly as hard to meet your micronutrients as most people think, at least over time. The whole "micro" point is that only very small amounts are needed. You also don't need to meet every RDA every single day, but average over time.
When it comes to magnesium and potassium, those are very tricky to meet the RDAs from food alone. I've heard it said on here that because those nutrients aren't listed in many foods, a lot of people probably meet the recommendations. However, looking at a lot of the diaries from others on here, I have a hard time believing that.
Potassium doesn't even have an RDA in the US.
According to the Mayo Clinic, the reason potassium is not included on nutritional labels and has no RDA is because deficiency is extremely uncommon. Potassium is found in almost all foods, and pretty much all meat, some dairy (milk and yogurt), and many fruits and vegetables have good amounts of potassium.
Magnesium is another one that is typically hard to actually be deficient in, since your body can stockpile excess in your bones, and the kidneys are good at moderating the amount of magnesium that is excreted in your urine.
This.
Also, when I logged for a while on cronometer using the USDA information (which does include these) I found that I typically easily met the amount that crono had as the default goal.
Anyway, as others have said, there are bad diets, not bad foods (other than things that are actively harmful at small doses -- I do avoid transfats). I might call something I dislike a bad food on occasion too, can't promise I haven't.
I ran 17.2 miles today and did some extra walking too, so I happily ate a toasted ham and cheese miga sandwich and turkey and cheese on a croissant (both from a little bakery), followed by a piece of my friend's pumpkin bread. Those are things I don't eat all that often, but I certainly don't think they were bad. (They were delicious.)0 -
I'm not disputing that, but there are some things that aren't routinely checked at a general checkup. I went in for a checkup a few months ago and found out that my body's glucose regulation is not behaving perfectly. But the particular test used to diagnose this is not one that most people would get tested on (unless there is a reason to suspect that the patient is having blood glucose issues). The key thing is that I had no idea at all that my body wasn't regulating glucose properly. I didn't have any symptoms that I thought would indicate it, and my doctor wasn't necessarily going to use that particular test if I hadn't requested it. I'm just using this as a personal example to say that it's possible to get a regular checkup and miss something that's not right.a lot of people justify their unhealthy habits and weights by stating that there are no bad foods, lifting heavy is all you need etc etc.....i think it is more than anything else just an effort to justify in their own minds their suboptimal choices regarding food and exercise. results don't lie though so visually you are able to see who is who.
Yea, it has nothing to do with the perfect health markets and high fives from my doctor...
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