"Clean" vs. "unclean" eating studies?
Replies
-
And how do we account for the sudden increase in calorie intake? Companies chemically engineer cigarettes to be addictive. Can you prove they don't do the same to foods? Like I said. Search google scholar and It'll show you all the research that is out there specific to making processed food more appealing (read: addictive).
Statistically morbid obesity brings on other health markers (diabetes, high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke etc) so I'm not sure I understand your question there. Yes they definitely pump in extra vitamins, artificial fiber and the like so we don't have people running around dying of scurvy and other illnesses like that. But we've gained a marked increase in obesity and the other illnesses listed above. Where are those coming from? Is it random? Does food play no role in it?
Are you an adult?
Can you make choices on your own?
So what if they do make it more addictive....
They ain't forcing it down your throat......
MY GOD, take some damn responsibility at some point, and stop blaming others or some big company.
It is coming from the fact that we have more food available
More jobs are sedentary
ppl sit on their fat *kitten* a lot more
technology....
laziness
pick anything you like.....
COMES DOWN TO CHOICES
Yes I'm an adult. I like to make informed choices. I like to know what I'm eating and how it affects my body.
I do take responsibility for myself which is why I research and make decisions based on my own opinion.
I agree there are other factors that bring on weight. I disagree that all fat people are inherently lazy, and irresponsible which is what you seem to imply.
You can be ugly towards me all you want. I don't care honestly. People think for themselves and won't always agree with you no matter how much you bully them.
You keep bringing up straw-men arguments.....you did the same in the other thread.
Then do your research, but don't blame companies on how they make their product for people's lack of self control
You would have to be rather stupid at this point to think that you can eat whatever you want and any amount you want, and stay slim and healthy.
And I ain't being ugly.
I am pointing out facts....tell me where I am wrong with what I said.
Unless they have some medical/health condition.....I would say that most people that are overweight, are prolly irresponsible...
Maybe not lazy.....
Maybe not even irresponsible....maybe just lack of discipline and self-control.
I respect your right to your opinion. I just don't understand why my opinions provoke what appears to be anger in you? I did not direct any of my statements to anyone other than the OP. So why do you take it so personally if I don't like a particular kind of food?
If you feel my conclusions are "Straw" as you say then give me some real science that disproves what I've said. I welcome a lively discussion as long as its supported by evidence and not presented in anger. I love learning new things and hearing other people's opinions.0 -
"In California, Seventh-Day Adventists who are vegetarians live about a year and a half longer than those who eat meat, according to a 2001 study of 34,000 Adventists published in the Archives of Internal Medicine."
Seventh-Day Adventists who are that devout, aside from not eating meat, also don't believe in smoking,drinking, wearing make-up, going to the club etc etc (it all leads to bad health and high risk behavior a.k.a. SINNING). So it would make sense that they live longer because they don't do anything except go to church an pray and eat eggs:laugh:
Seriously though, I went to SDA schools until 7th grade. They wouldn't let you do ANYTHING! It sucked major b*lls and I was happy when the parentals wizened up and sent me to Catholic school :smokin:
Far as I'm concerned they can keep the extra year and a half. I'd rather enjoy life.
^^^^My thoughts exactly.:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:0 -
In.0
-
[/quote]And how do we account for the sudden increase in calorie intake? Companies chemically engineer cigarettes to be addictive. Can you prove they don't do the same to foods? Like I said. Search google scholar and It'll show you all the research that is out there specific to making processed food more appealing (read: addictive).
Statistically morbid obesity brings on other health markers (diabetes, high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke etc) so I'm not sure I understand your question there. Yes they definitely pump in extra vitamins, artificial fiber and the like so we don't have people running around dying of scurvy and other illnesses like that. But we've gained a marked increase in obesity and the other illnesses listed above. Where are those coming from? Is it random? Does food play no role in it?
Are you an adult?
Can you make choices on your own?
So what if they do make it more addictive....
They ain't forcing it down your throat......
MY GOD, take some damn responsibility at some point, and stop blaming others or some big company.
It is coming from the fact that we have more food available
More jobs are sedentary
ppl sit on their fat *kitten* a lot more
technology....
laziness
pick anything you like.....
COMES DOWN TO CHOICES
Yes I'm an adult. I like to make informed choices. I like to know what I'm eating and how it affects my body.
I do take responsibility for myself which is why I research and make decisions based on my own opinion.
I agree there are other factors that bring on weight. I disagree that all fat people are inherently lazy, and irresponsible which is what you seem to imply.
You can be ugly towards me all you want. I don't care honestly. People think for themselves and won't always agree with you no matter how much you bully them.
I respect your right to your opinion. I just don't understand why my opinions provoke what appears to be anger in you? I did not direct any of my statements to anyone other than the OP. So why do you take it so personally if I don't like a particular kind of food?
If you feel my conclusions are "Straw" as you say then give me some real science that disproves what I've said. I welcome a lively discussion as long as its supported by evidence and not presented in anger. I love learning new things and hearing other people's opinions.
Not angry and not mad.
You bring up straw-men arguments.....
I have seen enough on here, and I think it is wrong.
It is a way for an overweight person to have execuses on why they can't lose weight,
"It is because of something outside of them....."
Which I think is bull crap.
And what I was answering, you did not list a specific food....you were saying food in general, made by big companies
I am not disagreeing with you that companies make their foods more sugary or more salty.....I know they do that.
So it is not a matter of science.
It is purely a matter of ones self-control and self-discipline.
So how you posed your questions in the part I quoted is a straw-man argument, plain and simple.0 -
Ha! I know all about the Twinkie diet, as I'm usually the one who posts it. But that doesn't really address the question, as there's no control group and tests to compare. And I'm not interested necessarily in just weight loss, but also in general health markers.
I'm really curious as to whether this clean eating rage makes a real difference, as most of those who tout it claim that while CICO works for weight loss, clean eating also addresses total health. I'd like to see proof of that. Does it exist?
Take it for what its worth. I can find you some more if you like these are the preliminaries of coming studies in the work at Harvard and John Hopkins
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eKGvGksKdloC&oi=fnd&pg=PT1&dq=Clean+Eating+vs+BAd+eating&ots=2jqsjP8F_x&sig=BQO5bB_PFPtGdpcruDtDaB-jTF4#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666313003942
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666312005077
Thanks! The book was super interesting to skim through, but didn't really address clean/unclean. It still had a lot of valuable information, though.
The studies were about peer pressure relating to healthy/unhealthy food choices, and modern portion sizes as barriers to weight loss (which corresponds with what I was saying earlier.) Good try, though!!
Sorry you don't get it. But I do have a doctor in Computer science and research is the synapses of research papers. So you skimmed through something without having the knowledge or the willing to open up to something that could prove or disprove a hypothesis. Research is like eating healthy and unhealthy you can make bad synopsis on things without pulling 100's of research papers into the equation. There is no one stop shop in research that will tell you the person the right and wrong with both. This will come however with other researchers that will follow to answer that question when people don't learn how to eat correctly and eating basic food groups. That means good fats and bad fats will play a big part of this.
Next time I will get a connect the dots form for you to really understand what Clean Eating and Un-Clean eating really is. I will make a point to pull hundred of papers together and zip them up for you to read.
Thanks0 -
I may have found one study which sort of addresses the question: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7947991&fileId=S1368980010003241
It's about the affects of ultra-processed foods on the health of Brazilians. The premise: It's not the nutrients or type of foods, but the processing that is the problem.
It defines processing as all industrial processes which turn whole foods into food products, and groups foods into 3 categories: unprocessed, processed, and ultra-processed, defined assalting, sugaring, baking, frying, deep frying, curing,
smoking, pickling, canning, and also frequently the use of
preservatives and cosmetic additives, the addition of synthetic
vitamins and of minerals, and sophisticated types of
packaging.
Which, btw, includes chocolate and baby food, apparently.
Conclusion:Causal relationships
between consumption of Group 3 food products
and health have been indicated or established only
for some products.
Those are soft drinks, impacting caloric intake, processed meats impacting colorectal cancer, and fast foods/snacks impacting obesity (although the paper specifies that this last is still inconclusive.)
Any other studies along these lines?0 -
There is a book called "Healthy at 100" about the eating/lifestyle/cultural habits of people who have lived to be 100 years old. One of his topic points is that the people of Okinawa eat 7 servings of whole grains per day. They, as a people, have some of the longest lifespans in the world.
Horse ****. Have you ever been to Okinawa? They eat white rice and pork and fish.
Hi-freakin-five Beach!!! Okinawa is well known for their pork dishes. Why do people think they don't eat any freakin' meat. They do. A lot.0 -
Go to PubMed and search "processed foods" and you'll find a variety of studies. I didn't right off hand that exactly addresses what you are asking but there are a variety of things that look at the relationship of consumption of high-calorie/low-nutrient foods or ease of access to fast food restaurants on things like child development, population BMI, etc.
I think denying the importance of eating a healthy diet because you can lose weight on a diet of Twinkies is just as bone-headed as denying global climate change because it snowed at your house last night.0 -
-
Ha! I know all about the Twinkie diet, as I'm usually the one who posts it. But that doesn't really address the question, as there's no control group and tests to compare. And I'm not interested necessarily in just weight loss, but also in general health markers.
I'm really curious as to whether this clean eating rage makes a real difference, as most of those who tout it claim that while CICO works for weight loss, clean eating also addresses total health. I'd like to see proof of that. Does it exist?
Take it for what its worth. I can find you some more if you like these are the preliminaries of coming studies in the work at Harvard and John Hopkins
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eKGvGksKdloC&oi=fnd&pg=PT1&dq=Clean+Eating+vs+BAd+eating&ots=2jqsjP8F_x&sig=BQO5bB_PFPtGdpcruDtDaB-jTF4#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666313003942
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666312005077
Thanks! The book was super interesting to skim through, but didn't really address clean/unclean. It still had a lot of valuable information, though.
The studies were about peer pressure relating to healthy/unhealthy food choices, and modern portion sizes as barriers to weight loss (which corresponds with what I was saying earlier.) Good try, though!!
Sorry you don't get it. But I do have a doctor in Computer science and research is the synapses of research papers. So you skimmed through something without having the knowledge or the willing to open up to something that could prove or disprove a hypothesis. Research is like eating healthy and unhealthy you can make bad synopsis on things without pulling 100's of research papers into the equation. There is no one stop shop in research that will tell you the person the right and wrong with both. This will come however with other researchers that will follow to answer that question when people don't learn how to eat correctly and eating basic food groups. That means good fats and bad fats will play a big part of this.
Next time I will get a connect the dots form for you to really understand what Clean Eating and Un-Clean eating really is. I will make a point to pull hundred of papers together and zip them up for you to read.
Thanks
Really? You're going to throw a sarcastic little tantrum because your links didn't provide relevant information? Perhaps, as has been stated repeatedly, the problem is in our definitions of "clean" eating.
The confusion, as clearly evidenced in previous posts, is that this not only involves the types of foods, but also in how they are prepared and with what other ingredients...ie. canned, frozen, read-made meals, etc. with or without additives or preservatives and possibly fortified with extra nutrients. Is sugar clean? Is ice cream from the store clean? Is it cleaner if I make it myself? Is Bryers clean, with it's tiny list of understandable ingredients, as opposed to some other brand with preservatives and solidifiers?
So the question has never been about whether veggies are good for you, which is what you seem to be trying to answer...it's whether processed veggies have a different health impact than fresh veggies. I'm afraid your response did not address that.0 -
I think denying the importance of eating a healthy diet because you can lose weight on a diet of Twinkies is just as bone-headed as denying global climate change because it snowed at your house last night.
This was in another topic...
Most ppl on here do not advise doing a bone-headed diet....I sure don't
No one is saying to do some extreme diet
I don't agree with extremes, humans/people don't do well with extremes.
But facts are facts
If weight loss/gain are your goals....then it does come down to calories overall.
Now, health should be factored into the equation as well, which should dictate what foods you eat or don't eat.
And regarding global warming or whatever you wish to call it....
No, don't agree.0 -
TOO many people on this site try to over think and "beat" the system on weight loss/health.
It boils down to CICO for weight loss. It boils down to correct macro/micro balance with health.
If you feel you LACK the correct macro/micro nutrients to meet the goal you're trying to attain (whether it be healthier, adding muscle, etc), then CHANGE THEM to fit it. Whether it's "clean" or processed ISN'T going to matter much at all.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The question the OP asked wasn't whether it would help weight loss, but if there were overall health benefits of eating clean.
And that is a question that is impossible to answer because there is no true definition of "clean". Obviously, there are health benefits to eating foods that are as nutrient dense as possible, but that is not how people define clean eating.0 -
Thanks! This is exactly the sort of thing I've been looking for!! Now if only we could find a larger-scale, longer-term experiment of this nature. I would like to see more info on the ingredients in the meals, however...organic doesn't necessarily mean clean if other "unclean" ingredients were added.0 -
Certainly, when I hit about 75 I'm going to take up cigar smoking. I love the smell but don't want to die of cancer just yet.
Not to derail, but if you smoke cigars the way most people smoke cigars (1-2 per week, or even 1 per day, and don't inhale), your health is unlikely to be affected.
The government "study" that gets passed around to show that CIGAR SMOKING IS JUST AS BAD AS CIGARETTES!!!1!! only looked at people who smoked multiple cigars per day every single day and inhaled.
I smoke cigars and have a lot of cigar-smoking friends, and I don't know anyone who does either of those things.
Like all things, moderation is key.0 -
Not likely to find anything that fits the bill entirely but these may be of interest.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2897733/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18267998 (<--- dont have the full text but I assume the MRP is a processed shake of sorts)
EDIT:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/69/2/198.long (<--- again probably doesn't fit your criteria but they replace a portion of calories with an MRP in one group)0 -
I think a generally accepted definition of clean eating is a diet that consists of foods as close to the natural state as possible. Where it can get tricky is some "processed" foods can be defined as clean, because while they have multiple ingredients combined to make a products; they are generally whole food ingrediants and do not contain say preservatives, dyes, stabilizers or any foreign lab created substance etc. I great general guideline of the principles of clean eating and what that looks like is in the Clean eating diet booK by Tosca Reno. As far as studies, there are numerous studies of food and its effects on the human body. I am not sure they necesarily attack it from a strict outline of clean eating as a method. I have several books at home that outline a mutiltude of studies in the U.S. and abroad. It may seem surprising, but many of these studies are long range dating from the 50's. What generally happens is most of these studies are published in peer journals, which unfortunately often never reach public hands or make into a public forum for discussion. I feel the medical community is largely to blame because whether we like it or not initially there is more money to be made on treatment than prevention. I think in terms of swaying you one way of the other. I am not about to try to do that. I feel if try a clean diet the results will speak volumes more than I can, but in the end the choice is an individual matter. I guess my only question would be what have you got to lose in giving it a shot.0
-
Thanks! This is exactly the sort of thing I've been looking for!! Now if only we could find a larger-scale, longer-term experiment of this nature. I would like to see more info on the ingredients in the meals, however...organic doesn't necessarily mean clean if other "unclean" ingredients were added.
Great article.0 -
Our bodies were made to eat real food; so it makes sense that anything that is not "real" would wreak havoc eventually. To me, real food, clean food, is anything that has not been altered. ]Of course, that does not mean cooking.
You do realize that cooking it until it browns IS altering the food right? So right there we have a clean... err... clear inconsistency already.0 -
Not angry and not mad.
You bring up straw-men arguments.....
I have seen enough on here, and I think it is wrong.
It is a way for an overweight person to have execuses on why they can't lose weight,
"It is because of something outside of them....."
Which I think is bull crap.
And what I was answering, you did not list a specific food....you were saying food in general, made by big companies
I am not disagreeing with you that companies make their foods more sugary or more salty.....I know they do that.
So it is not a matter of science.
It is purely a matter of ones self-control and self-discipline.
So how you posed your questions in the part I quoted is a straw-man argument, plain and simple.
Ok. I see your perspective but what you've said does not have any scientific evidence to prove it. All you've said so far is your personal opinion, which is fine but cannot be proven. How is your argument less "straw" than mine?
Is it wrong for an overweight person to be curious about the things they put in their body and maybe decide some of them might not be as good as others? Other people might call this whiny and lazy, I call it giving yourself the best chance you can.
How is it wrong for an overweight person to be upset at companies that are scientifically engineering things that are intended to make them fail at the one thing they want most in life?
If anything its LESS lazy to eat clean. It requires cooking and preparation and planning (and money). Why would your so called "lazy" people push so freaking hard to eat this way if they are really truly lazy?
If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.0 -
Sorry you don't get it. But I do have a doctor in Computer science and research is the synapses of research papers.
I'm usually not this pedantic, but I find it unlikely that someone with a doctorate in computer science would call their degree a "doctor". I also think they would realize that subject names don't get capitalized, and wouldn't use the term "synapses" in such an egregiously incorrect way.
But while I'm here, there is absolutely no doubt that you can lose weight eating nothing but McDonald's. The question is how you *feel* while you're doing it compared to eating "clean." Measuring feelings is difficult to do scientifically, so it's unlikely that any decent studies have been done on this.0 -
Sorry you don't get it. But I do have a doctor in Computer science and research is the synapses of research papers.
I'm usually not this pedantic, but I find it unlikely that someone with a doctorate in computer science would call their degree a "doctor". I also think they would realize that subject names don't get capitalized, and wouldn't use the term "synapses" in such an egregiously incorrect way.
But while I'm here, there is absolutely no doubt that you can lose weight eating nothing but McDonald's. The question is how you *feel* while you're doing it compared to eating "clean." Measuring feelings is difficult to do scientifically, so it's unlikely that any decent studies have been done on this.
I think he meant "synopsis"...perhaps his "synapses" were on the blink? ;-P
We could come up with a bunch of different definitions of "clean" food...but I think the real question is this: If you ate a McDonald's meal which had essentially the same macro and calorie content as a homemade meal, would the McDonald's meal negatively impact your health? The article posted above addresses that, but it was a super small study, barely worth even writing about. It compares McDonald's meals with organic beef and veg and a turkey sandwich meal, and tests blood serum health markers...but there were only, I think, 6 participants, and it was only for a few meals. A large scale study of that nature would answer my question beautifully...all other things being equal (calories, macros, etc.) does eating clean have a different health outcome than not eating clean?0 -
Sorry you don't get it. But I do have a doctor in Computer science and research is the synapses of research papers.
I'm usually not this pedantic, but I find it unlikely that someone with a doctorate in computer science would call their degree a "doctor". I also think they would realize that subject names don't get capitalized, and wouldn't use the term "synapses" in such an egregiously incorrect way.
But while I'm here, there is absolutely no doubt that you can lose weight eating nothing but McDonald's. The question is how you *feel* while you're doing it compared to eating "clean." Measuring feelings is difficult to do scientifically, so it's unlikely that any decent studies have been done on this.
I think he meant "synopsis"...perhaps his "synapses" were on the blink? ;-P
We could come up with a bunch of different definitions of "clean" food...but I think the real question is this: If you ate a McDonald's meal which had essentially the same macro and calorie content as a homemade meal, would the McDonald's meal negatively impact your health? The article posted above addresses that, but it was a super small study, barely worth even writing about. It compares McDonald's meals with organic beef and veg and a turkey sandwich meal, and tests blood serum health markers...but there were only, I think, 6 participants, and it was only for a few meals. A large scale study of that nature would answer my question beautifully...all other things being equal (calories, macros, etc.) does eating clean have a different health outcome than not eating clean?
I would love to see a large scale study of this as well.0 -
What does science have to do with what I said???Ok. I see your perspective but what you've said does not have any scientific evidence to prove it. All you've said so far is your personal opinion, which is fine but cannot be proven. How is your argument less "straw" than mine?
I am not making the case that you have to eat certain foods and not eat other foods to lose weight and be healthy, or whatever your goals are.
And I agree with you that companies do stuff w/ their food products to make it taste better so you eat more....again, it doesn't take me looking for a science paper to prove or disprove, I can look at the ingredients label for that.
No be curious, I am as well. Just don't blame the producers of said products for your weight loss or gain....seeing as how we agree on the above about them making their products more desirable.Is it wrong for an overweight person to be curious about the things they put in their body and maybe decide some of them might not be as good as others? Other people might call this whiny and lazy, I call it giving yourself the best chance you can.
Really good article that was posted:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html/
It is very wrong....cause those companies cannot force you to buy their products.How is it wrong as an overweight person to be upset at companies that are scientifically engineering things that are intended to make them fail at the one thing they want most in life?
Plain and simple
You choose to go to the store
You choose to purchase said products
You choose to put said products in your mouth, over and over.....
not the company's fault.
Whose definition of "clean"?If anything its LESS lazy to eat clean. It requires cooking and preparation and planning (and money). Why would your so called "lazy" people push so freaking hard to eat this way if they are really truly lazy?
So if I prepare the food at home, it is "clean"??
And you are picking out one choice I listed....there are multiple choices you can choose from for why a person (who has no medical issues) is overweight.....and they all come down to choice.
And how much you stick in your mouth.If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.
OMG
Please stop.
You think I just woke up one day, ripped/cut/defined????
Give me a break.....
Takes me just as much work to get to where I got, and that means turning down a lot of food I wanted to eat...
Get off the cross, someone else needs the wood0 -
What does science have to do with what I said???Ok. I see your perspective but what you've said does not have any scientific evidence to prove it. All you've said so far is your personal opinion, which is fine but cannot be proven. How is your argument less "straw" than mine?
I am not making the case that you have to eat certain foods and not eat other foods to lose weight and be healthy, or whatever your goals are.
And I agree with you that companies do stuff w/ their food products to make it taste better so you eat more....again, it doesn't take me looking for a science paper to prove or disprove, I can look at the ingredients label for that.
No be curious, I am as well. Just don't blame the producers of said products for your weight loss or gain....seeing as how we agree on the above about them making their products more desirable.Is it wrong for an overweight person to be curious about the things they put in their body and maybe decide some of them might not be as good as others? Other people might call this whiny and lazy, I call it giving yourself the best chance you can.
Really good article that was posted:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html/
It is very wrong....cause those companies cannot force you to buy their products.How is it wrong as an overweight person to be upset at companies that are scientifically engineering things that are intended to make them fail at the one thing they want most in life?
Plain and simple
You choose to go to the store
You choose to purchase said products
You choose to put said products in your mouth, over and over.....
not the company's fault.
Whose definition of "clean"?If anything its LESS lazy to eat clean. It requires cooking and preparation and planning (and money). Why would your so called "lazy" people push so freaking hard to eat this way if they are really truly lazy?
So if I prepare the food at home, it is "clean"??
And you are picking out one choice I listed....there are multiple choices you can choose from for why a person (who has no medical issues) is overweight.....and they all come down to choice.
And how much you stick in your mouth.If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.
OMG
Please stop.
You think I just woke up one day, ripped/cut/defined????
Give me a break.....
Takes me just as much work to get to where I got, and that means turning down a lot of food I wanted to eat...
Get off the cross, someone else needs the wood
Hey, no need to be rude over a difference of opinion. Also, you're way off subject at this point. Let's talk about clean eating studies or GTFO....
0 -
What does science have to do with what I said???Ok. I see your perspective but what you've said does not have any scientific evidence to prove it. All you've said so far is your personal opinion, which is fine but cannot be proven. How is your argument less "straw" than mine?
I am not making the case that you have to eat certain foods and not eat other foods to lose weight and be healthy, or whatever your goals are.
And I agree with you that companies do stuff w/ their food products to make it taste better so you eat more....again, it doesn't take me looking for a science paper to prove or disprove, I can look at the ingredients label for that.
No be curious, I am as well. Just don't blame the producers of said products for your weight loss or gain....seeing as how we agree on the above about them making their products more desirable.Is it wrong for an overweight person to be curious about the things they put in their body and maybe decide some of them might not be as good as others? Other people might call this whiny and lazy, I call it giving yourself the best chance you can.
Really good article that was posted:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html/
It is very wrong....cause those companies cannot force you to buy their products.How is it wrong as an overweight person to be upset at companies that are scientifically engineering things that are intended to make them fail at the one thing they want most in life?
Plain and simple
You choose to go to the store
You choose to purchase said products
You choose to put said products in your mouth, over and over.....
not the company's fault.
Whose definition of "clean"?If anything its LESS lazy to eat clean. It requires cooking and preparation and planning (and money). Why would your so called "lazy" people push so freaking hard to eat this way if they are really truly lazy?
So if I prepare the food at home, it is "clean"??
And you are picking out one choice I listed....there are multiple choices you can choose from for why a person (who has no medical issues) is overweight.....and they all come down to choice.
And how much you stick in your mouth.
If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.
OMG
Please stop.
You think I just woke up one day, ripped/cut/defined????
Give me a break.....
Takes me just as much work to get to where I got, and that means turning down a lot of food I wanted to eat...
Get off the cross, someone else needs the wood
Hey, no need to be rude over a difference of opinion. Also, you're way off subject at this point. Let's talk about clean eating studies or GTFO....
No need to be rude/ and then you post GTFO???
Hey kettle, this is pot...your black.
I aint' trying to be rude to the poster.
I have read a few of her posts already from other threads.
And to me, she looks like she is trying to set herself up for failure....and I don't want to see that.
I wnat to see her succeed with her goals.
So my point is to stop blaming other things or companies.
If she is healthy (no medical conditions).....then it will come down to her controlling her intake.
and also when poster says this:If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.
Sorry.....another straw man argument.
I have had to work just as hard to achieve my goals.....0 -
OMG
Please stop.
You think I just woke up one day, ripped/cut/defined????
Give me a break.....
Takes me just as much work to get to where I got, and that means turning down a lot of food I wanted to eat...
Get off the cross, someone else needs the wood
Hey, no need to be rude over a difference of opinion. Also, you're way off subject at this point. Let's talk about clean eating studies or GTFO....
No need to be rude/ and then you post GTFO???
Hey kettle, this is pot...your black.
I aint' trying to be rude to the poster.
I have read a few of her posts already from other threads.
And to me, she looks like she is trying to set herself up for failure....and I don't want to see that.
I wnat to see her succeed with her goals.
So my point is to stop blaming other things or companies.
If she is healthy (no medical conditions).....then it will come down to her controlling her intake.
and also when poster says this:If you've never been an overweight person then its easy to stand at the sidelines and yell at them to work harder. Its an entirely different thing to be in their shoes.
Sorry.....another straw man argument.
I have had to work just as hard to achieve my goals.....
Ok, you've made your point. Can we get back to the subject? (Also, I can see why you might take "GTFO" as rude, but it's actually just a meme, not intended to offend.)
You know, I didn't see her comments about the food industry as an attempt to shift blame...I saw them as a point in favor of "clean" eating as opposed to processed food...considering that's the subject of the discussion, in context, I can't see attributing further meaning to her comments.0 -
Ok, you've made your point. Can we get back to the subject? (Also, I can see why you might take "GTFO" as rude, but it's actually just a meme, not intended to offend.)
You know, I didn't see her comments about the food industry as an attempt to shift blame...I saw them as a point in favor of "clean" eating as opposed to processed food...considering that's the subject of the discussion, in context, I can't see attributing further meaning to her comments.
But you do know what the "F" in that meme stands for right???
I have not cussed another poster.
But did you read the link to body re composition?
So it doesn't matter whether food is "clean" or not......
So technically speaking my replies have been on topic0 -
Ok, you've made your point. Can we get back to the subject? (Also, I can see why you might take "GTFO" as rude, but it's actually just a meme, not intended to offend.)
You know, I didn't see her comments about the food industry as an attempt to shift blame...I saw them as a point in favor of "clean" eating as opposed to processed food...considering that's the subject of the discussion, in context, I can't see attributing further meaning to her comments.
But you do know what the "F" in that meme stands for right???
I have not cussed another poster.
But did you read the link to body re composition?
So it doesn't matter whether food is "clean" or not......
So technically speaking my replies have been on topic
Yes, I read the link, and responded to it at the top of this page. And no, that doesn't mean your responses were on topic. They were pretty much just attacking one poster repeatedly. So, if you'd like to get back to the topic, that would be great. Or, if you'd like to remain off topic, could you at least include an amusing gif? kthnx0 -
Ok, you've made your point. Can we get back to the subject? (Also, I can see why you might take "GTFO" as rude, but it's actually just a meme, not intended to offend.)
You know, I didn't see her comments about the food industry as an attempt to shift blame...I saw them as a point in favor of "clean" eating as opposed to processed food...considering that's the subject of the discussion, in context, I can't see attributing further meaning to her comments.
But you do know what the "F" in that meme stands for right???
I have not cussed another poster.
But did you read the link to body re composition?
So it doesn't matter whether food is "clean" or not......
So technically speaking my replies have been on topic
Yes, I read the link, and responded to it at the top of this page. And no, that doesn't mean your responses were on topic. They were pretty much just attacking one poster repeatedly. So, if you'd like to get back to the topic, that would be great. Or, if you'd like to remain off topic, could you at least include an amusing gif? kthnx
Very well...
Outta of your thread.0 -
Oh yes... the "processed foods contain these scary sounding chemicals which are also used for these unappetizing scary uses" argument.Additionally. I encourage you to educate yourself on what many processed foods contain.
Propylene glycol - commonly found on pre-packaged salads as a preservative - is also found in antifreeze and sexual lubricants.
Tertiary butylhydroquinone - chicken product preservative - a form of butane (aka Lighter Fluid)
Dimethylpolysiloxane - soft drinks, instant coffees, chewing gum, vinegars, cooking oils, confectionary snacks, syrups and chocolates. Dimethylpolysiloxane is used in the manufacturing of skimmed milk and wine fermentation. It can also be found energy or electrolyte drinks. - Also used as an anti-foaming agent for silly putty, cosmetics, shampoos, creation of heat-resistant tiles, caulking, and industrial oils.
E451 — Potassium and sodium triphosphates - processed meats - found in flame retardants, rubber and anti-freeze.
Are these bad for us? Probably. No serious long or short term studies have been done. But boy are they wonderfully chemically engineered to look, feel and taste yummy
Blueberries contain ethyl butyrate, a plasticizer for cellulose, and pentanal, used in resin chemistry and rubber accelerators.
And water. Don't forget water...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