Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
If it's all CICO - why can't you outrun a bad diet?
Options
Replies
-
Wickedfaery73 wrote: »3000 calories would be approximatly 6.5 McDoubles
Urg!
LOL - heck I could eat 3 of those tiny things at once0 -
For me, CI<CO comes down to this ...
I will consume fewer calories than what I burn in a day. However, how I go about accomplishing that may vary.
During the week, for example, I don't exercise a whole lot, so therefore I eat less. On the weekends, I exercise a lot more, so I eat more. This means that during the week, I might stick to a lot of veggies and lower calorie things ... but on the weekend I might have pizza, fish and chips, or something higher calorie (Interestingly, as an aside, now that I think about it, it has been ages ... almost a year ... since I've had a hamburger. For some reason they don't appeal.)
And that approach has helped me stick with it because I've got variety and flexibility.
Even when my my mileage is crazy I still need to track. One year, during the five months I trained for a 12 hour race, I gained about 7 pounds. It wasn't enough for me to notice until I under-performed during the race (187 miles).0 -
Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximatly 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)1 -
McDoubles have been brought up in this discussion on burgers, and I think that's probably what a lot of people think of first. What you described as a cheeseburger is not even close nutritionally to a McDouble.jmbmilholland wrote: »Why are cheeseburgers always the bad guys? Lean ground beef to help hit the protein macro, whole grain bread or ezekiel bread, jack cheese, avocados or guac, a lot of lettuce and tomatoes and onions, some salsa...dang it. Now I'm hungry.
0 -
jmbmilholland wrote: »Why are cheeseburgers always the bad guys? Lean ground beef to help hit the protein macro, whole grain bread or ezekiel bread, jack cheese, avocados or guac, a lot of lettuce and tomatoes and onions, some salsa...dang it. Now I'm hungry.
Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Even a McDouble has a good macro breakdown.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least
) I could eat 3 at a time
1 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
McDoubles have been brought up in this discussion on burgers, and I think that's probably what a lot of people think of first. What you described as a cheeseburger is not even close nutritionally to a McDouble.jmbmilholland wrote: »Why are cheeseburgers always the bad guys? Lean ground beef to help hit the protein macro, whole grain bread or ezekiel bread, jack cheese, avocados or guac, a lot of lettuce and tomatoes and onions, some salsa...dang it. Now I'm hungry.
Why on earth would you assume that most people think of a McDouble? Cheeseburgers are not some obscure food that most only run into in a fast food restaurant, let alone a McD's (let alone a specific type of McD's burger). Making a cheeseburger at home cannot be an unusual happening, eating cheeseburgers at a cookout, so on.2 -
"You can't outrun a bad diet." - This fails because it is a simple answer to a complex set of circumstances that cannot be boiled down into such a simple answer. It is a terrible saying because it fails to define the terms used; it fails to acknowledge the complexity of physiological differences; and it ignores the possibility of individual differences for appetite, satiety, and many other things.
It is just not that simplistic.2 -
Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
Appetite and hunger are individual differences, which are ignored by such a simple statement.
Personally, I've never actually eaten more than 4 McDoubles at a single time, but I'm sure I could have had more if I didn't have anything else along with it.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
My comments were to be funny more than anything and demonstrate how easy it is to eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers. I just used McD because it just seems to me to be the most recognizable reference point
My family did this quite often actually. If I didnt feel like cooking, no one else will cook, so it would be off to whichever fast food burger place and getting 2 of the value menu cheeseburgers. Sometimes twice in a day.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
Appetite and hunger are individual differences, which are ignored by such a simple statement.
Personally, I've never actually eaten more than 4 McDoubles at a single time, but I'm sure I could have had more if I didn't have anything else along with it.
Well, my original statement was that I doubted *I* could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers (in what was originally posed as a meal immediately after a huge workout). I didn't say no one could. (I also could manage to eat 3000 calories in a day, I'm sure, although I don't think that's the calorie count I'd hit just by including a cheeseburger.)
The question, though, is whether these extreme scenarios justify the claim that "no one can outrun a bad diet." Let's not forget this all important point! ;-)
I also am trying to find the highest cal widely-available cheeseburger and am failing. Here are a couple that are 1350.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/double-down-by-numbers-unhealthiest/0 -
Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
My comments were to be funny more than anything and demonstrate how easy it is to eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers. I just used McD because it just seems to me to be the most recognizable reference point
And mine were meant to counter the idea that if you just went and had a cheeseburger after a huge workout you'd eat 3000 calories. That seemed like a crazy-high calorie assumption and to be misunderstanding the normal calorie count of a cheeseburger.
Your response that you could if you ordered 6.5! of them seemed to be confirming what I said, but thanks for elaborating, I get your point now, even if I still disagree for me.0 -
Had a situation where I had my first McDonalds quarter pounder in about 2 years. Don't know how they can call that a bugger, tastes like *kitten*.1
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
Appetite and hunger are individual differences, which are ignored by such a simple statement.
Personally, I've never actually eaten more than 4 McDoubles at a single time, but I'm sure I could have had more if I didn't have anything else along with it.
Well, my original statement was that I doubted *I* could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers (in what was originally posed as a meal immediately after a huge workout). I didn't say no one could. (I also could manage to eat 3000 calories in a day, I'm sure, although I don't think that's the calorie count I'd hit just by including a cheeseburger.)
The question, though, is whether these extreme scenarios justify the claim that "no one can outrun a bad diet." Let's not forget this all important point! ;-)
I also am trying to find the highest cal widely-available cheeseburger and am failing. Here are a couple that are 1350.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/double-down-by-numbers-unhealthiest/
You see 3K calories a day as extreme, and I don't think that is even close to extreme. Tell me 30K is extreme and I can agree as it is something I can't do every single day... only once in awhile. Again, the original statement we are debating completely ignores individual differences.
ETA: This made me hungry for McDouble's, so for lunch, I just got 2 Mcdouble's with no buns (I'm eating low carb). I'm still just as hungry as before I ate them, but if I had gotten 4 instead of 2, I would only have 22 calories left for dinner tonight.0 -
I just did a Google search for "cheeseburger" and McDonald's comes up in numerous results on the first page (web pages and images). I would venture to say that the average person eating a cheeseburger is probably not making it, but rather getting it from a fast flood restaurant.lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
McDoubles have been brought up in this discussion on burgers, and I think that's probably what a lot of people think of first. What you described as a cheeseburger is not even close nutritionally to a McDouble.jmbmilholland wrote: »Why are cheeseburgers always the bad guys? Lean ground beef to help hit the protein macro, whole grain bread or ezekiel bread, jack cheese, avocados or guac, a lot of lettuce and tomatoes and onions, some salsa...dang it. Now I'm hungry.
Why on earth would you assume that most people think of a McDouble? Cheeseburgers are not some obscure food that most only run into in a fast food restaurant, let alone a McD's (let alone a specific type of McD's burger). Making a cheeseburger at home cannot be an unusual happening, eating cheeseburgers at a cookout, so on.
2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Wickedfaery73 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I don't think I could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers, so there's that.
In my teens and early 20s, I could outrun a bad diet, in the sense that I never thought about what I ate and yet did not gain weight.
By my 30s, I could not do that -- I needed to at least be a little mindful, even at my most active.Also, might I suggest we next debate "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" or possibly "a stitch in time saves 9."
Heh, this.
3000 calories would be approximately 6.5 McDoubles
So you are agreeing with me? ;-)
I don't know I bet you probably could, physically at least, eat 6.5 Mcdoubles in a day. LOL They are tiny little things ( to me at least ) I could eat 3 at a time
I dislike McD's burgers, so I doubt it. Don't know about the McDouble as I don't think it existed yet last time I was at a McD's, but research demonstrates that it is .75 the size of a Quarter Pounder (which I can't imagine eating more than one of at a time), so I doubt I could without making a real effort and feeling sick and overstuffed, even over the course of a day. And, of course, that contradicts the idea that people would just consume these calories quickly and without thinking (as with the "it would take me 4 hours to burn off 3000 calories and then I'd eat that back with a cheeseburger" claim I was responding too).
I seriously doubt that thoughtless eating plus a cheeseburger would result in me normally eating anywhere near 3000 calories in a day, and I'd never think to order multiple cheeseburgers. I just don't know why people hypothesize such odd and unusual behavior in these discussions.
Most people gain weight relatively gradually over time, after all.
Appetite and hunger are individual differences, which are ignored by such a simple statement.
Personally, I've never actually eaten more than 4 McDoubles at a single time, but I'm sure I could have had more if I didn't have anything else along with it.
Well, my original statement was that I doubted *I* could eat 3000 calories in cheeseburgers (in what was originally posed as a meal immediately after a huge workout). I didn't say no one could. (I also could manage to eat 3000 calories in a day, I'm sure, although I don't think that's the calorie count I'd hit just by including a cheeseburger.)
The question, though, is whether these extreme scenarios justify the claim that "no one can outrun a bad diet." Let's not forget this all important point! ;-)
I also am trying to find the highest cal widely-available cheeseburger and am failing. Here are a couple that are 1350.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/double-down-by-numbers-unhealthiest/
You see 3K calories a day as extreme, and I don't think that is even close to extreme. Tell me 30K is extreme and I can agree as it is something I can't do every single day... only once in awhile. Again, the original statement we are debating completely ignores individual differences.
I made no claims about anyone but me in my initial statement. (I was gently taking issue with the idea that if someone went and had a cheeseburger after a workout that the calorie count would be 3000.)
I don't think 3000 calories a day is inherently extreme--some people need that much to maintain.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I would venture to say that the average person eating a cheeseburger is probably not making it, but rather getting it from a fast flood restaurant.
Wow, seriously? I would venture to guess most people grill outside all summer, and make their own cheeseburgers quite often....
4 -
I made no claims about anyone but me in my initial statement. (I was gently taking issue with the idea that if someone went and had a cheeseburger after a workout that the calorie count would be 3000.)
I don't think 3000 calories a day is inherently extreme--some people need that much to maintain.[/quote]
Yea, 3000 for one burger would be extreme I would think.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »If you are looking for debate, you may want to post this in the debate section.
I've never really understood that saying personally, but to answer your question I think you'd have to first define what is meant by a bad diet. Are we talking about a diet that creates a caloric excess, or a diet that is nutritionally deficient?
I meant a diet that is nutritionally bad - if I eat 2,000 calories worth of cheeseburger a day (I don't!) and burn 3,000 calories in a day with exercise - surely that's outrunning a bad diet?
You actually can out run a bad diet. That is a little quip with no basis in fact. In your example, you would be losing two lbs a week.
My diet currently is nowhere near 'healthy' or 'clean'. But my calculations are good and I make sure my activity is high enough so I net a 1 lb loss every week. 8 weeks in 10 lbs down. While I can't run right now due to an ankle injury I am in fact 'out cardioing' a 'bad' diet.
that's where the confusion comes in...imo it's not talking about the value of the nutrients in the food you are eating it's the amount of calories you are consuming.Put your headphones on and start your running app. Run until it says "you have burned 1000 calories", for me between 7 and 8 miles. Now go straight to McDonalds and eat a big mac & fries. Tell me which one takes longer to do, there you will find the answer.
But you're not going to keep eating big macs and fries as soon as you've finished one ... you probably won't want to eat anything for a couple hours. So it balances out.
I go for long bicycle rides on the weekends ... then I come home and eat a Dominos pizza. And I've still burned more calories than I've consumed. That pizza is just replenishing things.
(BTW - I lost 55 lbs during 2015 doing that ^^ )
you are missing the point tho...how many people do 24hour bike trials?
Most people eat too much food for the activity they do but feel if they "have a killer session at the gym" then they can eat all the foods and they can't...why because in fact the maybe burned 500 calories and are consuming 1000 and that's puts them over maintenance.
The long rides I'm referring to in the post above aren't 24-hour rides. I used to do 24-hour rides a number of years ago and I'm building up to that again (I hope), but for right now, a long ride might be a little 100 km (5-6 hour) jaunt. Enough for a pizza.
And yes, you do have to be realistically aware of what you're burning and what you're consuming.
I've been counting calories since the mid-1980s ... used to be, I counted to get my calorie count up enough to fuel what I was doing. Last year I counted to lose some weight I put on when *life* stepped in and I couldn't exercise as much as I wanted. This year, I'm counting to maintain, in light of my gradually increasing exercise load.
you made the point the statement is making then...
you counted to lose weight as you couldn't exercise as much as you wanted but you continued to eat like you were and gained weight...you still exercised but gained.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions