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.
Fitness and diet myths that just won't go away
Replies
-
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One needs to "hydrate" and/or bring a water bottle for a 30 minute leisurely walk around the neighborhood.
Agreed. I normally walk for an hour and I need to restrict water intake for about 30 minutes prior to heading out as there are no public restrooms on my walk route and water goes straight through me. (Although this tactic may be unique to middle-aged lady bladders) If it's very hot outside I do carry a water bottle but don't drink until after the halfway point or my "walk" turns into a sprint.
I know I'm late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that my personal rule is that I don't carry water for any run shorter than 15 miles. It's totally unnecessary (even at high temps). That means that I haven't carried water on a run since my 40-mile ultra in 2013. During all that time, I've only stopped at one water stop during a race, too. That was at a half-marathon, somewhere around mile 10 or 11. I didn't need the water, but when I turned the corner, I could see the next mile of the course going up a long hill and I needed to stop and think about what I was doing!
During my ultra, I drank an excessive amount and it might have played a part in me avoiding cramps and a DNF due to dehydration (it was unseasonably warm in October), but I've since learned that it would have been a dangerous amount (10 L in 10.5 hours) if I hadn't have been eating so much sodium. I did have to pee a lot (7 to 10 times at least), which certainly took a few minutes off my finishing time.
The "need" to hydrate constantly during exercise is certainly a myth and it is one that is propagated by major corporations in order to increase their profits. Actual studies have demonstrated that the winners of major races are often the most dehydrated. I don't know of any evidence that someone has died during recreational or competitive exercise because of dehydration, but I understand that at least half a dozen people have died because of hyponatremia caused by over-hydration and inadequate sodium intake.
I agree with this. My aunt always brings a bottle of water with her when she goes for a short 1 mile walk. I also see so many people drinking tons off water in hot yoga (it is only 1-1.5 hours). I have never drank water during it. If you are well hydrated you should be okay for a few hours without water. If not, that means you likely aren't drinking enough in general. I drink a TON throughout the day so I just don't have the need to drink water when I only bike/run/walk for 2-3 hours. I have never done an ultra, but I DEFINITELY would have also had to drink then lol.
Wait ... what? You run or bike for "only" 2-3 hours and don't drink anything? Jesus my throat gets dry in 30 minutes on my spin bike I'd be parched in 2-3 hours.12 -
.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One needs to "hydrate" and/or bring a water bottle for a 30 minute leisurely walk around the neighborhood.
Agreed. I normally walk for an hour and I need to restrict water intake for about 30 minutes prior to heading out as there are no public restrooms on my walk route and water goes straight through me. (Although this tactic may be unique to middle-aged lady bladders) If it's very hot outside I do carry a water bottle but don't drink until after the halfway point or my "walk" turns into a sprint.
I know I'm late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that my personal rule is that I don't carry water for any run shorter than 15 miles. It's totally unnecessary (even at high temps). That means that I haven't carried water on a run since my 40-mile ultra in 2013. During all that time, I've only stopped at one water stop during a race, too. That was at a half-marathon, somewhere around mile 10 or 11. I didn't need the water, but when I turned the corner, I could see the next mile of the course going up a long hill and I needed to stop and think about what I was doing!
During my ultra, I drank an excessive amount and it might have played a part in me avoiding cramps and a DNF due to dehydration (it was unseasonably warm in October), but I've since learned that it would have been a dangerous amount (10 L in 10.5 hours) if I hadn't have been eating so much sodium. I did have to pee a lot (7 to 10 times at least), which certainly took a few minutes off my finishing time.
The "need" to hydrate constantly during exercise is certainly a myth and it is one that is propagated by major corporations in order to increase their profits. Actual studies have demonstrated that the winners of major races are often the most dehydrated. I don't know of any evidence that someone has died during recreational or competitive exercise because of dehydration, but I understand that at least half a dozen people have died because of hyponatremia caused by over-hydration and inadequate sodium intake.
I agree with this. My aunt always brings a bottle of water with her when she goes for a short 1 mile walk. I also see so many people drinking tons off water in hot yoga (it is only 1-1.5 hours). I have never drank water during it. If you are well hydrated you should be okay for a few hours without water. If not, that means you likely aren't drinking enough in general. I drink a TON throughout the day so I just don't have the need to drink water when I only bike/run/walk for 2-3 hours. I have never done an ultra, but I DEFINITELY would have also had to drink then lol.
Wait ... what? You run or bike for "only" 2-3 hours and don't drink anything? Jesus0 my throat gets dry in 30 minutes on my spin bike I'd be parched in 2-3 hours.
Yes, I think there's some individual variability left out here.
I've been talking 5 mile walks a few times a week, which takes me about an hour and a quarter to an hour and a half.
It's been getting hot here. I sweat ridiculously heavily under almost any conditions, so I've been taking a small water bottle with me lately, drinking at my halfway point. Recently, I took an alternate route with multiple loops (to try to stay on shadier parts of the trail), so I was doing mental math to track what I needed to do to hit my distance goal. My mental math degraded as I went along, and I'm pretty sure that's hydration. (I'm used to the distance/speed, and hydration doesn't seem to affect my pace, which is consistent throughout.)
On the water (I'm a rower), sub-ideal hydration can subtly affect coordination and reflexes, even on rows as short as an hour, and that's a safety consideration in those skinny boats. We all take a water bottle in the boat.5 -
mistyrbell9588 wrote: »not really a myth, but i wish it was:
1. aging has no effect on metabolism
2. child birth/pregnancy has little effect after the child is born and the pregnancy is over. . .
geez i wish that was just a myth
It's not a myth, in statistical terms (of course individuals can vary). I think people frequently over-estimate it, though. If I use a calculator to get a statistical estimate of my BMR at constant body size, the BMR at 25 and 65 differ by approximately 2 daily tablespoons of peanut butter. That's meaningful, but not exactly overwhelming. (The gap may be proportionately bigger for bigger people; I'm 5'5", 125 pounds, and the real me is 65, not 25.)
I tend to use Sailrabbit **, because it lets me compare multiple different research-based BMR estimating formulas. All three formulas, the difference between 25 and 65 is similar, ranges from 170 calories to 200 calories difference between the two ages 40 years apart, depending on the specific formula.
Sailrabbit also lets me add estimated body fat percent, and compare multiple different research-based formulas that take body fat into account. When I do that, and compare myself at 25 & 65 at the same size and body fat percent, the BMR estimates are . . . identical, for all 3 formulas that use body fat percent. Hmm. 😉
**https://www.sailrabbit.com/bmr/4 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One needs to "hydrate" and/or bring a water bottle for a 30 minute leisurely walk around the neighborhood.
Agreed. I normally walk for an hour and I need to restrict water intake for about 30 minutes prior to heading out as there are no public restrooms on my walk route and water goes straight through me. (Although this tactic may be unique to middle-aged lady bladders) If it's very hot outside I do carry a water bottle but don't drink until after the halfway point or my "walk" turns into a sprint.
I know I'm late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that my personal rule is that I don't carry water for any run shorter than 15 miles. It's totally unnecessary (even at high temps). That means that I haven't carried water on a run since my 40-mile ultra in 2013. During all that time, I've only stopped at one water stop during a race, too. That was at a half-marathon, somewhere around mile 10 or 11. I didn't need the water, but when I turned the corner, I could see the next mile of the course going up a long hill and I needed to stop and think about what I was doing!
During my ultra, I drank an excessive amount and it might have played a part in me avoiding cramps and a DNF due to dehydration (it was unseasonably warm in October), but I've since learned that it would have been a dangerous amount (10 L in 10.5 hours) if I hadn't have been eating so much sodium. I did have to pee a lot (7 to 10 times at least), which certainly took a few minutes off my finishing time.
The "need" to hydrate constantly during exercise is certainly a myth and it is one that is propagated by major corporations in order to increase their profits. Actual studies have demonstrated that the winners of major races are often the most dehydrated. I don't know of any evidence that someone has died during recreational or competitive exercise because of dehydration, but I understand that at least half a dozen people have died because of hyponatremia caused by over-hydration and inadequate sodium intake.
I agree with this. My aunt always brings a bottle of water with her when she goes for a short 1 mile walk. I also see so many people drinking tons off water in hot yoga (it is only 1-1.5 hours). I have never drank water during it. If you are well hydrated you should be okay for a few hours without water. If not, that means you likely aren't drinking enough in general. I drink a TON throughout the day so I just don't have the need to drink water when I only bike/run/walk for 2-3 hours. I have never done an ultra, but I DEFINITELY would have also had to drink then lol.
Wait ... what? You run or bike for "only" 2-3 hours and don't drink anything? Jesus my throat gets dry in 30 minutes on my spin bike I'd be parched in 2-3 hours.
Not at all uncommon for me to bike for a couple hours without water. Even when I've got a bottle full of it that's easy and convenient to reach.1 -
A piece of advice I read years back and still follow to this day: eat for the body you want. Whether you want to gain or lose weight, figure out what a person of your goal weight would eat as regular maintenance, and make THAT your new norm. Your body will over time change to be more in line with this new "normal." Yes, the change will be slower than if you actually calculate out a plus/minus x calories per day, but the benefit is you only have to change your eating habits ONCE. Reach your desired weight, your daily eating plan doesn't change one bit to sustain it, you've already been doing it for a while.
I think this is excellent advice! I haven't actually tried it, because I find it conceptually easier to follow MFP's 500 calorie deficit, but it seems like a great way to beat the "inevitable" gain when you go back to eating maintenance. Also, I'm not sure how accurately I could predict what my ideal self would eat. I think it's around 2400, so I try not to go much over that even when I've "earned" it, but I'm really not sure.
In regard to "eat for the body you want," it reminds me of "dress for the job you want." Every time someone says that I think about how I need a Batman costume.17 -
YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/4 -
mistyrbell9588 wrote: »not really a myth, but i wish it was:
1. aging has no effect on metabolism
2. child birth/pregnancy has little effect after the child is born and the pregnancy is over. . .
geez i wish that was just a myth
This is one of those things that is simultaneously true and untrue, depending on what specific thing you're talking about! I know I spend a lot of time here responding to threads from panicky pregnancy and postpartum women. It is one subject area I do feel I actually know a bit about, and my usual advice is, "Don't panic! Things may feel or seem weird but they're probably totally fine!"
Though it seems to me that a LOT of the advice people need here is "wait a month and see what happens." For pregnant or postpartum women, you just extend the time period by a few months or a year.
4 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One needs to "hydrate" and/or bring a water bottle for a 30 minute leisurely walk around the neighborhood.
Agreed. I normally walk for an hour and I need to restrict water intake for about 30 minutes prior to heading out as there are no public restrooms on my walk route and water goes straight through me. (Although this tactic may be unique to middle-aged lady bladders) If it's very hot outside I do carry a water bottle but don't drink until after the halfway point or my "walk" turns into a sprint.
I know I'm late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that my personal rule is that I don't carry water for any run shorter than 15 miles. It's totally unnecessary (even at high temps). That means that I haven't carried water on a run since my 40-mile ultra in 2013. During all that time, I've only stopped at one water stop during a race, too. That was at a half-marathon, somewhere around mile 10 or 11. I didn't need the water, but when I turned the corner, I could see the next mile of the course going up a long hill and I needed to stop and think about what I was doing!
During my ultra, I drank an excessive amount and it might have played a part in me avoiding cramps and a DNF due to dehydration (it was unseasonably warm in October), but I've since learned that it would have been a dangerous amount (10 L in 10.5 hours) if I hadn't have been eating so much sodium. I did have to pee a lot (7 to 10 times at least), which certainly took a few minutes off my finishing time.
The "need" to hydrate constantly during exercise is certainly a myth and it is one that is propagated by major corporations in order to increase their profits. Actual studies have demonstrated that the winners of major races are often the most dehydrated. I don't know of any evidence that someone has died during recreational or competitive exercise because of dehydration, but I understand that at least half a dozen people have died because of hyponatremia caused by over-hydration and inadequate sodium intake.
I agree with this. My aunt always brings a bottle of water with her when she goes for a short 1 mile walk. I also see so many people drinking tons off water in hot yoga (it is only 1-1.5 hours). I have never drank water during it. If you are well hydrated you should be okay for a few hours without water. If not, that means you likely aren't drinking enough in general. I drink a TON throughout the day so I just don't have the need to drink water when I only bike/run/walk for 2-3 hours. I have never done an ultra, but I DEFINITELY would have also had to drink then lol.
Wait ... what? You run or bike for "only" 2-3 hours and don't drink anything? Jesus my throat gets dry in 30 minutes on my spin bike I'd be parched in 2-3 hours.
Not at all uncommon for me to bike for a couple hours without water. Even when I've got a bottle full of it that's easy and convenient to reach.
I don't go 3 hours without drinking water if I am sitting on my *kitten* doing nothing. Definitely not if I am doing something active.8 -
I took water with me on a 10 mile, pretty challenging (lots of elevation gain) hike in 80 degree temps. Didn't touch it.
This is just always going to be individual preference.5 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »One needs to "hydrate" and/or bring a water bottle for a 30 minute leisurely walk around the neighborhood.
Agreed. I normally walk for an hour and I need to restrict water intake for about 30 minutes prior to heading out as there are no public restrooms on my walk route and water goes straight through me. (Although this tactic may be unique to middle-aged lady bladders) If it's very hot outside I do carry a water bottle but don't drink until after the halfway point or my "walk" turns into a sprint.
I know I'm late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that my personal rule is that I don't carry water for any run shorter than 15 miles. It's totally unnecessary (even at high temps). That means that I haven't carried water on a run since my 40-mile ultra in 2013. During all that time, I've only stopped at one water stop during a race, too. That was at a half-marathon, somewhere around mile 10 or 11. I didn't need the water, but when I turned the corner, I could see the next mile of the course going up a long hill and I needed to stop and think about what I was doing!
During my ultra, I drank an excessive amount and it might have played a part in me avoiding cramps and a DNF due to dehydration (it was unseasonably warm in October), but I've since learned that it would have been a dangerous amount (10 L in 10.5 hours) if I hadn't have been eating so much sodium. I did have to pee a lot (7 to 10 times at least), which certainly took a few minutes off my finishing time.
The "need" to hydrate constantly during exercise is certainly a myth and it is one that is propagated by major corporations in order to increase their profits. Actual studies have demonstrated that the winners of major races are often the most dehydrated. I don't know of any evidence that someone has died during recreational or competitive exercise because of dehydration, but I understand that at least half a dozen people have died because of hyponatremia caused by over-hydration and inadequate sodium intake.
I agree with this. My aunt always brings a bottle of water with her when she goes for a short 1 mile walk. I also see so many people drinking tons off water in hot yoga (it is only 1-1.5 hours). I have never drank water during it. If you are well hydrated you should be okay for a few hours without water. If not, that means you likely aren't drinking enough in general. I drink a TON throughout the day so I just don't have the need to drink water when I only bike/run/walk for 2-3 hours. I have never done an ultra, but I DEFINITELY would have also had to drink then lol.
Wait ... what? You run or bike for "only" 2-3 hours and don't drink anything? Jesus my throat gets dry in 30 minutes on my spin bike I'd be parched in 2-3 hours.
Not at all uncommon for me to bike for a couple hours without water. Even when I've got a bottle full of it that's easy and convenient to reach.
I don't go 3 hours without drinking water if I am sitting on my *kitten* doing nothing. Definitely not if I am doing something active.
I just don't need it. Even in the 90s when I am sweating, haha. I guess it is a personal thing. I prefer to wait until I am done because waiting makes it taste so much better. I never have needed to eat before working out or during but I only eat a few hundred calories during the day until 8pm so that is probably why my body is used to it. I also drink like 100 oz coffee every morning so I have a done of hydration on board.1 -
I have to drink water while exercising, especially in the heat. My mouth is already dry as it is and I am chronically dehydrated despite drinking a good amount.6
-
wunderkindking wrote: »I took water with me on a 10 mile, pretty challenging (lots of elevation gain) hike in 80 degree temps. Didn't touch it.
This is just always going to be individual preference.
Also, individual physiology, I suspect, even beyond preference. I'm not intending to argue with you by saying that, but intending to expand on the thought about individuality.
For any given individual, of course it's going to be hard to be *sure* whether their perceived thirst is a need, for best functioning; or a desire, for basically comfort (not having dry mouth/lips and that sort of thing).
It's pretty common on hydration threads around here for people to say it's not about a count of quarts/liters that matters; instead, it's that most people can drink based on thirst and be OK, with urine color as a post-hydration gauge to double-check.
Now, in this thread, we're kind of quibbling about whether people are wrong to go without water on (say) a 3-hour bike ride, or wrong to perceive they want/need water during (say) a shorter walk or group class.
Why?
If "drink to thirst" is a good guide for most people (maybe not all), why is my thirst a better guide to your needs than your thirst is? I think it probably isn't, bidirectionally.
At a physiological level, human bodies are similar, but I think not identical in every single detailed particular. There may be differences in sweat rates and hydration needs (without *necessarily* a correlation between those two things either, maybe), just as people have different nose shapes, or different relative lengths of the fingers on their hands.
I'd say this, from my partisan (defensive?) side, as a "drink during exercise" person personally: I'm kind of toward the "sweats lots" end of the scale, even when it's not that hot, exertion is mild, and I'm doing activities I'm well-conditioned to do.
I regularly row double with a woman who's a pretty extreme non-sweating person. She works hard, because she sits in front of me in the same boat, so I see her. Often, wearing similar clothing, in identically very hot weather, both doing the same thing, after a row she might admit to a tiny trickle of sweat somewhere (usually down the center of her chest into her cleavage 😉), when my t-shirt is soaked over 75%+ of the fabric, my hat band is visibly soaked through not just band but also hat, etc. It's a thing noticeable enough that we talk about it.
As always, I could be wrong, but it challenges my imagination to think that our hydration needs during exercise would be identical.5 -
I definitely agree that different people have different hydration needs based on their physiology, not just their size or activity level.
I think the "myth" part of it comes in when people tout a one-size-fits-all guide to drinking water. The most common recommendation is eight 8-oz glasses a day, but I've seen people post here recommending a gallon or more a day.
I do kind of shake my head when I see a co-worker, who sits at a desk all day, constantly drinking water. And then getting up every 10 minutes to use the restroom. Yeah...that's a sign that you're over-hydrating.1 -
wunderkindking wrote: »I took water with me on a 10 mile, pretty challenging (lots of elevation gain) hike in 80 degree temps. Didn't touch it.
This is just always going to be individual preference.
Also, individual physiology, I suspect, even beyond preference. I'm not intending to argue with you by saying that, but intending to expand on the thought about individuality.
For any given individual, of course it's going to be hard to be *sure* whether their perceived thirst is a need, for best functioning; or a desire, for basically comfort (not having dry mouth/lips and that sort of thing).
It's pretty common on hydration threads around here for people to say it's not about a count of quarts/liters that matters; instead, it's that most people can drink based on thirst and be OK, with urine color as a post-hydration gauge to double-check.
Now, in this thread, we're kind of quibbling about whether people are wrong to go without water on (say) a 3-hour bike ride, or wrong to perceive they want/need water during (say) a shorter walk or group class.
Why?
If "drink to thirst" is a good guide for most people (maybe not all), why is my thirst a better guide to your needs than your thirst is? I think it probably isn't, bidirectionally.
At a physiological level, human bodies are similar, but I think not identical in every single detailed particular. There may be differences in sweat rates and hydration needs (without *necessarily* a correlation between those two things either, maybe), just as people have different nose shapes, or different relative lengths of the fingers on their hands.
I'd say this, from my partisan (defensive?) side, as a "drink during exercise" person personally: I'm kind of toward the "sweats lots" end of the scale, even when it's not that hot, exertion is mild, and I'm doing activities I'm well-conditioned to do.
I regularly row double with a woman who's a pretty extreme non-sweating person. She works hard, because she sits in front of me in the same boat, so I see her. Often, wearing similar clothing, in identically very hot weather, both doing the same thing, after a row she might admit to a tiny trickle of sweat somewhere (usually down the center of her chest into her cleavage 😉), when my t-shirt is soaked over 75%+ of the fabric, my hat band is visibly soaked through not just band but also hat, etc. It's a thing noticeable enough that we talk about it.
As always, I could be wrong, but it challenges my imagination to think that our hydration needs during exercise would be identical.
Yep, agreed absolutely. I am basically a non sweater. I could not tell you the last time I worked up enough of a sweat to have more than my bangs and the back of my neck get sticky - and that's with doing some pretty high intensity stuff in heat and off water, sometimes. I'm just not a sweaty person.
I do, however, actually OVERHEAT into illness pretty fast in truly hot (above 90) temperatures, even just sitting around. I'm certainly not dehydrated per every marker ever. I apparently just... skip the evaporative cooling attempt and go straight to 'your brain is baked now, please puke'.5 -
YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/
Fiber is one of the big reasons why whole grain/whole meal products are recommended. In this case, if you ate a sandwich you would get 2 grams of fiber with the white vs 8 grams of fiber with the wheat. Fiber is something that is typically lacking in the diets of most Americans in regards to even getting close to the RDA. 8 grams for a sandwich gets you a lot closer than 2 grams...and 8 grams is a pretty good fiber hit. Whole grain breads are typically higher in protein as well.
If it was a one off, I probably wouldn't care, but I eat sandwiches fairly often. I eat Dave's Killer 21 whole grains and seeds. It's 110 calories per slice with 5 grams of fiber and 5 grams of protein. So I eat a sandwich and get 10 grams of fiber and 10 grams of protein just with the bread alone which seems significant to me relative to white bread.6 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/
Fiber is one of the big reasons why whole grain/whole meal products are recommended. In this case, if you ate a sandwich you would get 2 grams of fiber with the white vs 8 grams of fiber with the wheat. Fiber is something that is typically lacking in the diets of most Americans in regards to even getting close to the RDA. 8 grams for a sandwich gets you a lot closer than 2 grams...and 8 grams is a pretty good fiber hit. Whole grain breads are typically higher in protein as well.
If it was a one off, I probably wouldn't care, but I eat sandwiches fairly often. I eat Dave's Killer 21 whole grains and seeds. It's 110 calories per slice with 5 grams of fiber and 5 grams of protein. So I eat a sandwich and get 10 grams of fiber and 10 grams of protein just with the bread alone which seems significant to me relative to white bread.
I don't eat white bread from the store because it is tasteless, texture-less squarish sadness... the fact the my 15 grain bread has better nutrition is simply an added bonus.5 -
Again with individuality. There are definitely some benefits to whole grain bread, but for me it's just what's encasing my sandwich ingredients (or avocado, or jam or whatever).
As such the 35 cal slice of sadness is fine, though these days I usually eat the regular old white stuff rather than reduced calories because I over compensated on calorie cutting and it's a painless way to get it back.
Because I *don't like bread*.
Husband likes bread. He regularly eats Dave's Killer - whatever he got this week and it's well worth it for him.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/
Fiber is one of the big reasons why whole grain/whole meal products are recommended. In this case, if you ate a sandwich you would get 2 grams of fiber with the white vs 8 grams of fiber with the wheat. Fiber is something that is typically lacking in the diets of most Americans in regards to even getting close to the RDA. 8 grams for a sandwich gets you a lot closer than 2 grams...and 8 grams is a pretty good fiber hit. Whole grain breads are typically higher in protein as well.
If it was a one off, I probably wouldn't care, but I eat sandwiches fairly often. I eat Dave's Killer 21 whole grains and seeds. It's 110 calories per slice with 5 grams of fiber and 5 grams of protein. So I eat a sandwich and get 10 grams of fiber and 10 grams of protein just with the bread alone which seems significant to me relative to white bread.
I don't eat white bread from the store because it is tasteless, texture-less squarish sadness... the fact the my 15 grain bread has better nutrition is simply an added bonus.
Yeah, there's that as well. The only "white bread" I eat is sourdough.
I never really had white bread growing up, so I've never had to make any kind of big dramatic switch or anything like that. I've always had whole grain. That's pretty much all my kids know as well...we went to a end of soccer season cookout a couple weekends ago and they had white bread hotdog buns and my kids ended up taking the hotdog out of the bun and just eating the hotdog, which they never do.2 -
This might not be a myth for everyone, but I have heard experts say that you don't have to be hungry if you are in a deficit. If I am in a deficit, I go to bed hungry no matter how much fiber and protein I eat
11 -
GazelleLady wrote: »This might not be a myth for everyone, but I have heard experts say that you don't have to be hungry if you are in a deficit. If I am in a deficit, I go to bed hungry no matter how much fiber and protein I eat
Yep! Me too! My body is very sensitive to a deficit. My maintenance calories are also very low.
5 -
GazelleLady wrote: »This might not be a myth for everyone, but I have heard experts say that you don't have to be hungry if you are in a deficit. If I am in a deficit, I go to bed hungry no matter how much fiber and protein I eat
I understand and believe your experience, and know it's also true for others. I admit, I do hate to see new folks assume that hunger in a deficit *must necessarily* be true for everyone, universally . . . and not experiment, as a consequence. If a person can find relative satiation in a deficit, as some can, I have to believe it makes things easier, and easier is a good and useful thing. I'm sorry that that isn't in the realm of possibility for you and others.1 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/
Fiber is one of the big reasons why whole grain/whole meal products are recommended. In this case, if you ate a sandwich you would get 2 grams of fiber with the white vs 8 grams of fiber with the wheat. Fiber is something that is typically lacking in the diets of most Americans in regards to even getting close to the RDA. 8 grams for a sandwich gets you a lot closer than 2 grams...and 8 grams is a pretty good fiber hit. Whole grain breads are typically higher in protein as well.
If it was a one off, I probably wouldn't care, but I eat sandwiches fairly often. I eat Dave's Killer 21 whole grains and seeds. It's 110 calories per slice with 5 grams of fiber and 5 grams of protein. So I eat a sandwich and get 10 grams of fiber and 10 grams of protein just with the bread alone which seems significant to me relative to white bread.
And I rarely eat bread and easily get plenty of fiber from other sources, so am not all that concerned about fiber from bread. If I decide to eat a burger on a bun for a cookout or some such, I'll usually go with the lowest cal buns before the whole wheat, although all else equal I usually get whole wheat. The bread I have at home is Ezekiel, but mainly because it's a freezer bread so it fits with my rare bread usage.2 -
wunderkindking wrote: »Again with individuality. There are definitely some benefits to whole grain bread, but for me it's just what's encasing my sandwich ingredients (or avocado, or jam or whatever).
As such the 35 cal slice of sadness is fine, though these days I usually eat the regular old white stuff rather than reduced calories because I over compensated on calorie cutting and it's a painless way to get it back.
Because I *don't like bread*.
Husband likes bread. He regularly eats Dave's Killer - whatever he got this week and it's well worth it for him.
(jk, jk, jk - I can accept that there are breads that are merely conduits of toppings, and the breads that are the stars of the show)4 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »YellowD0gs wrote: »Here's a myth that apparently won't go away, that the choice between whole wheat or white breads is only about calories.
IMO (and this *is* subjective), the nutritional difference is pretty underwhelming, if comparing similar bread white vs. whole wheat, unless a person eats a lot of bread. For example, just to pick a common brand, Pepperidge Farm Farmhouse White vs. Farmhouse Whole Wheat, per 49g slice, white numbers first:
Calories: 130, 130
Total Fat: 1g, 2.5g
Sodium: 230mg, 180mg
Total Carb: 26g, 23g
Fiber: 1g, 4g
Sugar: 4g, 4g (all added sugar in both cases)
Calcium: 40mg, 40mg
Iron: 1.7mg, 1.3mg
Potassium: 50mg, 125mg
Thiamin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Riboflavin: 0.2mg, 0.1mg
Niacin: 1.5mg, 2mg
Folate: 95mcg DFE/0 folic acid, 10mcg DFE/50mcg folic acid
That's not the best whole grain bread compared to the worst white, or vice-versa; it's an attempt at a fair comparison using a commonly available mainstream brand, and I didn't cherry pick a brand, it was just the first one that came to mind.
I'd give a slight edge to the whole wheat nutritionally, but it doesn't have the advantage all the way through the nutrient profile, and the differences are pretty small. If I really preferred white bread for enjoyment reasons, it wouldn't be enough difference to sway me, personally. (NB: I prefer whole wheat for taste, if I eat either.)
Source:
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-hearty-white-bread/
https://www.pepperidgefarm.com/product/farmhouse-100-whole-wheat-bread/
Fiber is one of the big reasons why whole grain/whole meal products are recommended. In this case, if you ate a sandwich you would get 2 grams of fiber with the white vs 8 grams of fiber with the wheat. Fiber is something that is typically lacking in the diets of most Americans in regards to even getting close to the RDA. 8 grams for a sandwich gets you a lot closer than 2 grams...and 8 grams is a pretty good fiber hit. Whole grain breads are typically higher in protein as well.
If it was a one off, I probably wouldn't care, but I eat sandwiches fairly often. I eat Dave's Killer 21 whole grains and seeds. It's 110 calories per slice with 5 grams of fiber and 5 grams of protein. So I eat a sandwich and get 10 grams of fiber and 10 grams of protein just with the bread alone which seems significant to me relative to white bread.
I don't eat white bread from the store because it is tasteless, texture-less squarish sadness... the fact the my 15 grain bread has better nutrition is simply an added bonus.
Yeah, there's that as well. The only "white bread" I eat is sourdough.
I never really had white bread growing up, so I've never had to make any kind of big dramatic switch or anything like that. I've always had whole grain. That's pretty much all my kids know as well...we went to a end of soccer season cookout a couple weekends ago and they had white bread hotdog buns and my kids ended up taking the hotdog out of the bun and just eating the hotdog, which they never do.
Same. I grew up eating only whole grain and regular white bread is just so flavourless to me. Bread isn't just a vehicle for the fillings in my world, it's part of the whole sandwich taste gestalt.
2 -
I used to be a big bread eater, easily putting away 5-6 rolls with a single meal, bread at every meal (toast in the morning, sandwich bread at noon, rolls or biscuits in the evening). I found when I started my weight loss journey the two easiest sources of calories to cut out for me were sodas and bread. I've since reintroduced sodas a few times per week, but bread never really made a come-back into my regular diet. Just lost interest in it, I guess.
Except for Olive Garden breadsticks. Those things are from the devil, I tell you! It's just SO easy to plow through a basket by yourself, look up and you've just eaten 600 calories of bread, let alone the rest of the meal. Good thing my wife and I only go a couple times per year...5 -
Vegan diets make you lose weight. <<waves hi as a fat vegan!!>> LOL DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH VEGAN JUNK FOOD EXISTS NOW? it's GLORIOUS
10 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I definitely agree that different people have different hydration needs based on their physiology, not just their size or activity level.
I think the "myth" part of it comes in when people tout a one-size-fits-all guide to drinking water. The most common recommendation is eight 8-oz glasses a day, but I've seen people post here recommending a gallon or more a day.
I do kind of shake my head when I see a co-worker, who sits at a desk all day, constantly drinking water. And then getting up every 10 minutes to use the restroom. Yeah...that's a sign that you're over-hydrating.
I'd have to disagree with this.
I work in the office on a mine site, and we are subject to random hydration tests - where we pee in a cup and they use some dandy little machine to inspect the sample and tell us if we're hydrated enough to be on site today. Usually, these tests are done as we arrive to work in the morning, if our access tag is blocked at the gate then we head off for drug/alcohol/hydration testing - but sometimes they run random or blanket tests during the day or as we are leaving site.
As such, I'm pretty aware of how much water I drink in an average day - partly because I need to make sure I'm hydrated enough to firstly provide a sample, and then to pass the test, but also because they ask how much you've drank in the preceding 24 hours when they do your test. I have failed these tests in the past because I wasn't drinking enough water, and that was drinking 2 litres (your eight 8-oz glasses) plus herbal tea, coffee, diet soda, soup etc. throughout the day. And I just sit at a desk. I don't do excessive exercise or anything high-intensity, so I'm not sweating a lot out.
Now, I drink a litre of water before leaving the house for work at 6:30am. I drink another litre throughout my work day. And a third litre after work. Sometimes more, if I'm thirsty, plus coffee, herbal tea etc. Some days I am up and down to the bathroom "every 10 minutes" or so it seems; other days, I might go once or twice during the day which is usually before a meeting starts, just in case. I haven't been called up for testing for a while, but many days my pee is still quite yellow and I'm not sure I'd pass a test.
So, all of that to say: I don't think that you can say absolutely that there is a direct correlation between hydration levels and frequency of urination! Especially when frequent urination can be a symptom of other issues like diabetes or a UTI, or maybe they're just using the bathroom as an excuse to get up from their desk for a moment and get a few steps in?! Or maybe I'm just a particularly dehydrated individual who needs more water than the average...11 -
TwistedSassette wrote: »SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I definitely agree that different people have different hydration needs based on their physiology, not just their size or activity level.
I think the "myth" part of it comes in when people tout a one-size-fits-all guide to drinking water. The most common recommendation is eight 8-oz glasses a day, but I've seen people post here recommending a gallon or more a day.
I do kind of shake my head when I see a co-worker, who sits at a desk all day, constantly drinking water. And then getting up every 10 minutes to use the restroom. Yeah...that's a sign that you're over-hydrating.
I'd have to disagree with this.
I work in the office on a mine site, and we are subject to random hydration tests - where we pee in a cup and they use some dandy little machine to inspect the sample and tell us if we're hydrated enough to be on site today. Usually, these tests are done as we arrive to work in the morning, if our access tag is blocked at the gate then we head off for drug/alcohol/hydration testing - but sometimes they run random or blanket tests during the day or as we are leaving site.
As such, I'm pretty aware of how much water I drink in an average day - partly because I need to make sure I'm hydrated enough to firstly provide a sample, and then to pass the test, but also because they ask how much you've drank in the preceding 24 hours when they do your test. I have failed these tests in the past because I wasn't drinking enough water, and that was drinking 2 litres (your eight 8-oz glasses) plus herbal tea, coffee, diet soda, soup etc. throughout the day. And I just sit at a desk. I don't do excessive exercise or anything high-intensity, so I'm not sweating a lot out.
Now, I drink a litre of water before leaving the house for work at 6:30am. I drink another litre throughout my work day. And a third litre after work. Sometimes more, if I'm thirsty, plus coffee, herbal tea etc. Some days I am up and down to the bathroom "every 10 minutes" or so it seems; other days, I might go once or twice during the day which is usually before a meeting starts, just in case. I haven't been called up for testing for a while, but many days my pee is still quite yellow and I'm not sure I'd pass a test.
So, all of that to say: I don't think that you can say absolutely that there is a direct correlation between hydration levels and frequency of urination! Especially when frequent urination can be a symptom of other issues like diabetes or a UTI, or maybe they're just using the bathroom as an excuse to get up from their desk for a moment and get a few steps in?! Or maybe I'm just a particularly dehydrated individual who needs more water than the average...
Off topic, but I have to ask what area do you work in? I have never heard of a workplace doing a random "hydration test". So strange.1 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »TwistedSassette wrote: »SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I definitely agree that different people have different hydration needs based on their physiology, not just their size or activity level.
I think the "myth" part of it comes in when people tout a one-size-fits-all guide to drinking water. The most common recommendation is eight 8-oz glasses a day, but I've seen people post here recommending a gallon or more a day.
I do kind of shake my head when I see a co-worker, who sits at a desk all day, constantly drinking water. And then getting up every 10 minutes to use the restroom. Yeah...that's a sign that you're over-hydrating.
I'd have to disagree with this.
I work in the office on a mine site, and we are subject to random hydration tests - where we pee in a cup and they use some dandy little machine to inspect the sample and tell us if we're hydrated enough to be on site today. Usually, these tests are done as we arrive to work in the morning, if our access tag is blocked at the gate then we head off for drug/alcohol/hydration testing - but sometimes they run random or blanket tests during the day or as we are leaving site.
As such, I'm pretty aware of how much water I drink in an average day - partly because I need to make sure I'm hydrated enough to firstly provide a sample, and then to pass the test, but also because they ask how much you've drank in the preceding 24 hours when they do your test. I have failed these tests in the past because I wasn't drinking enough water, and that was drinking 2 litres (your eight 8-oz glasses) plus herbal tea, coffee, diet soda, soup etc. throughout the day. And I just sit at a desk. I don't do excessive exercise or anything high-intensity, so I'm not sweating a lot out.
Now, I drink a litre of water before leaving the house for work at 6:30am. I drink another litre throughout my work day. And a third litre after work. Sometimes more, if I'm thirsty, plus coffee, herbal tea etc. Some days I am up and down to the bathroom "every 10 minutes" or so it seems; other days, I might go once or twice during the day which is usually before a meeting starts, just in case. I haven't been called up for testing for a while, but many days my pee is still quite yellow and I'm not sure I'd pass a test.
So, all of that to say: I don't think that you can say absolutely that there is a direct correlation between hydration levels and frequency of urination! Especially when frequent urination can be a symptom of other issues like diabetes or a UTI, or maybe they're just using the bathroom as an excuse to get up from their desk for a moment and get a few steps in?! Or maybe I'm just a particularly dehydrated individual who needs more water than the average...
Off topic, but I have to ask what area do you work in? I have never heard of a workplace doing a random "hydration test". So strange.
I'm in Australia, it's pretty industry-standard here, I guess due to the heat.3 -
I'm months late to this thread, but I just want to reiterate a couple of my favorites from the first few pages:
1) Don't eat white foods - white bread and white potatoes are two of my favorite things and you will have to pry them from my cold dead hands before I voluntarily give them up.
2) People who eat breakfast lose more weight - Oh how I wish I had never bought into this! I used to skip breakfast and was fine, but after hearing this repeatedly I started eating in the morning. After years of doing it, my system expects it and I'm usually very hungry by 9:00 am. Now that I'm a calorie counter, I sure wish I had those calories for lunch or dinner instead!6
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
- 232.5K 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