You can eat whatever you want :)

13

Replies

  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    "plants" aren't a micro, last i checked. are you saying the that vitamins and minerals that are in the tomato sauce and french fries don't count?
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    "plants" aren't a micro, last i checked. are you saying the that vitamins and minerals that are in the tomato sauce and french fries don't count?
    Umm, are you working hard at being obtuse? I didn't say plants were a micro....

    And are YOU suggesting french fries and tomato sauce provide for all one's micro nutrient needs?
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    If you are actually following IIFYM, many times you can easily hit micros to where it's not a big deal/issue. Maybe that's what they mean?

    Either way, the point of the links is to clarify what IIFYM is and isn't...pointing out minor things about the name just seems like arguing just to argue against it.
    Without eating vegetables? I'd like to see that

    Ok. I'm out, Dont want to thread jack this poor girl's thread.
  • kgeyser
    kgeyser Posts: 22,505 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    I imagine IIFYM was chosen for the brevity of the acronym, and because food labels always list macros while only listing a few micros.
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    If you are actually following IIFYM, many times you can easily hit micros to where it's not a big deal/issue. Maybe that's what they mean?

    Either way, the point of the links is to clarify what IIFYM is and isn't...pointing out minor things about the name just seems like arguing just to argue against it.
    Without eating vegetables? I'd like to see that

    Ok. I'm out, Dont want to thread jack this poor girl's thread.

    ^Point proven by the strawman grasping

    ETA: And Veggies are made up of macros, btw and nowhere in my post did I say or insinuate that you don't eat them. Highly suggest reading the links and being informed on what it actually is (and what many IIFYM followers do) versus what you might see one or two people doing.
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    I have no problem eating cereal for dinner or as dessert so not sure how Kellog is brainwashing me in regards to breakfast. But hey, tinfoil hat anyone?


    And we need to add an anti-breakfast square to the bingo card.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    "plants" aren't a micro, last i checked. are you saying the that vitamins and minerals that are in the tomato sauce and french fries don't count?
    Umm, are you working hard at being obtuse? I didn't say plants were a micro....

    And are YOU suggesting french fries and tomato sauce provide for all one's micro nutrient needs?

    In the fantasy world where a person is only reason French fries and tomato sauce, sure, why not? I mean, this hypothetical person doesn't exist, so we might as well make it up as we go along.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    When did Snickers become "real chocolate"?

    It's a HFCS bomb with chocolate flavouring....

    I just meant that it's not really something that can be substituted with a pudding pack, at least not for me anyways. It would be like substituting mayo with broccoli.

    I don't like Snickers, but chocolate is a good example of something the desire for which can be satisfied by a small amount of it, ideally some really high quality chocolate. I occasionally have a 9 gram square after lunch, and it hits the spot.

    Other substitutions work too, homemade pizza being one, but it has to include ingredients you like. Whole wheat crust, smaller amount of cheese, lots of veggies and a good protein source would work for me for a pizza that also had similar nutrition and macros to a more typical dinner (I am still skeptical about the texture of the cauliflower crust--I'm not scared of carbs, so would rather have the cauliflower on the pizza). But for me fat free cheese is a deal breaker.

    People can all decide what satisfies their food desires and what doesn't, though.

    I have found that I almost never try to recreate a meal that has tons of calories in a lower calorie way. (The pizza is one of the few I'd do.) Instead, I tend to identify the flavors that cause me to like whatever it is and just make something totally different that has the flavors I'm looking for.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And I've seen "clean eaters" who have essentially no fruits and veggies too, so people are just weird. I think it's pretty widely agreed-upon at MFP (at least from what I've observed) that micros are important, even if not everyone who keeps a diary actually follows through.
  • Ang108
    Ang108 Posts: 1,706 Member
    I never narrow down my meal selection by seeking "healthy", "low-carb/calorie", "raw", etc. I decide what I want to eat and find a way to eat it, period. For example: pizza, Thai, Mexican, salad, chocolatey peanut buttery whatever. You can find or make them all in a way that works for your diet. And if you're on a diet, any version of what you crave will work, haha.

    Like pizza, I'll make one with FF cheese, sugar-free sauce, low-carb tortilla, a protein. Once it's all together, you don't notice a difference between thin pizza crust and a 50-calorie wrap. Chinese: no breading or rice, eat the whole thing. Chocolatey or PB things: Cocoa powder, stevia (I am comfortable with this despite whatever), PB II. Or delicious PB itself in moderation.

    If you have a leptin issue, use it to your advantage. If you can't get full, why does it matter if you have 1 plate or 10? Feels the same! Easy to opt for the lesser volume and not blow your stomach out.

    If you want ideas, please reach out! I feel like I eat whatever I want and consume 1300-1800/day.

    Also:

    -if you like spicy, just drown bland foods with seeds or hot sauce and you'll never know the difference
    -WATCH the sugar: 36g/day is like 4 tsp..watch those "low-fat" labels :)

    Don't stress salt too much if you are free of illness; counter it with a banana and it's like it never happened ;):flowerforyou:
  • cincysweetheart
    cincysweetheart Posts: 892 Member
    Personally, modification and moderation both have a place in my diet (meaning the broader term of way of eating).

    Sometimes I'll use low-fat/FF/sugar free/low-cal, etc. versions of some foods because the change doesn't bother me but it saves on some calories, letting me either have more of it or more of something else. Other times… I'd rather just eat the "real thing" but have less.

    For example: low-fat mayo. Saves me a TON of calories… but still gives me what I'm looking for when I'm putting mayo on/in something. But I don't do sugar free chocolate for example. Totally not the same.

    I love to find "modification" recipes for the typically high-cal foods (Mexican, Italian(including pizza), Chinese, and of course desserts). I may try it and love it and decide to adopt it on a permanent basis. Or I may decide it's not worth it and just practice moderation.

    For me… this is what makes it possible to make it a lifestyle change. It means I can still enjoy the things that I like -either through modifications on a recipe- or through simply eating less of it.
  • Ang108
    Ang108 Posts: 1,706 Member
    to me, that is not eating what i want. chinese food, i want the rice. if i want chocolate, i don't want unsweet cocoa. i think eating what you want means eating literally what you want but keeping it in your calorie goal.

    Surely that can work for non-volume seekers. I prefer larger...why eat 1 tbs. of mayo when you can slam a whole bag of broccoli? :)

    Why ? Because if I want Mayo broccoli makes a very poor substitute......that's why.
    And if you eat a bag of broccoli instead of a spoonful of mayo, then you don't eat what you want....at all.
  • La5Vega5Girl
    La5Vega5Girl Posts: 709 Member
    All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

    ALL carbohydrates.

    Just FYI.

    In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.

    i understand this to a degree, but have a hard time believing that a twinkie's carbs are "the same" as carbs from zucchini
  • thin2win777
    thin2win777 Posts: 38 Member
    Everyone will settle into what works for them. This is one tried-and-true idea of infinite available options. Please don't allow default reactions in life to be oppositional...that's also not healthy :) no one is the same, and yes, the population overall eats too much sugar.

    And sorry I cannot input on your micros and macros...that is perhaps better suited for another thread's population?

    Thanks all for your input :)
  • lorib642
    lorib642 Posts: 1,942 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    Not sure why you pointed that out. If you'd read even the first thread, you'd have noted the following:
    What IIFYM is not:

    1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
    2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
    ......

    Because it's called if it fits your macros. Not if it fits your macros and micros. And because NUMEROUS times here, someone has said "what else is there" than macros.... umm micros....
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And yes, low carb is IIFYM.

    If you are actually following IIFYM, many times you can easily hit micros to where it's not a big deal/issue. Maybe that's what they mean?

    Either way, the point of the links is to clarify what IIFYM is and isn't...pointing out minor things about the name just seems like arguing just to argue against it.
    Without eating vegetables? I'd like to see that

    Ok. I'm out, Dont want to thread jack this poor girl's thread.

    ^Point proven by the strawman grasping

    ETA: And Veggies are made up of macros, btw and nowhere in my post did I say or insinuate that you don't eat them. Highly suggest reading the links and being informed on what it actually is (and what many IIFYM followers do) versus what you might see one or two people doing.

    What is "a deficit is a deficit" dieting called. I think that is where I am right now
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    I like you OP haha

    I'm a volume eater as well so I prefer to sub lower calorie options all the time. Much more satiating to me which helps to hit the daily goals e.g. 2 nights ago I had 1kg of yoghurt with 80g of casein protein mixed in. The whole thing was 700cals and most people would have issues finishing it :smile:

    I sub zero noodles for "real" all the time. They are just stomach fillers :laugh:

    And yes, I still eat plenty of "normal" full fat foods also but these are in the minority because I can eat so much if I want to that I will blow calorie target away if these were the majority.

    And yeah, not interesting in eating 2 slices of a greasy pizza if I can get a lower cal one and eat the whole thing :smile:

    Each to their own, find what works for you.
  • thin2win777
    thin2win777 Posts: 38 Member
    I don't like Snickers, but chocolate is a good example of something the desire for which can be satisfied by a small amount of it, ideally some really high quality chocolate. I occasionally have a 9 gram square after lunch, and it hits the spot.

    Other substitutions work too, homemade pizza being one, but it has to include ingredients you like. Whole wheat crust, smaller amount of cheese, lots of veggies and a good protein source would work for me for a pizza that also had similar nutrition and macros to a more typical dinner (I am still skeptical about the texture of the cauliflower crust--I'm not scared of carbs, so would rather have the cauliflower on the pizza). But for me fat free cheese is a deal breaker.

    People can all decide what satisfies their food desires and what doesn't, though.

    I have found that I almost never try to recreate a meal that has tons of calories in a lower calorie way. (The pizza is one of the few I'd do.) Instead, I tend to identify the flavors that cause me to like whatever it is and just make something totally different that has the flavors I'm looking for.

    Good post :)
  • thin2win777
    thin2win777 Posts: 38 Member
    I like you OP haha

    I'm a volume eater as well so I prefer to sub lower calorie options all the time. Much more satiating to me which helps to hit the daily goals e.g. 2 nights ago I had 1kg of yoghurt with 80g of casein protein mixed in. The whole thing was 700cals and most people would have issues finishing it :smile:

    I sub zero noodles for "real" all the time. They are just stomach fillers :laugh:

    And yes, I still eat plenty of "normal" full fat foods also but these are in the minority because I can eat so much if I want to that I will blow calorie target away if these were the majority.

    And yeah, not interesting in eating 2 slices of a greasy pizza if I can get a lower cal one and eat the whole thing :smile:

    Each to their own, find what works for you.

    You totally got it man :love:
  • thin2win777
    thin2win777 Posts: 38 Member
    Personally, modification and moderation both have a place in my diet (meaning the broader term of way of eating).

    Sometimes I'll use low-fat/FF/sugar free/low-cal, etc. versions of some foods because the change doesn't bother me but it saves on some calories, letting me either have more of it or more of something else. Other times… I'd rather just eat the "real thing" but have less.

    For example: low-fat mayo. Saves me a TON of calories… but still gives me what I'm looking for when I'm putting mayo on/in something. But I don't do sugar free chocolate for example. Totally not the same.

    I love to find "modification" recipes for the typically high-cal foods (Mexican, Italian(including pizza), Chinese, and of course desserts). I may try it and love it and decide to adopt it on a permanent basis. Or I may decide it's not worth it and just practice moderation.

    For me… this is what makes it possible to make it a lifestyle change. It means I can still enjoy the things that I like -either through modifications on a recipe- or through simply eating less of it.

    :flowerforyou:
  • ereck44
    ereck44 Posts: 1,170 Member
    I don't eat whatever I want. I think about it first. I try to balance my protein sources with my fruits and vegetables, and breads. And i watch my portion size. If I ate whatever I wanted I would be obese again. Its a learning process and not easy but nothing worthwhile is easy. If it works for you, great. But it may not work for me or others.
  • vjohn04
    vjohn04 Posts: 2,276 Member
    Whatever you like.....

    tumblr_lt0u9ywAP31qjeh66o1_250-1.gif
  • cmcollins001
    cmcollins001 Posts: 3,472 Member
    It's called if it fits your macros.
    And mine includes normal chocolate and not ersatz anything. Stevia tastes like sadness and dirty socks.

    336437537.gif
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    I said it because I see folks following iifym that have no plants (other than tomato sauce and french fries) whatsoever in their log day after day...
    So, I said it.
    Because, well, micros too.

