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
-
MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
9 -
Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.4
-
Why does what someone eats matter so much to folks against IIFYM?
4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I think most objections to "eat what you want within your calories" assume, weirdly, that people won't want to eat a balanced diet or will want to eat a nutrient poor or even all junk food diet and won't care how the diet makes him or her feel in deciding what he or she wants to do.
I often (perhaps unfairly) wonder why the person is making those assumptions -- would that person actually WANT to eat a low nutrient diet and not eat vegetables, etc? Or does that person just look down on others and assume they aren't sensible?
I can provide at least somewhat of an answer. Because of people that have been observed IRL doing exactly that. I have been baffled to watch men and women of various ages and places in life, not just younguns, decide that it was perfectly okay to eat ONLY fast food as long as it was in their calorie limit. A couple months go by and these people are explaining to the doctor how awful they feel, and is it a virus? Doctor does bloodwork and says WTF did you eat? And that's where I'm facepalming and saying I TRIED TO TELL YOU when they are relaying all this to me as though it's surprising.4 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
Obesity is detrimental to physical health. It's hardly a weak measurement of health. If a person is obese and they have an unhealthy relationship with food, then yes they need to deal with that unhealthy relationship in order to achieve the goal of overcoming obesity because obesity kills.
What a ridiculous oversimplification. There is a correlation between obesity and some illnesses. And do you remember what was talked about in high school about the dangers of assuming causation vs correlation?0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
but my opinion is that the goal of losing weight is disordered5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I think most objections to "eat what you want within your calories" assume, weirdly, that people won't want to eat a balanced diet or will want to eat a nutrient poor or even all junk food diet and won't care how the diet makes him or her feel in deciding what he or she wants to do.
I often (perhaps unfairly) wonder why the person is making those assumptions -- would that person actually WANT to eat a low nutrient diet and not eat vegetables, etc? Or does that person just look down on others and assume they aren't sensible?
I can provide at least somewhat of an answer. Because of people that have been observed IRL doing exactly that. I have been baffled to watch men and women of various ages and places in life, not just younguns, decide that it was perfectly okay to eat ONLY fast food as long as it was in their calorie limit. A couple months go by and these people are explaining to the doctor how awful they feel, and is it a virus? Doctor does bloodwork and says WTF did you eat? And that's where I'm facepalming and saying I TRIED TO TELL YOU when they are relaying all this to me as though it's surprising.
So what? That's their perogative. This stuff happens to people that eat supposedly healthy food too.
Why is fast food always the devil?2 -
estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor5 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »Why does what someone eats matter so much to folks against IIFYM?
I think it was H.L. Mencken who described Puritianism as the "the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, is happy."
I think there's a hefty dollop of that going on sometimes. When people are making nutritional changes they think of as sacrifices, it's upsetting to think that other people are meeting their goals without making those sacrifices.
(Quote may not be exact, I'm going from memory here).22 -
MJ2victory wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
but my opinion is that the goal of losing weight is disordered
It's disordered for YOU.
Your therapist told you all that stuff because you took your eating behaviors to an unhealthy place mentally. Not everyone does that. For most of us it's a simple matter of being over-weight and deciding to do whatever it takes to not be over-weight any more. That means learning about the calories in the food we are eating, and eating less. The obsession/anxiety is a totally different thing and that's the mental health side. The tools your therapist is giving you may or may not work for you for the rest of your life. Time will tell.
You'll look back at this some day and understand, but I know you're not there yet.24 -
MJ2victory wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
but my opinion is that the goal of losing weight is disordered
I would rather be "disordered" than diabetic... What an odd statement.10 -
MJ2victory wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
but my opinion is that the goal of losing weight is disordered
Say what?
In my opinion, you might need to examine why you have a hang up about that.11 -
MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Imma go with the opinion of the doctor who sees an array of people of all weights and fitness and illnesses day in day out.14 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I think most objections to "eat what you want within your calories" assume, weirdly, that people won't want to eat a balanced diet or will want to eat a nutrient poor or even all junk food diet and won't care how the diet makes him or her feel in deciding what he or she wants to do.
I often (perhaps unfairly) wonder why the person is making those assumptions -- would that person actually WANT to eat a low nutrient diet and not eat vegetables, etc? Or does that person just look down on others and assume they aren't sensible?
I can provide at least somewhat of an answer. Because of people that have been observed IRL doing exactly that. I have been baffled to watch men and women of various ages and places in life, not just younguns, decide that it was perfectly okay to eat ONLY fast food as long as it was in their calorie limit. A couple months go by and these people are explaining to the doctor how awful they feel, and is it a virus? Doctor does bloodwork and says WTF did you eat? And that's where I'm facepalming and saying I TRIED TO TELL YOU when they are relaying all this to me as though it's surprising.
You know a lot of people in this scenario? because I have literally never heard of this. Fast food has nutrition, whether some want to believe it or not.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Why does what someone eats matter so much to folks against IIFYM?
I think it was H.L. Mencken who described Puritianism as the "the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, is happy."
I think there's a hefty dollop of that going on sometimes. When people are making nutritional changes they think of as sacrifices, it's upsetting to think that other people are meeting their goals without making those sacrifices.
(Quote may not be exact, I'm going from memory here).
This is money right here!2 -
MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Are you a HAES proponent?
Because I can tell you, as someone who undertook weight loss specifically because reaching a healthy body weight is recommended to manage my particular medical condition, it is totally FALSE that weight is not tied to health in many medical conditions.
In fact, although I am a healthy weight, my goal is to get to the very low end of BMI for optimal management of my medical condition.
I have two forms of arthritis. Arthritis is not a weight-neutral disease. Reaching and maintaining a healthy body weight is the best thing you can do for it, much as it was the same thing estherdragon could do for lymphedema. And yes, weight loss is the best thing you can do for that condition.14 -
MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Weighing daily would only be unhealthy if one's mindset is unhealthy. If one is just collecting data and not freaking out over normal fluctuations, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact, weighing daily is how I learned I gain water weight when I ovulate as well as premenstrually.6 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »A calorie might be a calorie in a bomb calorimeter but they're certainly not when it comes to nutrition. I can understand why people bang the calorie-is-a-calorie drum here on MFP because for the sake of counting calories it's all just an estimation and it's not helpful to differentiate between 500 calories of steak versus 500 calories of a sundae. But no one credible in nutrition research thinks a calorie is a calorie - if they did there would be no reason to hold things like protein constant in isocaloric studies. There wouldn't be new findings that nuts having fewer calories than we previously thought.
Foods are different yes but so are calories.
A degree might be a degree on a thermometer but they're certainly not the same when it comes to your reaction to a 100 degree sauna vs. a 100 degree pot of boiling water in your face.
A meter might be a meter on a ruler but they're certainly not the same when it comes to walking barefoot over a meter of glass shards vs. feathers.
Sounds stupid doesn't it.14 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I think most objections to "eat what you want within your calories" assume, weirdly, that people won't want to eat a balanced diet or will want to eat a nutrient poor or even all junk food diet and won't care how the diet makes him or her feel in deciding what he or she wants to do.
I often (perhaps unfairly) wonder why the person is making those assumptions -- would that person actually WANT to eat a low nutrient diet and not eat vegetables, etc? Or does that person just look down on others and assume they aren't sensible?
I can provide at least somewhat of an answer. Because of people that have been observed IRL doing exactly that. I have been baffled to watch men and women of various ages and places in life, not just younguns, decide that it was perfectly okay to eat ONLY fast food as long as it was in their calorie limit. A couple months go by and these people are explaining to the doctor how awful they feel, and is it a virus? Doctor does bloodwork and says WTF did you eat? And that's where I'm facepalming and saying I TRIED TO TELL YOU when they are relaying all this to me as though it's surprising.
Yeah, I am aware of some people who eat badly too, although in my day to day life it's much less common than what I have learned of from MFP (I seem to be among people who all think eating vegetables is important and do, despite the stats for the US as a whole). I have known exactly one person who decided to eat primarily fast food, and she knew it wasn't ideal, but at that point in her life was willing to take the risk. (She lost a bunch of weight eating mostly fast food and eventually started cooking some and eating more vegetables.)
But more to the point that some people CHOOSE to act irresponsibly doesn't mean that they think that it makes no difference (most of the time I think it's more "bad things won't happen to me" or "it takes a long time, I'll change before then" -- things I've certainly seen with problem drinkers I know). It certainly doesn't mean that anyone HERE is saying nutrition does not matter or that that's a common view.
As I said upthread, I think everyone KNOWS generally what a healthy diet is and that they should care about nutrition. Some people just don't, or don't right now, but still want to lose weight. (Heck, I cared about eating a nutritious diet for years and didn't care about losing weight, so that might be even more questionable from a health perspective. I've done other things I knew were not ideal, also. Humans are like that. I don't think it means people don't understand that vegetables are good for them and they should eat some.)1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Imma go with the opinion of the doctor who sees an array of people of all weights and fitness and illnesses day in day out.
cool it's almost like this is a forum thread specifically for people to share their opinions.7 -
MJ2victory wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
I think that thinking everyone has to have the same motivation/goal is a bit off-putting and rather assumptive on your part.
People are overweight or obese for a wide variety of reasons, and as such, their motivations for losing weight are going to vary, and in many cases there will likely be more than one reason.
but my opinion is that the goal of losing weight is disordered
Why is it inherently disordered to care about obesity risk factors (which could be a reason for having a goal of just losing weight) or even being able to wear cuter clothes or look better or run faster?8 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Are you a HAES proponent?
Because I can tell you, as someone who undertook weight loss specifically because reaching a healthy body weight is recommended to manage my particular medical condition, it is totally FALSE that weight is not tied to health in many medical conditions.
In fact, although I am a healthy weight, my goal is to get to the very low end of BMI for optimal management of my medical condition.
I have two forms of arthritis. Arthritis is not a weight-neutral disease. Reaching and maintaining a healthy body weight is the best thing you can do for it, much as it was the same thing estherdragon could do for lymphedema. And yes, weight loss is the best thing you can do for that condition.
as I've said from the beginning: my opinion is that the best thing you can do is make positive lifestyle changes like eating more nutrient dense foods, improving your emotional relationship with foods, using exercise to increase your ability level, etc. I feel that weight loss is a natural byproduct of these choices but should not be the focus.3 -
I get slammed for saying GMO's exist and are responsible for tons of health issues involving americans daily18
-
MJ2victory wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Imma go with the opinion of the doctor who sees an array of people of all weights and fitness and illnesses day in day out.
cool it's almost like this is a forum thread specifically for people to share their opinions.
It's on the debate board. If you don't want to debate your opinions then this might be the wrong section for you. Why don't people get this?11 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I finally have a place to say this Not all calories are equal. Calories from a hot fudge brownie sundae is going to affect your body differently than equivalent amount of calories from broccoli and a nice piece of steak.
Calories is often misused to mean food, but that's not what it means. It's a unit of measurement for energy.
OBVIOUSLY (and it's not an unpopular opinion, everyone agrees), a sundae is different in many ways from a steak or from broccoli. They have different macros, different calories per volume and serving, are not identically satiating (although that differs person to person), have different micros, may trigger a specific person to eat more, may be tasty or not for a person, so on and so on.
NONE of this means, however, that the calories are not equal, as a calorie is just energy, a specific unit thereof.
There's not really such a thing as a "calorie of hot fudge sundae" or a "steak calorie." The steak and the broccoli and the sundae provide your body with a bunch of things, that your body breaks down, including calories. Your body cannot tell that a particular calorie is from a particular food.
I think -- and this may or may not be an unpopular opinion, again -- that most people who claim that not all calories are equal are confusing "calorie" with "food" or using it as a metaphor for food without realizing it's just a metaphor.
I also think that most people who complain that their view that foods are different are unpopular are misreading what other people say, and I am always confused about how they manage to do this after all the many, many explanations. I think it's just that they cannot get their head around the fact that calorie means something other than "unit of a specific food" and indeed, that using calorie to mean food is an imprecise, metaphorical usage and not a particularly helpful one.
You also shouldn't assert something hyperbolic like getting death threats when that's not at all true, it's defamatory and harms discussion. (In the off chance I'm wrong here, you should alert MFP, as someone is mentally screwed up and it has nothing to do with views on nutrition.)
I am aware of what a calorie is. Just saying 100 calories of hot fudge is going to have a different affect on someone from 100 calories of steak.
No, you are continuing to misuse "calorie." A hot fudge sundae (even one that contains just 100 calories) is going to have different effects on the body and contribute different micros and macros than a steak (or a piece that contains 100 calories). BUT there's really no such thing as a steak calorie or a sundae calorie.But the CICO crowd says nope its all the same.
No, no one says this. You are misunderstanding, and I really don't see how it's possible.
Now, 2000 calories of a generally nutritious diet that including adequate protein and 2000 calories of a diet low in micros that contains adequate protein might well have the same effect on weight loss, all else equal (although it likely will not be), but acknowledging that -- which is what CICO says -- is NOT the same thing as saying different foods don't have different qualities and affects. You have made that bit up as a strawman to argue against.
The thought about a 100 calorie piece of steak makes me sad. Such a small, fragile thing.15 -
danigirl1011 wrote: »I get slammed for saying GMO's exist and are responsible for tons of health issues involving americans daily
GMOs do exist. That seems a silly thing to argue with.
I don't see any evidence for the other, but I wanted you to know that some certainly agree that GMOs exist. That's probably even a popular opinion!13 -
stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I finally have a place to say this Not all calories are equal. Calories from a hot fudge brownie sundae is going to affect your body differently than equivalent amount of calories from broccoli and a nice piece of steak.
Calories is often misused to mean food, but that's not what it means. It's a unit of measurement for energy.
OBVIOUSLY (and it's not an unpopular opinion, everyone agrees), a sundae is different in many ways from a steak or from broccoli. They have different macros, different calories per volume and serving, are not identically satiating (although that differs person to person), have different micros, may trigger a specific person to eat more, may be tasty or not for a person, so on and so on.
NONE of this means, however, that the calories are not equal, as a calorie is just energy, a specific unit thereof.
There's not really such a thing as a "calorie of hot fudge sundae" or a "steak calorie." The steak and the broccoli and the sundae provide your body with a bunch of things, that your body breaks down, including calories. Your body cannot tell that a particular calorie is from a particular food.
I think -- and this may or may not be an unpopular opinion, again -- that most people who claim that not all calories are equal are confusing "calorie" with "food" or using it as a metaphor for food without realizing it's just a metaphor.
I also think that most people who complain that their view that foods are different are unpopular are misreading what other people say, and I am always confused about how they manage to do this after all the many, many explanations. I think it's just that they cannot get their head around the fact that calorie means something other than "unit of a specific food" and indeed, that using calorie to mean food is an imprecise, metaphorical usage and not a particularly helpful one.
You also shouldn't assert something hyperbolic like getting death threats when that's not at all true, it's defamatory and harms discussion. (In the off chance I'm wrong here, you should alert MFP, as someone is mentally screwed up and it has nothing to do with views on nutrition.)
I am aware of what a calorie is. Just saying 100 calories of hot fudge is going to have a different affect on someone from 100 calories of steak.
No, you are continuing to misuse "calorie." A hot fudge sundae (even one that contains just 100 calories) is going to have different effects on the body and contribute different micros and macros than a steak (or a piece that contains 100 calories). BUT there's really no such thing as a steak calorie or a sundae calorie.But the CICO crowd says nope its all the same.
No, no one says this. You are misunderstanding, and I really don't see how it's possible.
Now, 2000 calories of a generally nutritious diet that including adequate protein and 2000 calories of a diet low in micros that contains adequate protein might well have the same effect on weight loss, all else equal (although it likely will not be), but acknowledging that -- which is what CICO says -- is NOT the same thing as saying different foods don't have different qualities and affects. You have made that bit up as a strawman to argue against.
The thought about a 100 calorie piece of steak makes me sad. Such a small, fragile thing.
Heh, I almost said something similar!1 -
seekingdaintiness wrote: »That ALL forms of calorie counting, weight loss dieting, food restriction that is not based on DOCTOR DIAGNOSED allergies or orders to cut a food from your diet, exercise intended for "body sculpting", and the like are forms of eating/body dysmorphic disorders that cause anywhere from mild to severe mental and social consequences for those engaging in them; and can (although do not always) lead to severe physical effects in those practicing them. I believe most of the people who use MFP have unrecognized eating or body dysmorphic disorders, mostly orthorexia.
Someone recently made a great post that I will try to paraphrase. It was about how she washes her hands frequently - before handling food, etc., etc., etc. However, her hand washing is not the same as that as someone with OCD who washes because of their anxiety disorder rather than due to an actual need.
So if calorie counting triggers an ED for you, by all means don't do it. But saying that most who count calories are orthorexic is like saying most who wash their hands have OCD.18 -
diannethegeek wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Imma go with the opinion of the doctor who sees an array of people of all weights and fitness and illnesses day in day out.
cool it's almost like this is a forum thread specifically for people to share their opinions.
It's on the debate board. If you don't want to debate your opinions then this might be the wrong section for you. Why don't people get this?
If you took the time to look over my posts, I've said the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.1 -
MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »ok I'm ready to weigh in on this (hahaha I crack myself up). Here are my unpopular opinions:
1. Weighing daily is unhealthy. (not to say it isn't tempting)
2. Weight loss should not be your objective. It's a side affect of making healthier choices.
3. Mental health is just as important as physical health (if not more).
4. If you lose weight bc you hate yourself, you will still hate yourself at your goal weight and you WILL gain it back.
Sometimes, losing weight (in and of itself) is the best thing a person can do for their health.
not if they're going to immediately gain it back because they didn't deal with their relationship with food and the emotional baggage that may have caused them to gain the weight.
Who says they didn't deal with those issues as a means to the goal of losing weight?
like I said in my original post: my opinion is that weight loss should be a byproduct, not the goal. The goal is to feel better, be more physically able, not eat emotionally, love yourself, etc. Weight is just your relationship with gravity. If you make lifestyle changes, you may lose weight, but it's about the weakest measurement of health.
Obesity is detrimental to physical health. It's hardly a weak measurement of health. If a person is obese and they have an unhealthy relationship with food, then yes they need to deal with that unhealthy relationship in order to achieve the goal of overcoming obesity because obesity kills.
What a ridiculous oversimplification. There is a correlation between obesity and some illnesses. And do you remember what was talked about in high school about the dangers of assuming causation vs correlation?
There is more than just a correlation between obesity and some illnesses. It has been identified as a de facto risk factor for them.8
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions