Opinions on the keto diet??
Options
Replies
-
^ This is absolutely hilarious.GaleHawkins wrote: »I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Lol! Gotta agree!!
2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
Pretty sure you completely missed the point. Not surprised. Must be that mental clarity you get from keto.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.6 -
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
For what it's worth, I think anyone without an axe to grind got your point and agrees fully with the above.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
Is it best that one puts water, gas or motor oil in their car?
Can we agree it depends on the needs of that car in question?
One that lived and ate their Blue Zone WOE for 100 years I would be against them moving to Keto or a high carb/fat processed food WOE.
This is why n=1 is the only thing that matters to me. If a WOE works well then that is well. If a WOE is killing one then that is not well.
In my case 40 years of high carb/fat processed food was flat out killing me. 3.5 years eating something between Keto and Low Carb High Fat as reversed my health decline back about 30 years so far and now I am learning the science behind it. I could have cared less about the science of Keto until I realized it was like magic in my case. As a scientist I do not believe in magic so I went looking for the science that made Keto/LCHF seemed like magic and found it.10 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
Is it best that one puts water, gas or motor oil in their car?
Can we agree it depends on the needs of that car in question?
One that lived and ate their Blue Zone WOE for 100 years I would be against them moving to Keto or a high carb/fat processed food WOE.
This is why n=1 is the only thing that matters to me. If a WOE works well then that is well. If a WOE is killing one then that is not well.
In my case 40 years of high carb/fat processed food was flat out killing me. 3.5 years eating something between Keto and Low Carb High Fat as reversed my health decline back about 30 years so far and now I am learning the science behind it. I could have cared less about the science of Keto until I realized it was like magic in my case. As a scientist I do not believe in magic so I went looking for the science that made Keto/LCHF seemed like magic and found it.
To the bolded:
This is the funniest thing I've ever read on these forums. You have got to be kidding me. You are not a scientist. Scientist doesn't mean what you think it means.11 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
But there aren't different Blue Zones WOE. They all eat a diet based in veggies, whole grains, beans, nuts, and fruit. Some are vegetarian, some eat a little fish, some have meat on special occasions. None are LCHF. I'm not saying LCHF isn't healthy, but I'm wondering why if it's optimal, it is the opposite of what the areas of the world where optimal results are being achieved are eating.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.7 -
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
keto = a real case of carbophobia. Irrational but trendy phobia of carbs.
4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?14 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?
How are you preventing all of these things when you are eating processed foods multiple times a day? McDonald's isnt exactly the most fresh and wholesome.
And yes, blue zones are know for low levels of hear disease and cardiovascular health. Thence being the longest living. You can also look up the evidence on plant based foods and fish. Because that is the blue zone diet.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?
Does generations of people who live to be over 100 and active not count as evidence? Do you have examples of groups of people who have eaten LCHF for an entire lifetime and lived to be over 100?
Studies that show switching from SAD to Keto improves health do not consider any other way of eating, or the long term effects of eating Keto. I'd wager you could switch from SAD to pretty much any reasonably nutritious diet mindful of calories and portion size and reduce your risk of all sorts of disease.
Until there are generations of people who eat Keto for their lifetime and live into a healthy old age with lower risk of lifestyle diseases, I think it's irresponsible to say that Keto is proven to be a healthy WOE. It seems to be healthy short term, and seems to be sustainable for some, and if done wisely is at least an improvement over SAD. As far as I can tell, anything beyond that is still up in the air.9 -
Also, I'm sure there are plenty of studies showing that diets high in fiber, or eating more veggies, or even eating vegetarian improve health markers.5
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?
Does generations of people who live to be over 100 and active not count as evidence? Do you have examples of groups of people who have eaten LCHF for an entire lifetime and lived to be over 100?
Studies that show switching from SAD to Keto improves health do not consider any other way of eating, or the long term effects of eating Keto. I'd wager you could switch from SAD to pretty much any reasonably nutritious diet mindful of calories and portion size and reduce your risk of all sorts of disease.
Until there are generations of people who eat Keto for their lifetime and live into a healthy old age with lower risk of lifestyle diseases, I think it's irresponsible to say that Keto is proven to be a healthy WOE. It seems to be healthy short term, and seems to be sustainable for some, and if done wisely is at least an improvement over SAD. As far as I can tell, anything beyond that is still up in the air.
I'd say that any diet can be healthy or unhealthy. Being keto, just like being vegan, doesnt gaurentee health, especially if one is overweight/obese and/or inactive.3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?
Does generations of people who live to be over 100 and active not count as evidence? Do you have examples of groups of people who have eaten LCHF for an entire lifetime and lived to be over 100?
Studies that show switching from SAD to Keto improves health do not consider any other way of eating, or the long term effects of eating Keto. I'd wager you could switch from SAD to pretty much any reasonably nutritious diet mindful of calories and portion size and reduce your risk of all sorts of disease.
Until there are generations of people who eat Keto for their lifetime and live into a healthy old age with lower risk of lifestyle diseases, I think it's irresponsible to say that Keto is proven to be a healthy WOE. It seems to be healthy short term, and seems to be sustainable for some, and if done wisely is at least an improvement over SAD. As far as I can tell, anything beyond that is still up in the air.
