My meeting with a Sports Nutritionist
Replies
-
And this thread is a very good example of why I stay out of the forums most of them time. The OP was offering to others wanting to get/stay healthy some help. And got crucified for it. Goodness gracious people.0
-
As a scientist I would like to remind people of the "Half-life of facts", which says that over time half of what you know to be true will be untrue.
Skepticism and questioning facts are vital to progress. Hating on a forum that, at it's core, is supposed to encourage and inspire users to lose weight is wrong.
As a scientist I would expect you to appreciate asking for facts rather than being asked to take someone's word for things. Skepticism and questioning facts is vital to progress, I completely agree. And questioning and arguing the minutiae of an assertion is how we find truth.
I agree totally and you missed my point. A discussion is welcome. An argument isn't.
It might help if you pointed out some of the posts you consider "hating" versus just "discussing." Otherwise we're just guessing at what you mean.
I don't think it would be helpful.
It would encourage a discussion (debate, argument!) about the difference between a discussion or argument and the line between the 2.
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!0 -
And this thread is a very good example of why I stay out of the forums most of them time. The OP was offering to others wanting to get/stay healthy some help. And got crucified for it. Goodness gracious people.
She wasn't crucified. The information was disputed and SHE attacked people.0 -
And this thread is a very good example of why I stay out of the forums most of them time. The OP was offering to others wanting to get/stay healthy some help. And got crucified for it. Goodness gracious people.
Actually, the OP was presenting somethings as fact - some of which are incorrect based on the current body of evidence.
Weight loss is hard. No need to make it harder with things that make no appreciable difference but make adherence harder.0 -
And this thread is a very good example of why I stay out of the forums most of them time. The OP was offering to others wanting to get/stay healthy some help. And got crucified for it. Goodness gracious people.
The OP offered advice and some of it was not scientifically sound and was based on pseudoscience. So you are saying things like that should go unchallenged?
For the record, the OP is the one that was deeming to people that legitimately challenged her by calling them "darlin" and such...0 -
And this thread is a very good example of why I stay out of the forums most of them time. The OP was offering to others wanting to get/stay healthy some help. And got crucified for it. Goodness gracious people.
The OP offered advice and some of it was not scientifically sound and was based on pseudoscience. So you are saying things like that should go unchallenged?
For the record, the OP is the one that was deeming to people that legitimately challenged her by calling them "darlin" and such...
^ Agreed. That was the only insulting post in this thread0 -
As a scientist I would like to remind people of the "Half-life of facts", which says that over time half of what you know to be true will be untrue.
Skepticism and questioning facts are vital to progress. Hating on a forum that, at it's core, is supposed to encourage and inspire users to lose weight is wrong.
As a scientist I would expect you to appreciate asking for facts rather than being asked to take someone's word for things. Skepticism and questioning facts is vital to progress, I completely agree. And questioning and arguing the minutiae of an assertion is how we find truth.
I agree totally and you missed my point. A discussion is welcome. An argument isn't.
It might help if you pointed out some of the posts you consider "hating" versus just "discussing." Otherwise we're just guessing at what you mean.
I don't think it would be helpful.
It would encourage a discussion (debate, argument!) about the difference between a discussion or argument and the line between the 2.
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
so you call people out for arguing with the OP and then don't "feel" like backing your claim up? How unscientific of you ….0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?0 -
will read later...0
-
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.
Physics.0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.
Physics.
That would be a field, not a type of scientist. University researcher? Lab assistant? High school teacher?0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.
Physics.
That would be a field, not a type of scientist. University researcher? Lab assistant? High school teacher?
I was a Phd student studying partial dislocations and stacking faults in GaN semiconductor thin flims.
I am struggling to see your point though?0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.
Physics.
That would be a field, not a type of scientist. University researcher? Lab assistant? High school teacher?
I was a Phd student studying partial dislocations and stacking faults in GaN semiconductor thin flims.
I am struggling to see your point though?
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)0 -
I was a Phd student studying partial dislocations and stacking faults in GaN semiconductor thin flims.
I am struggling to see your point though?
I'm not trying to make a point. Just struggling and trying to understand something. I'm failing.0 -
Oh no. I've lost a good 130 lbs breaking most of these "rules".
And the lightest I've been my entire adult weight was when I rarely ate breakfast, as I'm typically not a breakfast person. And I maintained that for years.
Wow. What will I ever do now that I've broken so many rules? Perhaps I should regain the lost 130lbs as an act of penance?0 -
AS A SCIENTIST....
I'm going to have to agree with the masses that this all sounds like correlation and not causation.
BUT
I'm actually going to speak to her credentials. She's a sports nutritionist. SPORTS. Not a nutritionist who specializes in weight loss. She does seem to know her stuff when it comes to sports. But knowing about sports does not mean she knows about weight loss.
The two are not the same. For example. I am a Social Psychologist. I conduct research on gender discrimination in the workplace and leadership. Saying a sports nutritionist can speak with authority and expertise on weight loss is like saying that I can start treating patients for depression.
LINE UP FOLKS! DOCTOR LIZ IS IN!!!
Holy ****! An intelligent comment. How did you get into this discussion?
(BTW Nancy Clark is a lot more than a nutritionist. She practically invented the field of sports nutrition. And she is an RD. Calling her a "nutritionist" is like calling a concert violinist a "fiddler").0 -
bump to read0
-
I appreciate the post although I do not agree with parts. To each his own. In any event, thanks for the info and hope you don't get beat up too badly in here. If it's help one person on MFP in reaching their goals (even if it's just you), then bravo.0
-
AS A SCIENTIST....
I'm going to have to agree with the masses that this all sounds like correlation and not causation.
BUT
I'm actually going to speak to her credentials. She's a sports nutritionist. SPORTS. Not a nutritionist who specializes in weight loss. She does seem to know her stuff when it comes to sports. But knowing about sports does not mean she knows about weight loss.
The two are not the same. For example. I am a Social Psychologist. I conduct research on gender discrimination in the workplace and leadership. Saying a sports nutritionist can speak with authority and expertise on weight loss is like saying that I can start treating patients for depression.
LINE UP FOLKS! DOCTOR LIZ IS IN!!!
Holy ****! An intelligent comment. How did you get into this discussion?
(BTW Nancy Clark is a lot more than a nutritionist. She practically invented the field of sports nutrition. And she is an RD. Calling her a "nutritionist" is like calling a concert violinist a "fiddler").
^^yep.
It makes me wonder how much misinterpretation/misunderstanding there was regarding context of some of the comments. (the meal timing one in particular).0 -
AS A SCIENTIST....
I'm going to have to agree with the masses that this all sounds like correlation and not causation.
BUT
I'm actually going to speak to her credentials. She's a sports nutritionist. SPORTS. Not a nutritionist who specializes in weight loss. She does seem to know her stuff when it comes to sports. But knowing about sports does not mean she knows about weight loss.
The two are not the same. For example. I am a Social Psychologist. I conduct research on gender discrimination in the workplace and leadership. Saying a sports nutritionist can speak with authority and expertise on weight loss is like saying that I can start treating patients for depression.
LINE UP FOLKS! DOCTOR LIZ IS IN!!!
Holy ****! An intelligent comment. How did you get into this discussion?
(BTW Nancy Clark is a lot more than a nutritionist. She practically invented the field of sports nutrition. And she is an RD. Calling her a "nutritionist" is like calling a concert violinist a "fiddler").
^^yep.
It makes me wonder how much misinterpretation/misunderstanding there was regarding context of some of the comments. (the meal timing one in particular).
Well in fairness I doubt that the OP's summarization is an accurate account of Nancy Clark's opinions.
If Nancy Clark indeed says "saving all your calories until dinner causes you to gain weight" then.... well.0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.0 -
I read the OP and will add it to the body of knowledge I have gathered on weight loss. As with most bodies of knowledge - some of it is helpful and accurate. Some of it is contradictory. Some of the well established and researched "facts" will be disproved in years to come and we will look back and say - people actually believed that!
How can a "scientist" say that a bunch of misinformation and some outright lies "add to the body of knowledge"?
What kind of scientist are you?
lies and misinformation imply that there is a deliberate intent to mislead. Contradictory "facts" are common place in science as is disproving a well established "fact" or assumption.
A personal insult like - what sort of scientist are you? Is a perfect example of the difference between a discussion and "Hating" Thank you for so clearly showing the difference.
My question was a genuine question. I actually want to know what kind of scientist you are.
Physics.
That would be a field, not a type of scientist. University researcher? Lab assistant? High school teacher?
I was a Phd student studying partial dislocations and stacking faults in GaN semiconductor thin flims.
I am struggling to see your point though?
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Hey! Not true! I came from a lab where we openly argued about whether any given study was "good research." Part of my mentor's mission was to teach us to critically evaluate and criticize established research!0 -
AS A SCIENTIST....
I'm going to have to agree with the masses that this all sounds like correlation and not causation.
BUT
I'm actually going to speak to her credentials. She's a sports nutritionist. SPORTS. Not a nutritionist who specializes in weight loss. She does seem to know her stuff when it comes to sports. But knowing about sports does not mean she knows about weight loss.
The two are not the same. For example. I am a Social Psychologist. I conduct research on gender discrimination in the workplace and leadership. Saying a sports nutritionist can speak with authority and expertise on weight loss is like saying that I can start treating patients for depression.
LINE UP FOLKS! DOCTOR LIZ IS IN!!!
Holy ****! An intelligent comment. How did you get into this discussion?
(BTW Nancy Clark is a lot more than a nutritionist. She practically invented the field of sports nutrition. And she is an RD. Calling her a "nutritionist" is like calling a concert violinist a "fiddler").
:flowerforyou:0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.0 -
She gave me scientifically sound guidelines that tend to work and be sustainable for most people- based on research. But if you want to lose weight eating just Twinkies, I'm sure it can be done. Will most people fail to sustain that type of weightloss? Yup.
Incorrect.
The overwhelming majority of people do not sustain weight loss regardless of the method used, or the rate of loss. It's criminal to sell this nonsense to people and tell them that it's sustainable for "most people", when scores of millions of people have regained their weight back even after doing it the so called "right" and "healthy" way.0 -
Wouldn't it be more helpful to the OP to point out the tips that are valid and good and the parts that are generally not necessary?
None of the advice will exactly stall weight loss (she's not advising taking raspberry ketones or VLCDs here), it is just that some of it (such as eating breakfast or avoiding large dinners) isn't necessary. The advice about large dinners would be good advice for someone who doesn't count calories because it's likely to lead to a surplus. For people who track and count calories, they can eat all of their calories before bed and find success.
Regaining weight and percentages, while flawed, must necessarily be based on statistics. How many of the people on here recommend TDEE and not eating too great of a deficit? How is that advice different from what this nutritionist has given.
The progesterone issue probably doesn't come into play for most women. It might, however, for someone who is under medical care and needs extra calories to deal with shedding meconium, blood loss, iron depletion, etc.
The advice about eating when your hungry is something that applies to people who have been at it for a while and pay attention to their actual hunger cues. Intuitive eating doesn't seem to work for dieters, though.
The rest of her advice seems to be "learn moderation, don't lose too fast, strength train and step away from the scale and pick up the tape measure." Honestly, is that any different from the advice given here daily?
I could go into more detail, but TL; DR. It's not completely wasted advice, but some of it isn't necessary, either.
^^^^^this
0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
Yeah, this is kind of a stunning misunderstanding of the scientific process for someone who claims to have a PhD. Or, at least, worked on one. A lot of people who go into PhD programs don't succeed.
Anyway, good data is good data. It's generally not data itself that's wrong or "proven as an untruth." Interpretations and extrapolations of that data is often proven untrue. This is why it's good to generally ignore the discussion part of the article and focus on the methodology, mathematical analysis, and results. Solid data and analysis does not often get "proven untrue" or whatever.0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
I agree!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions