To my brethren and sistren* converted from deep and woo
Options
Replies
-
I prefer A. Unless they seem genuinely like they want to lose weight but really don't know how to go about it. In which case B and they'll tend to listen. It's happened once though. Ever.0
-
How does one behave when visiting a friend's church? Lots of polite smiling and nodding. If a person asks me directly about their diet plan, if it achieves a deficit, I'll say, "It works." If someone tries to pry my aspartame-soaked Pepsi out of my cold hands claiming it's poison, I'll lecture them on the dangers of water.0
-
Yep. When you explain that you simply ate less and moved more, their eyes glaze over. The answer they're looking for is usually one of these two:
1) A magic pill that will let them effortlessly get to their goal weight in 30 days with no diet changes or exercise, or;
2) They want to hear that you deprived yourself, suffered and worked out until you dropped from exhaustion, so they can say "Oh, I could never do that, it's too hard!" and justify to themselves why they'll just stay fat.
This is the truest thing ever.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »People can believe all the woo they want, but what frustrates me is when people ask me how I've done what I've done and they reject my honest answers while indirectly or outright calling me a liar.
- "How did you get so thin?" I exercise and eat at a calorie deficit. "Oh don't tell me that, I go to the gym and haven't lost a pound!" Are you eating less calories than you burn? "I don't eat much." Oh, okay then.
- "Oh you're not going to eat any cake." Actually, I love cake. I'll have a piece, thanks! "Are you going to vomit it up later?"
- "You count calories? Oh, my life is far too busy for that. I don't have the time to do something like that." I guess my life isn't busy at all then, huh?
The problem is that many people want the results without accepting that it takes work to get there. No, there has to be some secret that only a few people are privy to and it's being hidden from the rest of the world. Many people don't want to accept that they eat too much or aren't active enough. They aren't willing to exercise during the week or keep tabs on their food intake, but they're willing to invest hundreds in miracle pills, creams, and diet plans that accomplish absolutely nothing. You can't have the "beach body" without putting in the time and effort it takes to achieve that goal.
When I get asked how I lost all the weight so fast and I give them similar answers they just tend to look very disappointed. They seem to be hoping I found some secret I could share or some product that performs miracles. People rarely want to hear that's it's a time consuming and often difficult process.
During the unbelieving, disappointed looks part, I'm often tempted to say "Ok, honestly? I ate the freshest pine cone I could find, once, every single day," just to see if eventually the forests are full of pine cone scavengers. My morality beats my humor when those whims strike though.0 -
Well @tomatosoup3 as a pedant I feel I have to acknowledge that language evolves. I believe derp entered the Oxford dictionary online 3 years ago0
-
tomatosoup3 wrote: »Also just to add "woo" and "derp" are describing the concept not the person who uses them
Similar to child development one describes the action and not the child ..how can that be offensive?
Woo and derp are adjectives that cannot be ascribed to people. One wouldn't say "you are woo" or "you are so derp" so taking offence at the use of the word as a concept descriptor is in my opinion grammatically and actually inappropriate
Just wanted to point out that you seem to be very seriously discussing proper grammar usage concerning the pseudo-words "woo" and "derp".
As an english teacher, I find that very entertaining!
The dynamics of language has its own kind of beauty. Even new words conform to grammatical rules
I'm just here for the language lessons myself.0 -
[/quote]
Just wanted to point out that you seem to be very seriously discussing proper grammar usage concerning the pseudo-words "woo" and "derp".
As an english teacher, I find that very entertaining![/quote]
English dictionary, Merriam Webster, defines "woo" at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woo
Gallup, has another interpretation for Woo. It is an acronym for "winning others over". It is considered a strength on their Gallup Strength Finder. It happens to be my number one strength.
Derp remains a pseudo-word, or slang, meaning to act stupidly or foolishly.0 -
Unless I am specifically in the conversation, I don't respond. If I'm in the conversation, I offer my advice and it's up to them to take it or not. I really don't care what people eat. Not my business. If they want to do a juice cleanse to detox their body, eat nothing but cabbage for a month, or eat grapefruit with every meal, then it's up to them to discover the woo.
Just don't ask me how I lost my weight and get peeved with the answer. That annoys me to no end. I'm sorry there isn't a magic instant skinny pill out there.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »People can believe all the woo they want, but what frustrates me is when people ask me how I've done what I've done and they reject my honest answers while indirectly or outright calling me a liar.
- "How did you get so thin?" I exercise and eat at a calorie deficit. "Oh don't tell me that, I go to the gym and haven't lost a pound!" Are you eating less calories than you burn? "I don't eat much." Oh, okay then.
- "Oh you're not going to eat any cake." Actually, I love cake. I'll have a piece, thanks! "Are you going to vomit it up later?"
- "You count calories? Oh, my life is far too busy for that. I don't have the time to do something like that." I guess my life isn't busy at all then, huh?
The problem is that many people want the results without accepting that it takes work to get there. No, there has to be some secret that only a few people are privy to and it's being hidden from the rest of the world. Many people don't want to accept that they eat too much or aren't active enough. They aren't willing to exercise during the week or keep tabs on their food intake, but they're willing to invest hundreds in miracle pills, creams, and diet plans that accomplish absolutely nothing. You can't have the "beach body" without putting in the time and effort it takes to achieve that goal.
When I get asked how I lost all the weight so fast and I give them similar answers they just tend to look very disappointed. They seem to be hoping I found some secret I could share or some product that performs miracles. People rarely want to hear that's it's a time consuming and often difficult process.
During the unbelieving, disappointed looks part, I'm often tempted to say "Ok, honestly? I ate the freshest pine cone I could find, once, every single day," just to see if eventually the forests are full of pine cone scavengers. My morality beats my humor when those whims strike though.
Lol oh I need to try that.
0 -
When people ask me how I have lost the weight I only say I use My Fitness Pal and let them discover it themselves. I try to say nothing when people speak woo and derp but...
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
It's not really that uncommon. Some of the smartest people can suffer from "selective skepticism". Woo peddlers can be very convincing with their scientific-sounding big words, and some people who lack knowledge in that specific field will consider them an authority. Now once invested, people like to feel right so the gravitate towards knowledge that confirms their views. An opposing view can be seen as a personal attack and a veiled accusation of ignorance.
Then there is confirmation bias, "traditionalists" who only believe in older scientific knowledge and refuse to consider updated views, people who take certain scientific findings that need more research as facts and base their knowledge on only a handful of sources without looking at the big picture, People who misinterpret findings (or have them misinterpreted for them), The conspiracy theorists who feel empowered by the fact that they are on to "big X" and their schemes, people who gravitate towards the fantastical with wishful thinking, people who have an emotional attachment to certain issues, and the list goes on...
That's why I really don't like to try and dissuade someone from believing a paddler or similar. The issue is more complicated than simply correcting information, and might be too loaded for my liking and I don't need that. None of my business. Even here on the forums. Now if someone ASKS about a certain point of woo and appears to be searching rather than asserting, I'm more than happy to offer my opinion. Otherwise I either offer my personal experience or reply to someone else.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
It's not really that uncommon. Some of the smartest people can suffer from "selective skepticism". Woo peddlers can be very convincing with their scientific-sounding big words, and some people who lack knowledge in that specific field will consider them an authority. Now once invested, people like to feel right so the gravitate towards knowledge that confirms their views. An opposing view can be seen as a personal attack and a veiled accusation of ignorance.
Then there is confirmation bias, "traditionalists" who only believe in older scientific knowledge and refuse to consider updated views, people who take certain scientific findings that need more research as facts and base their knowledge on only a handful of sources without looking at the big picture, People who misinterpret findings (or have them misinterpreted for them), The conspiracy theorists who feel empowered by the fact that they are on to "big X" and their schemes, people who gravitate towards the fantastical with wishful thinking, people who have an emotional attachment to certain issues, and the list goes on...
That's why I really don't like to try and dissuade someone from believing a paddler or similar. The issue is more complicated than simply correcting information, and might be too loaded for my liking and I don't need that. None of my business. Even here on the forums. Now if someone ASKS about a certain point of woo and appears to be searching rather than asserting, I'm more than happy to offer my opinion. Otherwise I either offer my personal experience or reply to someone else.
Oh, I know it's common. That's what my following paragraph addressed. It's just disappointing.0 -
For me me, two things make a major difference in how I react:
- Whether someone is trying to spread woo around to people who don't necessarily have better information, or simply living their woo themselves, and
- Whether the particular woo is IMO truly dangerous, or just unnecessary.
Much more likely to comment/disagree if they're spreading it, or it's dangerous.
That said, I wouldn't use words like "woo" or "derp" in that conversation, typically. It's not the best way to persuade most people. More likely tactics: "I haven't found that to be the case myself, because . . . ." or "However, I've read several solid research studies that indicate . . . .".0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
It's not really that uncommon. Some of the smartest people can suffer from "selective skepticism". Woo peddlers can be very convincing with their scientific-sounding big words, and some people who lack knowledge in that specific field will consider them an authority. Now once invested, people like to feel right so the gravitate towards knowledge that confirms their views. An opposing view can be seen as a personal attack and a veiled accusation of ignorance.
Then there is confirmation bias, "traditionalists" who only believe in older scientific knowledge and refuse to consider updated views, people who take certain scientific findings that need more research as facts and base their knowledge on only a handful of sources without looking at the big picture, People who misinterpret findings (or have them misinterpreted for them), The conspiracy theorists who feel empowered by the fact that they are on to "big X" and their schemes, people who gravitate towards the fantastical with wishful thinking, people who have an emotional attachment to certain issues, and the list goes on...
That's why I really don't like to try and dissuade someone from believing a paddler or similar. The issue is more complicated than simply correcting information, and might be too loaded for my liking and I don't need that. None of my business. Even here on the forums. Now if someone ASKS about a certain point of woo and appears to be searching rather than asserting, I'm more than happy to offer my opinion. Otherwise I either offer my personal experience or reply to someone else.
Indeed, intelligence is no predictor of skepticism or acceptance of scientific consensus. In many cases it even insulates against it as someone who is intelligent will convince themselves they're right because their intelligence will allow them to overcome someone else's evidence for the correct view, and reconfirm their view to one's self.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
I agree that there are areas where standards can (and should) be applied. But it is also important to recognize that those standards cannot be applied to all areas, and rather than expecting the person to rethink their position to adhere to the standards, perhaps one needs to rethink whether or not the standards they are expecting are unrealistic for a given situation.
This is why I don't let myself get frustrated by someone sharing information that may be incorrect. They aren't the one with the problem, I'm the one who is expecting my standards to be viewed as the accepted standards for the situation and all participants, and expecting them to intrinsically know that, which is unrealistic. That doesn't mean I can't attempt to elevate the conversation and level of understanding, but I need to do it in a way that doesn't alienate the other participants or make them feel self-conscious about their level of education or understanding of the topic. I feel like calling things "derp" and "woo" gets in the way of that goal.0 -
tomatosoup3 wrote: »Also just to add "woo" and "derp" are describing the concept not the person who uses them
Similar to child development one describes the action and not the child ..how can that be offensive?
Woo and derp are adjectives that cannot be ascribed to people. One wouldn't say "you are woo" or "you are so derp" so taking offence at the use of the word as a concept descriptor is in my opinion grammatically and actually inappropriate
Just wanted to point out that you seem to be very seriously discussing proper grammar usage concerning the pseudo-words "woo" and "derp".
As an english teacher, I find that very entertaining!
I derp
You derp
He derps
She derps
They derp
We derp
0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
It's not really that uncommon. Some of the smartest people can suffer from "selective skepticism". Woo peddlers can be very convincing with their scientific-sounding big words, and some people who lack knowledge in that specific field will consider them an authority. Now once invested, people like to feel right so the gravitate towards knowledge that confirms their views. An opposing view can be seen as a personal attack and a veiled accusation of ignorance.
Then there is confirmation bias, "traditionalists" who only believe in older scientific knowledge and refuse to consider updated views, people who take certain scientific findings that need more research as facts and base their knowledge on only a handful of sources without looking at the big picture, People who misinterpret findings (or have them misinterpreted for them), The conspiracy theorists who feel empowered by the fact that they are on to "big X" and their schemes, people who gravitate towards the fantastical with wishful thinking, people who have an emotional attachment to certain issues, and the list goes on...
That's why I really don't like to try and dissuade someone from believing a paddler or similar. The issue is more complicated than simply correcting information, and might be too loaded for my liking and I don't need that. None of my business. Even here on the forums. Now if someone ASKS about a certain point of woo and appears to be searching rather than asserting, I'm more than happy to offer my opinion. Otherwise I either offer my personal experience or reply to someone else.
Indeed, intelligence is no predictor of skepticism or acceptance of scientific consensus. In many cases it even insulates against it as someone who is intelligent will convince themselves they're right because their intelligence will allow them to overcome someone else's evidence for the correct view, and reconfirm their view to one's self.
Right: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n10/full/nclimate1547.html
It's depressing, though, for reasons well beyond MFP and internet arguments.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The world would be a better place if people would thoroughly research their claims from reputable information before they go handing it out to others.
Or just think about whether they have a reason to believe something is factual or not and be more careful in how you present it. I'm always amazed at how certain people act about things that they can't possibly have a good basis to believe is true.
But then it's more and more clear that people just believe what they want to believe and think others like them believe and seek out media that merely confirms their own beliefs, in all areas of life. I think this is a really negative trend for our society, so I like the idea that in some areas, at least, standards can be applied.
I agree that there are areas where standards can (and should) be applied. But it is also important to recognize that those standards cannot be applied to all areas, and rather than expecting the person to rethink their position to adhere to the standards, perhaps one needs to rethink whether or not the standards they are expecting are unrealistic for a given situation.
Of course. I do not think the standards I am referring to are.This is why I don't let myself get frustrated by someone sharing information that may be incorrect.
I don't get frustrated either, and as noted in social interactions often just ignore it, depending on the context and who the person is and how important I think it is to speak to the inaccuracy (re diet, usually it's not).
In other contexts, however, and I think MFP is one, I do believe it is important for accurate information to be presented and for inaccurate information to be rebutted. Indeed, I think it is irresponsible to allow inaccurate information to go unrebutted in some cases.They aren't the one with the problem, I'm the one who is expecting my standards to be viewed as the accepted standards for the situation and all participants, and expecting them to intrinsically know that, which is unrealistic.
Um, okay? I don't know what standards you are imagining that I apply or in what context, so maybe we need more specificity.That doesn't mean I can't attempt to elevate the conversation and level of understanding, but I need to do it in a way that doesn't alienate the other participants or make them feel self-conscious about their level of education or understanding of the topic. I feel like calling things "derp" and "woo" gets in the way of that goal.
I don't agree with the final sentence, as stated above, but I also don't think I use the terms "derp" or "woo" in such conversations. Perhaps I have forgotten about some example. Therefore, not sure why the lecture.
Also, belief in derp or woo is rarely about education level. I live and work among quite highly educated people, for the most part, and that's the group that LOVES a lot of the derpiest things (and I admit to such tendencies myself). For example, I have joked about the frozen yogurt place near me that has signs celebrating every trendy food thing and I expect such things are way more popular among people in this cohort.
I do think that a social stigma tends to change opinion more than actual facts, so that an atmosphere where claims based on woo and derp (note, I am using this in a general discussion of the concept, not referring to a particular claim beloved by someone here) tend to result in negative (if nice) reactions and be generally not respected as good information might do more to help people focus on better sources and information. I see zero benefit in pretending like bad, false information is instead good information, or just one truth of many. I also see zero benefit in not trying to encourage communication here to be better by pointing out when terms used are not clear and people are talking past each other. Again, I think I do this nicely -- and I also do come from a world where people can debate even more sensitive topics than diet and not take it personally -- but you have a right to disagree, of course.
I get the sense that to some expressing any disagreement or correcting inaccuracies or asking questions is seen as mean or improper, and I find that extremely puzzling and, really, an enemy of the idea that free discussion is a good way to get at the truth (which I still idealistically believe in, silly me).0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I get the sense that to some expressing any disagreement or correcting inaccuracies or asking questions is seen as mean or improper, and I find that extremely puzzling and, really, an enemy of the idea that free discussion is a good way to get at the truth (which I still idealistically believe in, silly me).
I have a feeling that some people view any form of disagreement, no matter how it's presented or the actual importance of the topic, as an affront to them and their beliefs even if you tell them that blue isn't the best colour, (which it is; of course) or that Pluto isn't a planet. I remember one of my friends dating a woman for a short time who was constantly complaining about us not "affirming her" at the slightest bit of disagreement, which was extremely annoying. I once told her that neither I, nor life in general, where there to affirm her and she would just have to get used to the fact. I enjoyed the silent treatment to be honest.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I get the sense that to some expressing any disagreement or correcting inaccuracies or asking questions is seen as mean or improper, and I find that extremely puzzling and, really, an enemy of the idea that free discussion is a good way to get at the truth (which I still idealistically believe in, silly me).
I couldn't possibly agree more. On a site that purports as it's purpose to help people meet their health and fitness goals, this has always baffled me.
Contrary to popular belief, some ideas are really just plain stupid. And while I will never call another person on this site stupid, pointing out that stupid ideas are stupid (or derp, or woo, or whatever terminology you prefer) should be encouraged, not shamed.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 959 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions