For Some of Us there ARE Bad Foods
Options
Replies
-
snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »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.
It's pretty trendy right now to pretend what we eat doesn't matter. I honestly think food industry advertising and sponsorship plays a big part of this belief. We were a lot thinner when we all knew the right and wrong way to eat.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing what works instead of faffing about with an everything in moderation mentality.
Can you see the difference between saying there is no singular food that is inherently "bad" (whatever you mean by that) and thinking what you're eating (i.e. your overall diet) doesn't matter?0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Not hostile, just trying to point out what a ridiculous argument that is.
The reason why I and many others on these boards try to dispel the "bad foods" argument is because it is the diet as a whole that is important. For example, you probably think of broccoli as a "good food". However, if I've only got a couple hundred calories left and I'm short on protein for the day, then steaming some broccoli and eating it is not going to be very beneficial to me in the context of my diet for the rest of that day. Likewise, if I've met my protein requirements and ate my veggies, but have some calories leftover and am short on carbs and fats, then something like Oreos would really not be a bad choice when looking at what I ate that day.
What? Context matters? Pffff. Silly goose. Everyone knows if you ever eat an oreo you'll immediately and irreversably become sicker.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Not hostile, just trying to point out what a ridiculous argument that is.
The reason why I and many others on these boards try to dispel the "bad foods" argument is because it is the diet as a whole that is important. For example, you probably think of broccoli as a "good food". However, if I've only got a couple hundred calories left and I'm short on protein for the day, then steaming some broccoli and eating it is not going to be very beneficial to me in the context of my diet for the rest of that day. Likewise, if I've met my protein requirements and ate my veggies, but have some calories leftover and am short on carbs and fats, then something like Oreos would really not be a bad choice when looking at what I ate that day.
What? Context matters? Pffff. Silly goose. Everyone knows if you ever eat an oreo you'll immediately and irreversably become sicker.
You're right.
Oreos are Teh Debil.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?
Of course not, but getting the excess weight off is a lot healthier than being overweight.
But, there are a lot of new people here, and they buy into some of this misinformation. I did myself when I began. The first two months here (3/2012 through 5/2012) I listened to this kind of information. Then, I read a post here that said all food in moderation. It was like an epiphany to me. An aha moment. I went on to lose over 1/2 of my current body weight and have kept if off for over 2 years.
You can do what is right for you. You can not, however, know what is right for anyone else. It is up to each individual and his/her health care professional.
I am not condoning a diet of Cheetos, just saying, fit it in to your calorie allotment, and enjoy your life a little.
0 -
Unless you have a health issue with ingredients in certain foods, there really isn't "bad food". It more likely BAD HABITUAL BEHAVIOR that's the issue.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.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
snowflake930 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?
Of course not, but getting the excess weight off is a lot healthier than being overweight.
But, there are a lot of new people here, and they buy into some of this misinformation. I did myself when I began. The first two months here (3/2012 through 5/2012) I listened to this kind of information. Then, I read a post here that said all food in moderation. It was like an epiphany to me. An aha moment. I went on to lose over 1/2 of my current body weight and have kept if off for over 2 years.
You can do what is right for you. You can not, however, know what is right for anyone else. It is up to each individual and his/her health care professional.
I am not condoning a diet of Cheetos, just saying, fit it in to your calorie allotment, and enjoy your life a little.
I wouldn't argue with any of that, and it doesn't seem opposite from what the OP said. But I don't see any of that as a reason I shouldn't call Cheetos bad food.
I'm not telling anyone else to call any food bad. I just wish others would stop telling me I shouldn't. I've been calling them bad for several decades while enjoying my life quite a lot.0 -
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »
It's pretty trendy right now to pretend what we eat doesn't matter. I honestly think food industry advertising and sponsorship plays a big part of this belief. We were a lot thinner when we all knew the right and wrong way to eat.
No we were thinner when we ate less (ers.usda.gov/publications/FoodReview/DEC2002/frvol25i3a.pdf) and moved more.
0 -
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.
that is your CHOICE, its not a medical necessity to lose weight.
i had cheetos the other day.
they were good.
i also drnk on the weekends.
thats REALLY good.
I've lost 84 pounds total.
all eating everything in moderation.........0 -
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?
Of course not, but getting the excess weight off is a lot healthier than being overweight.
But, there are a lot of new people here, and they buy into some of this misinformation. I did myself when I began. The first two months here (3/2012 through 5/2012) I listened to this kind of information. Then, I read a post here that said all food in moderation. It was like an epiphany to me. An aha moment. I went on to lose over 1/2 of my current body weight and have kept if off for over 2 years.
You can do what is right for you. You can not, however, know what is right for anyone else. It is up to each individual and his/her health care professional.
I am not condoning a diet of Cheetos, just saying, fit it in to your calorie allotment, and enjoy your life a little.
I wouldn't argue with any of that, and it doesn't seem opposite from what the OP said. But I don't see any of that as a reason I shouldn't call Cheetos bad food.
I'm not telling anyone else to call any food bad. I just wish others would stop telling me I shouldn't. I've been calling them bad for several decades while enjoying my life quite a lot.
And as has been pointed out time and again on these threads. Most people don't care if you consider Cheetos bad within your own personal ranking of foods. The issue comes up though, when people try to insist that ALL people label Cheetos bad, or say that you can't lose weight if you eat junk, or you can't be healthy if you eat junk. There are MANY people on here who get too hung up on labeling foods as good vs bad and that can paralyze their progress, or worse, send them into disordered thinking about foods. Even the OP seemed to indicate that he is bothered by people saying there are no bad foods and because Cheetos as a snack at 8pm doesn't fill him up, then no one should ever say they aren't bad. We don't all have to eat the same foods or think of foods in the same way. You don't have to eat Cheetos if they don't fit your criteria of food you want to eat. But that doesn't mean that the rest of us have to change the way we deliver advice or stop eating Cheetos. The Jalapeno ones are quite tasty and go well with my turkey sandwich at lunch time.0 -
BrianSharpe wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »
It's pretty trendy right now to pretend what we eat doesn't matter. I honestly think food industry advertising and sponsorship plays a big part of this belief. We were a lot thinner when we all knew the right and wrong way to eat.
No we were thinner when we ate less (ers.usda.gov/publications/FoodReview/DEC2002/frvol25i3a.pdf) and moved more.
This. I ate like what some people here in this thread would think is "crap" most of my young adult life into my mid '30s. I maintained at around 120-125 pounds. I got fat when I got pregnant with twins and had to quit my job, and my life became very sedentary very quickly and I did not change how much I ate to reflect that. I still eat like "crap" a lot of the time, and have managed to get back down to 123 pounds. All while eating cheetoes, cheesecake and chocolate. The three best "ch" foods. I eat less and move more.0 -
It's only bad because 160 calories of cheetos is just about the saddest thing ever.
Crunchy cheetos are delicious! Puffy cheetos I can say no to all day.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?
Of course not, but getting the excess weight off is a lot healthier than being overweight.
But, there are a lot of new people here, and they buy into some of this misinformation. I did myself when I began. The first two months here (3/2012 through 5/2012) I listened to this kind of information. Then, I read a post here that said all food in moderation. It was like an epiphany to me. An aha moment. I went on to lose over 1/2 of my current body weight and have kept if off for over 2 years.
You can do what is right for you. You can not, however, know what is right for anyone else. It is up to each individual and his/her health care professional.
I am not condoning a diet of Cheetos, just saying, fit it in to your calorie allotment, and enjoy your life a little.
I wouldn't argue with any of that, and it doesn't seem opposite from what the OP said. But I don't see any of that as a reason I shouldn't call Cheetos bad food.
I'm not telling anyone else to call any food bad. I just wish others would stop telling me I shouldn't. I've been calling them bad for several decades while enjoying my life quite a lot.
Perhaps just say it is bad for you and let others make their own determination.
According to the NIH, more than 2 in 3 Americans are considered to be overweight or obese. That is a staggering statistic. To tell people struggling to become a healthier weight that they have to eat, or not eat, certain foods, can be an immense obstacle looming in front of them. However, for many of us, to know we absolutely do not have to give up the foods we love to become a healthier weight, and keep the weight off, and that others have done this and are doing this, is like a light at the end of the tunnel. For many of us, it is hope for success. They may think, she/he did this, maybe I can too.
Just like I bought into the myth that losing weight over 40 is harder. B as in B, S as in S. It is hard at any age, and totally doable if there are no existing health issues.
As with most things involving our health and weight, experiment, find out what works for each of us, and is sustainable for the long term. We are our own best support, and know ourselves better than anyone else.
0 -
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
-I think the moralistic tone about willpower and "bad behavior" is misguided. Many snack foods are engineered to be craved. The makers utilize sophisticated research techniques to find the right combination of salt, sugar, fat, crunch, dissolve rate, so as to reach what flavor researchers refer to as the "bliss point." I think this is as much an attribute of food design as it is an attribute of the eater. But, since everyone is different, I think some are impacted more than others.
This is silly.
By this logic you could argue that I'm engineering the chili recipe that I'm constantly tweeking to reach the "bliss point."
Don't blame a food for your lack of self control because it tastes good.
The purpose of cooking IS to engineer foods to make them taste good. Of course! For that matter, I would expect a food manufacturer to do research to determine what makes their food "crave-able". I do think that one side effect of this is that some foods become much easier to overeat....
The term "bliss point" was coined by the food industry-NOT ME. The process I described is theirs; I didn't make it up.
Are people on this board so hostile because they are hungry all the time?
Nope, hostile because some can eat anything, and have the self control not to overeat, not because food is either "bad" or "good", but some of us found our way to moderation, portion control and not eating more calories than we burn.
In order for this to work long term, that is what has to be done to maintain.
In your opinion is "bad" solely tied to body weight?
Of course not, but getting the excess weight off is a lot healthier than being overweight.
But, there are a lot of new people here, and they buy into some of this misinformation. I did myself when I began. The first two months here (3/2012 through 5/2012) I listened to this kind of information. Then, I read a post here that said all food in moderation. It was like an epiphany to me. An aha moment. I went on to lose over 1/2 of my current body weight and have kept if off for over 2 years.
You can do what is right for you. You can not, however, know what is right for anyone else. It is up to each individual and his/her health care professional.
I am not condoning a diet of Cheetos, just saying, fit it in to your calorie allotment, and enjoy your life a little.
I wouldn't argue with any of that, and it doesn't seem opposite from what the OP said. But I don't see any of that as a reason I shouldn't call Cheetos bad food.
I'm not telling anyone else to call any food bad. I just wish others would stop telling me I shouldn't. I've been calling them bad for several decades while enjoying my life quite a lot.
And as has been pointed out time and again on these threads. Most people don't care if you consider Cheetos bad within your own personal ranking of foods. The issue comes up though, when people try to insist that ALL people label Cheetos bad, or say that you can't lose weight if you eat junk, or you can't be healthy if you eat junk. There are MANY people on here who get too hung up on labeling foods as good vs bad and that can paralyze their progress, or worse, send them into disordered thinking about foods. Even the OP seemed to indicate that he is bothered by people saying there are no bad foods and because Cheetos as a snack at 8pm doesn't fill him up, then no one should ever say they aren't bad. We don't all have to eat the same foods or think of foods in the same way. You don't have to eat Cheetos if they don't fit your criteria of food you want to eat. But that doesn't mean that the rest of us have to change the way we deliver advice or stop eating Cheetos. The Jalapeno ones are quite tasty and go well with my turkey sandwich at lunch time.
Exactly my point in reverse. I have NEVER told anyone to call Cheetos bad food. I have been told numerous times that I shouldn't call them bad food.
And not that is has anything at all to do with my point or the OP but I enjoy and eat Cheetos.0 -
It took me way too long to figure out that "itos" foods are foods that literally end in the letters i-t-o-s (which is funny since cheetos don't).
I bought fritos for the first time in a very long time because I made tortilla soup, and I've ALWAYS had fritos in the bottom of the bowl with shredded cheddar cheese on top. It just wouldn't be the same without them. But, I used to put a handful in the bottom (and a handful of cheese on top). Now, I weigh out exactly half a portion (because I had two bowls of soup), add soup, and then half an ounce of cheese. It worked into my calorie goals. In fact, I contemplated just grabbing some rolls to have on the side, and prelogging, I found the fritos were better for my macros that day (I was short on fat that day).
But, before a week or so ago, I hadn't had fritos in years. Not because they're bad, but I'd rather spend my calories elsewhere.
Do what works for you, but I personally find no reason to label foods "bad".0 -
I'm going to regret tossing my two cents into this discussion with the way this thread is going (especially given some of the players in this thread), but here goes nothing.
I lost the majority of my weight during something that I call The Year of Weddings. Over the course of 6 months I had 4 close friends get married. And that year included a number of showers, bachelorette parties, craft parties, engagement parties, cake tastings, cupcake tastings, and all of the other events that happen every year (birthdays, game days, holidays, etc.).
I was struggling a lot to stick with my plan. And as I got deeper into the diet and my calories started to drop and fatigue started to set in, I was struggling with some serious mental and food issues. I was regularly breaking into tears about the foods I was eating. I cried in a friend's driveway before her bridal shower. I cried in a restaurant with my family because they were out of quinoa burgers. I was also having occasional binges where I felt like I actually had no control over my body. It felt like I was sitting beside myself watching my body gorge itself to the point of pain as some kind of self-harm mechanism. And no matter how loudly I shouted, my body would not stop. It was not a happy time for me.
I was already seeing a therapist for anxiety and depression and I didn't bring any of this up with her at first because I thought it was entirely normal (it's hard to see it when you're in it, sometimes). Dieting is supposed to be about pain, right? You're supposed to be miserable, right? So I suffered.
When I finally did describe it to her what I was describing turned out not to be normal. She made me realize that it wasn't okay and she worked with me to reevaluate why it was happening. I wasn't ready to give up the diet despite her advice (I was open and honest with her about it - I still had quite a bit to lose and I wasn't to the point of being diagnosed with BED or other EDs), but I could not go on as I had been.
Learning to reevaluate the way I looked at foods and take the judgement away was the only thing that allowed me to continue. If I hadn't discovered how to do that (in large part thanks to these boards) I am fairly certain that I would not have reached my goals and probably would have spiraled further out of control.
For me, the idea of good foods and bad foods is damaging to my mental health. For me, it is not something that I can worth with within the framework of a healthy diet (remember, mental health is important too!). For me, I will not allow that idea to work its way into my brain again and start doing more damage.
I don't care what you call your food. But if you say it out loud or you say it on the boards, I will add the opposing view. If I can stop just one other person from going down the same route I went down, all of the stupid arguments the posters here want to have about it will be worth my time.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K 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
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions