Misinformation.

treetop57

And you need that extra salt if you're sweating excessively!

Elizabeth_C34

Bump, cuz it's awesome.

MissFit0101

:glasses:

DryFlyGirl77

LOVE!

mmapags

Wow! How did I miss this 1st time around?? Awesome sidesteal!!

So when is the "My Breasts are too Large and I Can't Run" thread coming out? I'm waiting to post on that one!
Thanks for this thread and thanks for all the help you've given me and others on their journey.

Sidesteal

Wow! How did I miss this 1st time around?? Awesome sidesteal!!

So when is the "My Breasts are too Large and I Can't Run" thread coming out? I'm waiting to post on that one!
Thanks for this thread and thanks for all the help you've given me and others on their journey.

Thanks

Heh, I've got a few thread titles in the holding box....

AllTehBeers

bump

Falenea

Bump!

rjmudlax13

That is why MFP has a disclaimer on the bottom of every page that says:

"Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy."

/End thread

squatsandlipgloss

It is each member's responsibility to take every piece of advice with a grain of salt.

Also, for those posting misinformation, if they knew what they were saying was false, they probably wouldn't keep saying it. I think the big problem is many of the posters giving advice only look at the OP, but never read the actual thread. That's why you have these long threads with lots of arguing, and then you have the same piece of misinformation repeated over and over, and the posters never learn the truth about what they are saying. If they simply read the thread, they would see that their beliefs are false and they wouldn't keep contributing to the misinformation.

But I think the larger issue is the misinformation all over the internet. There are too many web resources from people with MD or PhD credentials perpetuating these myths.

This.

neanderthin

I agree with you!!!!

Of course people SHOULD look up the info for themselves. We all know how to google lol. I see the eating every 3 hours thing all the time. Sometimes that works for people, sometimes it doesn't. We are all different. Our bodies tell us what we need and when. It would be great if people would tell other where they get the info from like "I read in a Jillian Michael's book..." or "Primal Dieting states that...." There are just so many philosophies out there and so many paths. It would be helpful if people knew where the info was coming from.

I also think a lot about how people freak out on here and start telling people, "YOU MUST EAT MORE! YOU'LL GO INTO STARVATION MODE AND NOT LOSE ANY WEIGHT!!" If we aren;t hungry, we aren't hungry. If we are overweight, it is a blessing to not feel hungry. If we are 200 calories under and have lot of fat stores, we are not going to starve any time soon. Some studies out there how that starvation mode is a myth (I read this in a book about intermittent fasting- there are probably other contradictory studies). The way I see it is this. I have never seen a fat starving person. You don't see an overweight person and think "Wow you must really be starving!" So if somebody who has struggles to stop eating for years finally has a day where they are under by 100 or 200 calories I think they will be just fine and maybe should not be told to eat regardless of whether or not they are hungry. But this is just my humble opinion.

I am not getting into the arguement of whether starvation mode exists or not as it will probably elicit a bunch of 'bro science', something that is contrary to the point of the post.

However, I would like to point out a few things.

1) The term 'starvation mode' as used by most people on this site (rightly or wrongly) means a metabolic slow down - NOT starvation
2) Feeling hungry has nothing to do with whether you should actually be eating
3) People with fat left on them can starve, and they can also suffer from malnourishment
4) IF is about fasting for short periods of time - not an extended time and so is not relevent to the 'starvation mode' concept (or at least it should not be)

Your so nerdy, and I like it. And to you Mr Steal, nice post as usual.

lavaughan69

But I think the larger issue is the misinformation all over the internet. There are too many web resources from people with MD or PhD credentials perpetuating these myths.

This!

I can't agree more with this statement. Books, blogs, tv shows, all represented by what seem to be credible sources. We tend to latch on to whatever piece of information best suits our needs at the time and then we take it on like religion, spouting the gospel of the thing that worked for "us".

amaira515

One of my biggest pet peeves for misinformation is "nuts are bad because they have fat so you should never eat nuts." I worked at walgreens and actually had a woman return several portion size baggies of pistachio's complaining about the fat and saying she might as well eat a candy bar because it would be the same thing. *slams head on desk* Granted you shouldn't eat an entire jar of nuts but in moderation nuts are good for you and your body needs some fats in order to be healthy. Just like it needs carbs, sugar, sodium, protein, etc. People just need to learn to pick the healthy non-processed versions of these and eat in moderation.

Also the whole eat 3 times a day or eat every 3 hours is the most ridiculous thing ever. Most overweight people have the issue of eating when they are not hungry. To me a HUGE key to losing weight and keeping it off is learning to listen to your body. Eat only when you are hungry, eat slowly, don't eat in front of the tv or computer, and give your body time to register your food and let you know when you've had enough.

amaira515

I agree with you!!!!

Of course people SHOULD look up the info for themselves. We all know how to google lol. I see the eating every 3 hours thing all the time. Sometimes that works for people, sometimes it doesn't. We are all different. Our bodies tell us what we need and when. It would be great if people would tell other where they get the info from like "I read in a Jillian Michael's book..." or "Primal Dieting states that...." There are just so many philosophies out there and so many paths. It would be helpful if people knew where the info was coming from.

I also think a lot about how people freak out on here and start telling people, "YOU MUST EAT MORE! YOU'LL GO INTO STARVATION MODE AND NOT LOSE ANY WEIGHT!!" If we aren;t hungry, we aren't hungry. If we are overweight, it is a blessing to not feel hungry. If we are 200 calories under and have lot of fat stores, we are not going to starve any time soon. Some studies out there how that starvation mode is a myth (I read this in a book about intermittent fasting- there are probably other contradictory studies). The way I see it is this. I have never seen a fat starving person. You don't see an overweight person and think "Wow you must really be starving!" So if somebody who has struggles to stop eating for years finally has a day where they are under by 100 or 200 calories I think they will be just fine and maybe should not be told to eat regardless of whether or not they are hungry. But this is just my humble opinion.

I am not getting into the arguement of whether starvation mode exists or not as it will probably elicit a bunch of 'bro science', something that is contrary to the point of the post.

However, I would like to point out a few things.

1) The term 'starvation mode' as used by most people on this site (rightly or wrongly) means a metabolic slow down - NOT starvation
2) Feeling hungry has nothing to do with whether you should actually be eating
3) People with fat left on them can starve, and they can also suffer from malnourishment
4) IF is about fasting for short periods of time - not an extended time and so is not relevent to the 'starvation mode' concept (or at least it should not be)

On some level I disagree with number 2. If you are hungry your body is telling you it wants food. The problem lies in the fact most people can't tell the difference between craving/addictions pains and real hunger. Real hunger is not felt in the stomach but in the throat. Strange but true. The thing is no one in our society ever feels it because we are always putting food in our bodies well before it is needed. So instead of being hungry their stomach grumbles because of withdrawal from whatever junk/processed food they're addicted to and they think "oh I'm hungry time to eat more."

skeo

Bump for a later read

leeannewgeorge

But if you read it on the internet it's true! ....Isn't it?

JDBLY11

In my weight loss journey, I have found that it is like religon and politics. People learn something or get taught something, or have success doing something. What they know and think is the only way or the right way. Some people believe the only way to get healthy is eating "healthy foods". Who is to say what is healthy. I have gone on diets where I have eaten healthy for months and have lost a lot of weight, yet I could not maintain it because I wanted the foods that I used to eat. I would gain all the weight back plus some each time. I know many people on here do not buy in to calories in calories out and that not all calories are created equal. I eat the same foods I always ate, I have fast food every day like I always did, I eat pizza, hot wings, chinese food, whatever I want to eat. I also walk 8-10 miles a day. I will begin lifting weights in a couple months. In 7 weeks i have lost 38 pounds. I never lost that much weight eating 100% clean and mixing that with weight and cardio training.

I had a friend that got a juicer and was miserble with what he was eating. He wasn't loosing as much weight because he wasn't satisfied and would cheat. Now he has bought in to calories in and calories out and he is seeing results and he enjoys life. In the end, TO EACH HIS OWN!

The reason people reject calories in, calories out is because it is an over-simplification. It doesn't take into account how macro-nutrients affect hormones in each person's body differently.

I have established that no matter what type of foods I eat, a calorie is a calorie as far as my weight loss goes. However if I eat 2000 calories of junk food, I am starving all the time. If I eat 2000 calories of clean food, I am satisfied. So by that logic, which is the better diet? The one in which I feel healthier, more energized, and less hungry, even though both diets lead to the exact same weight loss. So that's why I never subscribe to the over-simplification of calories in, calories out. I think in terms of sustained weight loss efforts.

That's what I've found.The thin people I know are not freaks about eating perfect. They just eat much smaller quantities than me and are more easily satisfied with it even when it is unhealthy.

JDBLY11

One of my biggest pet peeves for misinformation is "nuts are bad because they have fat so you should never eat nuts." I worked at walgreens and actually had a woman return several portion size baggies of pistachio's complaining about the fat and saying she might as well eat a candy bar because it would be the same thing. *slams head on desk* Granted you shouldn't eat an entire jar of nuts but in moderation nuts are good for you and your body needs some fats in order to be healthy. Just like it needs carbs, sugar, sodium, protein, etc. People just need to learn to pick the healthy non-processed versions of these and eat in moderation.

Also the whole eat 3 times a day or eat every 3 hours is the most ridiculous thing ever. Most overweight people have the issue of eating when they are not hungry. To me a HUGE key to losing weight and keeping it off is learning to listen to your body. Eat only when you are hungry, eat slowly, don't eat in front of the tv or computer, and give your body time to register your food and let you know when you've had enough.

I got used to eating quite often when I was pregnant because otherwise I would get sick and throw up. I was never good at havin a small amount often. I would have a regular meal often which added a lot of weight after I had my son, during pregnancy it was okay. I like to feel satisfied with what I eat, like I have a pretty full stomach a couple times a day.

toutmonpossible

Good post. Some addenda:

Just because YOU don't have the the commitment/resolve/structure in your life/willpower to stick to a 1200 calorie a day plan does not mean it's unhealthy. That's not even classified as a low calorie diet. It's what MFP recommends for people who want to lose 2 pounds a week.

Stop forgetting that a lot of things such as BMR, TDEE, the calorie content on food packages are estimates. You have to watch how you do and make appropriate changes. Usually, the answer is not to eat more.

Mrsallypants

The meal frequency myth that was/is so popular in the bodybuilding world. It's based on the belief that your metabolism will slow down from fasting a a meager period of 5 or more hours which is false. Moreover, there was a belief that if you eat more than 30 grams of protein in one sitting it won't be absorbed which is also false.

I found the opposite effect of eating many small meals a day. I got hungrier, and it was a pain in the *kitten* to schedule 5-6 meals a day which led to stress and cortisol production. haha

Yeah, it doesn't speed up your metabolism if you eat more frequently. The only justifiable reason to eat more than 3- 4 meals a day is if you're trying to eat a massive amount of calories to gain weight or "bulk." Eating 3,500 calories and more is very difficult to eat in 3 meals.