Watermelon
Options
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »can we get off the whole nutritious thing? FFS a box of cereal can get you your nutrition- it's fortified and all that.
Let's get back to the real question- what kind of wine do you blend with it to make a smoothie?
Never made it with watermelon but I would think something similar to what you'd make sangria with. Either a Spanish Rioja, or maybe a fruity red Zin. Also thinking a dry Rose might be good with the watermelon.
I was thinking a Beaujolais.0 -
Also, it does not have a lot of sugar. If it did, it would have a lot of calories.Wynterbourne wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »but it also has alot of sugar....
though i love blending my protein powder and watermelon. makes a protein shake real delicious
Speaking as someone who has zero medical issues related to the consumption of sugar, I have to ask, "So what that it contains sugar? It's a fruit, so if course it does. What's the problem with that?"0 -
Also, it does not have a lot of sugar. If it did, it would have a lot of calories.Wynterbourne wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »but it also has alot of sugar....
though i love blending my protein powder and watermelon. makes a protein shake real delicious
Speaking as someone who has zero medical issues related to the consumption of sugar, I have to ask, "So what that it contains sugar? It's a fruit, so if course it does. What's the problem with that?"
Not necessarily.
Cookie in my recipe box=200 calories, 12 g sugar.
Medium apple=95 calories, 19 g sugar.
Does the cookie have a lot of sugar? If so, so does the apple (more!), but it's not particularly high calorie.
Watermelon is LOWER calorie than the apple, gram for gram (people can eat large amounts of watermelon, because so much of its weight is water, I suspect), but like the apple, most of its calories are from sugar (the apple has more fiber).
Point is that there's nothing inherently wrong with sugar.1 -
This isn't correct. Even if someone has eaten the minimum recommended servings of fruits and vegetables, there's still a benefit to eating more.Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/23/five-day-10-portions-fruit-veg-cut-early-death
*I assume there's some point when fruits and vegetables would start crowding out other foods someone needs more, like proteins. But if someone is considering whether to eat cake or watermelon, we're not at that point yet.
1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
What is the benefit of consuming more of a nutrient that your body can use? Especially if it is water-soluble and will just be eliminated?
It's not like putting money in the bank where it collects interest.4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
What is the benefit of consuming more of a nutrient that your body can use? Especially if it is water-soluble and will just be eliminated?
It's not like putting money in the bank where it collects interest.
Did you see the article I linked to? There is a benefit to eating more fruits and vegetables. There's not some arbitrary line, after which the benefits dry up.
ETA: Here's a link to the article in the Journal of Epidemiology that the Guardian article is summarizing.
https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/3039477/Fruit-and-vegetable-intake-and-the-risk-of?searchresult=10 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.4 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.
There is no cut off point, really. My point was that eating more of a food (especially if it's high in a certain nutrient you're aiming for) can provide benefit. Just because you've reached, for example, the minimum recommended amount of iron/potassium/vitamins/etc. does not mean that suddenly all possible advantages of consuming the food high in that nutrient have dissipated.
The point is/was, just because a food has more nutrients then say another food, does not make it automatically better. Context of the diet as a whole is what has to be examined...2 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.
There is no cut off point, really. My point was that eating more of a food (especially if it's high in a certain nutrient you're aiming for) can provide benefit. Just because you've reached, for example, the minimum recommended amount of iron/potassium/vitamins/etc. does not mean that suddenly all possible advantages of consuming the food high in that nutrient have dissipated.
The point is/was, just because a food has more nutrients then say another food, does not make it automatically better. Context of the diet as a whole is what has to be examined...
Sure, I agree on both of those points. Watermelon and cake (depends on the cake, though) are both completely different foods with differing components, nutrients, and macros.
100%0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.
There is no cut off point, really. My point was that eating more of a food (especially if it's high in a certain nutrient you're aiming for) can provide benefit.
I don't think anyone was really disagreeing with this, but just with the idea that it's ALWAYS better to choose watermelon over cake, and that anyone concerned with nutrients would, whereas if you choose cake you are not interested in nutrition.Just because you've reached, for example, the minimum recommended amount of iron/potassium/vitamins/etc. does not mean that suddenly all possible advantages of consuming the food high in that nutrient have dissipated.
Sure, but at a certain point it would. If I've eaten 800 calories all day, 600 from watermelon, watermelon is a really poor choice for dinner. I'd need something else. (Not saying that something would be cake, but that the fact that watermelon has nutrients doesn't determine whether it is the ideal choice at a particular time and for a particular person.)0 -
Fine... Tonight I'll have a multi-vitamin with my chocolate cake. And I'll wash it all down with a big *kitten* glass of milk.
You people are a bad influence.....
4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »I love watermelon. I always thought it has like 0 calories. It has 30 per 100grams which doesn't seem like a lot until you realize that being a lot of water makes watermelon heavy. 100g is like 2 bites.
Now watermelon is still delicious summery and fits my macros but I was shocked when my serving was like 200 calories.I don't know why I thought a bowl would be like 50 calories I mainly posted due to how off my mental guess was. I can't be the only person ever amazed at serving vs Calories.
Are you weighing your watermelon now? Because you must take some pretty big bites and use big bowls (or pile your watermelon pretty high in a smaller bowl). 100 g of watermelon would be about two-thirds of a cup of diced or balled melon; 50 calories would be a little over a full cup of diced or balled melon. That seems like a pretty good calorie bargain to me. I can eat well over half a pound of watermelon, and still be under 100 calories.
Yeah, I find that you can eat a lot of watermelon or other melon for not that many calories.
I don't really love watermelon, though (I know, I know, sorry!) -- I think it's okay, but there are so many fruits I like better. I always end up getting a number of small watermelons in my CSA box over the summer, though.
I had 600 grams of watermelon as part of my lunch (I foolishly bought a whole watermelon and now have to eat it all up -- my husband doesn't care for it). It was a LOT of watermelon. And it was still under 200 calories. I agree that melon is a pretty good "deal" for the calories.
But once I finish this one, that will probably be it for the year.
You can cut it into chunks and freeze it also. I froze some today and will get another one to freeze also because they are on sale. I will make slushies for the kids(just blend the frozen pieces), ice cream topping, ice cubes, and watermelon margaritas(tequila, frozen melon, lime juice).2 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.
There is no cut off point, really. My point was that eating more of a food (especially if it's high in a certain nutrient you're aiming for) can provide benefit. Just because you've reached, for example, the minimum recommended amount of iron/potassium/vitamins/etc. does not mean that suddenly all possible advantages of consuming the food high in that nutrient have dissipated.
Just to add a bit to this, fruits and vegetables have literally hundreds of phytonutrients that have yet to be studied, and probably many more that haven't even been identified. All we know at this point is that fruits and vegetables have some phenomenal health benefits beyond just the vitamins and minerals that appear on nutrition labels, and supplements don't provide the same benefits.3 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
If you've gotten you nutrition for the day and can have the piece of cake without going into a calorie surplus, what's the problem? You don't get any extra credit for more "nutritious" watermelon...
I'd call it a matter of preference, belief, and opinion. For the nutritional benefit, watermelon contains vitamins A, B6, and C. It's also high in antioxidants, amino acids, lycopene, and potassium.
The "extra credit" probably differs from individual to individual. Some people would rather have fruit than cake, others would rather have cake than fruit.
Agreed it comes down to preference. That said, my comment was in response to the idea that watermelon was preferable because it was more nutritious. So again, I stand by my comment. If you've gotten your nutrition for the day, what's the benefit to more watermelon?
Extra nutrition. If the consumption of watermelon supplied you with the amount of potassium you've aimed for, it doesn't mean the benefits of eating more watermelon are nonexistent. That's especially if someone's aiming for an increase with a certain nutrient rather than having a focus on calories.
Again, you've gotten your nutrition. Extra? Extra what?
Extra what? Extra nutrition. Who said you needed to stop at x amount of grams?
And what's the cut off point? If 10 servings is the recommendation, does 20 servings make me 2x as healthy?
I love fruit. I eat it all the time. That said, a foods worth is really only measurable within the context of the overall diet.
There is no cut off point, really. My point was that eating more of a food (especially if it's high in a certain nutrient you're aiming for) can provide benefit. Just because you've reached, for example, the minimum recommended amount of iron/potassium/vitamins/etc. does not mean that suddenly all possible advantages of consuming the food high in that nutrient have dissipated.
Just to add a bit to this, fruits and vegetables have literally hundreds of phytonutrients that have yet to be studied, and probably many more that haven't even been identified. All we know at this point is that fruits and vegetables have some phenomenal health benefits beyond just the vitamins and minerals that appear on nutrition labels, and supplements don't provide the same benefits.
This isn't true only of fruits and veg, however -- it's one reason to focus on whole foods vs. getting micronutrients from supplements, but NOT a reason to say it's always nutritionally superior to eat more watermelon. (Or even to say that eating 10 servings of fruit is ideal -- I personally think for the vast majority of people that would likely be too much, and that vegetables are much more important than fruit and treating them as if they were the same is a mistake.) The study about eating 10 servings being helpful is problematic because it doesn't really separate out the difference between eating lots of veg or ONLY eating lots of fruit, first, and more significantly because of course it's a correlation, so the question is if there are other differences between people who get a significant part of their diet from veg and fruit and those who do not (in a country like the UK where most eat far too few fruits and veg). The answer, of course, is that there obviously are, and those could account for the differences. We don't really have reason to assume it's causative, or, perhaps, a result of crowding out other things (including things which would lead to excess calories).
All that aside, there's always a point at which there is no real nutrient benefit to more watermelon (or whatever) in your week. For example, for a while I was convinced I was a volume eater and routinely eating about 15+ servings of fruit and veg (mostly veg, but fruit too). This was kind of stressful in some ways and not helpful for me, but in that case would you still insist that eating the watermelon over the cake would be always better?
Anyway, the issue with including cake is (generally) not related to any nutrients that you need, of course -- there are some in cake, but they would be trivially easy to get in other ways, normally. It's that someone might have a psychological benefit to being able to occasionally enjoy some cake, for not thinking of it as 100% off limits. If you are someone who rarely eats cake anyway and sees it as a special occasion food (which I really do think is the most normal way to think of cake, I don't think even most obese people are chomping down on huge pieces of cake nightly), then why on earth are people acting like eating a piece of cake means you don't care about nutrition?
Don't worry, I don't expect an answer!1 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
Lol wut?
I mean the IIFYM folks will say any food is good. So im putting in a disclaimer that some people are selective about the foods they eat and so comparing watermelon to some candy treat - the watermelon would be worth it nutritionally.
Do you know what IIFYM stands for?
Personally, I'm a die-hard CI<CO person, who doesn't do the macro thing ... and I will say that any food is good.
In fact, that's the beauty of CI<CO.
I know what IIFM means. it means if you can eat cake, pie, pastry, candy bars, etc. into your macros, you can eat it and lose weight. However, to those of us who have other issues, like for me, IIFM will not include those treats. That might be "selective IIFM"
0 -
I'm going to make watermelon margaritas this year in tribute to this thread. It fits my macros. :drinker:3
-
Chef_Barbell wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
Lol wut?
I mean the IIFYM folks will say any food is good. So im putting in a disclaimer that some people are selective about the foods they eat and so comparing watermelon to some candy treat - the watermelon would be worth it nutritionally.
Do you know what IIFYM stands for?
Personally, I'm a die-hard CI<CO person, who doesn't do the macro thing ... and I will say that any food is good. In fact, that's the beauty of CI<CO.
I know what IIFM means. it means if you can eat cake, pie, pastry, candy bars, etc. into your macros, you can eat it and lose weight. However, to those of us who have other issues, like for me, IIFM will not include those treats. That might be "selective IIFM"
IIFYM isn't purely about weight loss...1 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »I'm going to make watermelon margaritas this year in tribute to this thread. It fits my macros. :drinker:
I just had the most lovely sangria. Nearly half the size of my head. No watermelon, but plenty of other fruit. The fact that my head is spinning is proof that sugar is the devil, correct?2 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
Lol wut?
I mean the IIFYM folks will say any food is good. So im putting in a disclaimer that some people are selective about the foods they eat and so comparing watermelon to some candy treat - the watermelon would be worth it nutritionally.
Do you know what IIFYM stands for?
Personally, I'm a die-hard CI<CO person, who doesn't do the macro thing ... and I will say that any food is good. In fact, that's the beauty of CI<CO.
I know what IIFM means. it means if you can eat cake, pie, pastry, candy bars, etc. into your macros, you can eat it and lose weight. However, to those of us who have other issues, like for me, IIFM will not include those treats. That might be "selective IIFM"
No, that would just be IIFYM. Because that's the beauty of IIFYM, you fill your macros how you like, with the foods that suit your dietary preferences.4 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I have around 400g of watermelon, plus the same amount of cantaloupe every single day. A huge bowl for under 300 calories
For the benefits you get from some food, its worth it. For me, it is way better to have a bowl of watermelon than a piece of cake. I don't mean all you IIFYM folks, but for people who want to choose more nutritious food vs a treat.
Lol wut?
I mean the IIFYM folks will say any food is good. So im putting in a disclaimer that some people are selective about the foods they eat and so comparing watermelon to some candy treat - the watermelon would be worth it nutritionally.
Do you know what IIFYM stands for?
Personally, I'm a die-hard CI<CO person, who doesn't do the macro thing ... and I will say that any food is good. In fact, that's the beauty of CI<CO.
I know what IIFM means. it means if you can eat cake, pie, pastry, candy bars, etc. into your macros, you can eat it and lose weight. However, to those of us who have other issues, like for me, IIFM will not include those treats. That might be "selective IIFM"
Although IIFYM stands for "if it fits your macros," it is essentially a form of flexible eating (for weight loss, gain, or maintenance) that says that one SHOULD pay attention to nutrients (including micronutrients) and macros and generally eat a healthy diet. However, it is also a way of reminding people (specifically bodybuilders, the original source) that so long as treat or junk foods fit into your overall healthy diets and the macros that you've decided serve your goals (bodybuilding in the original case), it is fine to fit them in. It was to answer the endless questions "can I eat X and gain muscle?" or "can I eat Y when cutting?".
The broader concept now fits ANYONE who wants to focus on macros when eating, so for example I do a low carb diet (lower than yours, currently, I believe), and can still apply the "IIFYM" concept if I want to. And of course I still focus on eating a nutrient-dense diet.
The idea that only people not doing IIFYM would care about nutrients is not accurate, then. Nor is it true that someone who has T2D or some such (although I do not) cannot do flexible dieting or some form of IIFYM.
Indeed, in many cases people don't worry about macros at all, and someone who has an issue like IR might want to and thus might find something like IIFYM more necessary (back when I was first losing weight the only macro I focused on at all was protein, and some lose weight without doing even that -- that's not IIFYM).
The reason I thought you were misunderstanding what IIFYM is is because you seemed to think it would make watermelon and cake interchangeable, and not only do they have different nutrients, but they have quite different macros. (Watermelon is delicious, low cal, and has some nutrients, but also gets essentially all of its calories from carbs (mostly sugar) and doesn't even have much fiber, unlike some other fruits. This is not a slam on watermelon, but I can't imagine any nutrient-focused diet would say that more watermelon is ALWAYS the best choice, no matter what else one was eating.)3
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
- 389 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
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions