Is 'eating at deficit' enough?
Options
Replies
-
Cooking destroys nutrients. Vegetable oil causes oxidative damage in the body, reducing the effects of any nutrients in the vegetables. Please, it's not rocket science.
Got it. I will eat raw potatoes moving forward.0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
http://www.healthylivingheavylifting.com/how-clean-eating-made-me-fat-but-ice-cream-and-subway-got-me-lean/
"[...] With the Paleo diet, there are no rules on how much you can eat. By that, I mean you’re not given a set calorie or macronutrient goal to hit each day, as the theory behind Paleo eating is that the low-carb, high-protein nature of the diet leads you to feeling naturally full, and prevents over-eating.
Well, say hello to the incredible eating machine. Also known as “bottomless pit Samuels,” or “the human bin.” I don’t seem to have a full setting. When I’m not given a set amount to eat, I just eat."
And your point is? Overeating is overeating. Bingeing is quite another thing. People generally don't "binge" on healthy foods, but yes they most certainly can and do overeat on them.
You should publish a dictionary of terms and then we can keep up with you!!0 -
Again, "realistically" if you were in it for the long haul and logging properly, changes are you're 50 calories off some days (over, as well as under). Denying any emotional attachment to food is when the restrictions come in. If anything, after eating whatever I want the foods become normal and don't necessarily have some immense pull.
As for 2000 calories of twinkies being processed differently than 2000 calories of veggies and thus causing different rates of loss for similar individuals, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Everyone has told you that people with medical conditions are more or less out of scope for this discussion. I mean think of a person whom even when eating veggies laden with sodium swells up the following morning. Are veggies then bad? Is that what you're saying that if you have a medical condition you probably can't or shouldn't eat certain foods in order to have a lower scale weight? If so, agreed!!!
Well I wasn't saying you're 50 cals off because you're not logging correctly, but because you cannot determine how your body is processing each type of food and some days you might expend more whilst other days you expend less. If foods have no immense pull to you then that's great for you. Not everyone has an emotional attachment to food and those that don't will find it easier to lose weight.
Saying we'll have to agree to disagree on how the body processes different foods is saying you disagree with science, because what I've said is supported by science. I quoted a study which proves that peoples BMRs and TDEE changes depending on what they eat, which directly disproves what you believe. But hey, I'm only studying nutrition and been researching for years on the subject so what do I know? Honestly, it's up to you what you wish to believe because beliefs are just that - beliefs, not fact. Anyone who wants to deny facts is absolutely entitled to do so, I just hope they won't be passing around advice to others on the subject...
TEF is minimimal and has been show to be so with respect to increasing metabolism...
unless you manage to find the study that you mentioned early and never posted….
I did post it, you obviously missed it. But here it is again: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1199154
^^ So it looks like that someone who has a varied diet with a "moderate" macro ratio, TEF changes would be negligible.
For starters the TEF is not the only thing I was referring to when I talked about how our body processes different foods. You'll see from that study that they note that leptin and thyroid levels were highest on a high carb diet. And leptin and thyroid levels affect rates of weight loss.
Secondly, I'm assuming your statement is based on the averages of the study which I said previously is not relevant when you are looking at individuals. You can't take a study of say 100 people with an average weight loss of 3lbs per person and then say that from this study you can conclude that everyone will lose 3lbs. Some will have lost more and some will have lost less, and that is what my argument has been based on. That we are not all the same and we do not process foods in the same way. Some people had negligible changes while others had significant changes.
But you could take a study of 100 people and find that after it's been analyzed and the results have been published, that it doesn't tell us anything we don't already know. There are tons of those, most of which are paid with our tax dollars.
And, yes, clearly some people have underlying medical conditions, and others tell lies to researchers, often lies that they themselves believe. The point being, your study does not say what you claimed back on page 6 that it said. I am disappoint.
Maybe it's something YOU don't already know, but I was asked to provide a study showing that not all food has the same effect and I did.0 -
And I don't believe they'd be serving anything healthy in those places either
They don't serve meat and vegetables at Brazilian steakhouses? I could've sworn the pounds of meat and vegetables I ate came from somewhere.....
I also washed it down with wine and Caramel Pecan Cheesecake.
Cooking methods and what's added to the food determine it's nutritional and health giving value. Vegetables that are charred and drowning in vegetable oil are no longer the health giving foods they were when they were fresh.
Oh see, that's perfect because I was referring to the salad bar.
As far are what is added to the food... you're telling me that adding in additional flavors, spices, oils and such makes the food devoid of nutrients then?
Yep. The addition of vegetable oil causes the nutrients to fly out of the food, presumably to Mars.
Cooking destroys nutrients. Vegetable oil causes oxidative damage in the body, reducing the effects of any nutrients in the vegetables. Please, it's not rocket science.
Cooking vegetables can preserve or even boost their nutritional value in comparison to their raw counterparts, depending on the cooking method used.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071224125524.htm
Man, science is a real jerk when it doesn't align with your misconceptions,
Yeah I don't think you've refuted what I said or that science doesn't align with what I've said. I gave a very vague example of a way in which one nutrient is destroyed while another is activated. I said earlier that cooking method and overcooking contribute, so what's your point exactly?0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
What? That would be - MAYBE - 900-1000 calories right there, so maybe 40% of total calories for one day. And that would be just dinner. After a while, it would not be so tasty. (I like my dinner hot)
900-1000 calories is not a binge.
The why the hell did you claim it was? What was the point of "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?"
As you just pointed out I said "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?" I didn't say there must be thousands of calories in there and it will take you all day to eat. I asked it under the premise that you would be eating that food throughout the day and bingeing on it, not that one meal. I realise that things get confusing through text so I'll let you off.0 -
And I don't believe they'd be serving anything healthy in those places either
They don't serve meat and vegetables at Brazilian steakhouses? I could've sworn the pounds of meat and vegetables I ate came from somewhere.....
I also washed it down with wine and Caramel Pecan Cheesecake.
Cooking methods and what's added to the food determine it's nutritional and health giving value. Vegetables that are charred and drowning in vegetable oil are no longer the health giving foods they were when they were fresh.
Oh see, that's perfect because I was referring to the salad bar.
As far are what is added to the food... you're telling me that adding in additional flavors, spices, oils and such makes the food devoid of nutrients then?
Yep. The addition of vegetable oil causes the nutrients to fly out of the food, presumably to Mars.
Cooking destroys nutrients. Vegetable oil causes oxidative damage in the body, reducing the effects of any nutrients in the vegetables. Please, it's not rocket science.
Actually the nutrients of certain vegetables is actually enhanced by cooking them...kale is a great example....
Some are, others aren't. Vitamin C is destroyed in cooking, but lycopene is activated by cooking. It depends on which nutrients are in which vegetables. Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting you should eat all your foods raw, but overcooking does more harm than good.
But vitamin C intake becomes a no-brainer when you are eating plenty of citrus fruits. And who cooks their orange before eating it?
I was giving an example...is that allowed? Many vegetables contain vitamin C too - it is ONE example of ONE nutrient that is destroyed in cooking. Jeez. And no, not everyone does eat a lot of fruit.0 -
You're confusing health with weight loss. Going over your calories doesn't make you unhealthy. Being fat makes you unhealthy. So eating that one tablespoon of olive oil might make an ever so slight dent in your weight loss progress, but it will positively affect your health. And what's wrong with planning your meals to allow for that olive oil? We need fat in our diets so why wouldn't you budget for it? And if you eat that salad alone with no fat you won't absorb all the nutrients either so I'd say you're always better off with the olive oil than without. You can make up for the extra 100 calories with exercise or the next day. Easy.
The term healthy really isn't as ambiguous as you make out. Either something is nutrient dense and contributes to health or it doesn't.
You were the one bashing the salad with plenty of olive oil on it, not me.
I love giant salads. I'm simply pointing out that a rich salad with plenty of oil and meat is not necessarily "unhealthy" as you seem to be suggesting and adding a generous amount of olive oil will not destroy the nutritional content of the salad. For that matter, there are plenty of situations where a rich salad is going to be the better choice. Simply put, whether a rich salad is a better choice than a dainty salad you make at home with "a little" olive oil depends on your activity level for the day and what else you've eaten. You can't just proclaim it's always more or less "healthy."
For that matter, you seem to be contradicting yourself a bit with this line of thinking. First the rich salad was unhealthy... now you're saying it's healthy and you can make-up for surplus calories the next day. Which is it? Moreover, if being nutrient-dense is all that's required to make something "healthy" then you could eat healthy food all day long and get extremely fat from it. But wait, you're saying being fat isn't healthy, and yet you can easily get fat from eating only healthy foods by that definition of healthy... meaning you can damage your health by eating healthy foods. Why make it so confusing by trying to assign such labels to what you eat?
And I'd love to hear what "contributes to health" means, since you seem to be suggesting it's a separate factor from being nutrient dense... but other than providing macro and micronutrients, what exactly do foods contribute to your overall health? Perhaps an oversight, I don't know.
Honestly, it seems like you've done some research but you also have a pretty rigid view that needlessly overcomplicates things by assigning poorly defined labels to foods. I've defended calling certain foods "generally unhealthy" before but it seems like you're taking that to an extreme.
Not olive oil, vegetable oil (sunflower, rapeseed etc). Olives are a fruit. And I'd never say to put tons on...1 tablespoon is more than sufficient. I also didn't say anything about oil on salad destroying nutrients - that was in relation to overcooking vegetables and using oil with them. The health part comes in with the type of fats and oils you are using, not the amount.
So no I haven't contradicted myself...a salad drowning in a sunflower oil based dressing is not healthy, whereas a salad with a little olive oil IS healthy. It depends on what you add to it. Going over your calories does not make it unhealthy, but if you are trying to lose weight then you can lower your calories the next day to make up for the excess.
Yes you could eat healthy food all day long and get fat if you're not expending enough energy and eating too much. That doesn't affect health, it affects your weight. Once you gain weight, THAT then affects your health. So it's not the foods that are making the person unhealthy, it's the over consumption of them, as with anything. After all, healthy foods aren't calorie free, are they?
Something being nutrient dense obviously relates to contributing to health. Many foods that contain nutrients also negatively affect health in certain situations. I don't know why something being nutrient dense and contributing to health has to be 2 separate issues, that's just me stating the obvious I guess. But, if you want to know how else foods contribute to your health, well certain foods contain substances that block minerals which negatively affects health. There are also certain carbohydrates that some people can't digest and that negatively affects their health. Foods contain more than just micro and macro nutrients and everything that goes into our body affects it in some way.
I don't think I'm taking anything to the extreme...if any food is low in nutrient value and negatively affects health then it is unhealthy because is promotes poor health. That's not me, that's just a fact. Eating those foods occasionally in small amounts may not majorly impact your health, but it by no measure makes them health giving.
I think you're confusing calorie dense with unhealthy. Both salads, assuming the are made with identical ingredients besides the oils, have the same nutritional value but one has a higher calorie content. High calorie content does not automatically make a dish unhealthy. It's all relative. Perhaps the salad eater that bathed their salad in sunflower oil hadn't eaten any fats that day. If that person is eating at a deficit and hitting macros, that salad they ate was perfectly healthy.
Taken a step further, if the person who eats the salad with only a tiny amount of olive oil (your more 'healthy' salad) regularly doesn't get enough fats in their diet, they will be a less healthy individual than the other salad eater.0 -
Gosh, I'm really confused by all the piles of quotes, the contradictory comments and whatnot.
I've read through some of the posts here, and some people are saying that calorie deficit is good enough by itself to lose weight, while other are saying that it's all about the calories going in vs. the ones going out.
Is there an answer for this topic, or does it simply matter on the person itself?
I just feel like it's dangerous and not really healthy for people to be commenting on these kinds of topics without having proper knowledge.
However that's just my opinion, and it's not meant to offend anyone in any way.
I'm just looking for some legitimate answers to help my weight loss.
And here it is!!!! This is why I was so adamantly digging my heels in. Pennylayne, would you agree with me to advise this lady to just worry about calories to get started? Because that is all that matters for weight loss?0 -
Cooking destroys nutrients. Vegetable oil causes oxidative damage in the body, reducing the effects of any nutrients in the vegetables. Please, it's not rocket science.
Got it. I will eat raw potatoes moving forward.
Good. Raw potatoes contain high amounts of resistant starch. It's very good for you 0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
http://www.healthylivingheavylifting.com/how-clean-eating-made-me-fat-but-ice-cream-and-subway-got-me-lean/
"[...] With the Paleo diet, there are no rules on how much you can eat. By that, I mean you’re not given a set calorie or macronutrient goal to hit each day, as the theory behind Paleo eating is that the low-carb, high-protein nature of the diet leads you to feeling naturally full, and prevents over-eating.
Well, say hello to the incredible eating machine. Also known as “bottomless pit Samuels,” or “the human bin.” I don’t seem to have a full setting. When I’m not given a set amount to eat, I just eat."
And your point is? Overeating is overeating. Bingeing is quite another thing. People generally don't "binge" on healthy foods, but yes they most certainly can and do overeat on them.
You should publish a dictionary of terms and then we can keep up with you!!
I didn't decide on what the word binge means. I used it in a sentence, if you don't understand the meaning then perhaps you need to consult a dictionary before responding.0 -
You're confusing health with weight loss. Going over your calories doesn't make you unhealthy. Being fat makes you unhealthy. So eating that one tablespoon of olive oil might make an ever so slight dent in your weight loss progress, but it will positively affect your health. And what's wrong with planning your meals to allow for that olive oil? We need fat in our diets so why wouldn't you budget for it? And if you eat that salad alone with no fat you won't absorb all the nutrients either so I'd say you're always better off with the olive oil than without. You can make up for the extra 100 calories with exercise or the next day. Easy.
The term healthy really isn't as ambiguous as you make out. Either something is nutrient dense and contributes to health or it doesn't.
You were the one bashing the salad with plenty of olive oil on it, not me. I love giant salads. I'm simply pointing out that a rich salad with plenty of oil and meat is not necessarily "unhealthy" as you seem to be suggesting and adding a generous amount of olive oil will not destroy the nutritional content of the salad. For that matter, there are plenty of situations where a rich salad is going to be the better choice. Simply put, whether a rich salad is a better choice than a dainty salad you make at home with "a little" olive oil depends on your activity level for the day and what else you've eaten. You can't just proclaim it's always more or less "healthy."
For that matter, you seem to be contradicting yourself a bit with this line of thinking. First the rich salad was unhealthy... now you're saying it's healthy and you can make-up for surplus calories the next day. Which is it? Moreover, if being nutrient-dense is all that's required to make something "healthy" then you could eat healthy food all day long and get extremely fat from it. But wait, you're saying being fat isn't healthy, and yet you can easily get fat from eating only healthy foods by that definition of healthy... meaning you can damage your health by eating healthy foods. Why make it so confusing by trying to assign such labels to what you eat?
And I'd love to hear what "contributes to health" means, since you seem to be suggesting it's a separate factor from being nutrient dense... but other than providing macro and micronutrients, what exactly do foods contribute to your overall health? Perhaps an oversight, I don't know.
Honestly, it seems like you've done some research but you also have a pretty rigid view that needlessly overcomplicates things by assigning poorly defined labels to foods. I've defended calling certain foods "generally unhealthy" before but it seems like you're taking that to an extreme.
Not olive oil, vegetable oil (sunflower, rapeseed etc). Olives are a fruit. And I'd never say to put tons on...1 tablespoon is more than sufficient. I also didn't say anything about oil on salad destroying nutrients - that was in relation to overcooking vegetables and using oil with them. The health part comes in with the type of fats and oils you are using, not the amount.
So no I haven't contradicted myself...a salad drowning in a sunflower oil based dressing is not healthy, whereas a salad with a little olive oil IS healthy. It depends on what you add to it. Going over your calories does not make it unhealthy, but if you are trying to lose weight then you can lower your calories the next day to make up for the excess.
Yes you could eat healthy food all day long and get fat if you're not expending enough energy and eating too much. That doesn't affect health, it affects your weight. Once you gain weight, THAT then affects your health. So it's not the foods that are making the person unhealthy, it's the over consumption of them, as with anything. After all, healthy foods aren't calorie free, are they?
Something being nutrient dense obviously relates to contributing to health. Many foods that contain nutrients also negatively affect health in certain situations. I don't know why something being nutrient dense and contributing to health has to be 2 separate issues, that's just me stating the obvious I guess. But, if you want to know how else foods contribute to your health, well certain foods contain substances that block minerals which negatively affects health. There are also certain carbohydrates that some people can't digest and that negatively affects their health. Foods contain more than just micro and macro nutrients and everything that goes into our body affects it in some way.
I don't think I'm taking anything to the extreme...if any food is low in nutrient value and negatively affects health then it is unhealthy because is promotes poor health. That's not me, that's just a fact. Eating those foods occasionally in small amounts may not majorly impact your health, but it by no measure makes them health giving.
I think you're confusing calorie dense with unhealthy. Both salads, assuming the are made with identical ingredients besides the oils, have the same nutritional value but one has a higher calorie content. High calorie content does not automatically make a dish unhealthy. It's all relative. Perhaps the salad eater that bathed their salad in sunflower oil hadn't eaten any fats that day. If that person is eating at a deficit and hitting macros, that salad they ate was perfectly healthy.
Taken a step further, if the person who eats the salad with only a tiny amount of olive oil (your more 'healthy' salad) regularly doesn't get enough fats in their diet, they will be a less healthy individual than the other salad eater.
Kinda what I am thinking as well. More calories does not equal unhealthy.0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
What? That would be - MAYBE - 900-1000 calories right there, so maybe 40% of total calories for one day. And that would be just dinner. After a while, it would not be so tasty. (I like my dinner hot)
900-1000 calories is not a binge.
The why the hell did you claim it was? What was the point of "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?"
As you just pointed out I said "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?" I didn't say there must be thousands of calories in there and it will take you all day to eat. I asked it under the premise that you would be eating that food throughout the day and bingeing on it, not that one meal. I realise that things get confusing through text so I'll let you off.
How many meals do you see in that picture? Yes, confusing indeed. I see one meal, maybe 900-100 calories, depending on what's exactly on that potato. And the weight of both the meat and the potato are potentially deceiving in the picture.
YOU: Eating only for hunger isn't highly rewarding
ME: It is if the food is particularly yummy
YOU: Are you going to binge on it?
Yes, confused...0 -
And I don't believe they'd be serving anything healthy in those places either
They don't serve meat and vegetables at Brazilian steakhouses? I could've sworn the pounds of meat and vegetables I ate came from somewhere.....
I also washed it down with wine and Caramel Pecan Cheesecake.
Cooking methods and what's added to the food determine it's nutritional and health giving value. Vegetables that are charred and drowning in vegetable oil are no longer the health giving foods they were when they were fresh.
Oh see, that's perfect because I was referring to the salad bar.
As far are what is added to the food... you're telling me that adding in additional flavors, spices, oils and such makes the food devoid of nutrients then?
Yep. The addition of vegetable oil causes the nutrients to fly out of the food, presumably to Mars.
Cooking destroys nutrients. Vegetable oil causes oxidative damage in the body, reducing the effects of any nutrients in the vegetables. Please, it's not rocket science.
Cooking vegetables can preserve or even boost their nutritional value in comparison to their raw counterparts, depending on the cooking method used.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071224125524.htm
Man, science is a real jerk when it doesn't align with your misconceptions,
Yeah I don't think you've refuted what I said or that science doesn't align with what I've said. I gave a very vague example of a way in which one nutrient is destroyed while another is activated. I said earlier that cooking method and overcooking contribute, so what's your point exactly?
You wrote, "Cooking destroys nutrients." You didn't write, "Cooking sometimes degrades nutrients and sometimes it improves it."
I refuted that declarative, all-encompassing statement and even provided some backup. Maybe work on being more accurate with your language and you will be better understood.0 -
You're confusing health with weight loss. Going over your calories doesn't make you unhealthy. Being fat makes you unhealthy. So eating that one tablespoon of olive oil might make an ever so slight dent in your weight loss progress, but it will positively affect your health. And what's wrong with planning your meals to allow for that olive oil? We need fat in our diets so why wouldn't you budget for it? And if you eat that salad alone with no fat you won't absorb all the nutrients either so I'd say you're always better off with the olive oil than without. You can make up for the extra 100 calories with exercise or the next day. Easy.
The term healthy really isn't as ambiguous as you make out. Either something is nutrient dense and contributes to health or it doesn't.
You were the one bashing the salad with plenty of olive oil on it, not me. I love giant salads. I'm simply pointing out that a rich salad with plenty of oil and meat is not necessarily "unhealthy" as you seem to be suggesting and adding a generous amount of olive oil will not destroy the nutritional content of the salad. For that matter, there are plenty of situations where a rich salad is going to be the better choice. Simply put, whether a rich salad is a better choice than a dainty salad you make at home with "a little" olive oil depends on your activity level for the day and what else you've eaten. You can't just proclaim it's always more or less "healthy."
For that matter, you seem to be contradicting yourself a bit with this line of thinking. First the rich salad was unhealthy... now you're saying it's healthy and you can make-up for surplus calories the next day. Which is it? Moreover, if being nutrient-dense is all that's required to make something "healthy" then you could eat healthy food all day long and get extremely fat from it. But wait, you're saying being fat isn't healthy, and yet you can easily get fat from eating only healthy foods by that definition of healthy... meaning you can damage your health by eating healthy foods. Why make it so confusing by trying to assign such labels to what you eat?
And I'd love to hear what "contributes to health" means, since you seem to be suggesting it's a separate factor from being nutrient dense... but other than providing macro and micronutrients, what exactly do foods contribute to your overall health? Perhaps an oversight, I don't know.
Honestly, it seems like you've done some research but you also have a pretty rigid view that needlessly overcomplicates things by assigning poorly defined labels to foods. I've defended calling certain foods "generally unhealthy" before but it seems like you're taking that to an extreme.
Not olive oil, vegetable oil (sunflower, rapeseed etc). Olives are a fruit. And I'd never say to put tons on...1 tablespoon is more than sufficient. I also didn't say anything about oil on salad destroying nutrients - that was in relation to overcooking vegetables and using oil with them. The health part comes in with the type of fats and oils you are using, not the amount.
So no I haven't contradicted myself...a salad drowning in a sunflower oil based dressing is not healthy, whereas a salad with a little olive oil IS healthy. It depends on what you add to it. Going over your calories does not make it unhealthy, but if you are trying to lose weight then you can lower your calories the next day to make up for the excess.
Yes you could eat healthy food all day long and get fat if you're not expending enough energy and eating too much. That doesn't affect health, it affects your weight. Once you gain weight, THAT then affects your health. So it's not the foods that are making the person unhealthy, it's the over consumption of them, as with anything. After all, healthy foods aren't calorie free, are they?
Something being nutrient dense obviously relates to contributing to health. Many foods that contain nutrients also negatively affect health in certain situations. I don't know why something being nutrient dense and contributing to health has to be 2 separate issues, that's just me stating the obvious I guess. But, if you want to know how else foods contribute to your health, well certain foods contain substances that block minerals which negatively affects health. There are also certain carbohydrates that some people can't digest and that negatively affects their health. Foods contain more than just micro and macro nutrients and everything that goes into our body affects it in some way.
I don't think I'm taking anything to the extreme...if any food is low in nutrient value and negatively affects health then it is unhealthy because is promotes poor health. That's not me, that's just a fact. Eating those foods occasionally in small amounts may not majorly impact your health, but it by no measure makes them health giving.
I think you're confusing calorie dense with unhealthy. Both salads, assuming the are made with identical ingredients besides the oils, have the same nutritional value but one has a higher calorie content. High calorie content does not automatically make a dish unhealthy. It's all relative. Perhaps the salad eater that bathed their salad in sunflower oil hadn't eaten any fats that day. If that person is eating at a deficit and hitting macros, that salad they ate was perfectly healthy.
Taken a step further, if the person who eats the salad with only a tiny amount of olive oil (your more 'healthy' salad) regularly doesn't get enough fats in their diet, they will be a less healthy individual than the other salad eater.
No, I'm not confusing calorie dense with healthy. Processed vegetable oils are not healthy. Not because of the calories, but because they are high in omega 6 fats which promote inflammation in the body and are damaged at high heats causing oxidative damage in the body. And I already said that more calories are not what makes something unhealthy. And I only gave the example of a tablespoon of olive oil in the case of not having any calories left for the day.0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
What? That would be - MAYBE - 900-1000 calories right there, so maybe 40% of total calories for one day. And that would be just dinner. After a while, it would not be so tasty. (I like my dinner hot)
900-1000 calories is not a binge.
The why the hell did you claim it was? What was the point of "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?"
As you just pointed out I said "You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?" I didn't say there must be thousands of calories in there and it will take you all day to eat. I asked it under the premise that you would be eating that food throughout the day and bingeing on it, not that one meal. I realise that things get confusing through text so I'll let you off.
How many meals do you see in that picture? Yes, confusing indeed. I see one meal, maybe 900-100 calories, depending on what's exactly on that potato. And the weight of both the meat and the potato are potentially deceiving in the picture.
YOU: Eating only for hunger isn't highly rewarding
ME: It is if the food is particularly yummy
YOU: Are you going to binge on it?
Yes, confused...
Alright, well as I said, things get confused in text. You quoted me and I assumed you were suggesting that you would binge on healthy foods. I obviously got that wrong. Apologies.0 -
Gosh, I'm really confused by all the piles of quotes, the contradictory comments and whatnot.
I've read through some of the posts here, and some people are saying that calorie deficit is good enough by itself to lose weight, while other are saying that it's all about the calories going in vs. the ones going out.
Is there an answer for this topic, or does it simply matter on the person itself?
I just feel like it's dangerous and not really healthy for people to be commenting on these kinds of topics without having proper knowledge.
However that's just my opinion, and it's not meant to offend anyone in any way.
I'm just looking for some legitimate answers to help my weight loss.
I tried MFP last year and started out really great and then fell off very quickly and gained all my lost weight back because I got very obsessed and very confused with all the differing information regarding macros and micros and healthy vs. unhealthy and clean vs. unclean and IIFYM and IF and blah blah blah. I've started over and have decided to just go with calorie deficit. So far, so good. I'm less stressed out, I'm less obsessive. I try to eat a good variety of foods, but I don't freak out if I'm 20g over for fat or 40g under for protein in a given day. I've set my calories slightly lower than TDEE-20% because I'm also a food estimator instead of a weigher (oh the horror) and I want to have a little cushion.
Though I am disappointed to hear that cooking my vegetables apparently negates them being healthy anymore. SInce I can't stomach raw veggies (literally, they do a number on my stomach), I guess I should just not eat them(?). Nah, just kidding. I love me some roasted broccoli with olive oil, garlic, and parmesan out of a green can.0 -
No, I'm not confusing calorie dense with healthy. Processed vegetable oils are not healthy. Not because of the calories, but because they are high in omega 6 fats which promote inflammation in the body and are damaged at high heats causing oxidative damage in the body. And I already said that more calories are not what makes something unhealthy. And I only gave the example of a tablespoon of olive oil in the case of not having any calories left for the day.
What does this have to do with changes in body composition?
Oh wait... nothing.0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
You gonna binge on that all day long and eat thousands upon thousands of calories?
http://www.healthylivingheavylifting.com/how-clean-eating-made-me-fat-but-ice-cream-and-subway-got-me-lean/
"[...] With the Paleo diet, there are no rules on how much you can eat. By that, I mean you’re not given a set calorie or macronutrient goal to hit each day, as the theory behind Paleo eating is that the low-carb, high-protein nature of the diet leads you to feeling naturally full, and prevents over-eating.
Well, say hello to the incredible eating machine. Also known as “bottomless pit Samuels,” or “the human bin.” I don’t seem to have a full setting. When I’m not given a set amount to eat, I just eat."
And your point is? Overeating is overeating. Bingeing is quite another thing. People generally don't "binge" on healthy foods, but yes they most certainly can and do overeat on them.
You should publish a dictionary of terms and then we can keep up with you!!
I didn't decide on what the word binge means. I used it in a sentence, if you don't understand the meaning then perhaps you need to consult a dictionary before responding.
And what did yours tell you the difference between binging and over eating was in the context you used it? Were you asking if the person who posted the pics had an eating disorder? Come on, share with us that amazing mind of yours!0 -
Something being nutrient dense obviously relates to contributing to health. Many foods that contain nutrients also negatively affect health in certain situations. I don't know why something being nutrient dense and contributing to health has to be 2 separate issues, that's just me stating the obvious I guess.
The problem with the definitions you've concocted for these terms is they don't make a lot of sense in practice. You keep talking about nutrient-dense food, but realize that fat, carbs and protein are nutrients. As such, ice cream is an incredibly nutrient-dense food, with a small portion of ice cream bringing in hundreds of calories based on the density of fat and carbs (i.e., nutrients). Is ice cream "healthy"? Well, it's dense in nutrients, so it passes the nutrient-dense prong of your test.Yes you could eat healthy food all day long and get fat if you're not expending enough energy and eating too much. That doesn't affect health, it affects your weight. Once you gain weight, THAT then affects your health. So it's not the foods that are making the person unhealthy, it's the over consumption of them, as with anything. After all, healthy foods aren't calorie free, are they?
Okay, so healthy foods make you healthy, but if you eat them in excess, they make you unhealthy... why are they always healthy again? That's the problem I have with your definitions for these terms; they're overgeneralized, as nothing is absolutely "healthy" for you. If you said they're "generally a healthy choice" we'd likely have no disagreement on this issue, but the generic label of any particular food as simply "healthy" really doesn't account for every situation. At the end of the day, I just don't see how such generic labels are helpful.But, if you want to know how else foods contribute to your health, well certain foods contain substances that block minerals which negatively affects health. There are also certain carbohydrates that some people can't digest and that negatively affects their health. Foods contain more than just micro and macro nutrients and everything that goes into our body affects it in some way
You really couldn't get more vague with that answer?0 -
A bit of meat, fat and veg is enjoyable for many when eating out of hunger but it is not highly rewarding and does not make you want to eat and eat and eat. People don't binge on meat, veg and healthy fat.
^^ Speak for yourself.
This looks highly rewarding to me:
This meal? Oh yeah, I could eat that meal several times over in one day. Especially the steak-y park. And I do binge on meat...it's one of my issues. I freakin' love meat.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions