Foods aren't unhealthy, diets are.

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

Maybe I'm not trying to sell anyone anything?

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

Hey! You made it!!

I was beginning to think that your account was restricted only to making OP and that you weren't able to reply later in the threads. Glad to see that isn't the case.

Anyhow, welcome to a thread with a viewpoint that differs from yours. Feel free to jump right in and start pointing out where you disagree with what has been stated and why.

And welcome to the MFP forums after page one!

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

Ok, I don't even agree with OP, but WTF dude? Your threads are usually chock full o' nuts.

Nothing brings the MFP forums together like the mutual disgust of this guy.

(FWIW: I do agree with the OP, if that wasn't clear on page 1.)

Indeed. Cheers :drinker:

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

Ok, I don't even agree with OP, but WTF dude? Your threads are usually chock full o' nuts.

Nothing brings the MFP forums together like the mutual disgust of this guy.

(FWIW: I do agree with the OP, if that wasn't clear on page 1.)

Indeed. Cheers :drinker:

It's like if aliens attacked earth, the human race would band together to fight them. At least that's what movies and BIll Clinton have told me.



ETA: He can also derail a thread simply by showing up.

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

Whoa, wait a minute. You're replying to posts???? Maybe you can't try replying to the questions members have asked you on the tons of nonsense you keep posting everywhere? Why do you say, bro?

Nope. It looks like he just starts new threads so he can continue to not engage with anyone on any side.

A lot of people look at a single food and make quickly designate that food as either healthy or unhealthy. Their definitions range the gamut. Does it have a lot of sugar or better yet added sugar? Does it have a lot of fat? Is it calorically dense while simultaneously nutrient sparse? Is it processed? Does it contain more than five ingredients? The list goes on.

If those criteria define a food as unhealthy, that would mean that if you eat it, you will be unhealthy. After all, if it's unhealthy wouldn't it, by the nature of its definition, make the person that eats it unhealthy? That doesn't seem to be the case. With the exception of individuals with medical reasons to avoid certain foods, people are able to eat those foods while maintaining a clean bill of health immediately after consumption, a day after consumption, a week after consumption, a year after consumption and even a decade after consumption.

'But if they eat enough of it, they'll be unhealthy!' you say. In a sense, that's true and leads me to my final point.

If a person eats nothing but pop tarts, his diet (the sum total of foods he consumes over a period of time) will not be healthy. The same can be said for any food, even foods that are classically seen as healthy. Take broccoli for example. No one ever claims that broccoli is an unhealthy food. It's filled with vitamins and minerals that the human body can use to help it function properly. However, a diet that consisted of nothing but broccoli would be unhealthy because it alone cannot support the human body and its needs.

It's the diet as whole that matters, the sum of its parts, not parts by themselves. It's myopic to look at single foods and put a health label on it. It's the bigger picture that has to be the focus if health is goal. A diet that satisfies the bodies needs for calories (neither too far over nor too far under), protein, carbs, fats and the vital micro nutrients is healthy whether it contains the occasional processed, sugar added chocolate chip cookie or not.

Healthy diets make healthy people, not healthy foods.

I think it all depends on how you look at it. Yes, eating an unhealthy food does not make you unhealthy, immediately or later. But when you talk about healthy and unhealthy diets, it's not just the sum of the parts but the parts themselves that matter as well. Yes, you can have too much of a good thing - too much healthy food or only some types of healthy food won't make you healthy. But too much unhealthy food, even a wide variety of unhealthy food, won't make you healthy either. You need healthy food to make you healthy (which isn't to say you need ONLY healthy food to make you healthy). To my way of thinking, a healthy diet means you eat primarily healthy foods - there's room for unhealthy foods to be enjoyed without negatively affecting your health but, in my opinion, there's no way to make a healthy diet out of primarily unhealthy foods. So saying healthy foods don't make healthy people is kind of wrong, since the healthy diet you speak of is composed primarily out of healthy foods.

For me, deciding how healthy or unhealthy something is (I see it more as a spectrum that a binary healthy or unhealthy) helps me decide how much of a focus it should get in my diet. The healthier it is the more often I should and can eat it; the less healthy, the less often I can or should eat it. That doesn't mean never necessarily, though obviously there are some foods I personally choose never to eat, but it does mean I'm not going to be basing a huge amount of my diet on eating that food.

It's all about how you look at it. If you view calling a food unhealthy as meaning you automatically become unhealthy eating it, then yes, those labels aren't helpful. But if you think, similarly to how I do, that healthy and unhealthy are simply labels to help guide you in deciding how prominent a food should be in your diet, then I think those labels are perfectly helpful.

Normally, I don't reply to many posts, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???

A reply.

We are all witnesses. This day will live on forever.

There ARE foods that are healthy and unhealthy; let's not kid ourselves about that. Yes, it would be unhealthy to consume nothing but broccoli 24/7, but consumed in moderation it is healthy. The same cannot be said about a bowl of sugar. That said, I have dessert every day and wholeheartedly accept the fact that while my Magnum Dark Chocolate bar may be empty calories, I enjoy every bite.

It's all about how you look at it. If you view calling a food unhealthy as meaning you automatically become unhealthy eating it, then yes, those labels aren't helpful. But if you think, similarly to how I do, that healthy and unhealthy are simply labels to help guide you in deciding how prominent a food should be in your diet, then I think those labels are perfectly helpful.

Spot on.

Would you consider your diet healthy despite the empty calorie desserts you eat everyday? If the answer is yes, then you proved my point. If you really think those foods are unhealthy, why would you eat them everyday?

If a person eats foin ods throughout a specific timeframe that meet their macros, micros, and calorie goals, then a bowl of sugar is not unhealthy. It will likely be a small bowl since a big bowl would crowd out nutrients but, like your desserts, it won't make your diet or you unhealthy.

portion size is key. That's the thing about "unhealthy" foods though. They are usually calorie dense bombs in small packages and they can easily unbalance your diet if your not careful. 6 cups of broccoli would have the same amount of calories as your average 150 cal 1/2 cup of icecream. Which would be easier to swallow in a couple bites lol.

With these subjects of healthy food verses non-healthy foods it seems people get too focused on the small details and do not look at the big picture as a whole. It is not rocket science that some foods are more nutritionally dense than others, but even if you eat nothing but "healthy" foods all day while sitting on your duff doing nothing you can still find yourself fat and out of shape. If you want to sit on the couch all day while watching television and eating junk food you will not get over weight as long as you do not exceed your caloric needs which would be very low.

It also seems people get too hung up on the only way to be healthy is to be skinny. There are plenty of unhealthy skinny folks out there. And being over weight does not necessarily mean you are not healthy. Sumo wrestlers would be a prime example.

It seems that every few years there is an announcement of some food which is now deemed bad and you should avoid. Eggs would be an example because of high cholesterol content. Now people realize that consuming cholesterol has little to do with your body producing it. Coffee was deemed to be bad several years ago, not we are told it is a good anti-oxidant and you can find coffee shops everywhere. I eat 4-6 eggs a day and my cholesterol level runs at about 100.

I would venture to say the reality for most people is it is not necessarily that they have been consuming un-healthy food which made them fat and out of shape but more that they have made it a life time habit to over estimate how active they are and under estimate just how much they consume. I began MFP not because I felt out of shape. I go to my doctor yearly for physicals and blood work and my blood lab work has always come back exceptionally well despite a crap diet and my blood pressure has always ran at about 112/69. I was a runner for several years and then transitioned into power lifting. On my last physical they found my blood sugar to be high so I went back a month later for another fasted lab work up and it was still high. Being as diabetes runs on both sides of my family I decided it would be best if I get ahead of it and begin watching my carb intake. While I knew I consumed a lot of carbs, I was floored when I began tracking them and discovered just how many I was consuming. Other than a pre-diabetic concern and weighing in at 240+ pounds at 5' 7'', I have no health problems at 50 years old. And have ate all these so called un healthy foods all my life. Not getting up and moving often enough is more of a risk than eating a daily pack of Pop Tarts.