Why does everyone think it's WHAT they eat that matters?

Wizard87

I think it's funny this thread talks so much about pizza. That is the one thing i have missed more than any other food. I got tired of never eating it, so now I do. I just eat one slice less or, if I overdo it, I hit the treadmill to burn the "extra."
The one thing that stops me from eating a piece of cake or candy is that the tradeoffs are wild: I'd rather eat and entire rotisserie chicken leg and wing rather than a candy bar. Easy trade. But NOTHING is an even trade for pizza. I just like it. I have decided to accept that and offset it elsewhere.

Afura

For me, it is what I eat.
If I eat a massive 2-lb salad with cucumber, tomato, avocado, and tuna which only comes to 300 calories, I will feel invigorated, full, and satisfied.
If I eat a 2.5oz bar of chocolate which comes to 300 calories, it will taste good while I'm eating it, but I'll still be hungry and I will feel unsatisfied and have heartburn.

I think the point the OP was making is that is IS possible to have a 1.85 pound salad and a PIECE of candy-and you will lose weight-and be healthy. It DOES NOT have to be an ALL or NOTHING proposition for nearly ALL people.

One could eat nothing but apples-which are typically thought of as GOOD food and if you eat only those and enough of them-FAT and UNHEALTHY.

It seems so intuitive...and simple.....and yet.....

^^^ That sums it up nicely, and not so much of a hot button comment as the OP had formed the post.

I still struggle where some days I feel victorious because I ate eggs, and chicken and vegetables and disdainfully looked down my nose at that thin mint cookie (yes... yes I still have thin mints in my freezer, no you may not have my address), and other days where I cheer because I ate well AND I had the cookie. Because I have sat down and had a half a package of cookies before, more than once due to stress or boredom, or just cause. Because I ate poorly and in excess, and for me I had to cut it out of my life, and now learn to reintroduce things so that I can have a healthy relationship with food.
I cheer for the sheepish friend who logged a glass of wine on their diary, or the person that had a big meal out and they still came in near/at/a little under, because they should NOT feel ashamed of what they have eaten. It's NOT black and white for everyone, just because it may be simple and intuitive for you, doesn't mean it is for everyone. And that's something that most of us forget from time to time.

Velum_cado

Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite.

Oh sweet Jesus, NO ONE should follow that advice.

But otherwise, yes, I agree. Whenever people ask what I've given up, my answer is always the same: "eating whatever I want, whenever I want". That's it.

raptor5k

Others have already said it, but it basically comes down to "Are you trying to be skinny, or are you trying to be healthy?" You can lose weight eating whatever you want, as long as you're under the calorie goal. However in my own experience, though I was losing weight eating that way, I feel a hundred times better, have infinitely more energy, etc, when fueling my body with the right types of calories. It's hard to get to that point, I know from personal experience. but The way I feel now is soooo awesome, I never want to go back to eating junk.

Feed_the_Bears

Well yes and no. Some nubs are going to read this and think they can eat nothing but pizza and guiness. It's an "all things good in moderation" approach, not just eat 1500 cal worth of pizza and you'll be good. Nutrition plays a large role in how your body either wants to burn or store fat, how you feel, the cravings you get, getting cancer and stuff like that..... WHAT you eat impacts all of those things. But treat yourself to portions of the food you love just for sanity's sake.

LiftAllThePizzas

Because "cutting out certain foods" is easier (in the short term) than actually growing up and learning moderation like a responsible adult.

RiannonC

I read so many threads on here about giving up this or that, limiting this or that, etc. It's not what you eat, it's how much you eat that matters. You just need to chose if you want calorie-dense food or more of a less-dense food.

If you have to lose a lot of weight and restrict what tastes good you're going to fail. So instead of giving up pizza why not just eat one less slice per meal? Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite. I really don't understand why people are so dang hard on themselves. Good luck!

I think it's usually because healthier foods tend to be more satisfying and filling for the same amount of calories. There are a lot of foods that I haven't "given up" but in reality I never eat them because they're just not worth the amount of calories I would have to spend on them. I could eat 1500 calories a day of cake and pizza but I'd probably want more food. The same amount of fruits and veggies, whole grains, lean protein, leaves me feeling much better.

And you talked about restricting "what tastes good" as if unhealthy or calorie dense foods are the only things that taste good. The way I see it, there are plenty of healthy foods I like the taste of, and plenty of unhealthy foods I like the taste of. So why not choose the healthy ones? I'm still going to be eating food I like either way.

rhogr000

Because "cutting out certain foods" is easier (in the short term) than actually growing up and learning moderation like a responsible adult.

A little more frank than I would be, but definitely this.

KatLifter

I've posted my thoughts already.
If you laugh at and put down someone's post, it's on you to prove they are wrong.

ETA: I never said they did cause cancer, just looking for something to back up your response of NO.

true you didn't say that and i apologize for that. But here a good article debunking the cancer claim http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Thanks, but what this article says is:
-Rats fed GMO have a "raft of health problems"
-The study was flawed and the results aren't reliable
Basically, still no conclusions.

KatLifter

Because "cutting out certain foods" is easier (in the short term) than actually growing up and learning moderation like a responsible adult.

Burn!
Actually, according to brain studies, sugar is as addictive as cocaine. Some people are more susceptible to addictive behaviors, so it is healthier to try and keep them from entering your body.
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/researcher-sugar-addictive-cocaine-obesity-diabetes-cancer-heart-disease-article-1.1054419
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/connie-bennett/the-rats-who-preferred-su_b_712254.html

Kimdbro

I read so many threads on here about giving up this or that, limiting this or that, etc. It's not what you eat, it's how much you eat that matters. You just need to chose if you want calorie-dense food or more of a less-dense food.

If you have to lose a lot of weight and restrict what tastes good you're going to fail. So instead of giving up pizza why not just eat one less slice per meal? Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite. I really don't understand why people are so dang hard on themselves. Good luck!

Agree whole heartedly!

CashierCantin

I find it so funny how its always a male who comes up with these things...who CAN eat how they want and lose the weight. You're a genius! I can't believe this hasn't been said before and I can't believe we're all not at goal with your words of wisdom! Thank you, thank you so much for opening our eyes. <eye roll>

jwdieter

OP should drink 2,000 calories/day of corn syrup and let us know how that works out in a couple months.

andyisandy

I've posted my thoughts already.
If you laugh at and put down someone's post, it's on you to prove they are wrong.

ETA: I never said they did cause cancer, just looking for something to back up your response of NO.

true you didn't say that and i apologize for that. But here a good article debunking the cancer claim http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Thanks, but what this article says is:
-Rats fed GMO have a "raft of health problems"
-The study was flawed and the results aren't reliable
Basically, still no conclusions.

Not sure where it says that the rats had a raft of problems but it did say this
But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats? Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats – 25 per cent – got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.

KatLifter

I've posted my thoughts already.
If you laugh at and put down someone's post, it's on you to prove they are wrong.

ETA: I never said they did cause cancer, just looking for something to back up your response of NO.

true you didn't say that and i apologize for that. But here a good article debunking the cancer claim http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Thanks, but what this article says is:
-Rats fed GMO have a "raft of health problems"
-The study was flawed and the results aren't reliable
Basically, still no conclusions.

Not sure where it says that the rats had a raft of problems but it did say this
But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats? Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats – 25 per cent – got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.

Exactly, it's to ambiguous. "Are the findings reliable? There is little to suggest they are." Looks like we have to wait for a study with a better design.
I used to work for a researcher and have had an article published, so I look for holes in all studies that I read.

magerum

I can understand your point, but you have to understand that most people wander through life eating whatever they feel like. Many people on here are trying to do things right and need to create a disciplined approach to their new lifestyle. While I can see your point about the foods, no doctor / nutritionist in the world will tell you that eating 2 scoops of ice cream and a fat slice of cake is an adequate replacement for 3 balanced, healthy meals with the same calorie count. The trick I’ve found is learning to like healthier choices. I’ve got a long way to go, but at least I’m on the right track. :happy:

You can eat healthy meals and your scoops of ice cream and slice of cake. You don't get extra credit for exceeding the amount of nutrients you can process in a given day. Sometimes you just have energy needs.

Carnivor0us

Those with metabolic issues find macros just as important as overall calories. You'd never realize how important it can be until you have such a disorder.

meeper123

If weight lose is my only goal maybe but why should things that taste good have to be unhealthy you can cook and make fantastic meals that are simply amazing and be very healthy. I just not a fan of chemicals in my food.

andyisandy

I've posted my thoughts already.
If you laugh at and put down someone's post, it's on you to prove they are wrong.

ETA: I never said they did cause cancer, just looking for something to back up your response of NO.

true you didn't say that and i apologize for that. But here a good article debunking the cancer claim http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/dn22287-study-linking-gm-crops-and-cancer-questioned.html

Thanks, but what this article says is:
-Rats fed GMO have a "raft of health problems"
-The study was flawed and the results aren't reliable
Basically, still no conclusions.

Not sure where it says that the rats had a raft of problems but it did say this
But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats? Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats – 25 per cent – got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.

Exactly, it's to ambiguous. "Are the findings reliable? There is little to suggest they are." Looks like we have to wait for a study with a better design.
I used to work for a researcher and have had an article published, so I look for holes in all studies that I read.

I agree. It seems though alot of people put their faith in this study about gmo causing cancer, so yes a much better study needs to come out until then all we can do is agree to disagree.
ETA: While I believe Cal's in and out dictate weight loss for most (barring some medical issue) I truly believe it what you eat that maters in health. Also I believe in moderation and hitting my macros

richardheath

Meet your calorie goal.

Meet your Macro targets.

Get your micronutrients.

Meet any medical needs.

Have a craft beer.