Define "healthy" food...

Options
1235757

Replies

  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Options

    Personally, I don't believe in "bad" food, unless its rotten. I DO believe that as a responsible (for my own body) adult, I'm going to make conscientious choices to make sure I have a well balanced diet to meet my macronutrients. This WILL include some kind of treat daily.
    P.S. did someone say ice cream? cuz we need some brownies to go with that. boofspln98nd.jpeg
  • gothchiq
    gothchiq Posts: 4,598 Member
    Options
    Totally agree with colejkeene. That which s/he said is the same thing explained to me by my doctor and my nutritionist. I do tend to believe them, as it's their job to know what is healthy, rather than just going with whatever the most popular opinion on the MFP boards is. I only get 1200 cals a day so I am going to be quite careful as to what those consist of.
  • CloudyMao
    CloudyMao Posts: 258 Member
    edited January 2015
    Options
    colejkeene wrote: »
    colejkeene wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    This has been coming up a lot lately, so I thought that I would combine it all into one thread so that we can have some fun and dig into this one. A lot of people say "I do not want to eat junk" OR "I only eat healthy food", which then naturally sparks the question what is "healthy" food.

    My premise is that there is no "healthy" or "junk" food, there is just food that your body uses for energy, and that context of diet is what matters. Different combinations of foods will result in different results for each individuals diet.

    None of this addresses micronutrient requirements and nutrient density.

    A diet rich in processed/refined sugars, pre-packaged and prepared foods with large amounts of sodium, sugars and highly saturated fats and low in raw or lightly cooking vegetables, fruits, grains and lean proteins is unhealthy. Especially in the realm of micronutrients.
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    For the person that is concerned with strictly fast loss, then it may make sense to get more of their calories from less calorie dense foods like vegetables, and then mix in the ocassional ice cream, cookies, etc.

    For the person that is trying to maintain weight and has more calories to play with, they may be able to have a daily serving, or more than one serving, of their favorite treat, and consume more calorie dense foods.

    For the person that is bulking/adding weight, they may get 25%, or more, of their calories from calorie dense foods, like pizza, cookies, ice cream, etc, and may fill in as many as 500 calories, or more, to hit their goals.

    The quality of your calories is as important as the quantity. It seems disingenuous and a little naive to believe otherwise.

    You also use the term "occasional" (albeit spelled improperly) but if you're going to break down the definition of the word "healthy" then you have to do the same for "occasional". I have a friend that eats one serving of sweets once every two weeks. I have another that has 2-3 pieces of dark chocolate every night and a "cheat" day at the end of the week. Clearly they have different definitions of "occasional" and by the same measure different definitions of "healthy".
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Is any one strategy more healthy than the other? IMO the answer is no. Vegetables are not more inherently healthy than ice cream.

    So if I get 500 to 600 calories from ice cream and cookies to fill in my diet, does that make me less healthy than the person that is getting 75% of their calories from fish, rice, and vegetables?

    At the end of the day there is no "healthy" food and a diet composed of 100% "clean" food is no more healthy then a diet composed of 25% ice cream, cookies, pizza, etc….

    so feel free to disagree with me and give me a definition of "healthy"….

    "Vegetables are not more inherently healthy than ice cream." <-- possible the dumbest thing I've read in a very long time.

    I say again: quality and quantity are not equivalent.

    Calcium, iron, Vitamins A, D, K, E, etc. are naturally occurring parts of nutrition in whole, unprocessed foods. You aren't going to find those quality micronutrients in pizza, ice cream, funnel cakes, candy bars, soda, etc. And, even if you do get some micronutrients in the ingredients used to make those foods, you will also get a huge dose of sodium (implicated in high blood pressure), saturated fats (implicated in cardiovascular diseases) and sugar (which has a whole slew of diet related health issues attributed with it).

    A bonus: what sort of education or research do you have to assert this position? I'd love to know.

    Okay, I'll bite.

    What constitutes an unhealthy person? Weight? A medical condition? High blood pressure? Blood work?

    I'm genuinely curious. If we have a definition of healthy vs unhealthy foods, we must also have one for healthy vs unhealthy people.

    I feel like this gets a little more difficult and takes a lot more factors into consideration like genetics, broken or disfigured body parts, medical conditions that influence requirements for a variety of parts of nutrition.

    In this context I would say "healthy" is an average human body, that is capable of a full range of motion, that requires the recommended amounts of macro and micronutrients on a daily basis.

    I mean, a person with a broken leg, that cannot exercise, is going to require a different amount of calories than a person working on 45-60 minutes 4-5 days a week.

    It's difficult though. Each body is different, and medical conditions play a huge role.

    So if a person's diet is unhealthy, does it then follow that they will be unhealthy?

    It means that their risk of developing health conditions is increased, meaning a prolonged 'unhealthy'/imbalanced diet could potentially cause them to become unhealthy in the long term.
  • BigT555
    BigT555 Posts: 2,068 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    auddii wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    yopeeps025 wrote: »
    By definition of my nutrition book since I took a class at my college, healthy foods have more micro nutrients than the so call junk food "empty calories", foods with no micro nutrients, was what it was called in the book.

    OK - so if I hit my macros/micors and calorie goals for the day, but I got 500-600 calories from ice cream and cookies is that then not healthy? Because empty calories??? (whatever those are)

    This line alone shows just how little you actually know about what you're talking about.

    Please feel free to enlighten us.

    The point trying to be made is that you can only absorb so many micronutrients. If you eat a majority of nutrient dense food (or at least sufficient amounts), and fill the rest with pizza, chocolate, ice cream, or whatever, how is that bad.

    *And keep in mind that this thread is being argued by people who eat a hell of a lot more than 1200 calories a day. It's hard to fit in treats when you only eat a little every day. When your goal is 2000 calories or even 3500 calories, you can easily work in more calorie dense food and still get proper nutrition.

    "Empty calories (whatever that is)" was the line I was going at.

    The credibility of the original post was lost when the OP admitted she doesn't know what an empty calorie is.

    for the record I am a male…

    please feel free to explain what an empty calorie is..? I assume a calorie with zero units of energy…?

    No. An empty calorie is where you eat or drink a substance that has little to no nutritional value on a micronutrient level.

    Take 12 fl oz of Cola vs freshly squeezed Orange Juice for example. The orange juice contains 41mg of calcium, 0.74 mg of iron, 41mg of magnesium, 63mg of phosphorus, 744mg of potassium, 4mg of sodium, 0.19mg of zinc, 186mg of Vitamin C, 0.335mg of Thiamin, 0.112mg of Riboflavin, 1.488mg of Niacin, 0.149mg of Vitamin B-6, 112 ug of Folate, 37ug of Vitamin A, RAE, 744IU of Vitamin A, IU, 0.15mg of Vitamin E, and 0.4 ug of Vitamin K. That's all in 328 total calories.

    The Cola, on the other hand, contains 7 mg of Calcium, 0.07 mg of Iron, 41 mg of Phosphorus, 11mg of Potassium, 15mg of Sodium, 0.04 mg of Zinc, and absolutely nothing else. From 12 fl oz, that is basically nothing, for 152 calories. These are called empty calories. Calories you consume that have minimal nutritional significance, beyond the macro level.
    and OP was never seen again
  • martyqueen52
    martyqueen52 Posts: 1,120 Member
    edited January 2015
    Options
    However, I do believe "Healthy" foods are a little more important to a female who is expecting. I know my wife eats pretty "clean" since we found out we have a planned daughter on the way. She still gets occasional cravings for weird things that would make any IIFYM'ers skin crawl due to the combination. But, her meeting her micros above and beyond and staying away from unprocessed foods and sodium is way more important since she's growing a little human.

    This and if you have medical issues should only be the only reason to avoid "unclean" foods.
  • chivalryder
    chivalryder Posts: 4,391 Member
    Options
    BigT555 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    auddii wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    yopeeps025 wrote: »
    By definition of my nutrition book since I took a class at my college, healthy foods have more micro nutrients than the so call junk food "empty calories", foods with no micro nutrients, was what it was called in the book.

    OK - so if I hit my macros/micors and calorie goals for the day, but I got 500-600 calories from ice cream and cookies is that then not healthy? Because empty calories??? (whatever those are)

    This line alone shows just how little you actually know about what you're talking about.

    Please feel free to enlighten us.

    The point trying to be made is that you can only absorb so many micronutrients. If you eat a majority of nutrient dense food (or at least sufficient amounts), and fill the rest with pizza, chocolate, ice cream, or whatever, how is that bad.

    *And keep in mind that this thread is being argued by people who eat a hell of a lot more than 1200 calories a day. It's hard to fit in treats when you only eat a little every day. When your goal is 2000 calories or even 3500 calories, you can easily work in more calorie dense food and still get proper nutrition.

    "Empty calories (whatever that is)" was the line I was going at.

    The credibility of the original post was lost when the OP admitted she doesn't know what an empty calorie is.

    for the record I am a male…

    please feel free to explain what an empty calorie is..? I assume a calorie with zero units of energy…?

    No. An empty calorie is where you eat or drink a substance that has little to no nutritional value on a micronutrient level.

    Take 12 fl oz of Cola vs freshly squeezed Orange Juice for example. The orange juice contains 41mg of calcium, 0.74 mg of iron, 41mg of magnesium, 63mg of phosphorus, 744mg of potassium, 4mg of sodium, 0.19mg of zinc, 186mg of Vitamin C, 0.335mg of Thiamin, 0.112mg of Riboflavin, 1.488mg of Niacin, 0.149mg of Vitamin B-6, 112 ug of Folate, 37ug of Vitamin A, RAE, 744IU of Vitamin A, IU, 0.15mg of Vitamin E, and 0.4 ug of Vitamin K. That's all in 328 total calories.

    The Cola, on the other hand, contains 7 mg of Calcium, 0.07 mg of Iron, 41 mg of Phosphorus, 11mg of Potassium, 15mg of Sodium, 0.04 mg of Zinc, and absolutely nothing else. From 12 fl oz, that is basically nothing, for 152 calories. These are called empty calories. Calories you consume that have minimal nutritional significance, beyond the macro level.
    and OP was never seen again

    I suppose I should add that what I just explained there is a clear cut example of what is a "healthy" food and what is not a "healthy" food.

    Now, put that together into a 'diet' and you're not longer talking about what a singular healthy food is. You're talking about a diet. You can eat whatever the heck you want, but what you eat can, and will make a different physiologically. Mentally, if you need to eat the donut, then eat the freaking donut because it would be unhealthy to completely ignore your cravings all the time
  • fit4eva86
    fit4eva86 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    Was my response too good or too bland to deserve a response?

    :);)
  • Illini_Jim
    Illini_Jim Posts: 419 Member
    Options
    Healthy food is food that doesn’t have poison, feces or bugs in it and is not rife with bacteria that causes botulism, cholera or salmonella.
  • court_fritch26
    court_fritch26 Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    iyk8p0v1j59h.gif
  • jpaulie
    jpaulie Posts: 917 Member
    Options
    i would say a healthy diet consists of food that supplies you body with the nutrients it requires in a day. Veggies have fiber, ice cream does not.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    I suppose I should add that what I just explained there is a clear cut example of what is a "healthy" food and what is not a "healthy" food.

    Now, put that together into a 'diet' and you're not longer talking about what a singular healthy food is. You're talking about a diet. You can eat whatever the heck you want, but what you eat can, and will make a different physiologically. Mentally, if you need to eat the donut, then eat the freaking donut because it would be unhealthy to completely ignore your cravings all the time

    ^^^ I like this...

  • CloudyMao
    CloudyMao Posts: 258 Member
    Options
    Illini_Jim wrote: »
    Healthy food is food that doesn’t have poison, feces or bugs in it and is not rife with bacteria that causes botulism, cholera or salmonella.

    what've you got against bugs? Highly nutritious, think of the protein.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    jpaulie wrote: »
    i would say a healthy diet consists of food that supplies you body with the nutrients it requires in a day. Veggies have fiber, ice cream does not.

    Ice cream has protein, vitamin A and calcium...
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    J72FIT wrote: »
    jpaulie wrote: »
    i would say a healthy diet consists of food that supplies you body with the nutrients it requires in a day. Veggies have fiber, ice cream does not.

    Ice cream has protein, vitamin A and calcium...

    And fat. I was seriously low on my fat yesterday; I should have supplemented with ice cream, but I wasn't hungry. :sad:
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,214 Member
    Options
    Okay, I will be the one to give you the definition you want to debate. I define healthy food as nutrient dense foods, with limited amounts of salt, sugar and fat. Meaning vegetables, lean meats, fruits and whole grains. I define junk as nutrient sparse food with lots of salt sugar or fat. Meaning chips, cheezies, candy, donuts, onion rings etc.

    So you would consider avocado or nuts "healthy food"? Both are high in fat.

    Too funny, because these are the bad guys that are always jacking up my fat numbers! I keep avocado on the counter and I end up eating it pretty much daily. And almonds are my go to snack food.

    I try for more plant based fats, but I still try to moderate my overall fat intake. I can easily overdo it with nuts. Especially if they are salted, but even if they're not.

    So yes, definitely healthy foods, but there are times when I have to practice restraint.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    However, I do believe "Healthy" foods are a little more important to a female who is expecting. I know my wife eats pretty "clean" since we found out we have a planned daughter on the way. She still gets occasional cravings for weird things that would make any IIFYM'ers skin crawl due to the combination. But, her meeting her micros above and beyond and staying away from unprocessed foods and sodium is way more important since she's growing a little human.

    This and if you have medical issues should only be the only reason to avoid "unclean" foods.

    Or, personal preference. ;)
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    Options
    LutzMol wrote: »
    I think healthy and unhealthy foods have nothing to do with calories. It's the composition of the food that matters.

    I would say ice cream is definitely less healthy than a carrot - not because ice cream has more calories, but because its composition is inferior ... no vitamins, minerals, ...the kind of stuff your body depends on

    seriously- it has fat-carbs and minerals- and vitamins.

    what kind of weird space ice cream are you eating??
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    There's gotta be a reason why the national health centers recommend complex carbohydrates over simple ones. I would define complex carbohydrates as "healthier". The simple carbohydrates are "empty" because all they supply is that energy hit. No vitamin or mineral support. No fiber to clean the pipes. No extended energy. It's like picking a cheap battery over an energizer bunny.

    http://arnop.unimaas.nl/show.cgi?fid=2665

    I think this is correct when foods are looked at individually. But if a simple carb is eaten with another food that provides fiber and micronutrients (like beans and pasta) then the lack of nutrients becomes less of an issue.

    This is the difference between healthy foods and healthy diet. When someone says 'healthy food' it's usually outside the context of total diet.
  • lawlifehanna
    lawlifehanna Posts: 90 Member
    Options
    I'd define healthy as something that makes both body and mind of the eater function better. (Note, this includes mental functions, so if ice cream makes you happy and doesn't hurt your body, go for it). The same goes for working out. For example, jumping jacks might be great and healthy for many, but for some people with injuries they could only make things worse and thus be unhealthy.
  • prattiger65
    prattiger65 Posts: 1,657 Member
    Options
    BigT555 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    auddii wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    yopeeps025 wrote: »
    By definition of my nutrition book since I took a class at my college, healthy foods have more micro nutrients than the so call junk food "empty calories", foods with no micro nutrients, was what it was called in the book.

    OK - so if I hit my macros/micors and calorie goals for the day, but I got 500-600 calories from ice cream and cookies is that then not healthy? Because empty calories??? (whatever those are)

    This line alone shows just how little you actually know about what you're talking about.

    Please feel free to enlighten us.

    The point trying to be made is that you can only absorb so many micronutrients. If you eat a majority of nutrient dense food (or at least sufficient amounts), and fill the rest with pizza, chocolate, ice cream, or whatever, how is that bad.

    *And keep in mind that this thread is being argued by people who eat a hell of a lot more than 1200 calories a day. It's hard to fit in treats when you only eat a little every day. When your goal is 2000 calories or even 3500 calories, you can easily work in more calorie dense food and still get proper nutrition.

    "Empty calories (whatever that is)" was the line I was going at.

    The credibility of the original post was lost when the OP admitted she doesn't know what an empty calorie is.

    for the record I am a male…

    please feel free to explain what an empty calorie is..? I assume a calorie with zero units of energy…?

    No. An empty calorie is where you eat or drink a substance that has little to no nutritional value on a micronutrient level.

    Take 12 fl oz of Cola vs freshly squeezed Orange Juice for example. The orange juice contains 41mg of calcium, 0.74 mg of iron, 41mg of magnesium, 63mg of phosphorus, 744mg of potassium, 4mg of sodium, 0.19mg of zinc, 186mg of Vitamin C, 0.335mg of Thiamin, 0.112mg of Riboflavin, 1.488mg of Niacin, 0.149mg of Vitamin B-6, 112 ug of Folate, 37ug of Vitamin A, RAE, 744IU of Vitamin A, IU, 0.15mg of Vitamin E, and 0.4 ug of Vitamin K. That's all in 328 total calories.

    The Cola, on the other hand, contains 7 mg of Calcium, 0.07 mg of Iron, 41 mg of Phosphorus, 11mg of Potassium, 15mg of Sodium, 0.04 mg of Zinc, and absolutely nothing else. From 12 fl oz, that is basically nothing, for 152 calories. These are called empty calories. Calories you consume that have minimal nutritional significance, beyond the macro level.
    and OP was never seen again

    I suppose I should add that what I just explained there is a clear cut example of what is a "healthy" food and what is not a "healthy" food.

    Now, put that together into a 'diet' and you're not longer talking about what a singular healthy food is. You're talking about a diet. You can eat whatever the heck you want, but what you eat can, and will make a different physiologically. Mentally, if you need to eat the donut, then eat the freaking donut because it would be unhealthy to completely ignore your cravings all the time

    No, you didn't. The target is always moving and that is why you cant make this blanket statement. If I need those macros/micros that are in a donut to complete my diet, the donut is not unhealthy. If I however, have complete my macros/micros for the day/week/month, whatever your measure (another moving target) then ANYTHING I eat above that would be unhealthy by your definition. Genetics plays so much a larger role in health anyway. You can eat all the "healthy" food you want and I can eat donuts and if you are genetically predisposed to a health issue, you are more likely to be ill. I genuinely hate this argument. There are no unhealthy foods other than the ones that make you ill, like poison or allergy. And I still don't know what is an empty unit of heat is?????
This discussion has been closed.