    And I've seen "clean eaters" who have essentially no fruits and veggies too, so people are just weird. I think it's pretty widely agreed-upon at MFP (at least from what I've observed) that micros are important, even if not everyone who keeps a diary actually follows through.
    And I've long said that IIFYM is as useless a label as clean eating.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    OP, that's not really eating whatever you want. Not saying those recipes or alternatives don't taste good, but it's not the same.

    For those actually interested in IIFYM, here are a couple links to read. And no, it's not about "just" eating pop tarts, ice cream and pizza as I'm sure someone has or will just throw out thinking putting out an extreme example is going to prove it's wrong or something.

    Also including a favorite quote:
    "Once our nutrient needs are met, we don’t get extra credit for eating more nutritious food!' - Eric Helms


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1380837-article-on-iifym-great-read
    Macro AND micro, of course.

    The quote from Helms is about micronutrients.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    I'll usually try a lower calorie substitution at least once. If I can't tell the difference, it goes in the permanent rotation.

    Oh, and snickers doesn't have to be real chocolate to hit the spot.

    And I'm pretty sure I'd still eat the whole thing of real chocolate if I had it in the house.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Edit ... lol...spam post was removed...so nothing so see here!!!
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

    ALL carbohydrates.

    Just FYI.

    In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.
    No reason to read that book OP or anyone else. It's just a bunch of nonsense that that member posts every post. Basically using mfp as marketing and the site allows it.

    Guyton's is an excellent reference book in General Physiology - It was my go-to in junior year in college. For general medical physiology.
    But our poster doesn't need Guyton's as a reference to her nutritional position.

    I doubt Guyton's has what our breakfast skipper poster writes above quite like that. For example, fiber is a carbohydrate and not digested - of the dietary carbohydrates that are digested, yes, they all end up primarily as glucose. So no, not ALL carbohydrates. Furthermore, the liver is a very complex organ and it's function with dietary carbs can't be reduced to glucose output - just to mention one process - dietary carbs (and the resulting glucose) are also used up to make a variety of glycoproteins - a simple example is transferrin, synthesized directly in the liver. Some ... Anyway, Guyton's is rather poor source of info on transferrin and other glycoprotein synthesis - barely makes a passing mention on page 46 of my edition.

    As good as Guyton's is, I wish he'd stop using it as a call to authority - I loved that text book, he's killing it.

    But I don't even know what that has to do with what the OP is writing.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

    ALL carbohydrates.

    Just FYI.

    In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.

    i understand this to a degree, but have a hard time believing that a twinkie's carbs are "the same" as carbs from zucchini

    Ok - maybe his post does have a reason.

    Why is it hard to understand that twinkie and zucchini carbs are the same?

    Let's look at something as simple as water. If you take soup, blood, drinking water, urine or sea water and filter out the gunk, boil it to evaporation and re-condense the vapor back into water it is just water. It is basically undecipherable from the source.
    This very basic process led the early Greeks (Democritus and Lucretius are at the heart of this) composed the idea that things around us composed entirely of various elements called atoms - these basic building blocks are interchangeable - a "you" carbon is no different than a "dog" carbon or a "star" carbon.

    If I use a chemical process to create a sugar for the Twinkie with carbon, hydrogen and oxygen and I create the the same sugar in a zucchini via photosynthesis - the resulting sugar - if they have the same chemical and structural formulas are truly indistinguishable. The carbs themselves are the same.

    What is different is "all the other stuff" that comes along with a Twinkie or a zucchini, the ratio of sugars, etc. But that single molecule and the resulting glucose once the liver gets done with it - indistinguishable at the molecular level. The Twinkie provides more nutritional value than a zucchini - that's right - an ounce of Twinkie provides more carbs than an ounce of zucchini - by a wopping ratio of 20 to 1. But obviously we need more than carbs - the micro-nutrient value of a zucchini is much much better.

    It's just that often the term "nutritional value" is misused to describe some sort of nutritional variety.

    Eating a twinkie is ok (if you like the taste) it's very rich in energy when compared to a zucchini. There micro-nutrient profiles are worlds apart but the carbs structures once digested are really the same.

    (and no I'm not suggesting someone only feed on Twinkies or zucchinis...)
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member

    (and no I'm not suggesting someone only feed on Twinkies or zucchinis...)

    Of course you aren't. As all iifym people do, you're insisting that the twinkie person eat tomato paste and French fries as well, and ONLY eat those three things.

    Because it's not iifym&m

Categories