Why eat dessert?
Options
Replies
-
I think anyone should eat dessert if that's what they want to do. It's not my business. Personally I don't really like sweet stuff so I rarely eat it but I don't think it's a big deal. One of my friends lives dessert and always orders it when we go out. She eats her dessert and I don't and we're both happy. I wouldn't tell her not to anymore than she would tell me not to order a steak.
I will also add that I have never felt socially pressured to eat sweet stuff. Ever. I have felt pressure to drink (which I like doing but not necessarily as often as some of my friends). But no one has ever invited me to a party where people were guzzling soda and snorting M&M's and I felt like a square for not partaking...3 -
If aunt flow... the most annoying person to visit is... visiting. There is nothing on this earth that could stop be from getting to a donut, cake, cookies, ice cream etc etc ect. I love candy especially chewy like gummy bears. I was also a pastry chef for 6 years soooo yea.1
-
I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.0 -
There's something wrong if you are eating things you don't want just because of social reasons. Most people eat things because they like them, and don't eat things because they don't like them. Learn how to say "no thank you," instead of starting rants about what other people choose to eat.vsauder729 wrote: »Which leads into the one main reason why I still currently eat desserts: social reasons. Almost everyone eats sweets, and they're much more heavily marketed than produce. But, why conform? Conformity may be instinctual, but that doesn't make it advantageous. Besides, vegetarians and vegans choose not to eat something that does, arguably, have nutritional value. So, choosing not to eat a nutritionally devoid food seems to make just as much, if not possibly more sense, from a health standpoint.
1 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
yea i was a pastry chef for 6 years and all day I literally would eat fresh baguettes dipped in butter and salt. Probably my favorite food on the planet.1 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
Oh yeah bread is evil too
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm sometimes jealous of people that prefer sugary foods. I'd take chicken wings over pastries every time. Not because they are savory but because they are savory and high in fat. Fat has twice the calories of sugar.
But fat is twice as filling as sugar! At least!
I mean, I haven't had any issue fitting the savory foods I crave in my days... even a 650 calorie pizza yesterday... but it takes days of planning to be able to fit a 400 calorie piece of pie without going over because I'm so hungry.
I suppose that's true. If only satiety were the only reason I ate. :grumble:
I can seriously put away a lot of chicken wings. I could eat my entire daily calorie allowance in roasted brussel sprouts dripping with olive oil (no joke).
I see what you mean, obviously we're here because we eat too much... stuff. Whatever it is.
I'm just saying that it's easier to stick to your calories if you eat 500 calories of chicken wings than 500 calories of chocolate, as it will be more filling and you won't run the risk of having a blood sugar drop (which happens to me too much), which will force you to eat even more.1 -
I've never been a dessert eater. In my family, we usually only had dessert after a holiday meal, like Thanksgiving or Christmas.
I was hospitalized for about 6 weeks about 2 years ago, and every meal except breakfast had a dessert of some sort. When I got out of the hospital I craved sweets really bad. It was a good thing I was housebound for a few weeks so I couldn't go out and get sweets. I got over the cravings after that few weeks of eating my normal way again.
I find that I don't want the extra calories. I usually eat about 400 - 500 calories per meal, so a 300 calorie dessert would put me way over on calories. If I know I'm going to eat a dessert at a friend's house, I eat much smaller portions of the main meal to make up for the extra dessert calories.0 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
Oh yeah bread is evil tooNeed2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm sometimes jealous of people that prefer sugary foods. I'd take chicken wings over pastries every time. Not because they are savory but because they are savory and high in fat. Fat has twice the calories of sugar.
But fat is twice as filling as sugar! At least!
I mean, I haven't had any issue fitting the savory foods I crave in my days... even a 650 calorie pizza yesterday... but it takes days of planning to be able to fit a 400 calorie piece of pie without going over because I'm so hungry.
I suppose that's true. If only satiety were the only reason I ate. :grumble:
I can seriously put away a lot of chicken wings. I could eat my entire daily calorie allowance in roasted brussel sprouts dripping with olive oil (no joke).
I see what you mean, obviously we're here because we eat too much... stuff. Whatever it is.
I'm just saying that it's easier to stick to your calories if you eat 500 calories of chicken wings than 500 calories of chocolate, as it will be more filling and you won't run the risk of having a blood sugar drop (which happens to me too much), which will force you to eat even more.
I don't think that would be true for me. 500 calories of chicken wings is a very small portion. It would never satisfy me. I can't say for sure if it would satisfy me more or less than 500 calories of chocolate but as someone who doesn't eat that much chocolate on the regular that seems like a large serving. I imagine I'd be left wanting more food with either. With the wings I'd want more wings because they tasted so good, with the chocolate I'd want something like wings because it was overly sweet and I need something to cut that icky sweet aftertaste.0 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
Oh yeah bread is evil tooNeed2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm sometimes jealous of people that prefer sugary foods. I'd take chicken wings over pastries every time. Not because they are savory but because they are savory and high in fat. Fat has twice the calories of sugar.
But fat is twice as filling as sugar! At least!
I mean, I haven't had any issue fitting the savory foods I crave in my days... even a 650 calorie pizza yesterday... but it takes days of planning to be able to fit a 400 calorie piece of pie without going over because I'm so hungry.
I suppose that's true. If only satiety were the only reason I ate. :grumble:
I can seriously put away a lot of chicken wings. I could eat my entire daily calorie allowance in roasted brussel sprouts dripping with olive oil (no joke).
I see what you mean, obviously we're here because we eat too much... stuff. Whatever it is.
I'm just saying that it's easier to stick to your calories if you eat 500 calories of chicken wings than 500 calories of chocolate, as it will be more filling and you won't run the risk of having a blood sugar drop (which happens to me too much), which will force you to eat even more.
I think this depends on the quality and flavor combinations of your food, too. I'm very content with one square of rich, dark chocolate - about 50-75 calories. There's no way I could eat 500 calories of it. On the other hand, I can never seem to get enough M&Ms to feel satiated, not because they're so good I want to keep eating them - they're really not - but because they're sweet enough to induce cravings but not rich enough to trigger the "enough" switch. If I'm going to eat them, I count them out and tell myself that's it.
Same goes for savory meals. I don't like chicken wings myself, but I'm more likely to eat a whole Big Mac than a homemade burger at someone's backyard BBQ, even though I enjoy the homemade burger more. The Big Mac is more calorie-dense with a combination of grease and sauce that tempt me to keep picking at it, whereas the homemade burger is filling and satisfying.
Cheesy snack crackers are a different story - a box of Cheez-Its or homemade cheddar crackers will be equally consumed in mass quantities. I don't discriminate there
0 -
My reasons:
1. I like it.
2. While most of the rest of my diet is comprised of nutrient dense foods, sometimes it is hard for me to get in enough calories without dessert.1 -
"This means eating little to no dessert would effect our health in a neutral or positive way."
No dessert for no effect!? No thanks!
Who am I kidding!? I probably wouldn't give it up unless it was somehow necessary to my survival..
Why? Because it's delicious.0 -
I have dessert every night after dinner, It's definitely a habit thing, it's like my brain expects and demands it! We never had dessert at home as a kid, I started doing it a few years ago and it stuck. I don't see a problem with it, except my desserts tend to be calorific, nothing under 400 calories, and goes up to 700ish cals for my super duper smoothie.0
-
Why not eat dessert?
Q: Should anyone else? A: I don't know. I don't care.
Q: Should I? A: I eat what I want.
Q: Under what conditions should I eat dessert? A: Whenever I want which for me is when I feel like it and it fits in my calorie goals for the day. And sometimes when it doesn't.
I eat a wide range of foods and would say that I get lots of good nutrients. Furthermore, my doctor says I'm healthy and my labs come back great. My weight is healthy and I'm working on it but I think I look pretty good too. Given all this, I don't feel the need to choose something "healthier". Besides, ice cream and dark chocolate are my two favorite desserts and I don't think there's anything unhealthy about either.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
Oh yeah bread is evil tooNeed2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm sometimes jealous of people that prefer sugary foods. I'd take chicken wings over pastries every time. Not because they are savory but because they are savory and high in fat. Fat has twice the calories of sugar.
But fat is twice as filling as sugar! At least!
I mean, I haven't had any issue fitting the savory foods I crave in my days... even a 650 calorie pizza yesterday... but it takes days of planning to be able to fit a 400 calorie piece of pie without going over because I'm so hungry.
I suppose that's true. If only satiety were the only reason I ate. :grumble:
I can seriously put away a lot of chicken wings. I could eat my entire daily calorie allowance in roasted brussel sprouts dripping with olive oil (no joke).
I see what you mean, obviously we're here because we eat too much... stuff. Whatever it is.
I'm just saying that it's easier to stick to your calories if you eat 500 calories of chicken wings than 500 calories of chocolate, as it will be more filling and you won't run the risk of having a blood sugar drop (which happens to me too much), which will force you to eat even more.
I don't think that would be true for me. 500 calories of chicken wings is a very small portion. It would never satisfy me. I can't say for sure if it would satisfy me more or less than 500 calories of chocolate but as someone who doesn't eat that much chocolate on the regular that seems like a large serving. I imagine I'd be left wanting more food with either. With the wings I'd want more wings because they tasted so good, with the chocolate I'd want something like wings because it was overly sweet and I need something to cut that icky sweet aftertaste.
500 calories of chocolate is about 2 candy bars.
I think I'm more of a combo macros person. A satisfying dessert as a meal for me is DQ's peanut buster parfait. It depends on what's being offered though I prefer sweet over savory.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jahillegas_51 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »OP I think you are asking a few different questions.
Why eat dessert?
1. Because it tastes good
2. Because it fits within my calorie goals
3. Because there is nothing inherently unhealthy about eating a cookie, a piece of cake, or a serving of ice cream.
Why not eat something healthier?
1. If I am already eating a diet that has a good macro and micronutrient balance, I don't get extra credit for eating a banana instead of ice cream.
2. People make decisions all day long. How to prioritize our time, what food to eat, how to spend our money, etc. There are always "better" decisions, but personally, I don't strive for perfection every minute of the day. If I spend 9 hours of my day in the office, 6 hours sleeping, 2 hours on household things (feeding the family, laundry, cleaning, etc), an hour of my day commuting, an hour working out, an hour eating meals, and an hour getting ready in the morning, that leaves about 3 hours in the day. I might choose to snuggle on the couch with my kids and watch American Ninja Warrior for 2 of those hours, another hour with my husband watching whatever Netflix show we are binge watching right now. Is that the "best" use of my time? Probably not. Could I work out more? Work more? Go volunteer? Clean more? Of course. There is always a "better" choice, just like with your dessert analogy. But sometimes we make choices for personal pleasure, or because they are "good enough".
"Should" you eat dessert? I don't know. Should is kind of a strong word. If people like dessert, and it fits within their calorie goals, and they want it at that point in time, then there is no reason why they "SHOULDN'T" eat it, in my opinion.
No need to comment further:) I guess I can add on a tad in that...
There is no such thing as good food, bad food. Placing labels on food, leads us to ban them from our intake. We say, “No, No, No, No, No…” We push for the perfect diet, once we eat this food that does not fall into this neat diet box; we throw our hands up, saying we failed so now is the time to eat everything we can. This leads to punishment. Which leads to more restrictions. This is the vicious cycle we as binge eaters face. I used to believe it myself, that there was clean food and bad food. It simply is this manifested idea. If you ask a vegan, he/she will say animal based foods are not clean. Someone who is a vegetarian will disagree, and say it is just animal products that are not clean. Then a paleo guy runs in screaming about how meat is clean, but grains aren’t. So someone has to be right? They are all wrong. Instead, adopt my grandmother’s wise old adage of “everything in moderation.” AKA IIFYM
I believe in good and bad foods and clean foods. It's never led me to overeat or binge. That's why the labels are only important for the individual and no one else. There is no all-encompassing "we" when it comes to made up dietary labels.
Hey, by all means if its working for you and your happy keep doing it. I am just pointing out that no science or current research has defined a "clean" food.0 -
jahillegas_51 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jahillegas_51 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »OP I think you are asking a few different questions.
Why eat dessert?
1. Because it tastes good
2. Because it fits within my calorie goals
3. Because there is nothing inherently unhealthy about eating a cookie, a piece of cake, or a serving of ice cream.
Why not eat something healthier?
1. If I am already eating a diet that has a good macro and micronutrient balance, I don't get extra credit for eating a banana instead of ice cream.
2. People make decisions all day long. How to prioritize our time, what food to eat, how to spend our money, etc. There are always "better" decisions, but personally, I don't strive for perfection every minute of the day. If I spend 9 hours of my day in the office, 6 hours sleeping, 2 hours on household things (feeding the family, laundry, cleaning, etc), an hour of my day commuting, an hour working out, an hour eating meals, and an hour getting ready in the morning, that leaves about 3 hours in the day. I might choose to snuggle on the couch with my kids and watch American Ninja Warrior for 2 of those hours, another hour with my husband watching whatever Netflix show we are binge watching right now. Is that the "best" use of my time? Probably not. Could I work out more? Work more? Go volunteer? Clean more? Of course. There is always a "better" choice, just like with your dessert analogy. But sometimes we make choices for personal pleasure, or because they are "good enough".
"Should" you eat dessert? I don't know. Should is kind of a strong word. If people like dessert, and it fits within their calorie goals, and they want it at that point in time, then there is no reason why they "SHOULDN'T" eat it, in my opinion.
No need to comment further:) I guess I can add on a tad in that...
There is no such thing as good food, bad food. Placing labels on food, leads us to ban them from our intake. We say, “No, No, No, No, No…” We push for the perfect diet, once we eat this food that does not fall into this neat diet box; we throw our hands up, saying we failed so now is the time to eat everything we can. This leads to punishment. Which leads to more restrictions. This is the vicious cycle we as binge eaters face. I used to believe it myself, that there was clean food and bad food. It simply is this manifested idea. If you ask a vegan, he/she will say animal based foods are not clean. Someone who is a vegetarian will disagree, and say it is just animal products that are not clean. Then a paleo guy runs in screaming about how meat is clean, but grains aren’t. So someone has to be right? They are all wrong. Instead, adopt my grandmother’s wise old adage of “everything in moderation.” AKA IIFYM
I believe in good and bad foods and clean foods. It's never led me to overeat or binge. That's why the labels are only important for the individual and no one else. There is no all-encompassing "we" when it comes to made up dietary labels.
Hey, by all means if its working for you and your happy keep doing it. I am just pointing out that no science or current research has defined a "clean" food.
Well that's certainly true. But I use a lot of terms that science probably hasn't defined. Pretty, bold, crazy, sweet, spicy, tight, yummy, vegetarian, happy ...0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm a pastry chef who doesn't like sweets too much, but I can kill some bread and butter. That's why I got fat lol.
Oh yeah bread is evil tooNeed2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I'm jealous of the people who prefer savory foods. Chicken wings will always be more filling and have a better macro profile than pastries, cookies, or chocolate! And they don't cause sugar crashes either. Sigh.
I'm sometimes jealous of people that prefer sugary foods. I'd take chicken wings over pastries every time. Not because they are savory but because they are savory and high in fat. Fat has twice the calories of sugar.
But fat is twice as filling as sugar! At least!
I mean, I haven't had any issue fitting the savory foods I crave in my days... even a 650 calorie pizza yesterday... but it takes days of planning to be able to fit a 400 calorie piece of pie without going over because I'm so hungry.
I suppose that's true. If only satiety were the only reason I ate. :grumble:
I can seriously put away a lot of chicken wings. I could eat my entire daily calorie allowance in roasted brussel sprouts dripping with olive oil (no joke).
I see what you mean, obviously we're here because we eat too much... stuff. Whatever it is.
I'm just saying that it's easier to stick to your calories if you eat 500 calories of chicken wings than 500 calories of chocolate, as it will be more filling and you won't run the risk of having a blood sugar drop (which happens to me too much), which will force you to eat even more.
I don't think that would be true for me. 500 calories of chicken wings is a very small portion. It would never satisfy me. I can't say for sure if it would satisfy me more or less than 500 calories of chocolate but as someone who doesn't eat that much chocolate on the regular that seems like a large serving. I imagine I'd be left wanting more food with either. With the wings I'd want more wings because they tasted so good, with the chocolate I'd want something like wings because it was overly sweet and I need something to cut that icky sweet aftertaste.
500 calories of chocolate is about 2 candy bars.
I think I'm more of a combo macros person. A satisfying dessert as a meal for me is DQ's peanut buster parfait. It depends on what's being offered though I prefer sweet over savory.
2 full sized candy bars? That's too much sweet for me. I do love a peanut buster parfait but I can't eat a whole one by myself. I usually just get a small hot fudge sundae with peanuts if I'm not sharing.0 -
If you're responding to me, and not just society in general...brian_gunther wrote: »Sorry, but why worry about what motivation other people have for doing or not doing something, or in your case, eating or not eating something? It's none of my business why you or anyone else decides they want to include or exclude something from their diet.
Sometimes I go through phases where I'll eat a cookie every night, or have some ice cream, or even a nightly beer, and then I'll go through phases where I won't touch sweets or alcohol. My choice.
One of my favorite new quotes: Don't worry about what I'm doing, worry about why you're worried about what I'm doing. Sorry, these threads that just randomly try to get into the minds of the masses grate on me. It's like the folks that eat sweets are being looked down on or that they are being painted as making bad choices. Who am I to judge? It's no one's business why someone pounds a box of Mallomars. Live and let live.
Rant over. God Bless. Carry on.
I'm so sorry! I didn't mean to come across like I was judging others. To be honest, I was mostly interested in other's reasoning behind eating desserts because I've gotten pretty stuck in one way of thinking about it, which, admittedly, nearly demonizes desserts. I simply didn't understand the opposition anymore, hence why I was especially interested in the opposing viewpoint. I admit I did get a little frustrated, but it was more with dessert's integration into culture itself (probably unreasonable as well). Individual rights FTW!0 -
vsauder729 wrote: »So, should I/you/we eat dessert? Under what conditions? Why? I'd greatly appreciate any thoughts you have, especially something from the opposing viewpoint. !
I generally don't eat dessert as a regular part of a meal. But I do like sweets, and I like to have something occasionally. I don't really like fruit. I eat it only when I feel guilty for not doing so. I do have a sweet tooth, and fruit definitely does NOT touch it. I eat yogurt for breakfast...it's not sweet enough for me to think of as a sweet treat. IS that a good thing? Of course not. But you asked why, and that's my answer.0 -
because i want to0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K 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
- 391 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
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions