For Some of Us there ARE Bad Foods

RobD520

I have been using MFP for some time, but have only recently started visiting this board. I find myself surprised at the number of people who say such things as "there are no bad foods" or "you can eat whatever you want" when they no nothing of the individual circumstances of the poster.

We know that people respond differently to medicines; we know that they respond differently to alcohol. Yet people seem to assume that whatever works for them apply to everyone else.

I find that most of the "itos" food group are bad foods for me. Consider the following situation:

I typically save calories so that if I get hungry in the evening, there is room for a snack. So lets assume I am going to "spend" 160 calories.

My choices:

A. Eat 1/4 cup of nuts B. 160 calories of raw veggies with hummus or C. 160 calories of Cheetos

If I were to select A or B, I would end up more full the whole evening, and I would experiences no strong urges to eat the entire pantry. If I were to select C., I would be REALLY hungry 15 minutes later and would have to fight back INTENSE cravings to eat more.

Now my willpower is usually very good; but even if it holds up, I am starving all night. However, if I have had a really bad day or am otherwise exhausted and feeling stressed, I may be vulnerable to succumbing.

Success for me means eliminating "itos". I have gone as long as 6-7 years without touching these foods, and my weight fluctuations are within about a 15-20 pound band. This band is much larger when I eat these kind of foods.

I understand that this does not apply to everyone. But I think we need to be careful about telling people they can succeed while eating everything they like to eat, because there are people for whom this generalization is simply not true.

jemhh

I think that people need to use their own experiences and common sense when deciding how to allocate their calories. Eat in a certain way. Gather the data as to whether or not it works well for you. Tweak your methods accordingly.

MommyL2015

That's fine. Everyone has foods that they probably generally don't eat much of just because of the calorie count. I don't eat much Chinese takeout anymore, simply because one dish would be enough calories for me for more than two days. But I still eat it, just not nearly as often as I used to. I certainly don't tell people they should never eat Chinese takeout, though, or that it's "bad." (It's delicious.)

Besides, you are giving your specific circumstance, which does not apply to everyone, just you. So, no, there are no single bad foods that everyone should stay away from.

Exceptions would be obvious ones like allergies or if you don't like it or if it's spoiled, things like that.

ETA: And things that end in 'itos' are also delicious, and something I still eat probably once a week.

For a lot of folks, especially folks named MommyL2015, elimination does not work and is why I failed so miserably in the past at trying to lose weight.

ilex70

I hear what you are saying, but that really isn't about the food being bad as much as about it being poor for satiety.

Some foods (your nuts or veggies and hummus) are more satiating than others.

That doesn't mean that you can never eat the less satiating food. Just that you need to account for that effect if you choose to eat it.

So maybe you exercise more to burn an extra 160 calories and then you can have both - the satiating snack and the less satiating snack.

Then there is ability to moderate. I think many of us have foods that we can eat in moderation and then other that we tend to overeat and so are better off avoiding.

glassyo

I think the people who have been around here a long time are pretty good about adding all the caveats like "for medical reasons". It's really up to the person seeking help to mention any special circumstances.

Also, personally, if I ate the 160 calories worth of veggies and hummus, I'd still end up sneaking a cheeto or two if that's what I wanted in the first place.

TeaBea

Okay - here's my 2 cents.

I've lost weight & re-gained, so this time it's lifestyle changes only. If I never eat these so-called "bad" foods while I'm losing weight, then I really don't have a clue portion control wise, when I get to goal.

Anything with sugar in it takes management for me. I'm not going (added) sugar free forever. But I realize, I may need to log forever.

If you plan to eliminate eating Cheetos for the REST OF YOUR LIFE, then good for you. But there are lunch sized bags.....that may help you.

It's easier to eat well when dieting, because you can tell yourself it's just temporary. When we get to goal we relax. Knowing the calories and the tiny portion sizes, of "bad" foods makes it harder to lie to myself.

concordancia

There is a big difference between eliminating certain foods and choosing to have them occasionally.

If Cheetos don't help as an evening snack, they could sometimes be incorporated as part of a meal, instead.

You can have what you want, just not in unlimited quantities every time you want it.

ClosetBayesian

Cheetos or other chips are still not "bad foods", even for you. They are foods which you don't have a lot of self-control around. Some people have specific foods for which they have trouble controlling portion sizes, or which go so far as to trigger binges, but that does not make the food inherently bad, even for that person. The issue is not the food.

MommyMeggo

RobD520 wrote: »

I have been using MFP for some time, but have only recently started visiting this board. I find myself surprised at the number of people who say such things as "there are no bad foods" or "you can eat whatever you want" when they no nothing of the individual circumstances of the poster.

We know that people respond differently to medicines; we know that they respond differently to alcohol. Yet people seem to assume that whatever works for them apply to everyone else.

I find that most of the "itos" food group are bad foods for me. Consider the following situation:

I typically save calories so that if I get hungry in the evening, there is room for a snack. So lets assume I am going to "spend" 160 calories.

My choices:

A. Eat 1/4 cup of nuts B. 160 calories of raw veggies with hummus or C. 160 calories of Chitos

If I were to select A or B, I would end up more full the whole evening, and I would experiences no strong urges to eat the entire pantry. If I were to select C., I would be REALLY hungry 15 minutes later and would have to fight back INTENSE cravings to eat more.

Now my willpower is usually very good; but even if it holds up, I am starving all night. However, if I have had a really bad day or am otherwise exhausted and feeling stressed, I may be vulnerable to succumbing.

Success for me means eliminating "itos". I have gone as long as 6-7 years without touching these foods, and my weight fluctuations are within about a 15-20 pound band. This band is much larger when I eat these kind of foods.

I understand that this does not apply to everyone. But I think we need to be careful about telling people they can succeed while eating everything they like to eat, because there are people for whom this generalization is simply not true.

Blanket labeling foods as "bad" is what the push back is about.
Those with underlying medical conditions- yes- there are some foods that are bad for them, but they are not bad foods.
Your 'itos arent a "bad food"...they are bad for you- from what I can tell by your post is due to lack of self control and eating in moderation.

Self control, moderation and portion control have nothing to do with food being good or bad, but the individual. This is true for the majority of MFP users at one time or another.

You CAN succeed eating what you want. You just have to learn to eat less of it if it puts you over your calorie goal. That burden is on the person, not the MFP Community.

Alyssa_Is_LosingIt

I find that eating my Cheetos as a tasty side to my sandwich for lunch is best for me. I wouldn't eat them on their own as a snack because those alone would not fill me up, and I like for my snacks to be substantial.

stevencloser

The purpose of a 160 kcal snack isn't to make you full like a meal so I don't see how it not doing that is somehow making it "bad".

snowflake930

You know yourself better than anyone else.
If you do not have the self control to limit certain foods the simple solution for you is to not buy, or eat them.

However, many people can eat anything in moderation and stay within their calorie allotment. Moderation is key for losing and maintaining weight loss.

As with all things related to this, do what works for you and will help you achieve and maintain your goals.

sherbear702

Did you mean Cheetos? That doesn't end in itos, but Doritos does and those are delicious.

I suppose you could consider a food bad if you eat it and go into anaphylactic shock or something, break out in hives maybe...that's bad. But deeming a food bad because you don't have self control doesn't make the food bad. It's just not nutritionally valuable.

Lovee_Dove7

jemhh wrote: »

I think that people need to use their own experiences and common sense when deciding how to allocate their calories. Eat in a certain way. Gather the data as to whether or not it works well for you. Tweak your methods accordingly.

QFT

kissedbythesunshine

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

Cheetos or other chips are still not "bad foods", even for you. They are foods which you don't have a lot of self-control around. Some people have specific foods for which they have trouble controlling portion sizes, or which go so far as to trigger binges, but that does not make the food inherently bad, even for that person. The issue is not the food.

I agree with this 100%. I personally have foods that I can not eat because they will cause me to overeat. Cracker Jacks are one. Granola bars with the nuts in them are another. Yes these are bad foods but only because I have no self control. They are not bad in and of themselves.

LBuehrle8

People need to do what works for them. Personally for me, cutting out foods that I love for the rest of my life just isn't going to happen- even if I worked really hard at it and did for a while I'd be miserable! It's not sustainable. So now I find ways to fit those foods that may have less nutritional value and a higher calorie content into my day. I've lost 12 lbs this way.

And for me, raw veggies and hummus would leave me a lot more hungry than Cheetos. Everyone is different.

tincanonastring

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

Cheetos or other chips are still not "bad foods", even for you. They are foods which you don't have a lot of self-control around. Some people have specific foods for which they have trouble controlling portion sizes, or which go so far as to trigger binges, but that does not make the food inherently bad, even for that person. The issue is not the food.

An emphatic +1 to the bolded.

cross2bear

"Bad" (or "good") is a value that each person assigns to things in their lives. Bad or good is not an intrinsic part of whatever it is. Each persons assessment of the value of anything is entirely subjective.

I do not think any food is "bad". However, as has been previously noted, around certain foods, I can behave inappropriately, and so try to avoid those food. The problem is with me, not the food.

Healthy4me4ever

@RobD520 I agree with you for some individuals cutting out certain foods is better for you than trying to reduce your consumption of those certain foods. For me it's foods high in added sugar, if I could limit my consumption I wouldn't be here in the first place. I have currently eliminated these foods from my diet and am finding my 1200 calorie limit very satisfying.

Yes it might be about willpower, self control and portion control if I felt I needed to eat these foods, but for me it's far easier not to eat the food at all. I hope to do this until I hit target, after that we'll see what happens but I will keep logging calories when I'm maintaining as if I do reintroduce foods it'll help me not to overdo it like before.

dubird

I always qualify it as "as long as you don't have a medical condition". I know there are medical conditions that will prevent or limit what a person can eat. We say 'you can eat what you want' because calories are calories, no matter the source.

However, what comes with the calories matters too. What you're talking about is satiety, ie. feeling full. Finding foods that help you stay full so you're not getting hungry between meals is important, but those foods are different for everyone. GENERALLY, fiber and/or protein are what keep people feeling full, but I'm sure there are people for whom that's not true.

The point we try to make is that you shouldn't label food as 'bad' food because there is no 'bad' food, only excess. Sugar didn't make someone fat, however too much sugar can. Carbs don't make a person fat, however, too much carbs can. This entire process is really one of discovery. You have to find a diet and eating plan that works FOR YOU, and that'll be different than other people's. But don't automatically toss out any foods just because some people say they're 'bad'. Learn and adjust, that's the biggest thing someone has to get the hang of to make this process stick, and part of that is seeing how you see food. Does that make sense?

cwolfman13

I think people are capable of determining what is and isn't going to work for them...telling people that there aren't any inherently bad foods, only inherently bad diets has nothing to do with that.