what NOT to eat
Replies
-
everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.2 -
Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Yup. MO too. 0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Perhaps if you were building a diet exclusively from these things that would be a concern, but when I eat these foods it is usually in combination with other things so this purported insulin spike either doesn't happen or I seem to be not significantly impacted by this imminent hunger.
I do IF and I've eaten sugar at the end of my meal time and have lost weight doing that. Recently I've been struggling with gout and gave up sugar to see if that would help and it has helped a lot I believe (better in a couple of days after a month long attack) and I lost 2-lbs over the Christmas Holiday even though I ate a lot but didn't have any straight sugary stuff whatsoever (I tried this starting just before Christmas). That loss tells me that my eating sugar might have been slowing my weight loss down. I don't think it was just getting rid of extra cals because I ate a lot of cheese instead and put down a lot of cals. I'm going to keep experimenting and see what happens.
The sugar causing hunger isn't a thing if I eat it at the end of the day after my meals. If I eat something sugary for breakfast or cheat on my fasting, it definitely will cause a lot of hunger that way.
I don't know anything about gout and how sugar may contribute to those symptoms. I would say though that your medical condition and the impact of sugar on that is different than saying that sugar is bad for everyone and that everyone should cut out the things listed above. The logic you use about feeling hungry is largely an individual thing, as I and I'm sure many others do not have that same experience, yet the way it was written saying "sugar makes you hungrier" seems to imply that is a universal truth.
I'm also curious about your weight loss over the holidays and your belief that not consuming sugar had something to do with that. Were you tracking calories during that time? And you are saying this is the same amount of calories in total just with less sugar, resulting in a 1-2 lb loss? I'm seeing a lot of scale fluctuation this week which is normal for weeks of indulgence followed by trying to get back on track, is it possible that what you're seeing is loss of water weight or some other normal fluctuation and not directly attributed to change in sugar consumption?2 -
Avoid the fast food stuff or use it as a treat once in a while. Other than that, eat what you like while staying within goals. Keep an eye on your nutrition though.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »During the first phases of weight loss (I am in the 4th month and reduced 16 Kgs/ 35 pounds), there are difinitively things I recommend to forget:
- Sugar of any kind (even brown or honey): they add calories we don't need, I only use sweeteners 0 cals.
- Sodas of any kind and even boxed juices. They are like water with sugar (see previous). From time to time (max 2 per week) some 0 cals soda
- Any cakes or industrial bakery: glucose shots that will unbalance you on spot.
- Pizza
Besides above, I won't eliminate anything else.
yea, I ate all those things, lost 50 pounds, and got to sub 15% body fat....I must be a freak of nature...
Not at all! It's just that your way isn't THE ONLY WAY! Your way worked for you and it would work for many others. But it might not work for someone else. So you don't need to blast anyone else's opinions in order to validate your own.
That's the point.
When you (not specifically you, but all saying "don't eat this" in answer to the question) purport to tell others what NOT to eat (the topic of the thread) aren't you inherently telling them what to do and NOT simply talking about what worked for you (which is individual). The thread topic asked for that, so IMO the correct answer is that no one else can tell her what not to eat.
There are tons of things I never eat (Domino's pizza, as noted above), because for me they aren't tasty or aren't ever worth the calories. I'd never tell OP not to eat them, because why should I assume my reasons would apply for her? Also, I don't tell myself I don't eat them, I just never want to -- if all of a sudden they seemed worth the calories for some reason, I would.
I respect your opinion. MO was a little different in that I decided to throw out a few suggestions. IMO neither one of us is wrong.0 -
During the first phases of weight loss (I am in the 4th month and reduced 16 Kgs/ 35 pounds), there are difinitively things I recommend to forget:
- Sugar of any kind (even brown or honey): they add calories we don't need, I only use sweeteners 0 cals.
- Sodas of any kind and even boxed juices. They are like water with sugar (see previous). From time to time (max 2 per week) some 0 cals soda
- Any cakes or industrial bakery: glucose shots that will unbalance you on spot.
- Pizza
Besides above, I won't eliminate anything else.
yea, I ate all those things, lost 50 pounds, and got to sub 15% body fat....I must be a freak of nature...
Not at all! It's just that your way isn't THE ONLY WAY! Your way worked for you and it would work for many others. But it might not work for someone else. So you don't need to blast anyone else's opinions in order to validate your own.
i ate in a calorie deficit, that works for everyone.
There's more to dieting/building muscle/losing fat/getting lean than simple math. That's what you don't seem to get.0 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Perhaps if you were building a diet exclusively from these things that would be a concern, but when I eat these foods it is usually in combination with other things so this purported insulin spike either doesn't happen or I seem to be not significantly impacted by this imminent hunger.
I do IF and I've eaten sugar at the end of my meal time and have lost weight doing that. Recently I've been struggling with gout and gave up sugar to see if that would help and it has helped a lot I believe (better in a couple of days after a month long attack) and I lost 2-lbs over the Christmas Holiday even though I ate a lot but didn't have any straight sugary stuff whatsoever (I tried this starting just before Christmas). That loss tells me that my eating sugar might have been slowing my weight loss down. I don't think it was just getting rid of extra cals because I ate a lot of cheese instead and put down a lot of cals. I'm going to keep experimenting and see what happens.
The sugar causing hunger isn't a thing if I eat it at the end of the day after my meals. If I eat something sugary for breakfast or cheat on my fasting, it definitely will cause a lot of hunger that way.
It doesn't matter what I eat, but if I eat breakfast early (near when I get up at 5:00), I'm ALWAYS more hungry throughout the day than if I hold off breakfast until 9:30 or so. I think it's more the fast than the sugar.
People are really individual on this. Some find breakfast makes them hungrier, some find it makes them less hungry. For me I've experimented and it seems to make no difference.
When I first started I found that eating lots of protein (30 g+) at breakfast made me less hungry than otherwise, but after I lost weight and was into my new habits I found it made no difference, so even there it might have been mental. (I do find that eating a muffin or something is lots of cals and no more value than eating nothing, so I avoid that. But I would anyway, since for me the point of breakfast -- in addition to it tasting good -- is an opportunity to get in some nutrition.)0 -
everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.8 -
deluxmary2000 wrote: »
No. Eat bears. Eat them raw.1 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Perhaps if you were building a diet exclusively from these things that would be a concern, but when I eat these foods it is usually in combination with other things so this purported insulin spike either doesn't happen or I seem to be not significantly impacted by this imminent hunger.
I do IF and I've eaten sugar at the end of my meal time and have lost weight doing that. Recently I've been struggling with gout and gave up sugar to see if that would help and it has helped a lot I believe (better in a couple of days after a month long attack) and I lost 2-lbs over the Christmas Holiday even though I ate a lot but didn't have any straight sugary stuff whatsoever (I tried this starting just before Christmas). That loss tells me that my eating sugar might have been slowing my weight loss down. I don't think it was just getting rid of extra cals because I ate a lot of cheese instead and put down a lot of cals. I'm going to keep experimenting and see what happens.
The sugar causing hunger isn't a thing if I eat it at the end of the day after my meals. If I eat something sugary for breakfast or cheat on my fasting, it definitely will cause a lot of hunger that way.
It doesn't matter what I eat, but if I eat breakfast early (near when I get up at 5:00), I'm ALWAYS more hungry throughout the day than if I hold off breakfast until 9:30 or so. I think it's more the fast than the sugar.
If I eat a high protein/fat diet, I'm satisfied for a long time. If I eat a sugary breakfast at 7:00 a.m., I'm starving by 9:30 a.m.. The sugar makes a big difference for me.0 -
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Perhaps if you were building a diet exclusively from these things that would be a concern, but when I eat these foods it is usually in combination with other things so this purported insulin spike either doesn't happen or I seem to be not significantly impacted by this imminent hunger.
I do IF and I've eaten sugar at the end of my meal time and have lost weight doing that. Recently I've been struggling with gout and gave up sugar to see if that would help and it has helped a lot I believe (better in a couple of days after a month long attack) and I lost 2-lbs over the Christmas Holiday even though I ate a lot but didn't have any straight sugary stuff whatsoever (I tried this starting just before Christmas). That loss tells me that my eating sugar might have been slowing my weight loss down. I don't think it was just getting rid of extra cals because I ate a lot of cheese instead and put down a lot of cals. I'm going to keep experimenting and see what happens.
The sugar causing hunger isn't a thing if I eat it at the end of the day after my meals. If I eat something sugary for breakfast or cheat on my fasting, it definitely will cause a lot of hunger that way.
It doesn't matter what I eat, but if I eat breakfast early (near when I get up at 5:00), I'm ALWAYS more hungry throughout the day than if I hold off breakfast until 9:30 or so. I think it's more the fast than the sugar.
If I eat a high protein/fat diet, I'm satisfied for a long time. If I eat a sugary breakfast at 7:00 a.m., I'm starving by 9:30 a.m.. The sugar makes a big difference for me.
I normally eat a breakfast that is very low sugar -- 2 egg omelet with spinach and broccoli (or some other vegetable) plus smoked salmon (or sometimes low fat cottage cheese). However, over the summer and into the fall I was experimenting with smoothies. A comparison of the two:
omelet: 360 calories, 11 g carbs, 23 g fat, 27 g protein, 5 g sugar, 4 g fiber (this day had full fat cottage cheese).
smoothie (these vary a lot): 368 calories, 53 g carbs, 6 g fat, 29 g protein, 32 g sugar, 12 g fiber.
(Both of these meals usually have somewhat more protein, but I log rarely now so it's hard to find the days when I logged.)
Anyway, despite the different macros, and the high sugar in the second, they end up being equally filling, for me. I have breakfast around 6 and lunch around 1, but sometimes eat later and am never feeling uncomfortable or like I'm starving before lunch.0 -
3
-
everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »Personally I try to limit overly processed foods. I read ingredients determining if I could even pronounce the words. If I can't I put it back.
Honestly, if i my husband followed that rule he'd practically starve to death! He's hopeless at spelling/grammar. But he blows me out of the water with mathematical equations and just any numbers in general.3 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Don't eat cake, ice cream, maple syrup, candy, donuts, potato chips, cookies, juices, bagels and stay away from sodas.
This. Sugar makes you hungrier cause you get an insulin spike and then your blood sugar drops and you get hungry again. If you count your cals and have a deficit that will work but that will be much harder if you eat sugar IMO.
Perhaps if you were building a diet exclusively from these things that would be a concern, but when I eat these foods it is usually in combination with other things so this purported insulin spike either doesn't happen or I seem to be not significantly impacted by this imminent hunger.
I do IF and I've eaten sugar at the end of my meal time and have lost weight doing that. Recently I've been struggling with gout and gave up sugar to see if that would help and it has helped a lot I believe (better in a couple of days after a month long attack) and I lost 2-lbs over the Christmas Holiday even though I ate a lot but didn't have any straight sugary stuff whatsoever (I tried this starting just before Christmas). That loss tells me that my eating sugar might have been slowing my weight loss down. I don't think it was just getting rid of extra cals because I ate a lot of cheese instead and put down a lot of cals. I'm going to keep experimenting and see what happens.
The sugar causing hunger isn't a thing if I eat it at the end of the day after my meals. If I eat something sugary for breakfast or cheat on my fasting, it definitely will cause a lot of hunger that way.
It doesn't matter what I eat, but if I eat breakfast early (near when I get up at 5:00), I'm ALWAYS more hungry throughout the day than if I hold off breakfast until 9:30 or so. I think it's more the fast than the sugar.
If I eat a high protein/fat diet, I'm satisfied for a long time. If I eat a sugary breakfast at 7:00 a.m., I'm starving by 9:30 a.m.. The sugar makes a big difference for me.
Exactly the same here.
My sticking point, which may have been mentioned, but I missed it, is IF I should always eat. For the past year I've made myself have a certain meal at a certain time of day. Breakfast, lunch and dinner, because I figure if I eat and am satisfied, my body has the fuel it needs and I'm less likely to give in to an impulse buy, like a package of frosted donuts.
Should I always eat even if I'm not hungry? I know answers to that will be as personal as everything else that's been discussed, but yeah, I actually get hung up on that.1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
When I was first told about processed foods I did some research on processed foods. I still eat processed foods but I defined my own line as to what is "overly" or "highly" processed and still I need to make my own decisions on whether to eat them or not. More often than not I look for alternatives or lesser evils. Works for me.
You can't count on strangers (Pals here!
) on a messageboard to do all the work for you. I give opinions and ideas and if people are interested they will do the research like I did. 2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
Possibly when humanity modified it so much that what you buy in the store doesn't exist in nature.6 -
GMO not equal processed. I'm not going down that road though... Just doing the best I can.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
Possibly when humanity modified it so much that what you buy in the store doesn't exist in nature.
I don't think this makes it processed.1 -
-
I like you.yamitenshi wrote: »How difficult something is to pronounce is probably the silliest way I know of to determine whether you should eat something or not, and is only marginally more accurate than throwing the product at a wall and seeing if it sticks.
I have a background in chemistry, does than mean I can safely eat anything? What about dimethylmercury? Hydrochloric acid? Dimethylmorphine? Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid?
Take for instance deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), desmosterol (a cholesterol precursor), 7-dehydrocholesterol (another cholesterol precursor and a precursor to vitamin D) - all perfectly safe to eat.
And I'm a big fan of this one:
Stop bitching about "chemicals". It's *kitten* fearmongering.
[Edited by MFP Staff]4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »During the first phases of weight loss (I am in the 4th month and reduced 16 Kgs/ 35 pounds), there are difinitively things I recommend to forget:
- Sugar of any kind (even brown or honey): they add calories we don't need, I only use sweeteners 0 cals.
- Sodas of any kind and even boxed juices. They are like water with sugar (see previous). From time to time (max 2 per week) some 0 cals soda
- Any cakes or industrial bakery: glucose shots that will unbalance you on spot.
- Pizza
Besides above, I won't eliminate anything else.
I lost that same amount of weight and never gave any of those things up. Well other than sugary soda, I wasn't drinking those to begin with.
I'm always perplexed why pizza gets such a bad rap. Depending on the toppings, it can be a macro balanced meal, especially if one eats salad with a couple of slices. Really not hard to work that in on a regular basis if it's something you enjoy.
Surely you gave up on something, else you would not give up calories and gave up weight, right?
Going for pizza, I will not restrict the pleasure of a Domino's Pizza by restricting its content, IMHO I prefer just to pass until I go for maintenance regime (still 10 kilos away).
I personally have not given up on anything. Yes, I have decreased portions (I weigh all my food), and I drink more diet/zero sodas instead of the full sugar ones, but if I have the calories, I will go for a can of the full sugar soda. I am just more mindful of the amount I eat, and this was a big thing in me losing 100lbs.1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
When I was first told about processed foods I did some research on processed foods. I still eat processed foods but I defined my own line as to what is "overly" or "highly" processed and still I need to make my own decisions on whether to eat them or not. More often than not I look for alternatives or lesser evils. Works for me.
You can't count on strangers (Pals here! ) on a messageboard to do all the work for you. I give opinions and ideas and if people are interested they will do the research like I did.
I'm not sure where "banana is processed" came into the discussion, I think the infographic was introduced to point out that the arbitrary rule of "nothing I can't pronounce" is kind of silly since every food is composed of chemicals and difficult to pronounce components.
I agree that everyone should do their own research and make decisions about what is best for each of us to include or exclude in our diets. However, as I pointed out, a significant number of people come to this site and these boards with misinformation propagated by social media and woo based pseudoscience trying to sell books. Many people are just not going to take the time to do extensive research for themselves. They often attempt to follow these rules they believe are necessary, and when they find them too restrictive, they simply give up altogether.2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
When I was first told about processed foods I did some research on processed foods. I still eat processed foods but I defined my own line as to what is "overly" or "highly" processed and still I need to make my own decisions on whether to eat them or not. More often than not I look for alternatives or lesser evils. Works for me.
You can't count on strangers (Pals here! ) on a messageboard to do all the work for you. I give opinions and ideas and if people are interested they will do the research like I did.
I'm not sure where "banana is processed" came into the discussion, I think the infographic was introduced to point out that the arbitrary rule of "nothing I can't pronounce" is kind of silly since every food is composed of chemicals and difficult to pronounce components.
I agree that everyone should do their own research and make decisions about what is best for each of us to include or exclude in our diets. However, as I pointed out, a significant number of people come to this site and these boards with misinformation propagated by social media and woo based pseudoscience trying to sell books. Many people are just not going to take the time to do extensive research for themselves. They often attempt to follow these rules they believe are necessary, and when they find them too restrictive, they simply give up altogether.
It came about when someone made the mistake of trying to define what "processed" foods are. Nothing is "arbitrary" - just like the number of ingredients isn't arbitrary. They are just guidelines. A piece of fruit is a piece of fruit. But if you go to buy some fruit juice and the fruit on the label isn't even listed in the long list of ingredients... you have a decision to make. That's all.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »everyusernamewastakenso wrote: »I said personally... what works for me might work for others. And I don't look up the ingredients for natural foods i.e. fruits.
I'm with you. What you've seen is why I wouldn't get into trying to define "processed" or "overly processed" foods earlier - everyone knows what you mean but some come with off the wall nonsense to try and discredit what you say. It's up to each of us to read through all the condescension and sarcasm to find what works for each of us. In the end we all make our own decisions anyway.
It would be great if everyone did have a solid, logic driven thought process as to what foods they wanted to consume and which they felt were better to cut out in order to maximize their individual results. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. The plethora of misinformation available to people today, combined with the click bait headlines like " 5 Foods You Must Never Eat IF You Want To Lose Weight" means that people often are deluded into thinking that they HAVE to restrict something in order to be successful. Demonstrating that this is not the case, by digging into the vague and unhelpful designation of "processed" can often be an aha moment for so many people who were led to believe that in fact, anything in a package is bad, even if that package contains a precut salad blend, or a dozen eggs, or rice, or Greek yogurt. All of those things could be beneficial components to many diets and yet rules such as "no processed foods" or may lead some to feel they truly shouldn't consume them.
I'd love to live in a MFP world where when people say "everyone knows what we mean when we say processed" was actually true, and that people didn't get confused by that classification, but it just isn't happening yet. And until it does, I'm going to continue to use those extreme examples to point out just how meaningless a term is if not everyone has the same definition.
When has a banana ever been considered or referred to as a "processed" food? Never.
But that's the point. First, because bananas are made up of unpronounceable chemical compounds, which we are supposed to avoid. Second because the banana you buy at the grocery store is not anything like a "natural" banana. A lot of science and engineering and human tweaking had to take place for that banana to exist. A modern banana is about as close to "as nature intended" as a chicken nugget. That's why some of us think the line between "processed" and "natural" is arbitrary to the point of being useless.
There are lots of great reasons to make the foundation of your diet nutritious food. It's the idea that somehow "processing" automatically makes something unhealthy or empty or bad for dieting or whatever that gets argued with.
And yeah, I'm having pizza and beer for dinner, LOL :drinker:5
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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