Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, Fat-Free

TX_Aggie_Dad
TX_Aggie_Dad Posts: 173
in Food and Nutrition
Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.
«1

Replies

  • ggxx100
    ggxx100 Posts: 520 Member
    Couldn't have said it better myself.
  • ashleyShades
    ashleyShades Posts: 375 Member
    hahahahaha I agree
  • weinbagel
    weinbagel Posts: 337 Member
    Agree!
  • GlassslippersAndFairyDust
    GlassslippersAndFairyDust Posts: 518 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    :flowerforyou:
  • Julettashane
    Julettashane Posts: 723 Member
    so true...and the "fat-free" ones are higher in sugar
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them
  • cicisiam
    cicisiam Posts: 491 Member
    Exactly!...Those words just make me move faster through the BS at the store. Stick to basic and natural.
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.
  • kellykw
    kellykw Posts: 184 Member
    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them
    This made me laugh out loud!

    I did a search for "chemicals in food." Very scary, even if only 1% of what you read on the internet is true.
  • Jen800
    Jen800 Posts: 548 Member
    YUP!

    Read the ingredients before you even CONSIDER that label!
  • ashleyShades
    ashleyShades Posts: 375 Member
    I also think it's funny that stuff that is low-fat or fat-free is loaded with sodium
  • TX_Aggie_Dad
    TX_Aggie_Dad Posts: 173
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."
  • tanmustlose
    tanmustlose Posts: 39
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    awww, i wish there were a like button... :laugh:
  • missADS1981
    missADS1981 Posts: 364 Member
    depends on the brand.

    check out walden farms, a favorite of mine. they are sugar free, carb free, calorie free and made with natural ingredients unlike say Hellmans fat free anything which is chemical, oils, etc.
  • Kanlassak
    Kanlassak Posts: 101 Member
    What about the times it's just being used as, you know, an accurate descriptor? Like half the shrimp I've seen lately has pointed out that they're "low in fat" on the package.
  • mssgeni
    mssgeni Posts: 83 Member
    Guilty... I eat a lot of these things because I want to keep my fats and sugars low. Why are these so bad for you? I kind of figured if they were approved by the FDA or whatever they're safe for human consumption. :/
  • missADS1981
    missADS1981 Posts: 364 Member
    I also think it's funny that stuff that is low-fat or fat-free is loaded with sodium

    youd be surprised how many people dont even take notice of sodium. i always have it is shocking how high so many low fat/fat free dressings are!
  • CoachReddy
    CoachReddy Posts: 3,949 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.
    :drinker:
  • fShaw86
    fShaw86 Posts: 878 Member
    OP, I totally agree! I can't count how many times I've busted my previous "diets" with that crap!!!
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Of course!
  • toaster6
    toaster6 Posts: 703 Member
    Oh yes, chemicals are the devil. Like that lethal, evil "water" thing.
  • GlassslippersAndFairyDust
    GlassslippersAndFairyDust Posts: 518 Member
    [/quote]

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."
    [/quote]


    M'mm gala, red delicious, granny smith
  • CoachReddy
    CoachReddy Posts: 3,949 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."

    those aren't ingredients.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."

    those aren't ingredients.

    Definition of INGREDIENT
    : something that enters into a compound or is a component part of any combination or mixture : constituent

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ingredient
  • SanteMulberry
    SanteMulberry Posts: 3,202 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."

    those aren't ingredients.

    Definition of INGREDIENT
    : something that enters into a compound or is a component part of any combination or mixture : constituent

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ingredient

    They are all food fractions and it is probably better to get them in their natural settings because phyto-nutrients and other nutrients appear to work better in synergy. Good, whole natural foods without the addition of synthetic or artificially concentrated chemicals (most sweeteners are in that category, with the exception of honey) is likely a much better idea.
  • TX_Aggie_Dad
    TX_Aggie_Dad Posts: 173
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."

    Does an Apple have an ingredients label? Come on, man. Better to confuse the masses and look smart, huh? So you are saying that a box with an ingredients label that lists a bunch of crap that I can't pronounce is probably still good for me?

    Let me get back to my bag of fat-free cookies and diet coke.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Whenever you see the words "Sugar-Free, Low-Fat, or Fat-Free", I want you to think of the words "Chemical Sh** Storm" instead.

    Good thing full fat and full sugared products don't have a ton of chemicals in them

    Decent point. Make me think of the diet concept I saw once, something along the lines of "if each of the ingredients doesn't sound like food you have eaten before or you can't pronounce it, then it isn't food".

    Would you eat a food with all this in it?

    "Alpha-Linolenic-Acid, Asparagine, D-Categin, Isoqurctrin, Hyperoside, Ferulic-Acid, Farnesene, Neoxathin, Phosphatidyl-Choline, Reynoutrin, Sinapic-Acid, Caffeic-Acid, Chlorogenic-Acid, P-Hydroxy-Benzoic-Acid, P-Coumaric-Acid, Avicularin, Lutein, Quercitin, Rutin, Ursolic-Acid, Protocatechuic-Acid, and Silver."

    Does an Apple have an ingredients label? Come on, man. Better to confuse the masses and look smart, huh? So you are saying that a box with an ingredients label that lists a bunch of crap that I can't pronounce is probably still good for me?

    Let me get back to my bag of fat-free cookies and diet coke.

    Determining if an ingredient is "good" or "bad" based off your own intellect and ability to pronounce words is a pretty crappy way to determine it. Esp when not factoring in dosage and context of said ingredient.

    As far as confusing people, trying to use the word chemicals with a negative connotation is confusing since everything is made up of chemicals. Fearmongering does no one any good
  • TX_Aggie_Dad
    TX_Aggie_Dad Posts: 173

    Determining if an ingredient is "good" or "bad" based off your own intellect and ability to pronounce words is a pretty crappy way to determine it.

    Is it a perfect approach? No. A "crappy" aproach? Really? Let's use oatmeal as an example.

    If I compare the ingredients list of the two oatmeals below, wouldn't common sense tell you that the one with the shorter and simpler ingredients list is likely better for you? Clearly we are talking generalities, but it seems like a pretty common sense and not entirely "crappy" approach:

    Quaker Oats - Old Fashioned:
    Ingredients: 100% NATURAL WHOLE GRAIN QUAKER QUALITY ROLLED OATS

    Quaker Weight Control Instant Oatmeal
    Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN ROLLED OATS, WHEY PROTEIN ISOLATE, MALTODEXTRIN, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, SALT, OAT FLOUR, CALCIUM CARBONATE, GUAR GUM, CARAMEL COLOR, SOY LECITHIN, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM, SUCRALOSE, NIACINAMIDE*, REDUCED IRON, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE*, RIBOFLAVIN*, THIAMIN MONONITRATE*, FOLIC ACID*.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member

    Determining if an ingredient is "good" or "bad" based off your own intellect and ability to pronounce words is a pretty crappy way to determine it.

    Is it a perfect approach? No. A "crappy" aproach? Really? Let's use oatmeal as an example.

    If I compare the ingredients list of the two oatmeals below, wouldn't common sense tell you that the one with the shorter and simpler ingredients list is likely better for you? Clearly we are talking generalities, but it seems like a pretty common sense and not entirely "crappy" approach:

    Quaker Oats - Old Fashioned:
    Ingredients: 100% NATURAL WHOLE GRAIN QUAKER QUALITY ROLLED OATS

    Quaker Weight Control Instant Oatmeal
    Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN ROLLED OATS, WHEY PROTEIN ISOLATE, MALTODEXTRIN, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, SALT, OAT FLOUR, CALCIUM CARBONATE, GUAR GUM, CARAMEL COLOR, SOY LECITHIN, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM, SUCRALOSE, NIACINAMIDE*, REDUCED IRON, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE*, RIBOFLAVIN*, THIAMIN MONONITRATE*, FOLIC ACID*.

    The 2nd one has more vitamins and minerals in it...
  • CoachReddy
    CoachReddy Posts: 3,949 Member

    Determining if an ingredient is "good" or "bad" based off your own intellect and ability to pronounce words is a pretty crappy way to determine it.

    Is it a perfect approach? No. A "crappy" aproach? Really? Let's use oatmeal as an example.

    If I compare the ingredients list of the two oatmeals below, wouldn't common sense tell you that the one with the shorter and simpler ingredients list is likely better for you? Clearly we are talking generalities, but it seems like a pretty common sense and not entirely "crappy" approach:

    Quaker Oats - Old Fashioned:
    Ingredients: 100% NATURAL WHOLE GRAIN QUAKER QUALITY ROLLED OATS

    Quaker Weight Control Instant Oatmeal
    Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN ROLLED OATS, WHEY PROTEIN ISOLATE, MALTODEXTRIN, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, SALT, OAT FLOUR, CALCIUM CARBONATE, GUAR GUM, CARAMEL COLOR, SOY LECITHIN, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM, SUCRALOSE, NIACINAMIDE*, REDUCED IRON, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE*, RIBOFLAVIN*, THIAMIN MONONITRATE*, FOLIC ACID*.

    The 2nd one has more vitamins and minerals in it...

    Bioavailability.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member

    Determining if an ingredient is "good" or "bad" based off your own intellect and ability to pronounce words is a pretty crappy way to determine it.

    Is it a perfect approach? No. A "crappy" aproach? Really? Let's use oatmeal as an example.

    If I compare the ingredients list of the two oatmeals below, wouldn't common sense tell you that the one with the shorter and simpler ingredients list is likely better for you? Clearly we are talking generalities, but it seems like a pretty common sense and not entirely "crappy" approach:

    Quaker Oats - Old Fashioned:
    Ingredients: 100% NATURAL WHOLE GRAIN QUAKER QUALITY ROLLED OATS

    Quaker Weight Control Instant Oatmeal
    Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN ROLLED OATS, WHEY PROTEIN ISOLATE, MALTODEXTRIN, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, SALT, OAT FLOUR, CALCIUM CARBONATE, GUAR GUM, CARAMEL COLOR, SOY LECITHIN, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM, SUCRALOSE, NIACINAMIDE*, REDUCED IRON, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE*, RIBOFLAVIN*, THIAMIN MONONITRATE*, FOLIC ACID*.

    The 2nd one has more vitamins and minerals in it...

    Bioavailability.

    So bioavilability doesn't matter when talking about whole grain/wheat flour vs white flour, but now matters here?

Categories