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.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Replies
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »scythianlady wrote: »I think vegetarians are pushing their luck, and vegans are playing Russian roulette with their health.
Also, anyone thinking of going vegan should be required to take a nutrition class.
Anyone asking about a low carb vegan diet (I've seen that question asked on another thread) should be required to take a remedial nutrition class.
Finally, anyone raising children and requiring them to be vegan needs to have social services called on them.
It's a little chilly in my house tonight. I'll go back to lurking and let the incoming flames keep me warm.
43 years of vegetarian near-roulette so far: At age 61, healthier & stronger than most of my age-mates, I'm feelin' pretty good about my future odds.
No flames, though.
not sure if the choice in foods aka being a vegetarian would be the main cause of the healthier you.
There are more omnivores that are your age that are as healthy if not healthier but it's not being touted that it has anything to do with their choice to eat meat.
Don't get me wrong...I have no issue with veganism or vegetarianism at all just wouldn't go as far to say they it's better.
None of us are saying it's better, we were disagreeing with the person who said we're pushing our luck. Ann used her own peer group as an illustration that long-term vegetarianism hasn't led to any dire health consequences for her.
I got that and didn't say anyone was saying they were saying they were better....
but the way it was phrased can be taken the way I did....that being a vegetarian has an advantage over omnivores as far as "health" .
No health advantage to vegetarianism IMO, and I've said so many times on "should I go veg" threads around here. This, despite studies that show an advantage - too darn many clean-livin' Seventh Day Adventists in those study populations.
As someone may've said around here sometime, "not what I meant, just how you're reading it".
and even if it was meant that way who cares...?
Well . . . I care whether what I write is perceived as I meant it. If it isn't, that's feedback that I've not communicated optimally. An opportunity for improvement, since communication is my goal. It takes two, but I only control one of them
I think most of the time far too much is read into what people write but of course I understand your point...
I try not to read into anything (tone or other) and read the words as they are written as I have been accused far too many times of "tone" that is mean or judgemental when in fact it's not...
6 -
scythianlady wrote: »I think vegetarians are pushing their luck, and vegans are playing Russian roulette with their health.
Also, anyone thinking of going vegan should be required to take a nutrition class.
Anyone asking about a low carb vegan diet (I've seen that question asked on another thread) should be required to take a remedial nutrition class.
Finally, anyone raising children and requiring them to be vegan needs to have social services called on them.
It's a little chilly in my house tonight. I'll go back to lurking and let the incoming flames keep me warm.
Is this based on any actual studies of vegetarian and vegan health outcomes or just a random unsupported opinion?
And how would you enforce vegans being required to take a nutrition class? Is the thought that one of my co-workers or neighbors will call some governmental hotline when they see me turn down ice cream or a hot dog one too many times and I get whisked away for reeducation?12 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »scythianlady wrote: »
How so?
I'm vegetarian, have been for over 20 years. I'm pretty darn healthy. It's not difficult to meet your nutritional requirements being vegetarian or vegan, though yes, some research to ensure you're doing that is always a good idea (though a nutrition class is OTT). Pretty sure you can also be a low carb vegan safely.
You can also raise children as vegans quite safely, so long as you are aware of meeting nutritional needs, so no need to call social services just because you disagree with someone else's ethical beliefs.
Cats, on the other hand, should never, ever be made to be vegan. They are obligate carnivores. If you don't want to feed your cat meat, don't get one.What would a low carb vegan eat? No sarcasm here. I am genuinely curious.
Calling social services was a bit of hyperbole on my part. I also find it interesting that you immediately jumped to veganism being an ethical decision. I think vegans take up their lifestyles for the most noble reasons, I just don't think it is nutrionaly sound. There are ways to make an omnivorous diet environmentally sustainable as well as humane.
Not vegan, but tofu, tempeh, pea protein powder off the top of my head for protein. There are likely other things, but since I don't eat them, I don't know their macros. Leafy greens are low carb. Of course it depends how low we're talking. The low carbers tell me I'd be classed as low carb, so if I subbed out my massive amounts of dairy for non animal proteins, and was willing to drop my protein intake (which is well above standard minimum requirements), I think it would be plenty doable.
As to why I 'jumped' to veganism being an ethical decision, that's simply because that is still probably the primary reason why people choose it. Or at least it was, before crappy documentaries like 'What the Health'.
You still haven't answered why you don't think vegetarianisn/veganism are nutritionally sound. Can't really debate something if all you'll say is 'because I don't'.
I find it fascinating that the person who declared vegans should be required to take nutrition classes was unaware of lower carbohydrate protein sources that are available to vegans.6 -
sheepingly wrote: »Flexible dieting lol
Does this mean that your unpopular opinion is thinking flexible dieting is amusing?
Or that you think flexible dieting is good and that will be an unpopular opinion, and that's amusing?1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sheepingly wrote: »Flexible dieting lol
Does this mean that your unpopular opinion is thinking flexible dieting is amusing?
Or that you think flexible dieting is good and that will be an unpopular opinion, and that's amusing?
I was wondering the same.0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »scythianlady wrote: »I think vegetarians are pushing their luck, and vegans are playing Russian roulette with their health.
Also, anyone thinking of going vegan should be required to take a nutrition class.
Anyone asking about a low carb vegan diet (I've seen that question asked on another thread) should be required to take a remedial nutrition class.
Finally, anyone raising children and requiring them to be vegan needs to have social services called on them.
It's a little chilly in my house tonight. I'll go back to lurking and let the incoming flames keep me warm.
43 years of vegetarian near-roulette so far: At age 61, healthier & stronger than most of my age-mates, I'm feelin' pretty good about my future odds.
No flames, though.
not sure if the choice in foods aka being a vegetarian would be the main cause of the healthier you.
There are more omnivores that are your age that are as healthy if not healthier but it's not being touted that it has anything to do with their choice to eat meat.
Don't get me wrong...I have no issue with veganism or vegetarianism at all just wouldn't go as far to say they it's better.
None of us are saying it's better, we were disagreeing with the person who said we're pushing our luck. Ann used her own peer group as an illustration that long-term vegetarianism hasn't led to any dire health consequences for her.
I got that and didn't say anyone was saying they were saying they were better....
but the way it was phrased can be taken the way I did....that being a vegetarian has an advantage over omnivores as far as "health" .
No health advantage to vegetarianism IMO, and I've said so many times on "should I go veg" threads around here. This, despite studies that show an advantage - too darn many clean-livin' Seventh Day Adventists in those study populations.
As someone may've said around here sometime, "not what I meant, just how you're reading it".
and even if it was meant that way who cares...?
Well . . . I care whether what I write is perceived as I meant it. If it isn't, that's feedback that I've not communicated optimally. An opportunity for improvement, since communication is my goal. It takes two, but I only control one of them
I don't think you were trying to say you are better, but in a way your original statement did come across as you are healthier because of X (in this case X is vegetarian)
along with defending being a vegetarian is playing roulette (which I too agree is incorrect as far as choosing to be a vegetarian, no more so than omnivores are playing the same game)
*including original quote I responded to in order to hopefully avoid an further cloudiness on what happened in this particular part...43 years of vegetarian near-roulette so far: At age 61, healthier & stronger than most of my age-mates I'm feelin' pretty good about my future odds.
ps I don't see an issue with being a vegetarian/vegan as far as health goes
That's really selective picking there because it's a deliberate losing of the context which the following words clarified *healthier and stronger....than most of my age-mates* which I took 100% to mean that her dietary choices were the very opposite of roulette.7 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »scythianlady wrote: »I think vegetarians are pushing their luck, and vegans are playing Russian roulette with their health.
Also, anyone thinking of going vegan should be required to take a nutrition class.
Anyone asking about a low carb vegan diet (I've seen that question asked on another thread) should be required to take a remedial nutrition class.
Finally, anyone raising children and requiring them to be vegan needs to have social services called on them.
It's a little chilly in my house tonight. I'll go back to lurking and let the incoming flames keep me warm.
43 years of vegetarian near-roulette so far: At age 61, healthier & stronger than most of my age-mates, I'm feelin' pretty good about my future odds.
No flames, though.
not sure if the choice in foods aka being a vegetarian would be the main cause of the healthier you.
There are more omnivores that are your age that are as healthy if not healthier but it's not being touted that it has anything to do with their choice to eat meat.
Don't get me wrong...I have no issue with veganism or vegetarianism at all just wouldn't go as far to say they it's better.
None of us are saying it's better, we were disagreeing with the person who said we're pushing our luck. Ann used her own peer group as an illustration that long-term vegetarianism hasn't led to any dire health consequences for her.
I got that and didn't say anyone was saying they were saying they were better....
but the way it was phrased can be taken the way I did....that being a vegetarian has an advantage over omnivores as far as "health" .
No health advantage to vegetarianism IMO, and I've said so many times on "should I go veg" threads around here. This, despite studies that show an advantage - too darn many clean-livin' Seventh Day Adventists in those study populations.
As someone may've said around here sometime, "not what I meant, just how you're reading it".
and even if it was meant that way who cares...?
Well . . . I care whether what I write is perceived as I meant it. If it isn't, that's feedback that I've not communicated optimally. An opportunity for improvement, since communication is my goal. It takes two, but I only control one of them
I don't think you were trying to say you are better, but in a way your original statement did come across as you are healthier because of X (in this case X is vegetarian)
along with defending being a vegetarian is playing roulette (which I too agree is incorrect as far as choosing to be a vegetarian, no more so than omnivores are playing the same game)
*including original quote I responded to in order to hopefully avoid an further cloudiness on what happened in this particular part...43 years of vegetarian near-roulette so far: At age 61, healthier & stronger than most of my age-mates I'm feelin' pretty good about my future odds.
ps I don't see an issue with being a vegetarian/vegan as far as health goes
That's really selective picking there because it's a deliberate losing of the context which the following words clarified *healthier and stronger....than most of my age-mates* which I took 100% to mean that her dietary choices were the very opposite of roulette.
not in my view it wasn't selective picking, but if I had seen "I am healthier and stronger than most of my age mates and I chose the vegetarian-roulette 43 years ago *wink wink*" I probably wouldn't have seen it as I did either...
being healthier and stronger is not just a choice of "diet" so that imo should have come first...pretty simple in my mind. In Ann's case she is healthier and stronger because she chooses what she feels is healthy food and exercise and living.
People don't have to see it the way I did...it's not really a huge deal is it? (almost a page of comments on it so it's apparently bigger than I thought)
if someone takes the post one way but it was meant another way and it's then clarified by the writer...*shrugs*
6 -
apparently after my gaff today - apparently its an unpopular opinion that a cupcake or muffin can meet daily nutritional goals11
-
Dear Posters,
Please keep the debate focused on the topic at hand, or wherever it leads within the realm of diet and fitness. If you do not wish to engage with particular posters then....don't....
Thanks,
4legs
MFP moderator7 -
Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish. 2 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.4 -
If the plant is Audrey II, dying first will be optional.10
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
LMAO I guess that's only fair.3 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
Life feeds on life, feeds on life, feeds on life, feeds on life...0 -
See, I've killed enough fish in my life, and tortured many, many more, that I think it would be fitting to be tossed in a lake when I die.
My wife doesn't like the idea though.6 -
I think diets are a joke and have been hijacked into a business. Don't diet, it always ends. Change your life and habits. Its harder at first but easier the rest of your life.2
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
Its the cirrrrrrrrcle of liiiiiiiiiiiiife.... and it moooooooves us allllllll.....
I miss you Mufasa!6 -
Calichusetts wrote: »I think diets are a joke and have been hijacked into a business. Don't diet, it always ends. Change your life and habits. Its harder at first but easier the rest of your life.
If I don't stop dieting won't I eventually starve to death?4 -
work_on_it wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
Its the cirrrrrrrrcle of liiiiiiiiiiiiife.... and it moooooooves us allllllll.....
I miss you Mufasa!
When folks ask how my day is going and it's not going well, my response is, "At least I'm not food for something else yet."7 -
work_on_it wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
Its the cirrrrrrrrcle of liiiiiiiiiiiiife.... and it moooooooves us allllllll.....
I miss you Mufasa!
When folks ask how my day is going and it's not going well, my response is, "At least I'm not food for something else yet."
What about mosquitoes?4 -
Hopefully not an unpopular opinion, but I think that telling kids they're "big boned" for being obese is borderline child abuse.7
-
I absolutely resent my parents for letting me get overweight, eat poorly, and be lazy when I was a kid. I still love them of course, but I'd be a fool not to acknowledge the years of damage they let me do to my body and all of the ways that my poor childhood habits held me back as a young adult.6
-
VintageFeline wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Plants are what my food eats.
... except the fish...they eat smaller fish.
And when you die, plants will eat you.
Its the cirrrrrrrrcle of liiiiiiiiiiiiife.... and it moooooooves us allllllll.....
I miss you Mufasa!
When folks ask how my day is going and it's not going well, my response is, "At least I'm not food for something else yet."
What about mosquitoes?
Or all the dust mites all over your home and bed?1 -
Cardio is a waste of time (unless you actually enjoy it).4
-
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.14 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do steady state cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
(P.S: HIIT is cardio)14 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your butt is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.1 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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