A random thought on rigid dieting
Replies
-
Ironically, I'm currently listening to my office mates talk about how important it is to give up wheat, dairy, grains, and anything else that's unnatural. Huh...
Wheat, dairy and grains are unnatural??
no - punctuation is used...anything unnatural AND dairy, grains, and weat.
Did you miss the word "else"?
Wheat, dairy, grains, and anything ELSE that's unnatural. Implication is that wheat, dairy, and grains are unnatural.0 -
While that can be true for some, the majority of diet failures happen because people omitted actual foods that they liked and were trying to force themselves to omit them. For me, I could try to go rigid, but I would have to omit going to family gatherings (which are quite often) because my favorite foods would be there. Not worth it to me. I'd rather do portion control, compensate for higher intake of calories by adding a little more exercise, and moderate. It's worked for 30 years now.I have found by removing certain foods from my diet that the cravings for them actually disappear.
Rather than becoming intolerable by omission, it becomes rather relaxing not to even have them around.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.0
-
Professional writer and editor here. Jonny's right. The way it's written lumps those things in with "unnatural." Poor sentence structure. :-)Ironically, I'm currently listening to my office mates talk about how important it is to give up wheat, dairy, grains, and anything else that's unnatural. Huh...
Wheat, dairy and grains are unnatural??
no - punctuation is used...anything unnatural AND dairy, grains, and weat.
Did you miss the word "else"?
Wheat, dairy, grains, and anything ELSE that's unnatural. Implication is that wheat, dairy, and grains are unnatural.0 -
No. I think if your social life suffers (because you absolutely can never skip a single workout to celebrate a friend's birthday or go to a party or whatever, that's just as bad. There has to be balance in life.When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.0 -
When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.
You're a kook if your exercise routine prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like hanging out with friends.
You're a kook if your diet prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like the occasional slice of pizza or office donut.0 -
Professional writer and editor here. Jonny's right. The way it's written lumps those things in with "unnatural." Poor sentence structure. :-)Ironically, I'm currently listening to my office mates talk about how important it is to give up wheat, dairy, grains, and anything else that's unnatural. Huh...
Wheat, dairy and grains are unnatural??
no - punctuation is used...anything unnatural AND dairy, grains, and weat.
Did you miss the word "else"?
Wheat, dairy, grains, and anything ELSE that's unnatural. Implication is that wheat, dairy, and grains are unnatural.
Oh good grief. What I meant to say (I was in a hurry here at work) is that they were saying that people should give up anything unnatural PLUS dairy, wheat, and other grains.0 -
I'm just teasing you. I got it.
Professional writer and editor here. Jonny's right. The way it's written lumps those things in with "unnatural." Poor sentence structure. :-)Ironically, I'm currently listening to my office mates talk about how important it is to give up wheat, dairy, grains, and anything else that's unnatural. Huh...
Wheat, dairy and grains are unnatural??
no - punctuation is used...anything unnatural AND dairy, grains, and weat.
Did you miss the word "else"?
Wheat, dairy, grains, and anything ELSE that's unnatural. Implication is that wheat, dairy, and grains are unnatural.
Oh good grief. What I meant to say (I was in a hurry here at work) is that they were saying that people should give up anything unnatural PLUS dairy, wheat, and other grains.
0 -
When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.
You're a kook if your exercise routine prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like hanging out with friends.
You're a kook if your diet prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like the occasional slice of pizza or office donut.
I think "normal" is hard to define and is completely relative. When I hear people say they work out twice a day for a couple hours at a time I think to myself that's not "normal" but that's really just a judgement based off my own perspective. I have friends who think I'm nuts for working out at all after an 8 hour work day (seriously). They just see things from a different perspective. Also, though no one wants to admit it, it's far more acceptable to be obsessive about exercise because people directly associate it with aesthetics.0 -
I was listening to a Lyle McDonald podcast interview and he touched upon something that was relevant to what the OP wrote. People are always trying to find one magic ingredient that they can cut out and it will solve all of their health and weight problems. It might be gluten, dairy, apartame, carbs entirely, fat or whatever. But the simple fact is that is you don't create a calorie deficit, you will not lose weight. If you eat cake and ice cream but still hit your calorie deficit (and macronutrient) goals, then you will continue to have success. If you eat 5000 Kcal of broccoli in a day, you most like won't.0
-
I think that food obsession doesn't stand by itself. I'm always curious about the underlying causes for different people. For me, I can get a little obsessive about food and tend to fail when it goes on too long, probably for reasons outlined by the OP. But more often than not, I'm obsessing over the food for a separate reason.
Usually it's because I have unrealistic desires about results. I see a lack of result, rather than a break in rigid diet, as a reason to feel guilty.
Jonnythan mentioned a coworker bringing in doughnuts. Now, I do love a good doughnut, so I too would have had one. Now here's where it turns south for me. Having eaten my doughnut, I accept that it's a perfectly fine food to eat and will then spend far too much time figuring out the various ways I can balance my macros for the rest of the day. It's a domino effect only I'm looking at several of them at the same time.
So, maybe this is just a long-winded way of saying that I can be liberal about my food choices, but it doesn't stop me from being obsessive about my consumption in a way that probably isn't all that healthy.0 -
I stand by what I said. If you are so obsessive that you can't give up a single workout now and then for other things, you have crossed a line. It should be a part of your life (obviously, some people have more time and do more of it than others) but not your entire life.When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.
You're a kook if your exercise routine prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like hanging out with friends.
You're a kook if your diet prevents you from enjoying normal things in life, like the occasional slice of pizza or office donut.
I think "normal" is hard to define and is completely relative. When I hear people say they work out twice a day for a couple hours at a time I think to myself that's not "normal" but that's really just a judgement based off my own perspective. I have friends who think I'm nuts for working out at all after an 8 hour work day (seriously). They just see things from a different perspective. Also, though no one wants to admit it, it's far more acceptable to be obsessive about exercise because people directly associate it with aesthetics.
Unless you're training for a major event, like the Olympics or a marathon or something. Obviously, those take a little more time and effort, but you're working toward a very specific goal and it's temporary.0 -
Rigid dieters would see them as offlimits. Unclean, unhealthy food they can't have. They either completely abstain through an act of enormous willpower, or they say "just this once" and eat three of them.
"an act of enormous willpower"?? There are donuts in our office every day, often on the table just outside my office dorr. I never eat them because they are a waste of calories IMO. I must have amazing willpower.0 -
It seems some people are too rigid about a lot of things!!!0
-
I have to disagree honestly. I've always been liberal about what I eat and it's never stopped me from having a lot of cravings, and I've never been one of those people who just stop eating when they're full either.
1. I welcome disagreement, so thanks for your opinion.
2. Just as there isn't one special way of exercising that's right for all people and all goals, there isn't a singular relationship or perception of food that's right for everyone. So my OP may very well not work for you, which is fine.
3. I've been helping people reach their physique goals for over a decade now and a number of those people said exactly that when I first gave them their plans - "that won't work with me since that's what got me fat in the first place." But there's more to this than recognizing that being liberal is possible. That's merely the outer shell. You also need to dive in and figure out why people over eat, which is the heart of the matter. Once you work on those things, you can start working in liberal relationships with food. If you skip this step, of course being liberal isn't going to work. And the next best thing is likely to be rigidity in order to overlay some restraint to your desire to overeat.
4. I stand by my original commentary, at least as it pertains to my experience thus far working with the people I've worked with. I certainly don't want to come across as knowing exactly what to do in all situations. I'm in a constant state of learning and tweaking my ideas just as I hope everyone else around here is. But as my experience with clients stands now, instituting rigidity to the degree most dieters are akin to instituting backfires more often than not in the long term.
But this thread, with the posts that are in agreement and the posts that are in disagreement, are part of what drives me to keep thinking this through and refining. So again, I appreciate all opinions and angles to this.0 -
You also need to dive in and figure out why people over eat, which is the heart of the matter. Once you work on those things, you can start working in liberal relationships with food. If you skip this step, of course being liberal isn't going to work. And the next best thing is likely to be rigidity in order to overlay some restraint to your desire to overeat.
100% this ^^ (emphasis mine).0 -
I agree for the most part, but I believe rigidity can be a good thing for some people.
Just so I'm clear, that post was an off the cuff thought I had last night that I posted on facebook. I'm hoping it's obvious that it's not my complete belief system... if I have such a thing... which I'd argue I don't. I certainly don't subscribe to complete, unbound eating. I mean, yeah, I think something similar to IIFYM is a good starting point. I'm more of a "if it fits your calories and is reasonably close to a sensible macro target" approach kind of guy.
My point is, I subscribe to and promote a flexible approach that I overlay with loose rules. There is structure.. And some would define that as a hint of rigidity.
The overwhelming difference between the kind of structure I subscribe to and the kind of structure I see many dieters subscribing to, though, is degree of deprivation and power. My way tends to empower and their way tends to strip them of power and choice.
An argument can be made that reducing choices tends to help people. I agree... this day and age people tend to have too many choices and thus over-complicate things.... paralysis by analysis and all of that. But, again, in my experience over the years, when it comes to food, depriving of choice only works so long for most people, at which point they go off the deep end and fuel the cycle I discussed in the OP. I realize I'm generalizing a bit, but I've maybe worked with 400 people in my tenure and it's held true much more often than not... so I go with it.Deeming some foods as "bad" isn’t always a bad thing. For the large part, taste is learned behavior. If one has been eating fast food, chips and candy (the “bad” foods) for some time, that is what is going to taste good to them. Grilled chicken and steamed roasted broccoli are likely not going to be as satisfying. But they switch to these things because they believe them to be “good” foods.
Most likely they will, as you suggest, eventually give in to their cravings for the familiar “bad” foods. They will feel guilty after. The process will likely repeat. Sounds bad, but the end result could be better eating habits, because while this is happening two important things may also happen. They develop a taste for the “good” foods, and they learn that eating the “bad” foods on occasion doesn’t ruin everything. They learn moderation.
On paper, that would be ideal. In reality, that's simply not how things have gone in my experience. Don't get me wrong... I'm sure that's how it goes for some people. But based on my working sample, those folks would be the statistical outliers. And there's plenty of lab based work that shows us that diet mentalities tend to fail in the long run.
I can't argue that tastes change. They do, and the degree to which will depend on the individual.
But the difference here is the degree of rigidity. My argument is that it doesn't have to be either/or. Most people can have those foods they enjoy, even if they're considered completely unhealthy, as long as they're fit into this system or structure I referenced above.
We're walking a fine line between some very subtle differences... but one of the big things that I find hurting people is the sense of permission. It's a strange phenomenon, but the rigid mindset tends to whittle the sense of permission down. And what's strange is, I've found that when people do in fact have permission... they tend to have better control over the long haul.
Granted, they got fat in the first place with a lack of permission or control. I can't argue with that. But when you overlay the loose structure mentioned above and, arguably more important, do some digging into why they've deviated from their physiological hunger patterns in the past and work toward resolving those issues... things tend to fall into place more often than not.Certainly everyone doesn’t need to go through this process. But I believe some people do need it. I believe it because I needed it.
And I wouldn't doubt it. As I said in my previous post to another member... I definitely don't want to stand here preaching The Way. That goes against the very fiber of my being. I'm all about individualization based on physiological and psychological makeup... for training, diet, and pretty much anything else out there.
In my business, I tend to revert to the majority. If I find something to work in the vast majority of cases, I'm going to start there with new clients. I won't deny that it's a fool proof system. Invariably it takes some refinement. And I've had clients who I simply couldn't reach. So as a professional, along with my systems, I'm still very much a work in progress.
Thanks for your thoughts on the matter... they're appreciated.0 -
I lost a lot of weight by being really strict and rigid, but when I loosened up the reigns, I gained it all back (this was back in 2008). More recently I have learned better, and I am currently at a lower body fat than I was back in 2008 (even though I weigh more, probably because I hit the gym and I know I gained some muscle when I was eating more in '08 and just retained it through constant gym visits). Now, there is no "loosing up the reigns" because I incorporate anything I want into my "diet" as long as I hit my calorie goal and meet my macro mins. for fat and protein. I just have to adjust the amount of calories for bulking/cutting/maintaining which is 238472893465287356 times easier than restricting food and then trying to figure out what to do if "OMG I just ate a pizza and cookie" like so many other MFP'ers complain about daily!0
-
the problem with eating whatever i want and trying to have a healthy and "normal" relationship with food is that i can never seem to eat in moderation. 80 percent of the time eating whatever i want leads to eating MORE of whatever i want, which leads me wanting even MORE of whatever i want. it's not about me being hungry. i just want to eat more of the foods i love. the other 20 percent of the time i seem to get a burst of extra motivation and an iron clad will that allows me to eat in moderation. most of the time, trying to have a healthy relationship seems to lead me to having an unhealthy binging relationship.. and the only way i have been able to combat it is by 1. replacing what I want with a healthier version of it or 2. cutting it out completely.
i've resigned myself to the fact that i'll probably never have a great relationship with food although i do continue to work on it.
Definitely hard for some than for others. Some of this has to do with how they're physically hardwired. Another part of it has to do with their upbringing and associations and how those things drive perceptions, beliefs, habits, and decisions.
Regardless though, you're essentially saying that your relationship with food is fueled by psychological hunger. You're mind wants to be eating regardless of the energy/nutritional status of your body. One way to combat this is to abstain. There are no absolutes here, and I'd imagine that for some people this is the optimal path to take. It's a depressing one from my perspective.... but it's MY perspective. Doesn't make the path any more right or wrong.
Before I ever subscribed to permanently abstaining though, I'd find someone who's equipped to dig a little deeper into your relationship with food. Especially seeing as how it's pretty clear that for many people, the more rigid and depriving they become, the greater their urges become too. And, again, for many folks... once the urges hit a certain threshold... they break. And when they break, they break hard. And they never truly gain any sense of sanity when it comes to eating... it's this round and round trip of strict diet, followed by binge, followed by guilt.
I'd be wondering if there's some psychological construct that's programming me to use food. Maybe there are self-worth issues that give you a sense of inadequacy. So anytime you encounter stress in life, which is bound to happen, you fail to focus on solutions and rather turn to food for a fix of pleasure until the stress resides. Maybe you're rocking some cognitive distortions that make it impossible to listen to your physiological hunger cues. The moment a cue tells you that you want a cookie, you irrationally go off the deep end because your mindset makes you feel like this is your last chance to eat this stuff since tomorrow you're back on the wagon. You truly believe that and the fact is more than likely you'll relapse a few days later and it's this never ending cycle. On and on it goes in terms of possibilities and it's far from simple for many folks.
The point is, though... abstinence may be the easy option for the time being, but don't give up hope for a better solution in the future. Don't stop trying to figure it out. That's what this should be about for everyone.... a process of refinement as we learn more and more.
Sucks that there are no easy answers that apply to everyone... right?0 -
When people are rigid with their exercise routine those people are labelled as driven. When people follow a rigid diet those people are labelled as kooks. Seems legit.
That's a generalization and a strawman.
I encounter someone who's excessively exercising on a monthly basis, at a minimum. And no, it's not a judgement I'm making based on personal judgement as your other post indicates. I'm referring to actual cases of people outstripping their ability to recover from the stresses of their exercise, which, in turn, leads to physical degradation in body and/or performance. Never minding some of "balance of life" sort of arguments which become much more subjective.0 -
I think that food obsession doesn't stand by itself. I'm always curious about the underlying causes for different people. For me, I can get a little obsessive about food and tend to fail when it goes on too long, probably for reasons outlined by the OP. But more often than not, I'm obsessing over the food for a separate reason.
Absolutely. Food obsession is downstream from some higher level stuff. Put differently, it's generally the symptom of something else.0 -
timely thread. i think people probably just have to learn this for themselves, sadly. bullcrud calorie-restriced diets where you drink some magic potion (but but but...superfood! and phytonutrients! and maca! lol) and then eat junk or mostly junk for the rest of that day's "allowed" calorie (usually see people go so far under i'm not even sure how they can do the exercise they are logging) intake aren't sustainable.0
-
bump for later reading0
-
timely thread. i think people probably just have to learn this for themselves, sadly. bullcrud calorie-restriced diets where you drink some magic potion (but but but...superfood! and phytonutrients! and maca! lol) and then eat junk or mostly junk for the rest of that day's "allowed" calorie (usually see people go so far under i'm not even sure how they can do the exercise they are logging) intake aren't sustainable.
Why must a rigid diet include magic potions? And how rigid is a diet that allows mostly junk?
I took the OP to be about those that feel they must give up all "junk food" in order to lose weight.0 -
timely thread. i think people probably just have to learn this for themselves, sadly. bullcrud calorie-restriced diets where you drink some magic potion (but but but...superfood! and phytonutrients! and maca! lol) and then eat junk or mostly junk for the rest of that day's "allowed" calorie (usually see people go so far under i'm not even sure how they can do the exercise they are logging) intake aren't sustainable.
Why must a rigid diet include magic potions? And how rigid is a diet that allows mostly junk?
I took the OP to be about those that feel they must give up all "junk food" in order to lose weight.
I don' t know that the OP was speaking strictly about *all* junk food. I took the point as issue of odd labeling that resulted in an unhealthy relationships with, and restrictions of, food. And I don't think magic potions are necessarily a must, but there are definitely a number of diets that suggest that Food A is the fountain of youth and health while Food B will definitely make/keep you fat.
I can see where one might view how restrictive a diet is based on how extreme the ideology is, rather than how many foods aren't allowed.0 -
*claps loudly*0
-
timely thread. i think people probably just have to learn this for themselves, sadly. bullcrud calorie-restriced diets where you drink some magic potion (but but but...superfood! and phytonutrients! and maca! lol) and then eat junk or mostly junk for the rest of that day's "allowed" calorie (usually see people go so far under i'm not even sure how they can do the exercise they are logging) intake aren't sustainable.
Why must a rigid diet include magic potions? And how rigid is a diet that allows mostly junk?
I took the OP to be about those that feel they must give up all "junk food" in order to lose weight.
I don' t know that the OP was speaking strictly about *all* junk food. I took the point as issue of odd labeling that resulted in an unhealthy relationships with, and restrictions of, food. And I don't think magic potions are necessarily a must, but there are definitely a number of diets that suggest that Food A is the fountain of youth and health while Food B will definitely make/keep you fat.
I can see where one might view how restrictive a diet is based on how extreme the ideology is, rather than how many foods aren't allowed.
I'm sure there are, I just thought the post was off topic. Particularly because I took the OP to be against labelling foods as "bad" or "junk" in general. That just about any food could be part of a healthy diet and therefore nothing was "junk".
But I may have misunderstood. I don't want to speak for the OP. Just my thoughts.0 -
timely thread. i think people probably just have to learn this for themselves, sadly. bullcrud calorie-restriced diets where you drink some magic potion (but but but...superfood! and phytonutrients! and maca! lol) and then eat junk or mostly junk for the rest of that day's "allowed" calorie (usually see people go so far under i'm not even sure how they can do the exercise they are logging) intake aren't sustainable.
Why must a rigid diet include magic potions? And how rigid is a diet that allows mostly junk?
I took the OP to be about those that feel they must give up all "junk food" in order to lose weight.
I don' t know that the OP was speaking strictly about *all* junk food. I took the point as issue of odd labeling that resulted in an unhealthy relationships with, and restrictions of, food. And I don't think magic potions are necessarily a must, but there are definitely a number of diets that suggest that Food A is the fountain of youth and health while Food B will definitely make/keep you fat.
I can see where one might view how restrictive a diet is based on how extreme the ideology is, rather than how many foods aren't allowed.
I'm sure there are, I just thought the post was off topic. Particularly because I took the OP to be against labelling foods as "bad" or "junk" in general. That just about any food could be part of a healthy diet and therefore nothing was "junk".
But I may have misunderstood. I don't want to speak for the OP. Just my thoughts.
Right....and I think the magic potions comment seems at least tangentially related. If we're talking about labeling foods as bad, we might as well talk about the problems of labeling certain foods as being metabolically superior for no particularly good reason. Both types of labels speak to the overall problem of ditching potentially complex rational thought in favor of a safety blanket, which could take the form of vilifying or exalting certain foods.0 -
Thank you for posting. You always present a balanced and helpful viewpoint.0
-
OP - Great, Sane, and Realistic Post
Thanks for putting this down. I will make sure I read it when I am tempted to do the "quick fix"
Great job!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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