Everything in Moderation?

13»

Replies

  • totem12
    totem12 Posts: 194 Member
    Almost everyone I know that is naturally thin (unlike me who has to count the cals) lives by moderation, 80:20, whatever you want to call it. There is more to health than nutrient breakdown. I don't want to live a miserable life of 'optimum' foods I don't like as much. I want to enjoy myself and eat that goddamn unhealthy pizza, and not have to stress because I know the broccoli can come later. My overall quality of life will ALWAYS feel better to me with everything in moderation rather than stress and deprivation.
  • happyheathen927
    happyheathen927 Posts: 167 Member
    Y'all are cracking me up ... the absolute very last thing in the WORLD that the Whole9/Whole30 folks are doing is trying to sell diet pills. And the earlier poster is right...you don't have to buy a damn thing to try a Whole30, except amazingly delicious whole foods (which presumably you were going to buy anyway). Yes, they have a book, about which I have heard wonderful things. I don't own it, and yet successfully completed a Whole30 almost a year ago. I know dozens of people who've done the same, with many associated health improvements.

    A Whole30 has little to do with weight loss (although I did lose 15# in that month) and more to do with finding out which foods might be causing health problems. For me, I discovered that the small amount of dairy I was eating was having a much larger impact on my bG than I realized or expected. I also found that even my limited use of stevia and honey was triggering cravings for sweets. I still use stevia and a little honey on occasion, but I'm more aware of the effect they have on my body. How can more information about how food affects your body (specifically, not in general) be a bad thing?
  • mrmagee3
    mrmagee3 Posts: 518 Member
    The problem is you put moderation in quotation like there isn't a way to measure if it isn't moderation. Moderation means it fits in your cal goals. If you keep increasing your portion size you are no longer using moderation. It is not that moderation doesn't work, it is that you are unwilling to use moderation.

    Addressing the "moderation means it fits in your cal goals" piece:

    If your calorie goal is 1700kcal/day, and you eat 1700kcal of table sugar, do you consider yourself to be indulging in a moderate amount of sugar?
  • SnicciFit
    SnicciFit Posts: 967 Member
    Y'all are cracking me up ... the absolute very last thing in the WORLD that the Whole9/Whole30 folks are doing is trying to sell diet pills.

    That cracked me up as well. Made me wonder if they actually read anything on the site??
  • SnicciFit
    SnicciFit Posts: 967 Member

    I don't see how either of these relate to the original topic or to the conversation? Malnourishment does not equal underfed. You can eat an excess of calories and still be malnourished.

    Edited for stupid errors.
  • SnicciFit
    SnicciFit Posts: 967 Member
    A caloric deficit (i.e. taking less than you burn) will always work unless you have an underlying medical issue. That also has to be accompanied by a CARB deficit as well.

    What the Whole30 program by Whole9 does is help reveal those underlying issues. It helps individuals identify how certain foods are effecting their health (without costing them a dime in medical bills..etc.)
  • ItsCasey
    ItsCasey Posts: 4,022 Member
    The problem is all this pop psychology "relationship with food" nonsense. People are attributing human qualities to food so that they have yet another thing to blame for their failures.

    Well let me burst some bubbles. Food doesn't give a flying crap about you. Food isn't your friend. You don't HAVE a relationship with food, healthy or otherwise. What you have is the ability to control how much food you eat. You either exercise it or you don't.
  • jlapey
    jlapey Posts: 1,850 Member
    The problem is all this pop psychology "relationship with food" nonsense. People are attributing human qualities to food so that they have yet another thing to blame for their failures.

    Well let me burst some bubbles. Food doesn't give a flying crap about you. Food isn't your friend. You don't HAVE a relationship with food, healthy or otherwise. What you have is the ability to control how much food you eat. You either exercise it or you don't.

    AMEN
  • SnicciFit
    SnicciFit Posts: 967 Member
    The problem is all this pop psychology "relationship with food" nonsense. People are attributing human qualities to food so that they have yet another thing to blame for their failures.

    Well let me burst some bubbles. Food doesn't give a flying crap about you. Food isn't your friend. You don't HAVE a relationship with food, healthy or otherwise. What you have is the ability to control how much food you eat. You either exercise it or you don't.

    I disagree. I believe that food is essential to survival and that it can make you healthy or unhealthy. I think our relationship with food is no longer as simple as you make it out to be due to the way it has been manipulated by manufacturers.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member

    I don't see how either of these relate to the original topic or to the conversation? Malnourishment does not equal underfed. You can eat an excess of calories and still be malnourished.

    Edited for stupid errors.

    They were in response to someone making up that nutrient deficiencies cause fat to be stored and the first link was in response that the person that said "Every research program (that i am aware of) that has studied calorie restricted diets over a long period show that they are a fail for sustainable, permanent weight loss"
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member

    I don't see how either of these relate to the original topic or to the conversation? Malnourishment does not equal underfed. You can eat an excess of calories and still be malnourished.

    Edited for stupid errors.

    They were in response to someone making up that nutrient deficiencies cause fat to be stored and the first link was in response that the person that said "Every research program (that i am aware of) that has studied calorie restricted diets over a long period show that they are a fail for sustainable, permanent weight loss"

    It is my opinion that you are the most ignorant person on MFP and it's beyond ridiculous how you go out of your way to ridicule my personal experience at every opportunity. It's interesting that you follow me around just to try to push people away from my simple message, based on 40 years of experience with what does NOT work, that WHAT one eats matters in regards to health. I think it's ridiculous that only your experiences matter and since you have apparently had no metabolic disorders, etc, you assert that it must not exist. My comments are usually in regards to someone that is struggling and I speak from personal experience with many health problems; shame on your for doing your best to sabotage people who desperately need a healthier lifestyle.

    I did not say that ALL malnourished people are fat. I'm talking about fat people in developed nations such as the US and Canada. Many of those people are malnourished. I was one of them. Strangely, though, previous hunter/gatherers that adopt a diet similar to SAD, obesity is soon commonplace even in absence of large quantities of calories (Pima Indians, native New Zealanders, Inuit, many others). Perhaps you should start learning about some things outside of your own limited experience, since you seem to lacking and would benefit from learning about other people. Anthropology would be just one of many places to start.

    I'd love to see you post a real picture of yourself. At least I'm not hiding behind a fake image of perfection.

    Ah the Pima, do a little research you say? Pot meet kettle. And ignorance? Better do a little more research before you call people ignorant, you have eat fat to burn fat herp derp

    RESULTS— We estimated that the traditional Pima diet, although seasonably variable, was ∼ 70–80% carbohydrate, 8–12% fat, and 12–18% protein.

    CONCLUSIONS— The major composition change in the Pima Indian diet over the last century has been that the
    high complex carbohydrate/high fiber foods have been replaced by high-fat modern foods. This change in the Pima
    Indian diet parallels the increase in diabetes.

    The Traditional Pima Indian Diet: Composition and adaptation for use in a dietary intervention study

    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/16/1/369.full.pdf+html

    No you didn't say all malnourished people were fat, what you did say was, "If your body needs nutrients and is not getting them, the signal to eat continues and continues, and excessive fat is stored instead of burned."

    Which was made up, as then we would see 3rd World countries as some of the most obese nations on Earth. Also posted a study of someone who fasted for over a yr with medical supervision, why wasn't tons of excess fat stored?

    As for the picture, it really is me. But do continue with the personal attacks, as they won't make what you say any more true