What drives you nuts on the main forums?

BeachIron

Oh! I have another one. People who complain about others debating fitness and nutrition on a fitness and nutrition website!

Or, how about people complaining about fit and healthy people on a fitness and nutrition website.

If only I was sick, seriously overweight, female and/or unhealthy my opinions would be much more valid. Then I would know everything, and be able to tell all the fit and healthy people what they are doing wrong.

Debating, respectfully, is one thing. This (which I've seen on numerous occasions, and most of the responses are from guys) is a completely different one:

OP: I've been having trouble losing weight due to my PCOS, so I figured I'd give LCHF/Paleo/gluten free a try. Where can I start? Does anyone have any good recipes?

P1: You're just eating too much/lying about what you're tracking. You don't need to cut anything out. Everything in moderation.
P2: Eat less, move more.
P3: *Posts giant pic of donut*
P4: *Posts pic of body builder eating 20 donuts*
P5: It's not healthy to cut food groups out. You need carbs.
P6: Don't do that. It's not sustainable, or healthy. If you don't have Celiac or a medical condition requiring you to do it, you're just going to fail.
P7: I've lost 100lbs eating a donut every morning for breakfast! You don't need to cut out foods!
*More pics of donuts and other heavily-refined simple carbs.*
*More unsubstantiated claims that the OP is embarking on an unsustainable path, doomed to failure.*

Pro tip - PCOS and hypothyroidism are two of the top most misdiagnosed disorders in women, and Celiac is one of the most misdiagnosed disorders in general, and it's a fight to get the right tests done to get a diagnosis in most cases. Not having a medical diagnosis in hand does not equate to not having a medical reason for doing something. In some cases, eliminating one or more food group is the way to figure out what's wrong, or further prove your case to your doctors. Or hell, simply because the standard American diet, IIFYM style, is the unsustainable path, and you've read that fat is more satiating, so you want to try it for yourself.

Again, it's about context (and, in some cases, reading comprehension). Put yourself in the other person's shoes - they've tried the IIFYM way and it's not working for them, so they need to do something different. They've determined that switching to LCHF will help them adhere to their calorie count, and maybe eventually that Paleo helps them adhere to their macros and that they feel better not eating grains. If it works for them and doesn't inherently deprives them of various vital nutrients, why bash it?

Please read the discussion above. Rather than reintroducing the discussion of which group is being the bigger *kitten* hat, be it males or females, it would be much more productive to focus on nutrition and fitness. I was truly hoping that we had already moved on to that.

As for IIFYM, I don't think most people have a very good idea what it is and is not. And it certainly is not the "standard American diet." Yes, there are people saying that they eat at McDonald's every day (hint that really doesn't fit the description so well), and yes some people post pics of donuts (some light heartedly and perhaps some not so light heartedly, and often in response to statements that one should "NEVER" eat sweets, etc.), but in any serious discussion of IIFYM there is ALWAYS the caveat for specific medical conditions when discussing not cutting out food groups. Keep in mind, that gifs such as that are often used to illustrate the absurdity of saying that "you have to eat clean to have visible abs" or that "serious competitors don't eat donuts." The truth is that a "perfect" diet, however you want to define that, isn't necessary. There are plenty of good descriptions out there of what IIFYM is and they have been posted and linked to in these discussions numerous times. I'm happy to provide some if you would like me to, but in general, the idea is to eat a balanced diet with sufficient protein, fats, and fiber while using nutrient dense foods as around 80% of one's total diet and allowing a few calories (around 20%) for "treats." I tend to identify with the diet and the term because it describes quite well what I do. I have never been a potato chip or fast food type of guy but I do like beer, pizza and ice cream. I'm not going to judge another person's treat choices. The more I've gotten into it and studied some of the scientific backings for the approach, the more it has freed my mind to relax and enjoy my food and still enjoy objective success.

Now, where I personally take issue with cutting out food groups is when it is advised that everyone try it out and "see how it works." It's as if to say that someone doesn't have any food issues but let's start restricting someone's diet anyway to see if we can find something wrong to "diagnose" that isn't really there. If you cut out any food for a while, then you're very likely going to have some gastric distress when you re-introduce it. I went through this before when I tried a low fat diet and started reintroducing more fat in my diet. It doesn't mean that I'm normally sensitive to fats. And frankly, some of the diets such as Paleo that I do take issue with, seem incredibly well suited for someone with a gluten sensitivity, for example. What I have argued, and will continue to argue, is that the anthropological framework for the Paleo diet, and the claim that "humans are meant to eat this way" are not valid. So I guess you could say that my "bashing" (if you wish to call it that) is context specific.

Let me say one last thing in regard to gifs etc. from IIFYM folks. What any specific person says or does is not necessarily representative of the group. This goes as much for being male or female, as it does for following Paleo, IIFYM or "clean eating." I highly doubt that anyone in this thread wants to claim for themselves statements such as "You deserved to get cancer because your lifestyle choices" that my wife has received from certain MFP members. Interestingly enough, my first strike on MFP came because I tore into one of those *kitten* hats in a clean eating thread. Apparently, MFP allows people to be as cruel as they like in PMs but calling someone an "*kitten* hat" in the forums is a big no no.

I wasn't trying to bring up the discussion again of "who's the bigger asshat." It comes down to the polar opposite of the OP posting something rude or unhelpful, because the OP is doing something the responder doesn't agree with. It happens in all groups, and it's rarely actually productive.

That said, the post I quoted struck a nerve, because it was being snarky to a discussion that wasn't about whether a genuine response that considered the poster's own issues and was trying to help, but rather was about the asshats who have a "I lost weight easily, so weight loss is easy for everyone. If it's not easy for you, then you're just being lazy" attitude and don't even take the time to consider the person's specific issues. If a particular way of eating works for you, great. Just keep in mind that what works for you doesn't work for everyone, and that changing weight isn't the only success marker (maintaining good health, or even simply adherence and ability to eat within the calorie allotment are important markers of success).

I think the biggest issue with just about any eating framework is that the realities of it are often clouded by the people using their chosen one as a bat to beat people over the head with. The sane end of "clean eating" isn't that far off from any of the other whole-foods based frameworks, but its goal is lost because of the people like the one you encountered. Likewise, the realities of using Paleo as a framework is lost because of people who keep repeating the fallacy that the framework is supposed to exactly recreate our ancestors, and the sane IIFYM realities are lost because of the jerks using it as a bat and mocking the people who legitimately only have 1200-1400 calorie allotments, or who immediately attack the OP of a thread because they mentioned "eating clean" (which, to be honest, I see more than clean crusaders in an IIFYM post, and usually under the banner of "well, they do it to us!").

That's one of the things that bugs me - people using things like IIFYM, "everything in moderation," and "it's all just math" (and Veg*nism, Paleo, or any other framework) as bats with which to beat other people over the head. If the thread is a discussion on the merits of the different concepts, then discuss it, but if it simply mentions a particular framework to provide context ("hey guys, know any good vegan substitutes for meat in lasagna?"), there's no need to start a debate or go on a "my way is better" tirade in that discussion.

That's a fair point. Please just remember that it does go both ways, which was really my primary point from the beginning.

I will say that "it is easy" is not the same as saying "it is simple." I find losing weight incredibly simple, i.e. I cut my calories and follow IIFYM so that I stay healthy and maintain lean body mass in the process. That is not to say that I don't crave more ice cream, or that I wouldn't love to eat an entire bucket of fried chicken. And for me, it also takes me hitting the weights 4 days a week for 70-90 minutes at a time, bag work, and running. There is nothing complicated about any of that, but I would never claim it is "easy."

And as for discretionary calories, yes, someone eating 1200-1400 a day isn't going to have a lot of room for treats, which is one of the reasons (other than hunger) that many people have trouble with lower calorie diets, which is why you will see many questions regarding intake when someone starts talking about their 1200 calorie or less diet. To some people they are necessary. My wife has had to drop that low at the bottom of a cut because she has had a battle with her metabolism since chemo. Fortunately, she can lose weight at around 1800 these days but it took a long time for her to get there. And for very small people, it can be hard to lose weight at anything above 1200. The issue comes in when we are speaking about GENERAL points in the forums and we are not talking about a chemo patient, or someone who is 4'11"-5'0" tall, or doesn't have PCOS, etc. We all make better points when we are specific in what we say, and we understand those points when we carefully read what someone has written.

So yes. I do generally agree with you.

jen_zz

Oh yes... And don't forget, the "A CALORIE IS A CALORIE". Idiots. What you eat impacts your hormones, and that changes how your body stores and releases fat.

THANK YOU. So glad I found this thread and this group.

Rei1988

How did I ever miss this thread!?