Can I petition MFP users to use the terms "more ideal" and "less ideal" instead of good/bad foods?

Why is any label necessary?

Packerjohn wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Tell it like it is. Good for you or crappy for you.

Well, we are telling it like it is. Very rarely are foods "crappy for you" because they come as a part of an overall diet. If you eat nothing but celery, which is supposed to be "good for you" it becomes "crappy for you". Unless the food is mouldy or you have some kind of allergy the "crappy" label rarely applies.

So cookies, chips, pop, etc aren't crappy?

So really the argument becomes "are foods that don't contribute lots of micronutrients and have lots of calories bad or 'crappy' always?" I don't see why, as there are certainly circumstances where micros are reasonably met and people might actually have a need for more calories or be able to fit in more calories of enjoyable food. Thinking of all food that's not strictly utilitarian for micros or as low calorie as possible seems screwed up to me. So when we have pie on Thanksgiving that's not a celebration of your blessings and family and a time for love and togetherness and all that, but simply indulging in "crap"? It really seems like a messed up and unhelpful way to think of food to me. Why are some so wedded to such terminology?

Why not eat the extra calories in food that is good for you instead of crap?

(1) I don't define a homemade apple pie as crap. You've yet to give me a reason to do so.

(2) I eat the apple pie (well, a piece) on occasion because it tastes good.

(3) I don't think the apple pie is NOT good for me. It gives me calories and carbs I need, some okay fat and micronutrients. I'm not sure why it's worse for me than, say, a steak if I have my protein needs met.

(4) Depending on how restrictively you define "good for me," it might be hard to get adequate calories on only such foods (which goes bad to that 17 year old girl). But if I've met my micros, why would any food be especially better for me than another, beyond how it makes me feel?

Don't go dragging up the food as celebration garbage. Sure there is nothing wrong with having a piece of pie on Thanksgiving, just as there is nothing wrong with skipping it. You can still spend time with family and celebrate your blessings.

If there's nothing wrong with it, why are you saying it's the equivalent of "eating crap"? That we eat food for pleasure, among other things, and as part of social events is not irrelevant at all. I take pride in making a good pie that people will enjoy, it's a skill I worked on. I like it if people are happy when they eat it. That doesn't mean it bothers me if people choose not to eat it because it doesn't fit in their diets (I really don't care, I do the same sometimes). But I don't agree it's "crap."

Acknowledge that nutritionally sparse foods are crappy for you and if they are used, they should be seldom used, not as a way to fill in daily calorie needs.

Why are they crappy for me? I simply think that's false. Should they replace foods that will fulfill your nutritional needs? Of course not, but no one is saying otherwise. Most people have room in their diets for both more and less nutritionally dense foods, however, and diversity is also important. (Cheese isn't that nutritionally dense, but having some fat and protein isn't a bad thing and many find it filling. I just find it really tasty. So I eat it, although somewhat sparingly.)

tincanonastring wrote: »

HardcoreP0rk wrote: »

tincanonastring wrote: »

Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?

Can you just release yourself of the need to feel in any way impacted by someone else's value statements about food?

Because a value statement about a food that I eat is a value statement about my diet, even if that's not the intent of the person making the statement. I, personally, don't give a flying *kitten* because I'm gonna eat whatever I want and anyone who has something to say about it can kindly *kitten* right off, but for a lurker with an eating disorder, they don't need to be constantly reading that something they have successfully incorporated into their diet to aid in their recovery is "bad."

This is such an important statement! I don't consider myself to have an ED per se (maybe dabbled a bit along the way but don't feel I am dealing with any of that now) but my head spins when I hear 'good' vs. 'bad'.

I still buy into there being 2 groups of foods (I know it's purely psychological for me and something I have to break away from). It's an old thought pattern that was taught by WW in the past.

This is something I'm working on... here's a rather drastic example that in the back of my mind I still struggle with but it was so engrained back in the day.

I went to a couple WW meetings eons ago, I was young and just tagged along with my older sister, I might have been 15. I recall being told corn and peas are very bad foods, it had a huge impact on me. I believe what they were basing that on is the GI factor is higher on those veggies than others, so more sugars. Carrots are higher in sugar as well but that was not on their list back then. I think the word 'starchy' was a buzz word back then.

But to this day it lingers in my head even when I crack open a frozen bag of peas.
I want to break the habit and some of the statements in these types of threads do help, they are logical and make sense. But when the fights break out it's confusing to me and I have to get out of the thread.

Sorry for the length but I think this was a teaching moment for myself as I was typing it. lol

Acknowledge that nutritionally sparse foods are crappy for you and if they are used, they should be seldom used, not as a way to fill in daily calorie needs.

Why are they crappy for me? I simply think that's false. Should they replace foods that will fulfill your nutritional needs? Of course not, but no one is saying otherwise. Most people have room in their diets for both more and less nutritionally dense foods, however, and diversity is also important. (Cheese isn't that nutritionally dense, but having some fat and protein isn't a bad thing and many find it filling. I just find it really tasty. So I eat it, although somewhat sparingly.)[/quote]

Sorry, here is the response
A race car will run on gas from the convenient store, but not very well. Runs much better on racing fuel. Why fill your extra calories with junk when good, nutritionally dense food is available? Maybe a bit here and there, but not on a daily basis.

MrM27 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Acknowledge that nutritionally sparse foods are crappy for you and if they are used, they should be seldom used, not as a way to fill in daily calorie needs.

Why are they crappy for me? I simply think that's false. Should they replace foods that will fulfill your nutritional needs? Of course not, but no one is saying otherwise. Most people have room in their diets for both more and less nutritionally dense foods, however, and diversity is also important. (Cheese isn't that nutritionally dense, but having some fat and protein isn't a bad thing and many find it filling. I just find it really tasty. So I eat it, although somewhat sparingly.)

Sorry, here is the response
A race car will run on gas from the convenient store, but not very well. Runs much better on racing fuel. Why fill your extra calories with junk when good, nutritionally dense food is available? Maybe a bit here and there, but not on a daily basis.

If eat a well rounded diet that allows you to meet your nutritional requirements and have some discretionary calories left do you get extra credit for going above and beyond your requirements? Do you get extra healthy? If you fill those discretionary calories with something different did that now undo the nutritional markers you hit for for the day?[/quote]

What are you calling "requirements"? The CDC says men should get 56g of protein a day
http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyone/basics/protein.html

I think if you talk to most people that lift weights or train people that lift they will recommend more protein. I would suggest that eating protein with the "extra" calories would make you healthier than filling in the calories with Ding Dongs, Cheetos, etc.

OP, if people did what you suggest, the MFP hive mind would wither and die. Half the population is sustained on these debates alone. Whether or not these debates contain more or less ideal nutrition is beyond me, but it keeps them going.

Maybe we could put this whole thread into the "safety box." It would be safe and warm there and no one would be offended.