We trashed the sodas, chips, cookies
Options
Replies
-
Fortified yes. I still prefer to get my nutrients the old fashioned way. :flowerforyou:What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
You still need to look at that bigger picture. It isn't all about macros. There are micronutrients as well that are just as important to make sure you are getting enough. If you are getting mass amounts of pure sugar then how are you going to get all of those oh so important vitamins and minerals? Taking them in pill form aren't going to do anything even close to what getting them from real food sources would. Sugar doesn't nourish your body either. Vitamin C, Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, Zinc, Potassium... Those do. Not to mention some of those "foods" can actually inhibit the absorption of these vitamins and minerals in your body.
It's 99% about macros. Modern foods are so fortified and nutritious you have to try really, really hard to actually achieve any sort of genuine nutrient deficiency.
That's fine. But people harp way too much on micronutrients. Yes, pay attention to them. Make sure you get enough. Take a multivitamin. Get blood work done every year or two by your doc. Eat fruits and veggies. Etc etc. But pretending that eating some Pop Tarts and ice cream mean you're going to be somehow nutrient-deficient is crazy.
BTW, are you the user formerly known as various iterations of "mulberry"?0 -
I know it works different for everyone...but I didn't trash any of the stuff I ate. I just changed the portion and gave it to myself in moderation. I still get popcorn at the movies (no butter, and its the kids pack) and a diet soda. I never really drank reg soda, so it wasn't hard. I have seen people on here, over the past few months, that kicked the "bad stuff" but some ended up binging on the stuff they took out, because they craved it so badly. If you do start craving it, measure it out, and have a small amount to feed the craving.
All in all, great start to getting rid of it, as the saying goes "out of sight, out of mind."
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter0 -
What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
The human body needs a variety of nutrients to thrive and survive. If you live on sugar alone, you're going to end up malnourished.
The term 'empty' calories is for a food that gives the body nothing else but energy.0 -
What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
The human body needs a variety of nutrients to thrive and survive. If you live on sugar alone, you're going to end up malnourished.
The term 'empty' calories is for a food that gives the body nothing else but energy.
Where did anyone say survive solely on sugar? No where, ever.
How about this though:This would be an interesting case study if they took all sorts of measurements (bf, wt, metabolic markers etc) prior to them going on a hunger strike. What's currently going on seems to be at odds with some common wisdom among these parts.
1) They are clearly consuming less than their BMR and half of the magical 1200 cals, yet they appear to still be losing weight (2 prisoners have lost at least 15% of their bodyweight in under 2 months. Do the 1200 cal/VLCD zealots believe they would be losing more if they were eating more?
2) The cals they are consuming are entirely from gatorade, the cals from gatorade all come from evil refined sugar, isn't that supposed to stop weight loss in it's track or cause all sorts of other evils? 54 days of just sugar and not the "good" fruit sugar either, if sugar was toxic you'd think some serious issues would have arisen
None of this of course is saying they are aren't doing some sort of damage to themselves but for the fear mongering that goes on about low cal diets and sugar around here, you'd expect these folks to be deadWith an inmate hunger strike over conditions at California’s highest security lockups now at day 54, it seems remarkable that none of the 41 prisoners refusing food since July 8 has experienced serious or life-threatening medical problems.
Officials monitoring the protest report that, as of Wednesday, the men had body mass indexes in the 20s, well above a danger zone established by the court-appointed receiver overseeing prison medical care. Only two of the prisoners had lost more than 15 percent of their body weight, another critical measure.
While the inmates are clearly suffering as a result of the extended fast, and report bouts of extreme nausea and dizziness, there are “no imminent health emergencies and no prisoners in critical condition,” said Joyce Hayhoe, a spokesperson for receiver Clark Kelso.
So what’s keeping the hunger strikers from more severe starvation? The answer, it turns out, could be mass quantities of Gatorade, the ubiquitous sports drink.
Under state rules, inmates are considered on hunger strike if they refuse all state meals for more than three days and have no other food items in their cells, such as snacks from the prison commissary.
However, Hayhoe said each day the hunger strikers are receiving five powder packets of Gatorade that deliver a total of 600-625 calories. That’s in addition to supplies of vitamins.
Hayhoe said the electrolytes in Gatorade are not considered “nutrition,” which would otherwise cancel inmates’ participation in a hunger strike.
“The amount of calories and the type of calories (from Gatorade) will not keep them from getting malnourished and could lead to heart, liver and muscle damage,” she said. “But it helps sustain them longer.”
The aim of providing electrolytes is to prevent severe dehydration, Hayhoe said.
Still, 650 calories from Gatorade constitutes “a severe starvation diet,” notes Andrea Garber, an expert on starvation with UC San Francisco Benioff Children’s Hospital. The Gatorade is merely “prolonging the starvation, not preventing it.”
Garber further notes that body mass index is a blunt measure and must be looked at individually. “We see patients starved and at high risk and they still have normal BMIs,” Garber noted. So hunger striking prisoners with BMIs in the 20s may not indicate much about their medical condition.
The fact that two of the prisoners have lost 15 percent of their body weight is a more accurate measure, she says, because it takes into account their starting point. Garber said a loss of 15 percent of body weight is a criteria for hospital admission in adolescents she treats.
As of Thursday, none of the strikers had been moved to an outside hospital, according to Hayhoe.
On August 19, U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson issued an order allowing force-feeding (or involuntary re-feeding) of any inmate near death. While the order prompted angry responses from prisoner advocacy groups, officials said such measures are not needed, at least for now.
In fact, visitors who spoke with strike leaders this week reported the men were chipper and energetic, thanks in part to the daily supply of Gatorade.
Anne Weills, an Oakland attorney representing several of the strikers in a federal lawsuit over conditions at Pelican Bay State Prison in Crescent City, said the prisoners were “vibrant and intellectually sharp” when she met with them on Wednesday.
“They are fiercely committed to this struggle,” she said. “They still want to negotiate with the state.”
However, corrections officials have refused to negotiate with the hunger strikers and this week released a document claiming to have addressed (thought not agreed to) all their key demands.
Officials maintain the current protest is the work of violent gang leaders seeking to reassert control over criminal networks in prison system and on the streets.
Hayhoe said that while several inmates are under medical observation, the biggest concern right now is a sudden heart attack.
http://blogs.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2013/08/30/prison-hunger-strikers-getting-by-on-gatorade-vitamins/
They seem to be doing quite well on sugar and vitamins, not that I would suggest it to anyone.0 -
What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
The human body needs a variety of nutrients to thrive and survive. If you live on sugar alone, you're going to end up malnourished.
The term 'empty' calories is for a food that gives the body nothing else but energy.
Indeed. Living on sugar alone, and therefore completely ignoring macronutrient intake entirely, is a bad idea. Go figure.0 -
What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
You still need to look at that bigger picture. It isn't all about macros. There are micronutrients as well that are just as important to make sure you are getting enough. If you are getting mass amounts of pure sugar then how are you going to get all of those oh so important vitamins and minerals? Taking them in pill form aren't going to do anything even close to what getting them from real food sources would. Sugar doesn't nourish your body either. Vitamin C, Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, Zinc, Potassium... Those do. Not to mention some of those "foods" can actually inhibit the absorption of these vitamins and minerals in your body.
I don't see how eating a pop tart, which typically has 13-16g of sugars, translates into "getting mass amounts of pure sugar". That's just asinine.0 -
Headed to get a Dt. soda now!! and maybe some cookies
I can factor them in and work them out later at the gym! Its about moderation not depravation!
But that said, if this is working for you... let the depravation continue
Posts like this are one of the the rudest things I consistently come across in these fora.
OK dont shoot me but it is almost like taunting a person, who is going thru challenges giving up thier fave food (note - i said it was a challenge) - i would try to not taunt a person but to try to help them go thru food challenges.0 -
Fortified yes. I still prefer to get my nutrients the old fashioned way. :flowerforyou:What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
You still need to look at that bigger picture. It isn't all about macros. There are micronutrients as well that are just as important to make sure you are getting enough. If you are getting mass amounts of pure sugar then how are you going to get all of those oh so important vitamins and minerals? Taking them in pill form aren't going to do anything even close to what getting them from real food sources would. Sugar doesn't nourish your body either. Vitamin C, Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, Zinc, Potassium... Those do. Not to mention some of those "foods" can actually inhibit the absorption of these vitamins and minerals in your body.
It's 99% about macros. Modern foods are so fortified and nutritious you have to try really, really hard to actually achieve any sort of genuine nutrient deficiency.
That's fine. But people harp way too much on micronutrients. Yes, pay attention to them. Make sure you get enough. Take a multivitamin. Get blood work done every year or two by your doc. Eat fruits and veggies. Etc etc. But pretending that eating some Pop Tarts and ice cream mean you're going to be somehow nutrient-deficient is crazy.
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.0 -
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
Totally nonsensical post. Macronutrients are in fact that important.
We want you not to think that you can't be happy unless you're eating Pop Tarts. We want you to realize you can be happy, and achieve your goals, even if you eat [insert any food you want here].
It's not about getting people to eat Pop Tarts. It's about getting people to understand that they can eat any foods they like and still achieve their goals.0 -
Supplements have been shown to be poorly absorbed. I suspect we'll find that the nutrients in the "fortified" foods are poorly absorbed as well.
Fortified yes. I still prefer to get my nutrients the old fashioned way. :flowerforyou:What is this "empty" calorie food people are talking about? Be definition that cannot be. Carb is a nutrient, 4 calories per gram. Protein the same. Fat in at 9 / gram.
If the food has calories it has nutrition, period. What is the problem here? Why is this so hard to accept? If a pop tart has 200 calories, that's 200 calories of nutrition. Unless those 200 calories come from some magical source of energy? Unicorn horn, the magical 5th macro?
"But the sugar!" Sugar is a carb, hence a nutriant.
You still need to look at that bigger picture. It isn't all about macros. There are micronutrients as well that are just as important to make sure you are getting enough. If you are getting mass amounts of pure sugar then how are you going to get all of those oh so important vitamins and minerals? Taking them in pill form aren't going to do anything even close to what getting them from real food sources would. Sugar doesn't nourish your body either. Vitamin C, Iron, Calcium, Magnesium, Zinc, Potassium... Those do. Not to mention some of those "foods" can actually inhibit the absorption of these vitamins and minerals in your body.
It's 99% about macros. Modern foods are so fortified and nutritious you have to try really, really hard to actually achieve any sort of genuine nutrient deficiency.
That's fine. But people harp way too much on micronutrients. Yes, pay attention to them. Make sure you get enough. Take a multivitamin. Get blood work done every year or two by your doc. Eat fruits and veggies. Etc etc. But pretending that eating some Pop Tarts and ice cream mean you're going to be somehow nutrient-deficient is crazy.
BTW, are you the user formerly known as various iterations of "mulberry"?
Of course eating a pop tarts wont make you nutrient deficient if you are otherwise eating a balanced diet. I'm not sure most people who read "eat the pop tarts" *are* eating nutritious foods. But no. No foods are "evil". A few ingredients are pretty craptastic, with no redeeming qualities, but no. No foods are bad. IN MODERATION. Most folks with weight to lose have not done well with some form of moderation or another, resulting in excess calories, thus the excess weight. "In moderation" is easier said than done. Now we eat 50 pringles. After we reach goal it's 70. Then soon we're back to eating the tube. Moderation is tough. Especially when it's yummy, salty, sweet and oily.
As for the other question, no. I have been here for several years (thus the post count), with only one name. This one.0 -
Of course eating a pop tarts wont make you nutrient deficient if you are otherwise eating a balanced diet.
No foods are bad.
/thread0 -
my best buddy and I detoxed our cupboards. We did a cleanse,. We have been lurking around the message board for a couple of months but just joined.
We want to thank all those who posted with how important it is to look at what we were putting in our bodies.
We have a certified nutritionist for our meals, worth the money and a fitness trainer. We also see the doctor regularly. The three of them advised it would be good for us to rid ourselves of the junk foo and sodas.
We do have our own diet plan that we write down daily.
My buddy is down 12 pounds in two months , I am reduced by 14 .
We are going strong.
A great move. Junk food is exactly that: "junk". If you are going to eat something, make it natural and healthy. Amazing how a couple of guys making a positive move to enhnace thier lifestyle can bring out all the haters. Don't believe any of the "IIFYM" losers. These are only people who are too weak to give up the crap and eat real food. Why would one eat crap when you can eat real. You guys made the right move. Good for you.0 -
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
This study showing that “reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.” - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
This study which found “diets differing substantially in glycemic load induce comparable long-term weight loss.”- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17413101
Results of Professor Mark Haub who lost 27lbs and improved markers of health while eating a diet consisting of Twinkies.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html (links within)
Flexible dieting greater success rate
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/117075500 -
when did this place turn into bashing people for not wanting to eat cookies....all you snarky "im going to think of you while i eat my ice cream tonight" people are annoying0
-
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
Totally nonsensical post. Macronutrients are in fact that important.
We want you not to think that you can't be happy unless you're eating Pop Tarts. We want you to realize you can be happy, and achieve your goals, even if you eat [insert any food you want here].
It's not about getting people to eat Pop Tarts. It's about getting people to understand that they can eat any foods they like and still achieve their goals.
Do you ask what their goals are before you tell them how to reach them?0 -
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
This study showing that “reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.” - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
This study which found “diets differing substantially in glycemic load induce comparable long-term weight loss.”- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17413101
Results of Professor Mark Haub who lost 27lbs and improved markers of health while eating a diet consisting of Twinkies.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html (links within)
Flexible dieting greater success rate
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11707550
What is your point?0 -
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
Totally nonsensical post. Macronutrients are in fact that important.
We want you not to think that you can't be happy unless you're eating Pop Tarts. We want you to realize you can be happy, and achieve your goals, even if you eat [insert any food you want here].
It's not about getting people to eat Pop Tarts. It's about getting people to understand that they can eat any foods they like and still achieve their goals.
Do you ask what their goals are before you tell them how to reach them?
Absolutely. However, no matter what your goals are in terms of fitness or health, macronutrient intake is critically important. Whether your foods are "clean" or "healthy" or "approved" or whatever is not important.0 -
I fully support this because it clearly has made you feel better about having a strong start. I'm tired of people who say that you can't deprive yourself, that they still eat/drink what they want, etc.--that's great. They still want to put chemicals in their bodies. Lovely. You don't, and this was a good decision FOR YOU. (I don't know why people spend time in the forums proselytizing about what works for them, like everyone else's plan just won't work.) Even if you do decide that you're okay with eating junk once in awhile, it can be good to have it out of the house. Then you have to make a conscious decision and effort to go get it--making you think even more about it. Or even if you decide that you will restock the house and have it on hand, your recent purge is what felt right for you for now. That's all that matters--congrats on this step and good luck!0
-
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
Totally nonsensical post. Macronutrients are in fact that important.
We want you not to think that you can't be happy unless you're eating Pop Tarts. We want you to realize you can be happy, and achieve your goals, even if you eat [insert any food you want here].
It's not about getting people to eat Pop Tarts. It's about getting people to understand that they can eat any foods they like and still achieve their goals.
Do you ask what their goals are before you tell them how to reach them?
Absolutely. However, no matter what your goals are in terms of fitness or health, macronutrient intake is critically important. Whether your foods are "clean" or "healthy" or "approved" or whatever is not important.
Agree. So are micronutrients.0 -
I think people harp way too much on macronutrients. They project the view that macros are all that matter, even when they know it's not true. They defend their junk food vehemently, even though they know that most of their diet is not junk. They seem to want us to believe we can't be happy or maintain a healthy weight without drinking soda or eating Pop Tarts. It's all so friggin' ridiculous. Junk food is just junk food. It's not necessary.
This study showing that “reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.” - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
This study which found “diets differing substantially in glycemic load induce comparable long-term weight loss.”- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17413101
Results of Professor Mark Haub who lost 27lbs and improved markers of health while eating a diet consisting of Twinkies.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html (links within)
Flexible dieting greater success rate
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11707550
What is your point?
Deprevation and food demonizing is counter productive to the weight loss community as a whole.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions