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.
Classifying food as "healthy" vs. "unhealthy": completely erroneous?
Replies
-
NorthCascades wrote: »Great article at Reason magazine's website. Article basically takes a look at what happens when you take a long list of food items and then ask consumers on the one hand, and nutritionists on the other to classify the foods as "healthy" or "unhealthy." Bottom line - there's a ton of disagreement, and maybe the question really just isn't that helpful in the first place?
People always tell me I should eat my vegetables because they're a healthy food. I'm so relieved to hear that there's no such thing as healthy and unhealthy food, I never have to eat another vegetable as long as I live.
But anyway. Say you already met your micronutrients for the day but are still 1000 calories shy of your goals and lacking in fat and protein, which can easily happen if your diet is rich in vegetables.
Is it healthy to eat even more vegetables or something that fulfills your current needs?0 -
CipherZero wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »CipherZero wrote: »There's no "healthy vs unhealthy" foods. There's more optimal and less optimal.
This type semantic argument seems silly to me.
The whole "healthy vs unhealthy" food debate is a silly semantics argument, but may make a psychological difference in how someone approaches their food choices.
More so than optimal and less optimal?? (which is completely incorrect anyway) Why would someone get all bent out of shape about not eating 100% "healthy" foods but be okay with eating foods that are less "optimal"? Either someone will obsess over eating perfectly or they won't. I doubt that little change in wordage will make a difference to those that are obsessive.1 -
"Healthy" is defined as: "indicative of, conducive to, or promoting good health." Applying that to foods only, I believe that a "healthy" food can be defined as a food that improves someone's health, leaves it in a better state than before the food was consumed, and/or has more positive impacts on the body than negative.
Obviously, in the context of different people's overall diet and exercise regimens, foods you could apply the above definition to could vary widely. But, for purposes of discussion, let's take a typical American who is not a body builder or extreme endurance athlete, has no diseases or allergies that limit types of food that can be consumed, and who generally eats a SAD.
For that typical American, I think it's difficult to argue that a carrot is not inherently healthier than a slice of chocolate peanut butter cookie dough cheesecake from The Cheesecake Factory. A carrot is nutrient-dense, low in calories compared to volume, and has very few properties that would result in a negative impact to the body (for that typical American). The cheesecake is very calorie-dense, far exceeds RDAs for an entire day for saturated fat and sugar, and has only a few properties that would result in a positive impact to the body.
The difficulties in applying the "healthy" or "unhealthy" tag to foods come when you look at the 90% of foods that fall in-between carrots and cheesecake - the foods that don't have significantly more or fewer positive or negative impacts on the body when taken completely on their own. That's when context again becomes the primary driver in determining whether something is healthy or not, this time within the SAD. A sandwich, a salad, a latte, an omelet, a slice of bacon, a chicken thigh, a bowl of pasta, a glass of wine...I believe the vast majority of the nutritional properties of most foods are in fact neutral until you look at them in relation to the rest of your day. Is this ham sandwich "healthier" than this chicken caesar salad? I don't know - what macros are you lacking today, how's your fiber intake, how about your vitamin A and sodium? Further - maybe the sandwich doesn't really fit today's calorie/macro/micro goals, but how does the rest of the week look? The month?
All of that being said, just because I believe that there are indeed a few foods that can generally be classified as "healthy" or "unhealthy" does not mean that I believe occasional consumption of "unhealthy" foods automatically means an "unhealthy" diet overall (or, conversely, that regular consumption of "healthy" foods automatically means a "healthy" diet). You may or may not be able to look at the nutritional properties of a single food someone consumed and draw some conclusions about the healthfulness of that food on its own, but you cannot use them to draw conclusions about the healthfulness of the diet of the person who ate it. It doesn't work that way. It's absolutely possible to consume "unhealthy" foods within a diet that, overall, meets that person's nutritional needs. Yet again, context is key.3 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »What's wrong with tofu?
I had the same reaction. Good stuff if done right
My reaction also. My wife makes Pad Thai with tofu and it totally kicks butt.1 -
fish, fruits, multivitamin ..etc...NorthCascades wrote: »Great article at Reason magazine's website. Article basically takes a look at what happens when you take a long list of food items and then ask consumers on the one hand, and nutritionists on the other to classify the foods as "healthy" or "unhealthy." Bottom line - there's a ton of disagreement, and maybe the question really just isn't that helpful in the first place?
People always tell me I should eat my vegetables because they're a healthy food. I'm so relieved to hear that there's no such thing as healthy and unhealthy food, I never have to eat another vegetable as long as I live.
as long as you get adequate micro nutrients from another source then yes you are correct.
0 -
markrgeary1 wrote: »I'd suggest it's never black and white.
If you were dying of starvation and came across a big juicy yummy bucket of frosting laden with trans fat, is it "healthy" to eat the "unhealthy" food to prevent starvation?
If you were stranded in a wilderness and starving, you might be surprised at what you would eventually come to consider as "food", healthy or otherwise. The definition of "palatable" changes under such circumstances, and the brain will demand glucose from whatever source is available.1 -
Like most food and fitness buzzwords, "healthy" isn't quantitative. That's why I avoid getting information from enthusiasts that use terms like "healthy" or "clean eating".4
-
stevencloser wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »What other sources will get me adequate micros, in practice? I mean I can't just take a multi-vitamin, right?
Organ meat, or yes a multivitamin.
I would also add there are micros in non-organ meats, fruit, dairy, grain products (usually enriched, but still), seeds and nuts, etc. it's not like veggies are our sole source of micronutrients. I happen to like veggies, but if you don't, you could still get adequate micronutrients. Might be more challenging, especially if you don't care for liver, lol, but possible.
1 -
stevencloser wrote: »What's wrong with tofu?
Everything..it is an alien lifeform looking to inhabit your body..it is horrible..Just my opinion ..0 -
Common Sense should be fine for most people. Unhealthy..could be a greasy doublecheeseburger with bacon Vs a salad. Could be a sundae with whipped cream Vs strawberries with no whipped cream? Could be potato chips Vs veggie sticks...
I think some of these foods could be considered unhealthy ..or perhaps..not the healthiest choice? I believe someone said it earlier..semantics...
Some foods are probably better choices for us, we simply don't always choose the best choice. Does that make having 6 beers on a Saturday night unhealthy? Or is it the quanity of the choice..? One beer = ok..
6 beers=unhealthy A doublecheeseburger 4 ounces fine, on the grill , a slice of real cheese and two slices of bacon..VS Can you eat the Big Bang DoubleCheeseburger challenge at the bar...? two 4 oz patties, 4 slices of cheese, 6 strips of bacon with ketchup, pickles, onions, mustard, and a 1/2 pound of salted fries in 20 minutes?
0 -
BiggDaddy58 wrote: »Common Sense should be fine for most people. Unhealthy..could be a greasy doublecheeseburger with bacon Vs a salad. Could be a sundae with whipped cream Vs strawberries with no whipped cream? Could be potato chips Vs veggie sticks...
I think some of these foods could be considered unhealthy ..or perhaps..not the healthiest choice? I believe someone said it earlier..semantics...
Some foods are probably better choices for us, we simply don't always choose the best choice. Does that make having 6 beers on a Saturday night unhealthy? Or is it the quanity of the choice..? One beer = ok..
6 beers=unhealthy A doublecheeseburger 4 ounces fine, on the grill , a slice of real cheese and two slices of bacon..VS Can you eat the Big Bang DoubleCheeseburger challenge at the bar...? two 4 oz patties, 4 slices of cheese, 6 strips of bacon with ketchup, pickles, onions, mustard, and a 1/2 pound of salted fries in 20 minutes?
if you hit micros, macros, and your calorie target for the day you will be fine.
if you have eggs and fruit for breakfast; whole wheat bread, turkey, and cottage cheese for dinner, a cheeseburger with grilled vegetables for dinner, and some oreos for dessert is that unhealthy or healthy ...? If you stayed within your calorie target and got your micros ad macros in for the day, then yes that is healthy ...0 -
stevencloser wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »Great article at Reason magazine's website. Article basically takes a look at what happens when you take a long list of food items and then ask consumers on the one hand, and nutritionists on the other to classify the foods as "healthy" or "unhealthy." Bottom line - there's a ton of disagreement, and maybe the question really just isn't that helpful in the first place?
People always tell me I should eat my vegetables because they're a healthy food. I'm so relieved to hear that there's no such thing as healthy and unhealthy food, I never have to eat another vegetable as long as I live.
But anyway. Say you already met your micronutrients for the day but are still 1000 calories shy of your goals and lacking in fat and protein, which can easily happen if your diet is rich in vegetables.
Is it healthy to eat even more vegetables or something that fulfills your current needs?
Fair point. I make these delicious smoothies from frozen raspberries, protein powder, peanut butter, and milk, or half and half when I need lots of calories. So I can't really relate.
But I think the concept of foods being more or less healthy than others is sound, and I think most people agree.2 -
I prefer Elmo's concept of everyday foods and sometimes foods.
You know, you kid
, but (without realizing it was an Elmo thing; either I missed that when they were littler or I absorbed it unconsciously while I was trying NOT to listen to Sesame Street 
) I actually do more or less use that with my kids.
We have "up" foods, foods that are "in the middle," and foods that are "down" (they came up with the terminology). "Up" foods are foods that are really good for you and you should eat them all the time and you can always have as much as you want** (fruits, vegetables, most legumes, many proteins, some other stuff). Foods that are "down" are treats (desserts, chips, candy, etc) that you should only eat once in awhile/in small portions. Foods "in the middle" are foods that have a lot of things that are good for you in them, but you need to eat them along with lots of "up" foods and other "in the middle" foods and not eat TOO much of any one "in the middle" food (so basically everything else, including most things that are combinations of foods like sandwiches, pizza, etc). It works really well for us, my kids get it....and, I didn't at all have it in mind when I wrote up my previous post, but it totally goes along with it - I would generally be comfortable saying the foods we've classified as "up" are "healthy," the "down" foods are "unhealthy," and everything "in the middle" is in that neutral ground where it depends on context.
**Yes, I realize that an adult could technically consume too many calories eating only foods from this group which could result in a net negative impact to their health. However, as I'm teaching small/growing kids who are also still in the picky stages of life, I prefer to tell them they can have absolutely as much broccoli, strawberries, black beans, and grilled chicken as they want.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions