Clean vs. Junk - does it really matter?
Replies
-
i havnt read the posts on this page... but put simply no it doesn at alll for weight loss.
now sayin that.. do get your fibre intake.. for obvious reasons.. and more serious ones.
try eat atleastttt 2+ portions of fruit and veg each.. (take a multi-vitamin jus incase.. y not)
but yer.. if you disagree please tell me for instance how your body knows the difference from where a carbohydrate came from.. from rice or a doughnut.
also you dont need to eat spaced out meals lol.. if you disagree please tell me how you can change your BASAL metabolism.0 -
in my first ever diet(this one) its just been a case of eating whatever i want ,but strictly being under the calorie limit,i have excluded nothing .
nothing in my diet has changed but the amounts
and ive managed to lose 60 lb in 6 month-im happy with this
i have recently noticed getting hungrier more so have simply substituted milk in coffee and cereal for none ,but my thinking is (i drink masses of coffee) but at what was 30 cal per cup soon adding up to 300+ cal per day to the same amount of coffee with no milk now buys me more soup extra slice of bacon's-or a "treat" .
i don't care for the intricacies of why and how all i know is its working for me and i am happier dieting than my Mrs(who does the whole cous cous,mung bean hummus "good" food malarkey and thus far i believe im the more successful .0 -
I eat what i want as long as it fits. Reason why is i know im not going to go the rest of my life not eating stuff i love:) Its just i make better choices for the most part and still slip in the stuff i like..0
-
i havnt read the posts on this page... but put simply no it doesn at alll for weight loss.
now sayin that.. do get your fibre intake.. for obvious reasons.. and more serious ones.
try eat atleastttt 2+ portions of fruit and veg each.. (take a multi-vitamin jus incase.. y not)
but yer.. if you disagree please tell me for instance how your body knows the difference from where a carbohydrate came from.. from rice or a doughnut.
also you dont need to eat spaced out meals lol.. if you disagree please tell me how you can change your BASAL metabolism.
you need that fiber or pepper your angus0 -
also in terms of weight loss... u could eat purely doughnuts... if you hit your maintenance calories or your deficit.. theres no way to put on weight without the surplus of energy,,, your not going to get the extra calories from thin air.
empty calories does mean you can get hungrier quicker.. but hunger changes with eating habits.. and hunger has nothing to do with metabolism0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
:drinker:
Nice argument. Too bad it's all made up
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html0 -
I eat what i want as long as it fits. Reason why is i know im not going to go the rest of my life not eating stuff i love:) Its just i make better choices for the most part and still slip in the stuff i like..
This is a reasonable approach. What is unreasonable is scaring people away from the foods they love on the basis that it will have some horrible effect (just not any effect that anyone has been able to establish or prove yet; but trust me it's definitely bad).0 -
It's dietitian, not dietician. Dietitians are actually generally very knowledgeable on the subject of nutrition. Go figure!
Anyway, Alan Aragon is one of the most respected people in the business. And he probably reads and intelligently interprets more raw nutrition research than everyone on MFP combined. The guy seriously knows his ****.
Just pointing out real quick that dietician and dietitian are both correct. Dietician has been used since 1917.
Continue on..... (trying to catch up on all the pages)
I know a bunch of actual trained and educated dietitians. It's definitely not dietician. That's some weird combination that's like "physician of diet" that makes no sense.
Dietician is considered a misspelling.
"According to Merriam-Webster, a leading producer of dictionaries, dictionary inclusions are based on word usage. The usage of dietitian spelled with a “c” is long standing and has become more common as the use of computer spell-check systems has increased and as the body of literature referring to dietitians has increased. Spellings, of course vary by country, as common words are often spelled differently from one English speaking country to the next. As an example, the Microsoft spell-check only recognizes the variant of dietitian with a ‘c’ in the English Canada version but in the USA both forms of the word are recognized."
http://www.internationaldietetics.org/Newsletter/Vol17Issue2/Feature-Article/The-c-in-dietitians-a-long-history-and-fading-futu.aspx
Regardless of what dietitians may prefer....both spellings are valid.
Well you should let all the Registered Dietitians who went through university programs that advertised their Dietitian programs, who get Today's Dietitian magazine, and work in hospitals and clinics with job titles called Dietitians that they're wrong.
Yes, dietician has been used in the past. I am telling you, however, that this is considered a misspelling by actual trained, certified dietitians as well as the organizations they belong to and the companies that employ them.
Why would I do that? As I said, they wish they could correct it..but because of the common usage of both spellings - both spellings are deemed valid. That's all I was saying. I never said that dietitians were doing it wrong. O.o.0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?0 -
It's dietitian, not dietician. Dietitians are actually generally very knowledgeable on the subject of nutrition. Go figure!
Anyway, Alan Aragon is one of the most respected people in the business. And he probably reads and intelligently interprets more raw nutrition research than everyone on MFP combined. The guy seriously knows his ****.
Just pointing out real quick that dietician and dietitian are both correct. Dietician has been used since 1917.
Continue on..... (trying to catch up on all the pages)
I know a bunch of actual trained and educated dietitians. It's definitely not dietician. That's some weird combination that's like "physician of diet" that makes no sense.
Dietician is considered a misspelling.
"According to Merriam-Webster, a leading producer of dictionaries, dictionary inclusions are based on word usage. The usage of dietitian spelled with a “c” is long standing and has become more common as the use of computer spell-check systems has increased and as the body of literature referring to dietitians has increased. Spellings, of course vary by country, as common words are often spelled differently from one English speaking country to the next. As an example, the Microsoft spell-check only recognizes the variant of dietitian with a ‘c’ in the English Canada version but in the USA both forms of the word are recognized."
http://www.internationaldietetics.org/Newsletter/Vol17Issue2/Feature-Article/The-c-in-dietitians-a-long-history-and-fading-futu.aspx
Regardless of what dietitians may prefer....both spellings are valid.
Well you should let all the Registered Dietitians who went through university programs that advertised their Dietitian programs, who get Today's Dietitian magazine, and work in hospitals and clinics with job titles called Dietitians that they're wrong.
Yes, dietician has been used in the past. I am telling you, however, that this is considered a misspelling by actual trained, certified dietitians as well as the organizations they belong to and the companies that employ them.
Why would I do that? As I said, they wish they could correct it..but because of the common usage of both spellings - both spellings are deemed valid. That's all I was saying. I never said that dietitians were doing it wrong. O.o.
You know, when a dietitian corrected me when I spelled it dietician, and then explained the difference, I said "oh, wow, that's fascianting! Thanks! I'll be sure to use the correct term in the future."
Oh well. Forget it.0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?
My shoes cost more than fast food. And if I ate my shoe, I'd probably die right then and there. I say your example is invalid.0 -
Clearly you both have to start investing in better shoes.Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
:drinker:0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
Depends on who you ask, doesn't it? Virtually anything besides raw vegetables can be deemed not clean by the various criteria used in this very thread.0 -
The thing about calorie counts at fast food restaurants (or any restaurant really) is that serving sizes vary therefore calorie counts aren't exact (or even close). It's very easy to unknowingly eat more calories than you think you are just from that. I'd always suggest making/weighing your own food over eating junk food, but it's not always possible... which is why IIFYM is so popular
Also, nutrition labels aren't always 100% truthful, they can round down their numbers to make it more appealing (if something has less than .4 or something grams trans fat per serving, they can label it as 0). Ever wonder why those snack boxes/bags have odd serving sizes? It's to take advantage of that.
Does it matter? Depends, are you trying to get stage lean? Then probably yeah it would matter. Do you just want to look good at the pool/beach or just lose some weight? Probably not so much.0 -
Clearly you both have to start investing in better shoes.Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
:drinker:
I just bought a new pair of Rockports with leather soles. Are they more clean than my old Merrells with rubber soles? All natural right?0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
Depends on who you ask, doesn't it? Virtually anything besides raw vegetables can be deemed not clean by the various criteria used in this very thread.
those would be?
i'd consider that cake clean. totally.0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?
:laugh:
Its all a conspiracy.0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
Depends on who you ask, doesn't it? Virtually anything besides raw vegetables can be deemed not clean by the various criteria used in this very thread.
those would be?
i'd consider that cake clean. totally.
Sweet. I'm starting a clean junk food store.0 -
I would think it would be much more difficult to stay on target calorie wise while eating junk. Seems to me that much of the junk food is much more calorie dense, so less equals more. The junk food eater would be hungry all the time!0
-
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
Depends on who you ask, doesn't it? Virtually anything besides raw vegetables can be deemed not clean by the various criteria used in this very thread.
those would be?
i'd consider that cake clean. totally.
Sweet. I'm starting a clean junk food store.
bwahahaha
0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
Depends on who you ask, doesn't it? Virtually anything besides raw vegetables can be deemed not clean by the various criteria used in this very thread.
those would be?
i'd consider that cake clean. totally.
Sweet. I'm starting a clean junk food store.
meh, they already exist in cities like NYC0 -
I eat what I want so long as it fits my calorie/macro goals. I see no reason to give up things like ice cream or chocolate.0
-
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?
Oh, I'm sorry. Apparently I need to be more descriptive. "The Fed" can also describe the FDA, which is the FEDERALLY RUN ADMINISTRATION implementing laws and criteria regarding the safe growing, selling and eating of food items under the United States Department of Health and Human Services. It's been my experience that "the Fed" is useful in describing circumstances involving "The Federal Government."
Anyway....0 -
I eat what I want so long as it fits my calorie/macro goals. I see no reason to give up things like ice cream or chocolate.
Dark chocolate is actually good for you. Woohoo
0 -
I eat what I want so long as it fits my calorie/macro goals. I see no reason to give up things like ice cream or chocolate.
absolutely no reason you should.
0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?
Oh, I'm sorry. Apparently I need to be more descriptive. "The Fed" can also describe the FDA, which is the FEDERALLY RUN ADMINISTRATION implementing laws and criteria regarding the safe growing, selling and eating of food items under the United States Department of Health and Human Services. It's been my experience that "the Fed" is useful in describing circumstances involving "The Federal Government."
Anyway....
I think for most, including myself....it means FBI. Damn tv shows and books!.....hahahaha0 -
Eating processed foods and unnatural chemicals is fattening-starvation. Your body cannot process the foods but there are no nutrients in what you're eating that it needs to survive, so it takes and stores whatever it can from the crap you eat, and then fights like crazy to get rid of what it can't use or even digest. Do yourself a favor and clean it up! Eat food that's actually food, not the chemical crap the Fed is trying to pass for food these days.
Next time you go to reach for a processed treat or something in the drive-thru, just take off your shoe and eat that instead. It'll be about the same nutritionally and will save you money.
Lol, quoted for the cray and "the Fed" - what does the American Monetary Reserve have to do with donuts?
Oh, I'm sorry. Apparently I need to be more descriptive. "The Fed" can also describe the FDA, which is the FEDERALLY RUN ADMINISTRATION implementing laws and criteria regarding the safe growing, selling and eating of food items under the United States Department of Health and Human Services. It's been my experience that "the Fed" is useful in describing circumstances involving "The Federal Government."
Anyway....
In all seriousness, it makes more sense to use the term "the feds" in that situation. "The fed" specifically means the Federal Reserve.
It's like DOE. Technically it could be Department of Education, but it's used exclusively for the Department of Energy. The Department of Education is typically called the ED.0 -
Can't clean be junk? For example, I could make a cake with butter I turned myself, flour I ground myself...totally clean and unprocessed, but it's still unhealthy.
I would say absolutely (though I wouldn't go to that much trouble) but then others would say it couldn't be clean because you had to use sugar.
Sugarcane I crushed myself and cooked the juice off?
Ah... but it's still sucrose.
But when you make this divine confection, I will gladly fall on the sword and alleviate you of it's evil dirty-ness!
Wait, even natural sources of sucrose aren't considered clean?
I have a serving of granulated sugar every morning in my coffee because I refuse to use artificial sweeteners. I consider myself eating clean 90-98% of the time. I make my own food at home including sweets. But I have never made a cake because I try and consume my simple carbs for breakfast and the rest of the day complex ones. To me frozen grapes or other options are just a better choice for my body but to each their own if you must have cake......you must have cake 0 -
I love when you guys quibble about semantics instead of ignoring the point at large.
it's mah favorite.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions