McDonalds?

CoachReddy

and those typical ingredients consumed as a part of the typical american diet make us a nation of people who are typically sick and obese.

Little statements like this are why the very mention of your username invokes people to laugh. You want to be a coach, be healthy, be elite, etc. That's really great. You can pull it off. But nonsense like this is where you lose any shred of credibility you've built up.

only to people like you who want to continue eating crap.

I eat crap and I'm in excellent health. I must be a special snowflake then.

What is the date of your blood test? Are you stepping up to this? I will be calling you out when my results are in. When the results show that I'm healthy will you STFU with your orthoexic crusade?

i had a blood test back in june of last year. i don't really need another physical... are you willing to accept those or do you need me to re-test?

I suppose they'll do.

Answer the second part. If the results show that I'm healthy will you STFU? Or will you continue to cling to the peculiar idea that you will be better off than me in 50 years?

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

CoachReddy

yep, once and a while ain't a big deal.

now we're back to once in a while is ok? again?

that's always been my stance but my view of once and a while is like... once a month or some ****. i don't have a hard and fast rule. lol

taso42

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

I'm 37. How do we normalize for age? I am confident that I am better than you in every way.

jonnythan

Two data points doesn't prove anything, regardless of whose are "better."

CoachReddy

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

I'm 37. How do we normalize for age? I am confident that I am better than you in every way.

don't talk TOO big a game... who knows what'll happen

taso42

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

I'm 37. How do we normalize for age? I am confident that I am better than you in every way.

don't talk TOO big a game... who knows what'll happen

yeah that may come back to bite me :laugh:

but at least i'm only predicting a month into the future; not 50 years

CoachReddy

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

I'm 37. How do we normalize for age? I am confident that I am better than you in every way.

don't talk TOO big a game... who knows what'll happen

yeah that may come back to bite me :laugh:

but at least i'm only predicting a month into the future; not 50 years

hey don't blame me, blame logic.

taso42

if they're better than my numbers, I'll consider it. that was the deal back in the day - not that you're healthy, but that your numbers are just as good as mine. (or comparable for age, how old are you?)

I'm 37. How do we normalize for age? I am confident that I am better than you in every way.

don't talk TOO big a game... who knows what'll happen

yeah that may come back to bite me :laugh:

but at least i'm only predicting a month into the future; not 50 years

hey don't blame me, blame logic.

haven't seen you demonstrate any logic. that is the whole problem.

CoachReddy

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

LiftAllThePizzas

Good luck, Taso.

taso42

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

CoachReddy

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

... that's not circular reasoning...

Mermaidyo

McDonald's = vomit food

Have you seen Super Size Me - the documentary?

Or the experiment with the McD hamburger and fries that has been sitting on a plate for two years without rotting?

Fast food sometimes, go for it. But McD... gross!

Have you seen super high me? cause that ****s legit. i mean what? oh..mcdonalds that's what the post was about.my bad...

taso42

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

... that's not circular reasoning...

your are making up a premise: "if you eat fast food, then in 50 years you will be screwed". and you're saying that in case it happens to be true, then it's true.

you can't just make stuff up and say just in case i'm right my premise is true.

maybe it's not circular reasoning. but it's certainly a fallacy.

if any logicians are watching (i don't know why they would be), then can correct us.

ETA: unless you were making a joke ... "this isn't circular reasoning because it isn't circular reasoning"

Sunny____

GO Coach Reddy! :drinker:

I eat McDonald's once a month. JUST two fish sandwiches, light tarter, add pickles, only half the bun. So bad for me, but it is my fun treat. Love! I just would never admit this to anyone I know in the REAL world.

LiftAllThePizzas

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Sounds like Pascal's Wager, which is among other things a false dichotomy.

Fortunately for me I don't eat at McDonald's. I eat at McDowell's.
McDonald's has the Golden Arches.
McDowell's has the Golden Arcs.

McDonald's has the Big Mac.
McDowell's has the Big Mic.

HeyHEY! Get outta here with that camera!

CoachReddy

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

... that's not circular reasoning...

your are making up a premise: "if you eat fast food, then in 50 years you will be screwed". and you're saying that in case it happens to be true, then it's true.

you can't just make stuff up and say just in case i'm right my premise is true.

maybe it's not circular reasoning. but it's certainly a fallacy.

if any logicians are watching (i don't know why they would be), then can correct us.

ETA: unless you were making a joke ... "this isn't circular reasoning because it isn't circular reasoning"

nah, circular reasoning is "a is true because b is true; b is true because a is true"

and no, I'm not making up a premise. see if you can follow:

If you're right, and eating whole foods gives you no benefit over eating processed foods, the fact that I've eaten whole foods for 50 years won't harm me, correct?

If I'm right, (even if you don't believe it to be very likely) and eating processed foods ends up being worse than eating whole foods, the fact that you've eaten processed foods for 50 years WILL harm you, correct?

which is the safer bet?

CoachReddy

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Sounds like Pascal's Wager, which is among other things a false dichotomy.

Fortunately for me I don't eat at McDonald's. I eat at McDowell's.
McDonald's has the Golden Arches.
McDowell's has the Golden Arcs.

McDonald's has the Big Mac.
McDowell's has the Big Mic.

HeyHEY! Get outta here with that camera!

hah! watched that on netflix a couple weeks ago

taso42

but i'd rather be on the side that eats real food, because call me crazy - but if i'm wrong 50 years from now, I'm no worse off. If YOU'RE wrong, you're screwed.

is this incorrect logic?

yes. its logical fallacy. circular reasoning.

or, there may be a better match among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

... that's not circular reasoning...

your are making up a premise: "if you eat fast food, then in 50 years you will be screwed". and you're saying that in case it happens to be true, then it's true.

you can't just make stuff up and say just in case i'm right my premise is true.

maybe it's not circular reasoning. but it's certainly a fallacy.

if any logicians are watching (i don't know why they would be), then can correct us.

ETA: unless you were making a joke ... "this isn't circular reasoning because it isn't circular reasoning"

nah, circular reasoning is "a is true because b is true; b is true because a is true"

and no, I'm not making up a premise. see if you can follow:

If you're right, and eating whole foods gives you no benefit over eating processed foods, the fact that I've eaten whole foods for 50 years won't harm me, correct?

If I'm right, (even if you don't believe it to be very likely) and eating processed foods ends up being worse than eating whole foods, the fact that you've eaten processed foods for 50 years WILL harm you, correct?

which is the safer bet?

You are making up a premise: eating processed foods [in some frequency which you do not even define. "there's no hard and fast rule"], then you WILL HAVE HARM COME TO YOU.

We're not talking safer bets, we're talking logic, remember?

LiftAllThePizzas

Bratman describes orthorexia as an unhealthy fixation with what the individual considers to be healthy eating. The subject may avoid certain unhealthy foods, such as those containing fats, preservatives, man-made food-additives, animal products, or other ingredients considered by the subject to be unhealthy; if the sufferer does not eat appropriately, malnutrition can ensue. Bratman claims Orthorexic sufferers have specific preferences about the foods they are eating and avoiding. Products that are preserved with additives can be considered dangerous. Industrial products can be seen as artificial, whereas fruits and vegetables can be seen as healthy.[8] Bratman asserts that "emaciation is common among followers of certain health food diets, such as rawfoodism, and this can at times reach the extremes seen in anorexia nervosa." In addition, he claims that "anorexic orthorexia" can be as dangerous as anorexia. However, he states, "the underlying motivation is quite different. While an anorexic wants to lose weight, an orthorexic does not desire to become thin[8] but wants to feel pure, healthy and natural. Eating disorder specialists may fail to understand this distinction, leading to a disconnect between orthorexic and physician."[4][9]


...

Donini et al. define orthorexia nervosa as a "maniacal obsession for healthy foods" and propose several diagnostic criteria.[16] Sufferers of orthorexia often display symptoms consistent with obsessive-compulsive disorder and have an exaggerated concern with healthy eating patterns. Like anorexia, however, these obsessive compulsive symptoms may be an effect of starvation rather than a cause of the disorder.[18] A diagnostic questionnaire has been developed for orthorexia sufferers, similar to questionnaires for other eating disorders.[17] Bratman proposes an initial self-test composed of two direct questions: "Do you care more about the virtue of what you eat than the pleasure you receive from eating it?... Does your diet socially isolate you?"[19] Other questions concerning those who may be suffering from orthorexia provided by Davis on the WebMD (2000) website are: Do they spend more than 3 hours a day thinking about healthy foods? When they eat the way they're supposed to, do they feel in total control? Are they planning tomorrow's menu today? Has the quality of their life decreased as the quality of their diet increased? Have they become stricter with themselves? Does their self-esteem get a boost from eating healthy? Do they look down on others who don't eat this way? Do they skip foods they once enjoyed in order to eat the "right" foods? Does their diet make it difficult for them to eat anywhere but at home, distancing them from family and friends? Do they feel guilt or self-loathing when they stray from their diet? If yes was answered to two or more questions, the person may have a mild case of orthorexia.