Stupid Stupid Question....

Options
2»

Replies

  • heathersmilez
    heathersmilez Posts: 2,579 Member
    Options
    If weight loss is your only goal then YES, a calories is a calorie. Check out the article about the man who lost 30lbs on a twinkie diet

    For overall health the banana is obviously preferred because of less sugar, potassium and other nutrients that are good for your body. Of course the ice cream has calcium so feel free to switch it up to not be on a “diet”. Have a banana one day for dessert and ice cream the next.
  • dls06
    dls06 Posts: 6,774 Member
    Options
    One is natural and one is processed, you decide. Depends what you think about the subject of processed foods.
  • jojoworks
    jojoworks Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    to echo others: good question

    personal philosophies seem to be trending for responses

    so here's mine: if I'm going to limit the number of calories I eat in a day I am going to make each of those calories be as nutritionally dense as possible in order to support my body's ability to function well.

    good luck and happy eating!
  • Behavior_Modification
    Behavior_Modification Posts: 24,482 Member
    Options
    This is similar to "edible oil topping" as it's called in the baking industry. That disgusting non-dairy whipped topping that leaves a film of oil on the roof of your mouth.

    Mmmm. Film. Tasty Film. :wink:
  • liagarden
    liagarden Posts: 54
    Options
    Amen. People don't think about glycemic levels and the damage insulin does to your body (inflammation, which, in the arteries, is what causes fat to stick, called plaque. Arteries are smooth inside and cholesterol is always in your blood, going out of the body, unless you have inflammation)
  • Mommyof3texans
    Mommyof3texans Posts: 347
    Options
    It's not a stupid question first of all. Mathmatically speaking, it doesn't make a difference but even aside from the obvious nutrient difference our bodies behave differently depending on the types of calories we put in. Certain foods have a greater effect on fat loss than others and some will have the opposite effect.
  • liagarden
    liagarden Posts: 54
    Options
    I don't believe that. Can you cite the study? Over what period of time? Look what happened in "Super-size Me" and that was only 30 days.
  • busub
    busub Posts: 58
    Options
    a professor of nutrition asked the same question and went on a twinkie diet
    ate 1800 kcals a day mostly in twinkies and supplemented with vitamins and veg
    he lost 27lb his good fats incresaed by 20% and bad fats decreased by 20%
    make of that what you will

    This is a manipulation of the truth for the sole purpose of sensationalism. He didn't eat ONLY twinkies or junk, he also had protein supplements, vitamin supplements, and vegetables. So first, this proves nothing. Second, he only did this for 10 weeks, I.E. 2 and a half months. A short period of time for a human to be on a food source, not significant enough to outline long term health changes. Third, we don't know what his diet was like before, who's to say he wasn't already eating these types of foods before hand, and just slightly increased the amount, it wouldn't surprise me. He was at 33.5% body fat when he started the experiment, for men (women are different), that's well into the obese category, so he obviously wasn't being healthy (side note: for a nutrition professor to be at 33.5% body fat is horrifying IMHO, how can you presume to teach others about nutrition and/or health and be living this unhealthy? That's like an active alcoholic mediating an AA class.), and last, this was barely an experiment at all, no control group, no outside observer dictating the study, very little follow up and pre-test methodology...etc.

    Guys, I implore you to be very cautious in perpetuating these kind of stories, if you're going to do it, do the research first and give all sides to the story, don't just say "a nutrition professor ate twinkies for 10 weeks and lost 30 lbs" or what ever. Heck, I could amputate my leg and lose 40 lbs, that doesn't make it GOOD for me. That's all I'm saying.



    Alcoholics do mediate AA meetings. Just an FYI.

    As far as I know, fat has no bearing on knowledge (regarding the overweight nutritionist comment). A doctor who smokes still has some credibility, no? Lighten up, I think his response was meant to be taken tongue in cheek. I hardly think anyone would truly try a twinkie diet.
  • jojoworks
    jojoworks Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    a professor of nutrition asked the same question and went on a twinkie diet
    ate 1800 kcals a day mostly in twinkies and supplemented with vitamins and veg
    he lost 27lb his good fats incresaed by 20% and bad fats decreased by 20%
    make of that what you will

    This is a manipulation of the truth for the sole purpose of sensationalism. He didn't eat ONLY twinkies or junk, he also had protein supplements, vitamin supplements, and vegetables. So first, this proves nothing. Second, he only did this for 10 weeks, I.E. 2 and a half months. A short period of time for a human to be on a food source, not significant enough to outline long term health changes. Third, we don't know what his diet was like before, who's to say he wasn't already eating these types of foods before hand, and just slightly increased the amount, it wouldn't surprise me. He was at 33.5% body fat when he started the experiment, for men (women are different), that's well into the obese category, so he obviously wasn't being healthy (side note: for a nutrition professor to be at 33.5% body fat is horrifying IMHO, how can you presume to teach others about nutrition and/or health and be living this unhealthy? That's like an active alcoholic mediating an AA class.), and last, this was barely an experiment at all, no control group, no outside observer dictating the study, very little follow up and pre-test methodology...etc.

    Guys, I implore you to be very cautious in perpetuating these kind of stories, if you're going to do it, do the research first and give all sides to the story, don't just say "a nutrition professor ate twinkies for 10 weeks and lost 30 lbs" or what ever. Heck, I could amputate my leg and lose 40 lbs, that doesn't make it GOOD for me. That's all I'm saying.



    Alcoholics do mediate AA meetings. Just an FYI.

    As far as I know, fat has no bearing on knowledge. Lighten up, I think his response was meant to be taken tongue in cheek. I hardly think anyone would truly try a twinkie diet.

    you'd be surprised how many people have quoted the twinkie diet as evidence that what you eat doesn't matter and that the calories in vs. calories out theory works and doesn't care what constitutes the calories.
  • bmontgomery87
    bmontgomery87 Posts: 1,260 Member
    Options
    for "weight loss" I'd say a calorie is a calorie for the most part.
    for "fat loss" it matters what you eat.

    Your body composition will change based on the amounts of certain macronutrtients you take in.
  • busub
    busub Posts: 58
    Options
    I actually agree with the sox fan (hard to admit from a mariner fan). Just correcting a couple false assumptions, and marvelling at the intensity of the response. To twinkie diet guy, I bet that professor was hungry as all heck for those 10 weeks.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Options
    ]



    Alcoholics do mediate AA meetings. Just an FYI.

    As far as I know, fat has no bearing on knowledge (regarding the overweight nutritionist comment). A doctor who smokes still has some credibility, no? Lighten up, I think his response was meant to be taken tongue in cheek. I hardly think anyone would truly try a twinkie diet.

    you'll note I said ACTIVE alcoholics I.E. people currently drinking alcohol who are alcoholics, I don't know many of those mediating meetings, I know they are ALL alcoholics, but without having the actual number, I'm gonna guess that 99.9% of the ones that run the meetings aren't currently drinking regularly.
    A doctor who smokes is not a relevant comparison, now if you said an ONCOLOGIST who smokes? Yeah, wouldn't put MY faith in him/her, would you? That's a very relevant comparison. I mean do you really think that it's not relevant to practice what you preach? I didn't say the nutrition professor didn't have the knowledge.

    you said to lighten up, but in this particular arena, I just won't. If it's tongue in cheek, then it's in bad taste IMHO. These kind of myths run rampant and whether you want to believe it or not people BELIEVE them. The only way to stop them is to refute these types of claims and show the real facts. I say get serious instead of lighten up, this stuff is important, and should not be taken lightly.
  • arosegeo
    arosegeo Posts: 254 Member
    Options
    there is also a difference in the way the food is broken down and sent through your body. I was watching The Doctors, and they did a test having a group of people eating x amount off calories in nuts and another group eating the same amount of calories in junk food and the ones in the second group gained weight here the first didnt
  • namrettik
    namrettik Posts: 127
    Options
    There is a difference. This long, but very interesting video, explains how having the wrong kind of sugar can seriously harm one's health.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM


    $10 says you'll lose more weight eating bananas than you would ice cream.
  • busub
    busub Posts: 58
    Options
    ]



    Alcoholics do mediate AA meetings. Just an FYI.

    As far as I know, fat has no bearing on knowledge (regarding the overweight nutritionist comment). A doctor who smokes still has some credibility, no? Lighten up, I think his response was meant to be taken tongue in cheek. I hardly think anyone would truly try a twinkie diet.

    you'll note I said ACTIVE alcoholics I.E. people currently drinking alcohol who are alcoholics, I don't know many of those mediating meetings, I know they are ALL alcoholics, but without having the actual number, I'm gonna guess that 99.9% of the ones that run the meetings aren't currently drinking regularly.
    A doctor who smokes is not a relevant comparison, now if you said an ONCOLOGIST who smokes? Yeah, wouldn't put MY faith in him/her, would you? That's a very relevant comparison. I mean do you really think that it's not relevant to practice what you preach? I didn't say the nutrition professor didn't have the knowledge.

    you said to lighten up, but in this particular arena, I just won't. If it's tongue in cheek, then it's in bad taste IMHO. These kind of myths run rampant and whether you want to believe it or not people BELIEVE them. The only way to stop them is to refute these types of claims and show the real facts. I say get serious instead of lighten up, this stuff is important, and should not be taken lightly.

    Oncologist, Pulmonologist, Cardiologist... doesn't really matter if they smoked. They still went to 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of med school, x years of residency (depending on focus) and year to year continuing education credentialing. I'd still say their opionion mattered. I don't see a lot of smoking cardiologists recommending to smoke all you want.

    If someone truly believes they'll get healthy from eating twinkies and supplements let them have it. Their naivete is their issue, not mine. In fact, taking nutrition and fitness advice from anybody on an (mostly) anonymous message board is a crap shoot. It is up to the individual to do their own research on what's appropriate or not. I've seen some very extreme views on this site (up to outright defiance against the ADA). Some appear to make sense from the get go, but I sure as heck won't follow that advice until I've researched it thoroughly.

    Everybody's weight loss is their own journey, and bad taste or not, I viewed the post as tongue in cheek, especially when you note the picture he's chosen as his forum avatar.
  • busub
    busub Posts: 58
    Options
    BTW, I made the switch to cardiologist from oncologist as your risk of dying of heart disease is much greater than cancer for the average smoker. That is, if you want a more relevant comparison.
  • End6ame
    End6ame Posts: 903
    Options
    ]



    Alcoholics do mediate AA meetings. Just an FYI.

    As far as I know, fat has no bearing on knowledge (regarding the overweight nutritionist comment). A doctor who smokes still has some credibility, no? Lighten up, I think his response was meant to be taken tongue in cheek. I hardly think anyone would truly try a twinkie diet.

    you'll note I said ACTIVE alcoholics I.E. people currently drinking alcohol who are alcoholics, I don't know many of those mediating meetings, I know they are ALL alcoholics, but without having the actual number, I'm gonna guess that 99.9% of the ones that run the meetings aren't currently drinking regularly.
    A doctor who smokes is not a relevant comparison, now if you said an ONCOLOGIST who smokes? Yeah, wouldn't put MY faith in him/her, would you? That's a very relevant comparison. I mean do you really think that it's not relevant to practice what you preach? I didn't say the nutrition professor didn't have the knowledge.

    you said to lighten up, but in this particular arena, I just won't. If it's tongue in cheek, then it's in bad taste IMHO. These kind of myths run rampant and whether you want to believe it or not people BELIEVE them. The only way to stop them is to refute these types of claims and show the real facts. I say get serious instead of lighten up, this stuff is important, and should not be taken lightly.


    I couldn’t agree more. I think all professionals should practice what they preach. I wouldn’t trust a doctor that actively engaged in unhealthy practices, like smoking, alcoholism, etc… because it shows poor judgment regardless of their knowledge. If they are willing to exercise poor judgment in their own lives, how do I know they won’t with mine or my families.

Categories