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.

"Junk Food" and Health

Options
geneticexpectations
geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
in Debate Club
Will the internet explode?
«13456

Replies

  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    So...what is the debate?
  • geneticexpectations
    geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    So...what is the debate?

    Lemurcat wanted to talk about our disagreement regarding junk food and its effect on health.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    Original thread for context: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10484020/not-all-calories-are-equal#latest
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    Original thread for context: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10484020/not-all-calories-are-equal#latest

    Ah, thanks Dianne.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    OP, can you provide your working definition of "junk food"? People can mean different things by that term, so it might be helpful for you to explain what you mean by it.
  • geneticexpectations
    geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    OP, can you provide your working definition of "junk food"? People can mean different things by that term, so it might be helpful for you to explain what you mean by it.

    On the other thread I explained that for me, I don't have a definition of junk food and health food, but I look at food as a spectrum.

    I'll just give a quick run down of where I come from in case anyone is curious

    I do like to try to eat MORE ALONG THE LINES OF what our bodies "expect" according to a long evolutionary timeline. Not EXACTLY what our bodies expect b/c that isn't an exact science, but MORE ALONG THE LINES OF.

    Essentially I prefer that the STAPLES (not the only constituents) of my diet consist of plants that come from the ground (or sea) and animals that eat plants that come from the ground (or sea). But I do include a lot of grass fed high fat dairy, dark chocolate made with minimal ingredients etc.

    I do try to outright avoid manmade industrial seed/vegetable oils. I avoid grains as best as possible, and am not much for the added sugars, but that last one sneaks in every now and then and I don't totally mind esp if post workout.

    BUT, there's a whole middle ground there - will I eat Mapleton's ice cream on occasion? Sure. Will I eat the most delicious cakes I have ever tasted on occasion (this shop near me makes them with with nuts, coconut oil, dates, honey and a few other "whole food" ingredients)? Absolutely.

    At first glance people think I deprive myself, but I have a rule that I do not put anything in my mouth that isn't absolutely delicious. Yes, including vegetables, because I smother them in ghee.

    And everything I eat now I find tastes far better than everything I ate before. (up until 5 years ago, I ate all the "typical" junk everyone is familiar with - conventional pizza, burgers, cakes, ice cream).

    You may be thinking, whatever how can anyone compete with pizza? I've got a recipe for a pizza crust made with nut flour, and every single person who I have served it to says it is the best pizza they have ever tasted - yes it tastes different, but also better.

    Just as background, with the foods I now eat, I only eat when I'm hungry, and stop when I'm full. I don't count calories. I've gone from 200 lbs to 150 lbs (with big increases in strength, which highlights that the fat loss is even more than the weight loss). Maintained this level for 4 years. That's the weight loss side of things

    But, to address this forum thread, my opinion (of course not "proven" by RCT, just my opinion, which I acknowledge is not for everybody) is that sticking with "higher quality" foods may impact chronic disease incidence independent of weight loss. Just my opinion and my choice. I understand that this viewpoint is not for everyone. And if I can enjoy food, yet stay within parameters that make me comfortable, why not? And I certainly have lots of friends who don't see "junk food" as "unhealthy" and that's totally cool. We get along!

    Big take home point though!!!!!! - I recognize that this works for ME. That I got to where I wanted to get to and that food has never tasted better. I'm happy. But I recognize that lots of you have achieved lots of things and are happy too and have done things differently and view things differently.
  • geneticexpectations
    geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    zyxst wrote: »
    geneticexpectations wrote: »
    richln wrote: »
    Smells like a trap. Like a trap made out of a dumpster, doused with gasoline, and baited with donuts.

    Combustion is not healthy

    But toasted marshmallows?
    Toasted-Marshmallow-Day-30th-August.jpg

    Also please define "junk food". I read the other thread and what you said about "junk food" being over-touched by humans (or something similar) has me wondering how you're eating food since most of it has been processed by man and unlike it is in nature.

    Sorry, I probably just posted right as you were posting. see above (ie, I can't draw a hard line between what is junk and what isn't).
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    geneticexpectations wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    OP, can you provide your working definition of "junk food"? People can mean different things by that term, so it might be helpful for you to explain what you mean by it.

    On the other thread I explained that for me, I don't have a definition of junk food and health food, but I look at food as a spectrum.

    I'll just give a quick run down of where I come from in case anyone is curious

    I do like to try to eat MORE ALONG THE LINES OF what our bodies "expect" according to a long evolutionary timeline. Not EXACTLY what our bodies expect b/c that isn't an exact science, but MORE ALONG THE LINES OF.

    Essentially I prefer that the STAPLES (not the only constituents) of my diet consist of plants that come from the ground (or sea) and animals that eat plants that come from the ground (or sea). But I do include a lot of grass fed high fat dairy, dark chocolate made with minimal ingredients etc.

    I do try to outright avoid manmade industrial seed/vegetable oils. I avoid grains as best as possible, and am not much for the added sugars, but that last one sneaks in every now and then and I don't totally mind esp if post workout.

    BUT, there's a whole middle ground there - will I eat Mapleton's ice cream on occasion? Sure. Will I eat the most delicious cakes I have ever tasted on occasion (this shop near me makes them with with nuts, coconut oil, dates, honey and a few other "whole food" ingredients)? Absolutely.

    At first glance people think I deprive myself, but I have a rule that I do not put anything in my mouth that isn't absolutely delicious. Yes, including vegetables, because I smother them in ghee.

    And everything I eat now I find tastes far better than everything I ate before. (up until 5 years ago, I ate all the "typical" junk everyone is familiar with - conventional pizza, burgers, cakes, ice cream).

    You may be thinking, whatever how can anyone compete with pizza? I've got a recipe for a pizza crust made with nut flour, and every single person who I have served it to says it is the best pizza they have ever tasted - yes it tastes different, but also better.

    Just as background, with the foods I now eat, I only eat when I'm hungry, and stop when I'm full. I don't count calories. I've gone from 200 lbs to 150 lbs (with big increases in strength, which highlights that the fat loss is even more than the weight loss). Maintained this level for 4 years. That's the weight loss side of things

    But, to address this forum thread, my opinion (of course not "proven" by RCT, just my opinion, which I acknowledge is not for everybody) is that sticking with "higher quality" foods may impact chronic disease incidence independent of weight loss. Just my opinion and my choice. I understand that this viewpoint is not for everyone. And if I can enjoy food, yet stay within parameters that make me comfortable, why not? And I certainly have lots of friends who don't see "junk food" as "unhealthy" and that's totally cool. We get along!

    Big take home point though!!!!!! - I recognize that this works for ME. That I got to where I wanted to get to and that food has never tasted better. I'm happy. But I recognize that lots of you have achieved lots of things and are happy too and have done things differently and view things differently.

    If you don't have a definition of junk food, I am unsure of what we are actually being encouraged to debate here.

    Virtually 100% of my body comes from plants from the ground or sea (100% if you don't consider things like salt). Some of those things receive more pre-processing than others, but everyone is basing their diet on plants from the ground or sea, animals from the ground or sea (who eat those plants or other animals), or things like dairy/eggs that are produced by the bodies of those creatures. So when you say your diet is based on those things, what is that being compared to? We're just on this planet right now -- our food has to come from things that either grow on Earth with us or live on Earth with us.
  • chocolate_owl
    chocolate_owl Posts: 1,695 Member
    Options
    @geneticexpectations It seems your concern with food on the "bad" end of your spectrum is its possible relation to chronic disease in your opinion (no evidence provided - do you have studies anywhere?). If incidence of chronic disease is a concern, why choose a paleo diet rather than emulating a way of eating that's already correlated with low incidence of chronic disease, like a diet from a Blue Zone? Do you have any evidence to support that how you're eating will really provide you with the benefits you want?
  • geneticexpectations
    geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    geneticexpectations wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    OP, can you provide your working definition of "junk food"? People can mean different things by that term, so it might be helpful for you to explain what you mean by it.

    On the other thread I explained that for me, I don't have a definition of junk food and health food, but I look at food as a spectrum.

    I'll just give a quick run down of where I come from in case anyone is curious

    I do like to try to eat MORE ALONG THE LINES OF what our bodies "expect" according to a long evolutionary timeline. Not EXACTLY what our bodies expect b/c that isn't an exact science, but MORE ALONG THE LINES OF.

    Essentially I prefer that the STAPLES (not the only constituents) of my diet consist of plants that come from the ground (or sea) and animals that eat plants that come from the ground (or sea). But I do include a lot of grass fed high fat dairy, dark chocolate made with minimal ingredients etc.

    I do try to outright avoid manmade industrial seed/vegetable oils. I avoid grains as best as possible, and am not much for the added sugars, but that last one sneaks in every now and then and I don't totally mind esp if post workout.

    BUT, there's a whole middle ground there - will I eat Mapleton's ice cream on occasion? Sure. Will I eat the most delicious cakes I have ever tasted on occasion (this shop near me makes them with with nuts, coconut oil, dates, honey and a few other "whole food" ingredients)? Absolutely.

    At first glance people think I deprive myself, but I have a rule that I do not put anything in my mouth that isn't absolutely delicious. Yes, including vegetables, because I smother them in ghee.

    And everything I eat now I find tastes far better than everything I ate before. (up until 5 years ago, I ate all the "typical" junk everyone is familiar with - conventional pizza, burgers, cakes, ice cream).

    You may be thinking, whatever how can anyone compete with pizza? I've got a recipe for a pizza crust made with nut flour, and every single person who I have served it to says it is the best pizza they have ever tasted - yes it tastes different, but also better.

    Just as background, with the foods I now eat, I only eat when I'm hungry, and stop when I'm full. I don't count calories. I've gone from 200 lbs to 150 lbs (with big increases in strength, which highlights that the fat loss is even more than the weight loss). Maintained this level for 4 years. That's the weight loss side of things

    But, to address this forum thread, my opinion (of course not "proven" by RCT, just my opinion, which I acknowledge is not for everybody) is that sticking with "higher quality" foods may impact chronic disease incidence independent of weight loss. Just my opinion and my choice. I understand that this viewpoint is not for everyone. And if I can enjoy food, yet stay within parameters that make me comfortable, why not? And I certainly have lots of friends who don't see "junk food" as "unhealthy" and that's totally cool. We get along!

    Big take home point though!!!!!! - I recognize that this works for ME. That I got to where I wanted to get to and that food has never tasted better. I'm happy. But I recognize that lots of you have achieved lots of things and are happy too and have done things differently and view things differently.

    What makes you think our bodies "expect" to be fed certain types of foods? Our stomach, intestines, liver and kidneys are not sentient. They extract the nutrients from what we put in them and excrete what they don't need as waste. They work the same way no matter what we put into them (barring allergies/intolerances/other medical conditions that alter the digestive process). Humans are incredibly adaptive and our survival over the millennia and ever-increasing life expectancy are proof of that.

    As far as thinking that man-made=unhealthy because natural is better - I just don't buy into that line of thinking, at all. We are animals, we are nature. Just because we are smart enough and resourceful enough to alter foods and other substances to fit our needs does not separate us from the overall food chain, or that nature knows best. I'd rather take a BC Powder for my headache than chew on willow bark, for example.

    I look at it a bit differently. Again, my beliefs and my beliefs only:

    The hominid lineage has been around for 2.5 million years.
    Over that time, we grew to dominating that food chain.
    The two main selection pressures (starvation and predator danger) dictated that we had to be at our absolute best, not just in peak performance fitness wise, but there was no room for chronic health conditions to slow us down.
    One can assume that the chronic diseases that are rampant in our population (and are NOT limited to old age) such as cancer, diabetes, atherosclerosis, autoimmune conditions, and obesity were rare as hens teeth or nonexistent. We just could not have competed with those on board.
    In other words, although all of us carry varying genes for chronic disease to some capacity, our environment back then did not allow those genes to be expressed.
    During this long long time period, we ate what plants grew naturally and we ate animals that ate plants that grew naturally. We also moved around a lot at a slow pace, and exerted ourselves briefly to get dinner or get away from being someone else's dinner.
    This whole process of 2.5 million years changed drastically with the advent of civilization and agriculture 10 thousand years ago.
    Diet and activity changed accordingly, but did we evolve to adapt to this?
    I would argue not to any significant degree, because Evolution depends upon the main selection pressures of starvation and predator danger to exert its selection effects. Civilization eliminated those selection pressures.
    Genetically, we are "essentially" similar to 10 thousand years ago, yet the environment has changed substantially (namely food and types of activity).
    I humbly believe that it's probably best for genetic expression (not just for performance, but for absence of health conditions) to try AS BEST AS I CAN to eat CLOSER to the foods available then as compared to standard dietary convention today.
    So I just try to choose options that steer me in that direction, not worrying if I'm emulating a caveman perfectly or something ridiculous like that, but to try to have a positive influence on gene expression.

    There. I imagine that around these parts, this will be torn apart like a pack of lions on a gazelle :) But, that's me being honest about where my thoughts come from and so far over the last years, I'm happy that it's worked well. Not just weight wise, but lots of different aspects of life and health. I also totally respect your viewpoints Alyssa and thank you for sharing them.
  • geneticexpectations
    geneticexpectations Posts: 146 Member
    edited December 2016
    Options
    chocolate_owl wrote: »
    @geneticexpectations It seems your concern with food on the "bad" end of your spectrum is its possible relation to chronic disease in your opinion (no evidence provided - do you have studies anywhere?). If incidence of chronic disease is a concern, why choose a paleo diet rather than emulating a way of eating that's already correlated with low incidence of chronic disease, like a diet from a Blue Zone? Do you have any evidence to support that how you're eating will really provide you with the benefits you want?

    Correct, I don't have evidence in the form of a big RCT, and that's why I share rather than preach. And I'm perfectly open to the possibility of being totally wrong.

    However, I do have scattered collection of all sorts of small trials (and some big trials) and anecdotes and journal articles that add up to a big picture FOR ME. I emphasize the "FOR ME".

    However, I don't really have an impetus to look for that huge piece of evidence everyday when I'm enjoying life and food as much as I do now. The lazy gene :)

    I'd rather not use the term "Paleo". It's a silly name and the original version of the paleo diet is kinda silly to me. However, I prefer ancestral health principles as a whole because the evolutionary model of 2.5 million years with exceptionally strict and harsh criteria (stick around or be extinct) I think is much stronger than a "Blue Zone model", because that's just a comparison of modern societies and who has the best health on average, and given the incidence of chronic disease in the world (over a lifetime it is the majority of the population), the control standard is easy to beat. Again, those are just MY reasons.

    But if my friend chose a Blue Zone model and found that it worked for him/her or if he she chose IIFYM or veganism or whatever... if my friend is happy and comfortable and loves the food he/she is eating, I WILL BE THEIR BIGGEST CHEERLEADER.

Categories