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.
which is the best diet for overall health and weight loss
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »
I'm surprised I didn't drop dead from all those refeeds I did in the last few months of last year. I was pushing 300+ grams of carbs a day on weekends, easily over 40% of my cals. And yet here I am, slim, healthy (other than eczema and hay fever, which have no connection to carb or sugar intake, might have tested that one already...), perfect blood work (including A1C). I are special snowflake?
Special Snowflake... lol
I am pushing about 250-275 a day right now daily, maintaining weight, feel great, stamina to do lots of exercise and I will be 50 veeeeerrry soon.
I ran 10 miles today (training run this morning), I wonder if carbs had anything to do with that???
I pay so little attention to my carb intake (and none to sugar). So long as I'm hitting my protein and fat goals (and please note bro guy that fat is far from low), I honestly don't care where the rest of the cals fall, other than enough carbs to fuel activity and that's usually going to be over 30%. When the damn weather cools down enough to start running again, it will be higher. I am seriously perplexed as to why healthy, non-diabetic individuals should be remotely scared of carbohydrates. Did we get any sources on that yet?
(secretly waiting for Bro Dude to make outrageous claims about how people in the Palaeolithic ate...)
I have seen no resources on non-diabetic. Did bro guy leave the building?
I too concentrate on protein and fat first. I NEED dietary fat for hormonal balance at my age. Protein is essential to for my exercise (lifting and now running back into my schedule). I let the carbs fall too. And I chose good sources, but I also enjoy a good dessert every night as well. :laugh:
If I had to eat 40% protein and 40% fat I would not feel like eating too much of anything else really.
And today is the only nice day this week to be outside. Winter has killed my outdoor running, treadmills are the worst for training. So I have to take it when it comes, I went into work later so I could run, but don't tell anyone. lol
I can so relate to this.
Couldn't run through all the snow this morning, though, and the weekend is definitely going to be another treadmill one, sigh.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »what i am saying is that they are already getting the sugar from the F&V then they buy fat free stuff thinking it health only to be eating massive amount of Sugar - 20% carbs a day are more than enough 40% Fat needed for endocrine system and CNS function, 40% protein needed for muscle retention , blood production, enzyme production....
Sugar needed for ATP production but you can produce ATP with fats and not have all the ancillary issue associate with Sugar consumption
Who is doing this? Given the current trends (paleo, low carb, keto, "clean eating"), who exactly is buying this fat free stuff? Who is even making it anymore? I don't think my grocery store even sells Snackwells anymore and they were like the poster child for low fat snacks. The trendy snacks are higher fat things like coconut chips or things that are higher in fiber like roasted chickpeas.
All I posted was a 40-40-20 rule where carbs are 20 - people started blowing me up over it and i was left having to call up medical journals substantiating my opinion
That wasn't all you did. You also claimed that the food pyramid was still current, that people following it would be "pounding down pasta all day long," and that someone who was following the current food recommendations would be consuming "massive" amounts of sugar.
You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies so that they could more easily sell fat-free products to people (although how this connection is supposed to work still isn't exactly clear to me).
You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals (or any type of journal).
"You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies" - NOPE never did that - I did respond to a question about it
"You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals" - yes i did
NIH
MAYO
JAP
you pic - reading is fun
When asked whether sugar companies benefit from people eating fruit, you responded: "of course it does - keep them eating sugar(fruit- sugar - basically the same) keep them fat - and watch us justify a low/no fat diet and we'll be able to load the products with sugar."
So you think the sugar companies had nothing to do with the recommendation to eat fruits and vegetables, they're just benefiting passively from recommendations made for other reasons? If I misunderstood you, then I apologize.
In the scenario you're writing about, who wants to "keep them fat" and why? If it isn't the sugar companies behind it, then who is doing it?
Sugar producers and corn producers love a fat USA - they get the tout a fat free diet knowing full well they are going to be throwing massive amounts of sugar into the product to make it taste good the whole time the package will say "FAT FREE" it so healthy for you
what products specifically?
the only low fat products I buy are 1% milk and non-fat Fage...neither of those products has added sugar at all...let alone "massive amounts"...I get plenty of dietary fat elsewhere from nuts, avocados, good cooking oils, etc...
It's 2018, not 1990...I don't really see "low fat" products produced and marketed like they were in 1990...
So what products specifically are marketed as "low fat" but have massive amounts of sugar added...
Perfect Example Special K - hey a HEALTHY cereal - almost no fat but hey please don;t look at the
33 grams of Sugar - CRAP for you - but touted as healthy and people buy it by the truck loads but hey ITS A GRAIN
5.8 grams of sugar...the rest of the carbohydrates are starch and fiber
Carbohydrate is a sugar ---- fiber content is 2.6 gramds the rest????? SUGAR - oh wait don;t you get it from the milk too
oh yeah FAT FREE milk though so its "healthy"
You know the sugar in milk is naturally occuring though... lactose.
and?????? who cares - its sugar - then you through the sugar in from you HEALTHY Special K and you fat free Faje yogurt with 8 more grams of Sugar - 100 pounds of year of processed sugar is what the average person eats - the average bag of sugar is 8 pounds - so that mean the average person literally consume 12-13 bag a year
Well you are the one claiming that there is tons of added sugar in fat free products....
Look fat free - so it MUST be healthy for you aside form the 33 grams of sugar - but hey its FATFREE
When you have nothing of importance to say keep repeating faulty info... yup 5.8=33
Has a hard time reading labels - must suck
Even if you are going to count all the carbs as "sugar"...which they aren't...the 5.8 is part of the 26.6 grams of carbohydrates...as is the 2.6 grams of fiber...they aren't on top of the 26.6...learn to read labels..
Amazing how the sugar industry managed to get 5.8grams per box put into a HEALTHY cereal that already has 26 grams of Carbs
First of all, Special K is more promoted as low cal than healthy.
Second, "the sugar industry" did nothing. Consumer taste and Kellogg's decided to make a cereal with added sugar. You can buy cereal without it too.
And if you are concerned about added sugar, why rant about 33 g, most of which is obviously NOT added sugar. You seem to think all carbs are bad for people (see also posts complaining about the promotion of fruits and veg). Absurd.
you need CARBS but not at the 40% of your diet level
My diet is 50%-60% carbs and I've lost 130 lbs. If that's my results with those numbers, I'll continue to stick with a diet that you think is complete and utter BS thank you very much.6 -
I eat these sometimes as a snack...they're marketed as "healthy" because they're high fat and "paleo approved"...
I mean, I'm sure they're very healthy being high fat and all...
But I'm on the fence with the 8 grams of sugar...err...I mean 26 grams of sugar...but hey...it's high fat so I think we're good here...6 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »I eat these sometimes as a snack...they're marketed as "healthy" because they're high fat and "paleo approved"...
I mean, I'm sure they're very healthy being high fat and all...
But I'm on the fence with the 8 grams of sugar...err...I mean 26 grams of sugar...but hey...it's high fat so I think we're good here...
Well if it's "paleo inspired" and has a picture of a caveman on the wrapper, it must be healthy, right? Because paleo.4 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »I eat these sometimes as a snack...they're marketed as "healthy" because they're high fat and "paleo approved"...
I mean, I'm sure they're very healthy being high fat and all...
But I'm on the fence with the 8 grams of sugar...err...I mean 26 grams of sugar...but hey...it's high fat so I think we're good here...
Defo 26g.2 -
Paleo is one of the biggest diet scams to come along in a while. To begin with, it's built upon false premises and assumptions. Couple that with the fact that an entire industry has formed around selling packaged/processed "paleo" products - and I'm pretty overwhelmingly sure that paleolithic man didn't have access to much in the way of packaged/processed foods.
(Note: I'm not saying there's anything inherently wrong with packaged/processed foods, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the paleo craze. If you're going to claim to eat like a caveman, sit there on a rock and gnaw on a freshly-killed animal carcass you roasted over an open fire, or boil some plants you just picked - don't peel the wrapper off your "paleo friendly" candy bar and think you're doing something special and virtuous.)
It's even more ridiculous than the "clean" or "whole food" based eaters who rail about the evils of processed foods, yet they use protein powders, supplement products, "superfood" mixtures, etc.11 -
Paleo is one of the biggest diet scams to come along in a while. To begin with, it's built upon false premises and assumptions. Couple that with the fact that an entire industry has formed around selling packaged/processed "paleo" products - and I'm pretty overwhelmingly sure that paleolithic man didn't have access to much in the way of packaged/processed foods.
(Note: I'm not saying there's anything inherently wrong with packaged/processed foods, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the paleo craze. If you're going to claim to eat like a caveman, sit there on a rock and gnaw on a freshly-killed animal carcass you roasted over an open fire, or boil some plants you just picked - don't peel the wrapper off your "paleo friendly" candy bar and think you're doing something special and virtuous.)
It's even more ridiculous than the "clean" or "whole food" based eaters who rail about the evils of processed foods, yet they use protein powders, supplement products, "superfood" mixtures, etc.
TRUFAX: Some of the tastiest gluten free pancakes I've ever had came from a package of "paleo" pancake mix.
Cuz cavemen totally chowed down on pancakes, yo.
Now, there were several funny things about this product (including the fact that almonds weren't even edible in the paleolithic era), but a recommendation in a thread here on MFP gave me a heads up that the taste and texture were good. I was more interested in a tasty GF product than anything else, tbh. I couldn't care less about the "paleo" claims.4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »TRUFAX: Some of the tastiest gluten free pancakes I've ever had came from a package of "paleo" pancake mix.
Cuz cavemen totally chowed down on pancakes, yo.
Now, there were several funny things about this product (including the fact that almonds weren't even edible in the paleolithic era), but a recommendation in a thread here on MFP gave me a heads up that the taste and texture were good. I was more interested in a tasty GF product than anything else, tbh. I couldn't care less about the "paleo" claims.
@GottaBurnEmAll
What brand? Asking for my wife.
1 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »TRUFAX: Some of the tastiest gluten free pancakes I've ever had came from a package of "paleo" pancake mix.
Cuz cavemen totally chowed down on pancakes, yo.
Now, there were several funny things about this product (including the fact that almonds weren't even edible in the paleolithic era), but a recommendation in a thread here on MFP gave me a heads up that the taste and texture were good. I was more interested in a tasty GF product than anything else, tbh. I couldn't care less about the "paleo" claims.
@GottaBurnEmAll
What brand? Asking for my wife.
Birchbenders.
Great thing about it is that it's a just add water type mix, so it's easy to use. Be sure to follow the instructions to let the batter sit, the pancakes will the fluffier.1 -
I adore Kitchfix Paleo Granola, but won't buy it, since it's silly high cal -- a bag (not that big) is like 10 servings and I could easily eat the whole thing. They also have a "paleo waffle mix," which is as hilarious as the pancake mix above. Probably tasty and high cal.
A serving has 27 g of carbs (before adding anything else), which I seem to recall someone else claiming made something inherently bad, though.2 -
The overwhelming body of evidence of low-carb/high fat trials has been aimed at the obese and diabetic. They work in that population and are safe to use in that population. There is a much more limited body of evidence in the non-diabetic person, but seems to be increasing slowly with the resurgence of low carb and keto.0
-
I refuse to even buy anything with the word 'paleo' on it. Is anyone surprised?
To be fair though, Palaeolithic peoples did use processing equipment, to *shock horror* make flour
. Presumably for the pancakes... 11 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »I refuse to even buy anything with the word 'paleo' on it. Is anyone surprised?
To be fair though, Palaeolithic peoples did use processing equipment, to *shock horror* make flour . Presumably for the pancakes...
Almonds, coconut, cassava. Seems legit. I'm sure all paleolithic people had access to those ingredients in their locations around the world.........oh and they totally avoided grains, that flour was made from almonds. Right?1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »I refuse to even buy anything with the word 'paleo' on it. Is anyone surprised?
To be fair though, Palaeolithic peoples did use processing equipment, to *shock horror* make flour . Presumably for the pancakes...
Almonds, coconut, cassava. Seems legit. I'm sure all paleolithic people had access to those ingredients in their locations around the world.........oh and they totally avoided grains, that flour was made from almonds. Right?
Well, if you didn't mind dying, sure you could use almonds (undomesticated almond kernels are wicked high in arsenic, someone obviously worked out how to deal with that somewhere along the line, or the trees never would have been cultivated, not sure when or where that happened, no time to check!). But no, that flour was the real deal, delicious, evil grainy things. Oats at c. 32KYA (thousand years ago), evidence for sorghum dates back to 105KYA.
Here's a nice wee article from Nature on some of the ones dating to around the 30KYA mark. I particularly like the last line of the second to last paragraph...http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101018/full/news.2010.549.html6 -
Well this was a fun way to spend a morning, dude went full on potato there with his "math"
Now I'm off to go make an evil death cake11 -
I just had a sticky toffee mug cake with vanilla Breyer's Delight vanilla ice cream. Was pretty legit. Don't mind if I die now.7
-
VintageFeline wrote: »I just had a sticky toffee mug cake with vanilla Breyer's Delight vanilla ice cream. Was pretty legit. Don't mind if I die now.
My daughter loves those mug cakes, warm cake and ice cream sounds like heaven1 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I just had a sticky toffee mug cake with vanilla Breyer's Delight vanilla ice cream. Was pretty legit. Don't mind if I die now.
My daughter loves those mug cakes, warm cake and ice cream sounds like heaven
I live alone so making an entire cake or pudding fit into my day is really not going to happen. And things have to super fresh for me to enjoy so stretching it would just end up with waste. And then the ready to go mug cakes just called out to me from the shelf in supermarket today. Would be rude to ignore them.5 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »I refuse to even buy anything with the word 'paleo' on it. Is anyone surprised?
To be fair though, Palaeolithic peoples did use processing equipment, to *shock horror* make flour . Presumably for the pancakes...
Trust me, it was a debate, but the "gluten free" label on it was the big draw for me. I just blithely ignored the big font on the paleo bit. So they're almond flour, cassava flour, coconut flour (there might be some tapioca starch in there, I don't remember). Just normal gluten free stuff that they slapped a paleo label on.2 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »I refuse to even buy anything with the word 'paleo' on it. Is anyone surprised?
To be fair though, Palaeolithic peoples did use processing equipment, to *shock horror* make flour . Presumably for the pancakes...
Almonds, coconut, cassava. Seems legit. I'm sure all paleolithic people had access to those ingredients in their locations around the world.........oh and they totally avoided grains, that flour was made from almonds. Right?
Well, if you didn't mind dying, sure you could use almonds (undomesticated almond kernels are wicked high in arsenic, someone obviously worked out how to deal with that somewhere along the line, or the trees never would have been cultivated, not sure when or where that happened, no time to check!). But no, that flour was the real deal, delicious, evil grainy things. Oats at c. 32KYA (thousand years ago), evidence for sorghum dates back to 105KYA.
Here's a nice wee article from Nature on some of the ones dating to around the 30KYA mark. I particularly like the last line of the second to last paragraph...http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101018/full/news.2010.549.html
Hey! Oats and sorghum are gluten free. Huzzah!1 -
tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.16 -
tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...10 -
tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
11 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
That fly life tho.4 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
That fly life tho.
Nah, that's just flying in the face of common sense...4 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
That fly life tho.
Nah, that's just flying in the face of common sense...
I got distracted and this whole thing flew past me!nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
That fly life tho.
That does sound pretty awesome!3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
I think I actually saw someone post a link to a worm study. I'm pretty sure it was related to IF but I could be remembering wrong.5 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »tramaine_21 wrote: »Too each is own when it comes to diets but intermittent fasting is a great kick start to a healthy lifestyle.
Intermittent fasting isn't a diet, it's an eating pattern. And there's nothing magical about it other than the fact that it helps some people adhere to their calorie goals more easily and provides higher satiety. For some people.
I know it's not a diet, hence why I wrote 'lifestyle', I was just putting it out there what works for me...Btw, there is a science behind 'IF'; it actually promotes autophagy, benefits, the liver, gall bladder, adrenals--especially weight-loss etc...All that can lead to a healthy body, diet and overall lifestyle. Do your research, and I say that respectfully.
Mildly only - the real benefits for increased autophagy are not seen until the fasting state reaches 24-48 hours. And all of the studies that I could find were either on mice or flies, so take those results with a grain of salt as well...
If I had a dollar for every time we have to tell people we aren't mice...
Someone please tell me that we aren't going to have to start telling people that we aren't flies. I'm scared
I think I actually saw someone post a link to a worm study. I'm pretty sure it was related to IF but I could be remembering wrong.
This made me laugh harder than it should have. :laugh:4
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
- 232.6K 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