I'd say that any diet can be healthy or unhealthy. Being keto, just like being vegan, doesnt gaurentee health, especially if one is overweight/obese and/or inactive.
I totally agree any diet can be unhealthy, but I'm still not sure any diet can be healthy long term. But I'm an old fogey set in my ways with a lifetime of bad advice rattling around in my brain, and I can't deny that bias with a straight face 4 -
My opinion? I think this diet was originally designed with specific medical issues in mind - medical issues which I do not personally have.
I get great results without putting a bunch of strict limits and rules on my eating, and I'm not interested in adding any additional complications to my life. A lot of people feel like they have to make things complicated in order to feel like they are doing something legit. I don't have that need, and I like to keep things simple and easy. Plus, I'm big into my athletic activities, and a lack of carbs makes me evil cranky. I could never sustain that. I need all the serotonin I can get.
But I'm cool with live and let live. I'm also a big fan of doing what works for the individual. If Keto does it for you, that's great. Who am I to say what's best for everyone?
5 -
when I worked at a nursing home one of the residents was 106 and ate what she wanted and got around pretty good for he age. she couldnt hear though she went deaf over the years(she could read lips).but when she died she was like 110, she was on no special diet at all. she still ate her meals without needing then blended up like some of the residents. she needed help cutting things up of course.cant say exactly why she was in there. could be that her son was a dr and didnt have the time? I dont know. but she loved her treats too. this was in the mid 90s.
point is she had no know health issues eating that way all her life.could be possibly that she has a normal weight and obtained it all of her life(there were many pics).2 -
I have not read this entire thread as it is quite long but from what I can see there is little understanding of the keto diet here. I have been in ketosis for over a year and I have lost 110 pounds. The diet really is the only solution for individuals with insulin resistance to successfully lose weight and regain a healthy metabolism. I was diabetic with high cholesterol and high blood pressure. I now have perfect numbers with the exception of the scale but that number keeps going down.
The only way to be successful with keto is to focus on the food you can eat and understand that many of us are basically allergic to sugar. If you were allergic to peanuts you would avoid them wouldn't you?
It takes some getting used to but after two weeks or so it gets much easier.
Is it the diet for everyone? Probably not but calories in calories out is not either. Calorie restriction will eventually lower your BMR and weight loss will stop.
The fundamental truth behind keto is that your body cannot burn fat when it is in fat storage mode which is what happens in the presence of insulin. Insulin is produced when you consume carbs. If you continually have carbs available you will never be in a state where you can burn fat because you will continually have insulin present in your system.
Being low carb becomes easy in time. I regularly go out with friends and family and succeed in staying low carb without putting anyone out. Again, it's low carb. Not NO carb. The first month or so you should be under 20 net carbs to get yourself firmly into ketosis but after that you can have days when you have 50 net carbs without kicking yourself out of ketosis. Just don't do it day after day.
Tonight I went out with a friend and had Chinese. Stuck to dishes which were meat and veg and asked them to go easy on the starch. No fuss and no social awkwardness.
I am sure that some will take exception to some or all of this but hey it's working for me and many others.
Oh, and I am doing this under the supervision of a medical doctor and they are thrilled with my progress.
Insulin is actually produced 24/7 to control natural releases of glycogen by the liver during normal function, as well as in response to stress. Your body doesn't just shut it off and start again.8 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.
I am only 67 currently and trying to reverse damage I took after 40 years of eating highly processed food high in sugar and fat. I am using Keto to do that and find out why the carbs were leading me to binging on processed foods like I use to eat.
Preventing cancer, stoke, dementia, heart attack, type 2 diabetes, etc from past highly processed foods have put me at risk of experiencing.
Clearly a lifestyle of not cursing, drinking alcohol and doing drugs plus no highly processed carbs/fats like the Blue Zone in CA is awesome but I have not seen research on how it can lower the risks of the above health issues the way Keto/LCHF studies. If a person with a compromised heart can increase its efficiency by 25% by burning fat based foods vs carb based foods then where would be the gain for that person to eat the Blue Zone WOE?
Does generations of people who live to be over 100 and active not count as evidence? Do you have examples of groups of people who have eaten LCHF for an entire lifetime and lived to be over 100?
Studies that show switching from SAD to Keto improves health do not consider any other way of eating, or the long term effects of eating Keto. I'd wager you could switch from SAD to pretty much any reasonably nutritious diet mindful of calories and portion size and reduce your risk of all sorts of disease.
Until there are generations of people who eat Keto for their lifetime and live into a healthy old age with lower risk of lifestyle diseases, I think it's irresponsible to say that Keto is proven to be a healthy WOE. It seems to be healthy short term, and seems to be sustainable for some, and if done wisely is at least an improvement over SAD. As far as I can tell, anything beyond that is still up in the air.
I'd say that any diet can be healthy or unhealthy. Being keto, just like being vegan, doesnt gaurentee health, especially if one is overweight/obese and/or inactive.
I’d be hard pressed to think that high fat diets are healthy. I’m old though. I know my doctor wants me to eat with a lower fat intake, a more balanced approach. She said more vegetables and less fat.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 997 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions