Don't read this if brutal honesty (or profanity) offends you..
Options
Replies
-
herrspoons wrote: »This guy isn't being brutally honest. He's just blaming other people for his failure as a successful motivator."
You are aware of the phrase 'lead a horse to water', right?
He's absolutely spot on.
I'll lay money on the people getting butthurt about his article being the ones who will ultimately fail in their goals.
exactly!0 -
Love it! Thank you!0
-
#6 - I read it and think I'm not so bad, I don't complain... but the truth is I just do it in my head thinking about those "treats". Very good article. #6 "just to take a single step"... that'll run through my mind more.0
-
emily_stew wrote: »
What are you talking about? I'm pretty sure she has a gluten allergy/insensitivity. That's not even the same thing.
People who have a compelling reason to eliminate food can and do successfully eliminate all the time. That includes any compelling reason, including "I can't control myself around X food".
0 -
excellent0
-
Most people will fail at something at some point in their lives. Part of the whole being human, I'm afraid. It's what you do after failure that counts. We can take this author's approach and beat ourselves over the head w/ what we did wrong, *or* we can move on and vow to be better tomorrow. Tenacity>perfection.herrspoons wrote: »This guy isn't being brutally honest. He's just blaming other people for his failure as a successful motivator."
You are aware of the phrase 'lead a horse to water', right?
He's absolutely spot on.
I'll lay money on the people getting butthurt about his article being the ones who will ultimately fail in their goals.
And on that note, have a great day.
0 -
When does ultimately happen herrspoons? I've lost 42lb over 14 months with around 20 lb to go. I wouldn't have found that article very helpful if I'd read it on Day 1, and I don't find it very helpful now. Some people need kindness, encouragement, fun. I'm going to carry on as I have been, grumbling, complaining, bemoaning my health issues, commiserating with others, having the odd cry about it into a pint of wine, failing on many days but picking up and carrying on. I don't need that kind of silly rhetoric. Maybe that's the British spirit. And we are - just about - still a thinner nation.0
-
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
OMG, this^^^^0 -
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
I completely agree with you. I tried to fit it in. Doesn't work for me. Back to a "zero tolerance" attitude.
So because it doesn't work for YOU, nobody should do it?
I'm sorry but I fail to see how a 50 calorie piece of chocolate is a big deal in a 1200 calorie diet (or heck 200 calories of ice cream if someone has a 2000 calories diet). That guy is an idiot. Some people ONLY succeed BECAUSE of those treats. I wouldn't have lasted longer than his 8 weeks otherwise.
I don't think the poster is saying no one should do it. He/she is saying that there is a large group of members that seem to scour each newbie post/question about "junk food", pizza, "treats", etc. with the same answer: Just fit it in, they say. Why be miserable, they ask? You are probably going to fail if you deprive yourself, they quirp. Same ish everyday. Meanwhile, most of them are already in maintenance where their calories targets are MUCH higher than people in weight loss mode. And also, many of US who are striving to lose weight, gained it from eating such calorie dense items in the first place. The answer is that it should be up to the individual. If you can and want to eat that stuff, go ahead. If not, you don't have to and it's OK. No one should act as though they have the answer to others problems. People can say what has worked for them. But to ridicule and admonish others because they choose not to eat chocolate or pie or pizza (or whatever) is ridiculous. To each his own.0 -
He is a correct, obnoxious, self-righteous assbag. Unfortunately, his tone speaks much louder than his words.0
-
The article is preaching to the choir, but it's not going to reach those who actually "need" it. While some of it does ring true (e.g. #6), he makes it seem like it's either his way or you'll be a fat*** with a victim mentality all your life. That approach lacks balance and is helpful to no one.
Everyone has their own journey and there are different ways to be successful in achieving a caloric deficit for weight loss. It's a bit dismissive of people with real obstacles to weight loss that aren't necessarily in the "bedridden, paraplegic, or living in a war-torn country" category. There were various factors that led me to the point where I decided once and for all to lose weight - they were not "excuses," but they were reasons. Yet the choice to make the best of the hand I was dealt and work hard to lose weight was still my own. It took me getting my mind right, so to speak, and then discovering the right tools that actually worked for me so I could have success at weight loss. Knowing what has held you back, dealing with it, then making a change is not the same thing as having a victim mentality and being an ultimate failure at weight loss.
I still eat pizza, wings, donuts, nachos, etc. (not all the time mind you, but occasionally), but 1. they fit in my calorie goals, 2. I have found that to actually feel full, I have to eat less of those foods and more protein and veggies, and 3. the more I'm on this journey, the less I desire most of those foods anyway. I approach my daily nutritional allowance like game of Tetris - what do I really want, and what are the smarter choices that will actually fit in my daily allowance and allow me to feel satisfied? The lower my caloric target gets, the better my choices need to be, but it's about making permanent lifestyle changes, not just making abrupt and drastic changes cold turkey - human nature simply doesn't work like that.0 -
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
I completely agree with you. I tried to fit it in. Doesn't work for me. Back to a "zero tolerance" attitude.
So because it doesn't work for YOU, nobody should do it?
I'm sorry but I fail to see how a 50 calorie piece of chocolate is a big deal in a 1200 calorie diet (or heck 200 calories of ice cream if someone has a 2000 calories diet). That guy is an idiot. Some people ONLY succeed BECAUSE of those treats. I wouldn't have lasted longer than his 8 weeks otherwise.
I don't think the poster is saying no one should do it. He/she is saying that there is a large group of members that seem to scour each newbie post/question about "junk food", pizza, "treats", etc. with the same answer: Just fit it in, they say. Why be miserable, they ask? You are probably going to fail if you deprive yourself, they quirp. Same ish everyday. Meanwhile, most of them are already in maintenance where their calories targets are MUCH higher than people in weight loss mode. And also, many of US who are striving to lose weight, gained it from eating such calorie dense items in the first place. The answer is that it should be up to the individual. If you can and want to eat that stuff, go ahead. If not, you don't have to and it's OK. No one should act as though they have the answer to others problems. People can say what has worked for them. But to ridicule and admonish others because they choose not to eat chocolate or pie or pizza (or whatever) is ridiculous. To each his own.
I was talking about the author of that article, not the posters. People can do what they want. I just think the author is wrong to demonize food and say that treats should be a once in a while thing, because there is NOTHING wrong with a 50 calorie piece of chocolate even in a 1200 calorie diet. Heck, chocolate is good for you. Yet he calls them '*kitten*' and say that people fail because they have them every day. No. People fail because they eat too many of them every day. If I signed up with him and he expected me to have chocolate or cookies once a month, I'd be out of there way faster than the 30 seconds it would take him to judge me.0 -
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
OMG, this^^^^
Agreed0 -
Most people who are into "treating" themselves constantly are not having 50 calorie servings of chocolate.
0 -
When does ultimately happen herrspoons? I've lost 42lb over 14 months with around 20 lb to go. I wouldn't have found that article very helpful if I'd read it on Day 1, and I don't find it very helpful now. Some people need kindness, encouragement, fun. I'm going to carry on as I have been, grumbling, complaining, bemoaning my health issues, commiserating with others, having the odd cry about it into a pint of wine, failing on many days but picking up and carrying on. I don't need that kind of silly rhetoric. Maybe that's the British spirit. And we are - just about - still a thinner nation.
I wouldn't have found it helpful when I started changing things and losing weight, but I find it helpful now. When I started and had over 100 pounds to lose, I might have cried when I left after our first meeting. I don't agree with the treating myself once a month if the 50 calorie piece of chocolate is a treat, but I sure could cut down on the treats now. I lost 100 plus pounds plus almost 5 years ago now, but still haven't hit my goal. Hearing these things now is helpful to me because I have gotten comfortable and need to stop treating myself so much and not giving up the things that get in my way.
I don't think I will ever just treat myself once a month though. I like my beer too much and life is too short...I have to keep some sort of balance.0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »Most people who are into "treating" themselves constantly are not having 50 calorie servings of chocolate.
A lot have 200 calorie treats, sure, but with a goal of even 1800 calories, what's wrong with that? The guy is assuming that people who eat too many 'treats' are doomed to fail. Yet most of the people you see here who talk about having treats most days have healthy weights.
It's funny too... I mean, who is he to categorize things as treats? What's a 'treat' anyway? Some people will consider a PB&J sandwich a treat. Is it? And wine... seriously? He's talking about how people ate 100 years ago, well where I come from, I'm quite sure they drank wine quite regularly. And ate cake (or at least muffins, but heck, what's the difference?). And cookies. But according to him, those are 'treats'? Totally ridiculous argument. Basically, if it tastes good, we shouldn't have it? Sorry but F that *kitten*.
0 -
He wasn't nearly as harsh as I expected from the title.0
-
I am talking about the kind of people who insist on eating several very unheathy meals out (places like CPK, Cheesecake factory) every week because they feel like they somehow deserve it or NEED it. If it works for you, that's one thing...but if you can't lose or can't keep the weight off, the ridiculous indulgences have to go at some point.
I don't eat anything that doesn't taste good, but I don't eat crap either. It doesn't work for my weight loss and it doesn't fit in with my long-term health goals. I don't need to be able to eat junk in order to be social or enjoy my life. There are all kinds of rewards and things you can do to be nice to yourself which don't involve food at all.
0 -
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
Oh and btw - I'm laughing at the irony here. Are people really that offended that some people can actually eat what they want in moderation and still lose weight, that they applaud anyone saying that people shouldn't have treats regularly? Is it jealousy or something?
I mean, I sure can't fit most fast food meals in my calories either (mostly because I'm never going to be satisfied with a small 1000 calorie serving, and because I don't always have moderation under control either), but I'm not going to tell people that they shouldn't eat that stuff, if it's working out for them. And I'm sure not going to quote people and say that I agree with them when they said that people shouldn't have treats within their calories.
0 -
Well I agree on the guy's take on what a treat is and that it's not to be consumed often. I wish more people on here did actually understand that rather than advocating regular consumption of junk and fast food "because you can fit it in your calories" (which many of us can NOT, if we plan to eat more than once a day.... not that I want to in the first place. I cook better than the McD's.)
Oh and btw - I'm laughing at the irony here. Are people really that offended that some people can actually eat what they want in moderation and still lose weight, that they applaud anyone saying that people shouldn't have treats regularly? Is it jealousy or something?
I mean, I sure can't fit most fast food meals in my calories either (mostly because I'm never going to be satisfied with a small 1000 calorie serving, and because I don't always have moderation under control either), but I'm not going to tell people that they shouldn't eat that stuff, if it's working out for them. And I'm sure not going to quote people and say that I agree with them when they said that people shouldn't have treats within their calories.
Yep, their envious passive aggressive posts are a dead giveaway.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 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
- 997 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions