What drives you nuts on the main forums?
Options
Replies
-
This.how about all the people who pounce on someone low carb curious as being hell spawn? LOL
Hell spawn, mouth breathing blithering idiots.
All of us.:happy:0 -
As a 48 year old woman in menopause, I'd have to say the shirtless 20something men telling everyone to eat more donuts and how they had 1200 calorie breakfasts, and it's just math brah, make me a tad testy. :happy: They fail to consider context as well.
And the folks who claim to be not on a diet, while measuring everything and counting every calorie. Umm, that's a diet.0 -
People who fail to apply context.
People who make assumptions about someones level of knowledge based on whether or not they are wearing a shirt.
People who use age to validate their erroneous claims.
And in. This thread should be good.
To be fair, one of the biggest alternative (non-IIFYM) diet bashers on the general forum is a shirtless 20-something.
That's entirely irrelevant to the point that appearance does not validate or invalidate information.0 -
What raises my metabolism by boiling my blood...
1 - The Vegans and their accusations of me being UNmoral and not evolved enough to care for the animals.
2 - The folks who tell me I don't understand the results I got from my WOE and that I am wrong in how I eat.
3 - The Low-Carbers who attack and tell me I should eat more carbs even though I am diabetic & my sugars are the best ever.
4 - ANYone who attacks anyone for their CHOICE of eating plan.
5 - The anti-High Fatters who spout their research is better than the research I did to make my choices. 0
6 - The MEANies.
7 - Anyone who is "ANTI" a certain eating style who trolls the threads to find something they are against and the go there and argue over and over why the poster is wrong. If you aren't Vegan, don't go to Vegan threads, if you aren't a low-carber, stay away, If you are Vegan, leave the carnivores alone.
p.s. I am not Anti-Vegan, Anti-High Carb, Anti-Low fat if that is what you CHOOSE. I CHOOSE to be the opposite!
' GREAT POSSIBILITIES comes with CHOICE"
P.S.0 -
People who fail to apply context.
People who make assumptions about someones level of knowledge based on whether or not they are wearing a shirt.
People who use age to validate their erroneous claims.
And in. This thread should be good.
To be fair, one of the biggest alternative (non-IIFYM) diet bashers on the general forum is a shirtless 20-something.
That's entirely irrelevant to the point that appearance does not validate or invalidate information.
I think you are proof of this, obviously your superior genetics play a huge role in your body0 -
People who make assumptions about someones level of knowledge based on whether or not they are wearing a shirt.
I half hope you changed your photo, just to make this point :-)
oh no...no no no...that's THE standard daily SS photo
god love him0 -
- Starvation mode discussions really wind me up. Starvation mode doesn't happen to people who are 100 lbs overweight and eating 1500 cals a day. Other things, like your body using both fat and protein for fuel to make up the cal difference, but that isn't "starvation mode".
- The 20 something guys preaching to everyone else about "how it works" ... those guys generally don't have enough experience in life and their bodies to know what it is like to be in your late 40's and trying to lose weight and gain muscle.
- IIFYM and CICO drive me insane. They totally ignore the content of the food, equating the carbs in a twinkie with the carbs in a salad is whacked.
- Being anti clean eating and proud of eating processed crap.
- Thinking that something as crappy for you as refined sugars are okay in moderation so that you don't deprive yourself of something you enjoy. This is like saying that you will only use heroin in moderation so that you don't deprive yourself of something that you enjoy.0 -
not looking at people's public diaries before making any kind of assumptions0
-
All of the above... and it's advised by some shirtless 20-something.
(I'm so glad I found you people)
^^^^^THIS^^^^^
I could eat over 6000 calories a day and maintain 11% body fat when I was in my 20's. That has changed drastically as I got older. It was nothing for me to eat a loaf of bread and drink a gallon of milk in a day. If I did that now, I'd gain 5 - 7 lbs per week.
In!
With my 40 year old self.0 -
People who fail to apply context.
People who make assumptions about someones level of knowledge based on whether or not they are wearing a shirt.
People who use age to validate their erroneous claims.
And in. This thread should be good.
To be fair, one of the biggest alternative (non-IIFYM) diet bashers on the general forum is a shirtless 20-something.
That's entirely irrelevant to the point that appearance does not validate or invalidate information.
I don't disagree on that part. I was simply pointing out the fact that several of the worst offenders do actually fit the aforementioned stereotype, and as Sabine put it:As a 48 year old woman in menopause, I'd have to say the shirtless 20something men telling everyone to eat more donuts and how they had 1200 calorie breakfasts, and it's just math brah, make me a tad testy. :happy: They fail to consider context as well.
And yes, while technically, it does ultimately boil down to "calories in vs calories out," there's a completely different problem at hand when losing weight requires you to eat sub-1000 calories when you should be able to lose comfortably on more than 2000 according to every calculator available. In this case, the context is hormones screwing with one's metabolism, well outside the norm (and when dealing with uncooperative hormones, what you eat does, in fact, matter at least as much as how much you eat).
And sorry, but just because you, as a male in his prime can lose weight eating nothing but Twinkies, it doesn't mean that I, as not only a female, but one with PCOS can.0 -
Seriously, SS, quit living on Twinkies and handing out such horrible advice already. How dare you.0
-
IN. just cuz
(also, i'm trying to cut back on refined carbs, in all honesty. but yeah, i like bread. so sue me. i'm just trying sonmething new out because i can't seem to shed belly fat no matter what i've tried.)
back to the original programming...
0 -
Exactly. And there's mounting evidence that menopause is or causes insulin resistance, and I firmly believe that given my life experience as someone who could lose easily, until the last two years.People who fail to apply context.
People who make assumptions about someones level of knowledge based on whether or not they are wearing a shirt.
People who use age to validate their erroneous claims.
And in. This thread should be good.
To be fair, one of the biggest alternative (non-IIFYM) diet bashers on the general forum is a shirtless 20-something.
That's entirely irrelevant to the point that appearance does not validate or invalidate information.
I don't disagree on that part. I was simply pointing out the fact that several of the worst offenders do actually fit the aforementioned stereotype, and as Sabine put it:As a 48 year old woman in menopause, I'd have to say the shirtless 20something men telling everyone to eat more donuts and how they had 1200 calorie breakfasts, and it's just math brah, make me a tad testy. :happy: They fail to consider context as well.
And yes, while technically, it does ultimately boil down to "calories in vs calories out," there's a completely different problem at hand when losing weight requires you to eat sub-1000 calories when you should be able to lose comfortably on more than 2000 according to every calculator available. In this case, the context is hormones screwing with one's metabolism, well outside the norm (and when dealing with uncooperative hormones, what you eat does, in fact, matter at least as much as how much you eat).
And sorry, but just because you, as a male in his prime can lose weight eating nothing but Twinkies, it doesn't mean that I, as not only a female, but one with PCOS can.
It IS math. But when your window is 200 calories, it's not easy math. When carbs screw you up (PCOS) it's not easy, and when you're so fatigued (many of the nice folks on here) that working out is a challenge, to be told to "just lift heavy" or "just move more and eat less" isn't all that helpful.0 -
Which gets harder now that even POSTS are private. Hard to see who's 16 with an ED when I can't see posting histories.not looking at people's public diaries before making any kind of assumptions
But yes. I totally agree.0 -
All of the above... and it's advised by some shirtless 20-something.
(I'm so glad I found you people)
^^^^^THIS^^^^^
I could eat over 6000 calories a day and maintain 11% body fat when I was in my 20's. That has changed drastically as I got older. It was nothing for me to eat a loaf of bread and drink a gallon of milk in a day. If I did that now, I'd gain 5 - 7 lbs per week.
In!
With my 40 year old self.
In!
With my 46 year old female self (without a shirt).0 -
People who equate sugar addiction to heroin addiction.0
-
All of the above... and it's advised by some shirtless 20-something.
(I'm so glad I found you people)
^^^^^THIS^^^^^
I could eat over 6000 calories a day and maintain 11% body fat when I was in my 20's. That has changed drastically as I got older. It was nothing for me to eat a loaf of bread and drink a gallon of milk in a day. If I did that now, I'd gain 5 - 7 lbs per week.
In!
With my 40 year old self.
In!
With my 46 year old female self (without a shirt).
Hot.0 -
I think this is the fastest I've seen a thread move in this group
0 -
I think this is the fastest I've seen a thread move in this group
we're just all here for Sara and SS.....
they are inspiring...uh I mean shirtless...
0 -
And sorry, but just because you, as a male in his prime can lose weight eating nothing but Twinkies, it doesn't mean that I, as not only a female, but one with PCOS can.
If you're going to go there, it just means you get fewer twinkies than I do. It doesn't mean you can't lose weight eating them.0
