Shockingly bad foods

WendyTerry420

people that get salads at fast food restaurants with chicken or something on them.. just cause its a salad doesn't mean all the crap that is in it isn't the same as a burger.

Just grilled chicken, with lite dressing isn't bad, but you're right. A cobb salad at Mcdonald's is more calories than a big mac!!!

The new crispy chicken cobb salad at ChickFilA is 430 calories w/o dressing, the avocado lime ranch dressing they suggest to go with it is 310.. that's 740 cals for a salad!!!! Yikes!! Thankfully they will let you swap out the crispy chicken for grilled, then get the light italian dressing (25 cals), then your salad is 355. So I usually get the grilled chicken nuggets, a fruit cup & water, 250 all together and its filling.

Sounds like a meal to itself. I'll have to go try that one! Thanks!

Siansonea

Fancy salads always shock me with their calorie content. If I'm going to eat that many calories, I'm not going to eat a damn salad. :grumble:

chelseascounter

Cheeseburger from tgi friday's 1,100+ cals. I thought it would be around 900 cals.

Holly_Roman_Empire

Fancy salads always shock me with their calorie content. If I'm going to eat that many calories, I'm not going to eat a damn salad. :grumble:

This made me lol. My thoughts exactly.

bcattoes

I was shocked at the calorie count of most everything at Applebees. Wow, I've been there once since I started actively tracking 9 months ago and was taken by surprise at how high in calories they were.

I feel the same was about Outback. Seriously, even grilled salmon is sky high in calories. They must just melt buckets of butter and pour it over everything they make.

funkyspunky872

Virtually everything yummy at starbucks has a wack of sugar and hundreds and hundreds of liquid calories.

Yeah, but every single calorie is frickin' delicious and worth it. I have starbucks almost every day of the week. Tbh, if you're eating enough calories in the first place, there isn't any problem with fitting in "liquid calories".

swillybay

Costco pumpkin streusel muffin. One muffin has almost 700 calories and oodles of fat and sugar. They taste SO good. I was so disappointed. Might as well have chocolate whipped cream cake.

bcattoes

Ok, I guess we're just going to wade into this. There are no bad foods. There are carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Many foods have varying levels of these three macro nutrients, as well as any number of sundry micro nutrients. These are available in a wide range of calorie options.

I think it's ridiculous to demonize some food for not being whatever you consider to be an ideal combination of the above factors.

I said good day!

I think it's ridiculous to say there are no bad foods because all foods contain some portion of macronutrients. I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that saying there are bad foods = "demonizing" foods.

Everyone knows that there are foods that are better for us than others. There are foods that we are better off eating, and foods that we'd just as well off if we never ate them. You know it, I know it, we all know it.

Good day to you too! :flowerforyou:

Rebekah718

Definitely Starbucks drinks

shell_mc

The dark, heavy stout beers that I love. I knew there were more than a light beer, but some of those go over 200 calories for a 12 ounce beer!

Not that I'm going to give them up, but come on!

TheRealParisLove

*Juice smoothies from those mall food-court places. You could easily get 1200 calories in a large sized smoothie. :noway:

*Breakfast pastries. I used to think bagels or bran muffins were a good "healthy" choice. At 600-800 calories each, one of those suckers would take 40% or more of my daily calories.

*DQ Blizzard. Even a mini sized blizzard packs in 400 calories. The minis are about 1/2 cup serving. If I had just gotten 1/2 cup of regular ice cream, it would clock in at about 175 calories. The larges are 1100-1200 calories. I've had those as my dessert in the past.

ruthhunter336

I'm shocked at the calorie count in everything I have entered into my food diary. I have never counted calories in my life but a mixture of being a mother of two and a sedentary job means I'm not happy with the weight that I can't seem to shift. MFP has me at 1400 calories a day and I'm struggling to get anywhere near that. I checked my normal diet for a few days and I have been consuming about 2300 a day. Feeling hungry and disheartened and I've been doing this less than a week.

Stage14

Cashews. 320 calories in 1/4 cup.

What kind of cashews are you eating? Mine are around 160 for 28g (which ends up being a little less than 1/4 cup, but not half as much).

TheRealParisLove

Um....you get plenty of nutrition from a hamburger. Add cheese and you have all 4 food groups.

We've had 7 food groups since the 1970's.

RivenV

Ok, I guess we're just going to wade into this. There are no bad foods. There are carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Many foods have varying levels of these three macro nutrients, as well as any number of sundry micro nutrients. These are available in a wide range of calorie options.

I think it's ridiculous to demonize some food for not being whatever you consider to be an ideal combination of the above factors.

I said good day!

I think it's ridiculous to say there are no bad foods because all foods contain some portion of macronutrients. I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that saying there are bad foods = "demonizing" foods.

Everyone knows that there are foods that are better for us than others. There are foods that we are better off eating, and foods that we'd just as well off if we never ate them. You know it, I know it, we all know it.

Good day to you too! :flowerforyou:

Oh, well... if everyone just *knows* then I guess that's sound reasoning. I didn't know it was like that.

What are you even saying? All food is just macro nutrients, micro nutrients, and calories. Am I correct in guessing that you think the axiomatic components of food are different from one variety of food to another? It sounds like you would argue that 6 grams of fat in Food A are worse than 6 grams of fat in Food B. Is this accurate? If so, on what basis?

Maybe you subscribe to a school of thought like that, but that's not my way.

blondieellie

Yes, musli is quite calorific! I do love it though, so I make my own or weigh out a small portion of a low sugar brand.

DamePiglet

Pineapple. I grabbed about 6 rings in the chow hall at breakfast, figuring it would be healthy enough. When I entered it in my diary I found those six rings put me over my sugar max for the entire day - over 45 g of sugar in one shot.

Discovered strawberries are way better and actually have some fiber as well.

oh honey! If you can get fresh pineapple, it's soooo much better... both taste and calories/sugar

bcattoes

Ok, I guess we're just going to wade into this. There are no bad foods. There are carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Many foods have varying levels of these three macro nutrients, as well as any number of sundry micro nutrients. These are available in a wide range of calorie options.

I think it's ridiculous to demonize some food for not being whatever you consider to be an ideal combination of the above factors.

I said good day!

I think it's ridiculous to say there are no bad foods because all foods contain some portion of macronutrients. I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that saying there are bad foods = "demonizing" foods.

Everyone knows that there are foods that are better for us than others. There are foods that we are better off eating, and foods that we'd just as well off if we never ate them. You know it, I know it, we all know it.

Good day to you too! :flowerforyou:

Oh, well... if everyone just *knows* then I guess that's sound reasoning. I didn't know it was like that.

What are you even saying? All food is just macro nutrients, micro nutrients, and calories. Am I correct in guessing that you think the axiomatic components of food are different from one variety of food to another? It sounds like you would argue that 6 grams of fat in Food A are worse than 6 grams of fat in Food B. Is this accurate? If so, on what basis?

Maybe you subscribe to a school of thought like that, but that's not my way.

Yes, some fats are better than other fats. Fat in avocado is better than fat in partially hydrogenated oil, for example.

Francl27

*Juice smoothies from those mall food-court places. You could easily get 1200 calories in a large sized smoothie. :noway:

*Breakfast pastries. I used to think bagels or bran muffins were a good "healthy" choice. At 600-800 calories each, one of those suckers would take 40% or more of my daily calories.

*DQ Blizzard. Even a mini sized blizzard packs in 400 calories. The minis are about 1/2 cup serving. If I had just gotten 1/2 cup of regular ice cream, it would clock in at about 175 calories. The larges are 1100-1200 calories. I've had those as my dessert in the past.

What bagels have 600-800 calories? Wow. The ones I find have 300 calories typically...

RivenV

Ok, I guess we're just going to wade into this. There are no bad foods. There are carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Many foods have varying levels of these three macro nutrients, as well as any number of sundry micro nutrients. These are available in a wide range of calorie options.

I think it's ridiculous to demonize some food for not being whatever you consider to be an ideal combination of the above factors.

I said good day!

I think it's ridiculous to say there are no bad foods because all foods contain some portion of macronutrients. I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that saying there are bad foods = "demonizing" foods.

Everyone knows that there are foods that are better for us than others. There are foods that we are better off eating, and foods that we'd just as well off if we never ate them. You know it, I know it, we all know it.

Good day to you too! :flowerforyou:

Oh, well... if everyone just *knows* then I guess that's sound reasoning. I didn't know it was like that.

What are you even saying? All food is just macro nutrients, micro nutrients, and calories. Am I correct in guessing that you think the axiomatic components of food are different from one variety of food to another? It sounds like you would argue that 6 grams of fat in Food A are worse than 6 grams of fat in Food B. Is this accurate? If so, on what basis?

Maybe you subscribe to a school of thought like that, but that's not my way.

Yes, some fats are better than other fats. Fat in avocado is better than fat in partially hydrogenated oil, for example.

... Are you trolling me right now? I'm not talking about different types of fat (trans vs saturated vs etc.) I mean a direct comparison... Let's change the wording so that you can answer it properly.

It sounds like you would argue that 6 grams of protein in Food A are worse than 6 grams of protein in Food B.
It sounds like you would argue that 6 grams of carbohydrate in Food A are worse than 6 grams of carbohydrate in Food B.
- I feel like I should clarify the carbohydrate statement to say--a direct comparison of the same types of carbohydrates (simple to simple; complex to complex; etc.)

Is this even worth exploring with you, or are you you going to continue to (perhaps deliberately) misinterpret what I'm saying (so that you can say it fits your agenda)?