Fed Up Documentary
Options
Replies
-
SanteMulberry wrote: »
The "rules" of "calories in-calories out" work well for the majority of people in their youth (and who exercise). HOWEVER, it just doesn't work very well for the typical post-menopausal woman, because the reduced number of calories she needs to shrink her fat deposits results in malnutrition,
Funny, this 5 years post menopausal woman is doing just fine losing weight and fat deposits and I am healthier than I have been in years. I follow CICO with a touch of IIFYM to help me find the best way to distribute the calories in part of the equation.
I agree 100%. Not only am I post-menopausal, I lack a thyroid gland. So leave all of the metabolic arguments outside of the door. CICO is a universal law.for everyone.EOM.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »SnuggleSmacks wrote: »It's really sad to me that all these so-called "documentaries" and theories which point to an outside source (carbs, sugar, processed foods, meat, etc.) and blames that source for weight gain gets so many followers who are ready to embrace a crutch rather than take personal responsibility for their own actions. *sigh*
I agree with your point about blaming others...but your argument is like saying there is nothing wrong with heroin, and in fact it should be legal so people, who can moderate their heroin usage, can do so at their leisure.
Are you REALLY comparing heroin to sugar, and are you suggesting that sugar should be illegal because people can't control themselves around it? The absurdity!
Are you trying to argue that there's nothing wrong with sugar ?
yes, I believe we are.
over consumption of calories leads to obesity….
you can get 100% of your diet from sugar, be in a deficit, and lose weight. Just google the twinkie diet….
there are no essential nutrients in sugar.
Lol. None? It serves no benefit?
What benefit to your body does refined sugar have ?
Destroys your liver and teeth.
A quick source of energy?
Getting fat adapted freed me from needing a quick source of energy so no more lack of sugar crashes to deal with.
Cool, I will keep eating simple sugars and my body will still burn fat reserves as well
0 -
Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/09/health/beating-the-bulge-brazil-obesity/
What's it say in the black text box on the cover picture ?
I'll tell you..."access to processed foods".
I'm done debating this by the way. You believe what you want and I will do the same.
First of all, that link contradicts your other 'source'
"In 2012, around one in seven Brazilians were classed as obese. Globally, Brazil is far behind countries such as the United States and Mexico, where around a third of people are obese, but the concern is the rapid rate of weight gain. The country once vulnerable to malnutrition and the associated health impacts, such as impaired growth, is instead now vulnerable to obesity and resulting heart disease and diabetes. In 1975 just 19% of Brazilian men and 29% of Brazilian women were overweight: In 2014 those figures are now 54% and 48% respectively.""
Secondly, nice cherry picking
Thirdly, its a news article and does not show the food consumption statistics.
Fourthly, you actually probably did not cherry pick - you likely did not read the whole article - otherwise you would have used a different quote as access to processed foods =/= sugar consumption.
I'm not sure why that article was published considering your suggestion that there is not an obesity issue in Brazil. Can you explain this to me before I go to bed ?
Look at your chart, then read the article you posted.
Also, tell me where I said there was not one.Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
You were suggesting that there was no epidemic in Brazil.
When I think of processed food the first thing I think of is cereal... and what is most kids cereal packed with ?
No I was not.
Yeah, ok.
If many processed foods are high in refined sugars, and the obesity spike is linked to access to processed food then what would a person with common sense say about excessive refined sugar consumption ?
Booming your own comment? Lulz.0 -
Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/09/health/beating-the-bulge-brazil-obesity/
What's it say in the black text box on the cover picture ?
I'll tell you..."access to processed foods".
I'm done debating this by the way. You believe what you want and I will do the same.
First of all, that link contradicts your other 'source'
"In 2012, around one in seven Brazilians were classed as obese. Globally, Brazil is far behind countries such as the United States and Mexico, where around a third of people are obese, but the concern is the rapid rate of weight gain. The country once vulnerable to malnutrition and the associated health impacts, such as impaired growth, is instead now vulnerable to obesity and resulting heart disease and diabetes. In 1975 just 19% of Brazilian men and 29% of Brazilian women were overweight: In 2014 those figures are now 54% and 48% respectively.""
Secondly, nice cherry picking
Thirdly, its a news article and does not show the food consumption statistics.
Fourthly, you actually probably did not cherry pick - you likely did not read the whole article - otherwise you would have used a different quote as access to processed foods =/= sugar consumption.
I'm not sure why that article was published considering your suggestion that there is not an obesity issue in Brazil. Can you explain this to me before I go to bed ?
Look at your chart, then read the article you posted.
Also, tell me where I said there was not one.Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
You were suggesting that there was no epidemic in Brazil.
When I think of processed food the first thing I think of is cereal... and what is most kids cereal packed with ?
No I was not.
Yeah, ok.
If many processed foods are high in refined sugars, and the obesity spike is linked to access to processed food then what would a person with common sense say about excessive refined sugar consumption ?
Please refer to my other comment re the fact that there are no stats shown or linked.
Also, you realize that processed foods are also often high in fats and non-refined sugar carbs right?
These people are getting fat because they're drinking all of these sugary drinks and eating all of those crappy foods. Why can't you just admit that ?
So the Beverage Digest was wrong when they said we have a steady decrease in sugary drink consumption since 1998? Maybe 'these people' is a reference to folks prior to 1998?
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/soda-losing-grip-america/story?id=23151625
Hmmm, what else could it be?
0 -
SnuggleSmacks wrote: »It's really sad to me that all these so-called "documentaries" and theories which point to an outside source (carbs, sugar, processed foods, meat, etc.) and blames that source for weight gain gets so many followers who are ready to embrace a crutch rather than take personal responsibility for their own actions. *sigh*
I agree with your point about blaming others...but your argument is like saying there is nothing wrong with heroin, and in fact it should be legal so people, who can moderate their heroin usage, can do so at their leisure.
Are you REALLY comparing heroin to sugar, and are you suggesting that sugar should be illegal because people can't control themselves around it? The absurdity!
Are you trying to argue that there's nothing wrong with sugar ?
yes, I believe we are.
over consumption of calories leads to obesity….
you can get 100% of your diet from sugar, be in a deficit, and lose weight. Just google the twinkie diet….
there are no essential nutrients in sugar.
that has nothing to do with whether it is addictive or not ..
actually, the guy that did the twinkie diet lost weight and had better health markers….go figure…but you know, sugar...
We're talking sugar here... not specific foods that have other ingredients in them.
Refined sugar will spike your blood sugar and insulin level...has no fiber which will not make you full..like eating fruits will do.
Yes, any sugar (not just refined) without fiber will spike your blood sugar and insulin level. It also causes your blood sugar and insulin level to quickly go back down. Any sugar with fiber will slowly raise your blood sugar and insulin level, keep it at the higher level for a longer period of time, and slowly lower it. No. it doesn't go as high but it stay higher longer.
These two scenarios, with and without fiber, will give you the same average blood glucose level for the day. Neither is any better or worse than the other in how it affects the body (with the exception of T1 diabetics. Even T2 diabetics look at averages, not one single spike which is why the A1C is the main test). A high daily average will be bad for you and it doesn't matter how that average gets high.
0 -
Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/09/health/beating-the-bulge-brazil-obesity/
What's it say in the black text box on the cover picture ?
I'll tell you..."access to processed foods".
I'm done debating this by the way. You believe what you want and I will do the same.
First of all, that link contradicts your other 'source'
"In 2012, around one in seven Brazilians were classed as obese. Globally, Brazil is far behind countries such as the United States and Mexico, where around a third of people are obese, but the concern is the rapid rate of weight gain. The country once vulnerable to malnutrition and the associated health impacts, such as impaired growth, is instead now vulnerable to obesity and resulting heart disease and diabetes. In 1975 just 19% of Brazilian men and 29% of Brazilian women were overweight: In 2014 those figures are now 54% and 48% respectively.""
Secondly, nice cherry picking
Thirdly, its a news article and does not show the food consumption statistics.
Fourthly, you actually probably did not cherry pick - you likely did not read the whole article - otherwise you would have used a different quote as access to processed foods =/= sugar consumption.
I'm not sure why that article was published considering your suggestion that there is not an obesity issue in Brazil. Can you explain this to me before I go to bed ?
Look at your chart, then read the article you posted.
Also, tell me where I said there was not one.Wait...what happened to the insulin response and how sugar is responsible for the obesity 'epidemic' in Thailand and Brazil?
You were suggesting that there was no epidemic in Brazil.
When I think of processed food the first thing I think of is cereal... and what is most kids cereal packed with ?
No I was not.
Yeah, ok.
If many processed foods are high in refined sugars, and the obesity spike is linked to access to processed food then what would a person with common sense say about excessive refined sugar consumption ?
We can add post hoc (or cum hoc) ergo propter hoc to the the list.
Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, Saddam Hussein were all brutal dictators.
They all wore mustaches.
Therefore mustaches are associated with brutal dictatorship.
What does that say about anyone who wears a mustache?
(November must be brutal)
0 -
wow this thread exploded over night….lol0
-
...0
-
-
I don't get sugar crashes. Probably because my body uses sugar to do awesome things like this:
0 -
SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »Katie Couric is a visionary
LOLOLOLOL the comments are killing me, this one wins ^_^
*dead*
0 -
LiftAllThePizzas wrote: »I don't get sugar crashes. Probably because my body uses sugar to do awesome things like this:
That's what an addict would say.0 -
SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
I'm 34 and eat whatever I please, and I'm in the best shape of my life. I'm an anomaly too I guess?
Well, good for you! You are not a post-menopausal, obese women.
Quit moving the goalposts.
How is that "moving the goalposts"? I have always been discussing post-menopausal, obese women.
You've blamed everything but Obama for your weight gain. It's like playing whack-a-mole with your layered misinformation.
No, I blame my previous lack of information. Now I know how to be healthy. Do you really want to argue with my success?
Proof? I can show you a side-by-side of my success, but you first. And insinuating that younger folks are immune to CICO makes you look uninformed, even though you claim to be knowledgeable now. There's a saying that goes something like "a wise person speaks because they have something to say, fools speak because they have to say something."
I did not insinuate a thing and I most certainly did NOT say that "younger folks are immune to CICO". I find that remark somewhat unintelligible. Perhaps you were speaking of yourself in your aphorism?
Here ya goSanteMulberry wrote: »
Apparently, you are having some difficulty expressing yourself. What you seem to have meant to say is, "You must think that younger folks do not have to obey the rule of "calories in-calories out". But I did NOT say that. You, undoubtedly missed the subtlety of my remarks. I said that CICO operates well for many people--especially younger people. But, there is a significant problem in older people--particularly post-menopausal women, because the number of calories that supposedly make one be in "calorie deficit" are lower than what is typically thought (influenced by many factors--lean body mass, metabolism, sex hormones, etc) AND that the number of calories to put one in a REAL deficit ares smaller for most older women (and some older men) UNLESS a significant program of good nutrition and exercise is launched to build up lean body mass and increase metabolism.
0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »It just occurred to me that it's very troubling that you have over 3,000 posts on the forums. It doesn't seem like you really know what you're talking about at all and to think you've spread that much misinformation is kind of scary...
Now, I have the information that it took to make me successful. You can argue with it but it makes little sense to argue with my success and what I attribute it to. Many of you are apparently incensed for some reason that I cannot fathom. Is it because I don't adhere to your religion?
Pictures or it didn't happen.
Check with one of my MFP friends--they have been with me every step of the way.
I can't see your friends because your profile is only viewable by your friends. Try again.
I'll give you the names of some of them tomorrow--I have to leave now.
Why don't you just ask them to come onto this thread and plead your case for you?
Most of my MFP friends eschew the general forums because there are so many aggressive people here. I find it amusing to venture in here when I am bored.
They will sometimes peek in here when I am here and report laughing at some of the interchanges.
0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »
Once you hit menopause, I guess you lose the technological edge too.
Hey now. Don't lump all of us post-menopausal women together. Some of us are doing even better after the "change".
I have several ladies on my list who are kicking *kitten* in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. But they don't count apparently, because reasons.
All special snowflakes with high metabolisms and workout schedules that no one else wants to do/can do.
I am sincerely glad to hear that some women in their 60s are doing so well--but what would you describe as differing from me? CICO does work BUT (and this is a big exception) you must make certain that you are indeed in deficit, and there are many, many nutritional and exercise elements that influence calorie-burn. I cannot imagine why any of you have a problem with that.
0 -
thesupremeforce wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »SonicDeathMonkey80 wrote: »
Once you hit menopause, I guess you lose the technological edge too.
Hey now. Don't lump all of us post-menopausal women together. Some of us are doing even better after the "change".
I have several ladies on my list who are kicking *kitten* in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. But they don't count apparently, because reasons.
The reason is that she's obsessed with speaking for all post-menopausal women, even as she continues to insist that she's only speaking for herself. If they're not like her, it must be MAGIC (or aliens).
Why the hostility? I do not pretend to speak for all post-menopausal women and I am not one given to "obsessions". Why the insults? Ad hominems are the resort of those who have a weak response to opposing arguments.0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
What about MFP user Sarauk2sf? She's in her late 40's and has managed to lose weight and recomp her body while including (in moderation) full fat items like ice cream, dairy and such.
Not everyone can (or will) follow the type of regime that Sarauk follows. I have arthritis and must be very careful as to the type and amount of exercise that I do--but, within that parameter, I have made a drastic change in my health and appearance.
Which is a factor, but please do not assume that everyone else has your issues.
I do not. But many women do and I have compassion for those who are suffering because of a lack of information. When they have problems that are similar to mine, I try to give them advice that may help them to be successful.
0 -
SanteMulberry wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »SanteMulberry wrote: »
What about MFP user Sarauk2sf? She's in her late 40's and has managed to lose weight and recomp her body while including (in moderation) full fat items like ice cream, dairy and such.
Not everyone can (or will) follow the type of regime that Sarauk follows. I have arthritis and must be very careful as to the type and amount of exercise that I do--but, within that parameter, I have made a drastic change in my health and appearance.
Which is a factor, but please do not assume that everyone else has your issues.
I do not. But many women do and I have compassion for those who are suffering because of a lack of information. When they have problems that are similar to mine, I try to give them advice that may help them to be successful.
Are you insinuating that I do not?
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions