Bread??

18911131417

Replies

  • nancyjay__
    nancyjay__ Posts: 310 Member
    Since this thread I've read a bunch of articles some broscience some from reputable researchers about how bread is not good for a weight loss diet and they all tiptoe around the question. I've read that bread is higher in calories than another food of the same volume or weight ive read by cutting out the bread you cut out the margarine butters jelly etc. But none of them said that by not eating a bread slice of 80 calories and instead eating oatmeal of 80 calories you will lose more weight.

    Bazinga*
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited April 2015
    The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??

    We are having a conversation, on things that we may (or may not, it's unclear at this point, as maidentl has pointed out) have different opinions, and on which there is actual factual information.

    I don't think people are being ridiculed, and I find it frustrating that some seem to think that disagreeing, even on factual matters, is somehow impolite or improper. I would find these forums tedious and useless in the extreme if all we did was validate every opinion or thing someone read on the internet or in a women's mag or heard from some bodybuilder at the gym.

    Sure, there's a mix of information--some hard information that should be supported (and can be)--that bread calories aren't somehow more "fattening" than other calories is one of those; some "this is what worked for me," and some support/encouragement. But the latter alone isn't the only good use of the forum, especially not boards like "Food and Nutrition" but also in "General Weight Loss Help" when someone asks whether bread is something that is inconsistent with weight loss.

    Again, whatever happened to the idea that being able to defend an opinion is a good and important thing? That being challenged and hearing disagreement is part of how we sort through competing information and let the good and correct ideas ultimately win out over the bad? Obviously, the first amendment doesn't apply here, but these assertions that it's mean to disagree with people always makes me think of those who see speech something to be protected from, rather than something to encourage, and makes me sad.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    You said my weight would not be affected the next day, I said it would, and it was.

    No, she did not say that.
  • donjtomasco
    donjtomasco Posts: 787 Member
    /\ /\ /\ - that, what lemurcat12 said. spot on.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,878 Member
    /\ /\ /\ - that, what lemurcat12 said. spot on.

    Exactly right. Nobody said your weight wouldn't be affected the next day. What was actually said was that you probably would experience temporary water weight gain after eating a high sodium meal.
  • donjtomasco
    donjtomasco Posts: 787 Member
    well, not the last one, the long one just before. :) and yes, she did say that, maybe not "word for word" but it is what she said and meant. but i guess we all interpret and hear what we want and need to interpret and hear. which is why i try to find out as close to possible exactly what someone is trying to say before i disagree with them. otherwise, why disagree with a bunch of grey area and vagueness. I got a very simple answer from her and my results proved me correct and her not correct, "JUST" on that one point, and NOT on any global scale. Don't over judge and over analyse and globalize a very simple thing that I have done. It was very concise and precise and I clearly proved "JUST ONE POINT" whether anyone agrees with the point or not, or whether anyone thinks my "PERSONAL" experiment yesterday was "DENSE" or "STUPID" or whatever adjective has been chosen to call me.

    I don't think I can be any clearer without getting this down to a sub kindergarden level. It was not and is not scientific. It was just a personal experiment to test what would happen if I ate bread, fried food, and other food that I have excluded in order to lose weight since January 1. It proved that for me these foods need to be avoided. It does not mean that you or anyone else can't lose any amount of weight eating some of these foods, or ALL of these foods, I am sure some of you can. And it is a personal choice. Eating these foods at the "LEAST" slowed down my weight loss (which was the simple question posed to me), and at most "ADDED" weight. Whether it was water retention or pieces of fried oyster stuck in my digestive track along with the hot dog and popcorn and fried okra, or anything else, my weight was negatively affected. The other poster said my weight would NOT be negatively affected.

    Only after I have proven that "FOR ME" my weight was negatively affected, now there is the addition of "Well, it is water retention due to sodium". YES, NO KIDDIING!!! Genius comeback with that.

    Was my "WEIGHT" affected by the food I ate yesterday, within my daily calorie goals? YES. It is that simple. You can make it as complicated as you want to make yourself feel better. And that is fine with me. We are all here to discuss, learn, read, express opinions and debate it all, like some of you have so astutely commented to. And I think that this is simply all that is being done. :)
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,205 Member
    OK, really? Now you're just making things up. You were told multiple times yesterday before you weighed in this morning that your weight would be up due to water retention. It's absolutely ludicrous to say it was only claimed after the fact. It's right here in black and white, date and time stamped even. Come on! You never once acknowledged that any other element in your meal would contribute to this "weight gain." You have stated repeatedly that it's the bread. Your actual weight was not affected, you're just holding on to water and holding on to the mistaken belief that this has slowed you down somehow.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,878 Member
    well, not the last one, the long one just before. :) and yes, she did say that, maybe not "word for word" but it is what she said and meant. but i guess we all interpret and hear what we want and need to interpret and hear. which is why i try to find out as close to possible exactly what someone is trying to say before i disagree with them. otherwise, why disagree with a bunch of grey area and vagueness. I got a very simple answer from her and my results proved me correct and her not correct, "JUST" on that one point, and NOT on any global scale. Don't over judge and over analyse and globalize a very simple thing that I have done. It was very concise and precise and I clearly proved "JUST ONE POINT" whether anyone agrees with the point or not, or whether anyone thinks my "PERSONAL" experiment yesterday was "DENSE" or "STUPID" or whatever adjective has been chosen to call me.

    I don't think I can be any clearer without getting this down to a sub kindergarden level. It was not and is not scientific. It was just a personal experiment to test what would happen if I ate bread, fried food, and other food that I have excluded in order to lose weight since January 1. It proved that for me these foods need to be avoided. It does not mean that you or anyone else can't lose any amount of weight eating some of these foods, or ALL of these foods, I am sure some of you can. And it is a personal choice. Eating these foods at the "LEAST" slowed down my weight loss (which was the simple question posed to me), and at most "ADDED" weight. Whether it was water retention or pieces of fried oyster stuck in my digestive track along with the hot dog and popcorn and fried okra, or anything else, my weight was negatively affected. The other poster said my weight would NOT be negatively affected.

    Only after I have proven that "FOR ME" my weight was negatively affected, now there is the addition of "Well, it is water retention due to sodium". YES, NO KIDDIING!!! Genius comeback with that.

    Was my "WEIGHT" affected by the food I ate yesterday, within my daily calorie goals? YES. It is that simple. You can make it as complicated as you want to make yourself feel better. And that is fine with me. We are all here to discuss, learn, read, express opinions and debate it all, like some of you have so astutely commented to. And I think that this is simply all that is being done. :)

    You are not correctly determining what people wrote and what they mean.

    Nobody ever denied that eating a meal high in sodium would result in temporary water weight gain. In fact, after you announced your "study," some of the first comments were that you would probably have water weight gain the next day. This was not an addition. You simply ignored these comments yesterday.

    At issue was your statement that eating bread, in and of itself, would cause a stall in weight loss.
  • greenlizard72
    greenlizard72 Posts: 76 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    The bickering on this site gets old quickly. Don't we all have the same goal...to lose weight? Just because someone may have a different opinion does not mean they should be ridiculed. I don't think even the experts agree...so why don't we all agree that none of us are experts on healthy eating. If we were, would we really need this site??

    We are having a conversation, on things that we may (or may not, it's unclear at this point, as maidentl has pointed out) have different opinions, and on which there is actual factual information.

    I don't think people are being ridiculed, and I find it frustrating that some seem to think that disagreeing, even on factual matters, is somehow impolite or improper. I would find these forums tedious and useless in the extreme if all we did was validate every opinion or thing someone read on the internet or in a women's mag or heard from some bodybuilder at the gym.

    Sure, there's a mix of information--some hard information that should be supported (and can be)--that bread calories aren't somehow more "fattening" than other calories is one of those; some "this is what worked for me," and some support/encouragement. But the latter alone isn't the only good use of the forum, especially not boards like "Food and Nutrition" but also in "General Weight Loss Help" when someone asks whether bread is something that is inconsistent with weight loss.

    Again, whatever happened to the idea that being able to defend an opinion is a good and important thing? That being challenged and hearing disagreement is part of how we sort through competing information and let the good and correct ideas ultimately win out over the bad? Obviously, the first amendment doesn't apply here, but these assertions that it's mean to disagree with people always makes me think of those who see speech something to be protected from, rather than something to encourage, and makes me sad.

    I absolutely agree. I took some contrary feedback from this thread and used it to increase (and change) my understanding. It would be great if some people that have good information to spare wouldn't sprinkle it with derogatory comments, but that seems to be the nature of public forums. I take the good stuff no matter where it comes from and ignore bad stuff.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    It would be great if some people that have good information to spare wouldn't sprinkle it with derogatory comments, but that seems to be the nature of public forums. I take the good stuff no matter where it comes from and ignore bad stuff.

    This is a fair point, IMO, and I try to do the same.
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    well, not the last one, the long one just before. :) and yes, she did say that, maybe not "word for word" but it is what she said and meant. but i guess we all interpret and hear what we want and need to interpret and hear. which is why i try to find out as close to possible exactly what someone is trying to say before i disagree with them. otherwise, why disagree with a bunch of grey area and vagueness. I got a very simple answer from her and my results proved me correct and her not correct, "JUST" on that one point, and NOT on any global scale. Don't over judge and over analyse and globalize a very simple thing that I have done. It was very concise and precise and I clearly proved "JUST ONE POINT" whether anyone agrees with the point or not, or whether anyone thinks my "PERSONAL" experiment yesterday was "DENSE" or "STUPID" or whatever adjective has been chosen to call me.

    I don't think I can be any clearer without getting this down to a sub kindergarden level. It was not and is not scientific. It was just a personal experiment to test what would happen if I ate bread, fried food, and other food that I have excluded in order to lose weight since January 1. It proved that for me these foods need to be avoided. It does not mean that you or anyone else can't lose any amount of weight eating some of these foods, or ALL of these foods, I am sure some of you can. And it is a personal choice. Eating these foods at the "LEAST" slowed down my weight loss (which was the simple question posed to me), and at most "ADDED" weight. Whether it was water retention or pieces of fried oyster stuck in my digestive track along with the hot dog and popcorn and fried okra, or anything else, my weight was negatively affected. The other poster said my weight would NOT be negatively affected.

    Only after I have proven that "FOR ME" my weight was negatively affected, now there is the addition of "Well, it is water retention due to sodium". YES, NO KIDDIING!!! Genius comeback with that.

    Was my "WEIGHT" affected by the food I ate yesterday, within my daily calorie goals? YES. It is that simple. You can make it as complicated as you want to make yourself feel better. And that is fine with me. We are all here to discuss, learn, read, express opinions and debate it all, like some of you have so astutely commented to. And I think that this is simply all that is being done. :)

    You didn't prove anything you think you proved. What you did prove is that you don't know how human bodies works.

    And again, do you think you would have seen the same results eating only a piece or two of bread yesterday instead of a whole day of fried, breaded and salty foods? I've asked three times now.
  • Michelle4588
    Michelle4588 Posts: 271 Member
    My trainer suggested pumpernickel or sourdough. Manly isn't it about portion control and will power?
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,205 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    It would be great if some people that have good information to spare wouldn't sprinkle it with derogatory comments, but that seems to be the nature of public forums. I take the good stuff no matter where it comes from and ignore bad stuff.

    This is a fair point, IMO, and I try to do the same.

    I do try to stay civil, but you have to admit, even a saint would lose his patience with this thread. :laugh:

  • I don't believe all calories are created equal. But having said that I think that I would rather use something like swedish crisp bread for a lower count and a different carb level and use my calories more effectively for something more satisfying.
  • Flab2fitfi
    Flab2fitfi Posts: 1,349 Member
    Eat the bread and enjoy. I miss bread as i have coeliac disease.
  • donjtomasco
    donjtomasco Posts: 787 Member
    Maid, it was only after I said I would do this that others started complicating the issue, like they were somehow worried that I might actually prove my point to be correct. Go back and read the thread and you will see the timeline and how the positions changed once I said I would do exactly what I was told would produce NO weight fluxuations, since it is all about CICO and has nothing to do about WHAT YOU EAT. Sorry, you are you speaking without checking your facts, once again. If you are going to nitpic, then please accurately nitpic. This is exactly why I wanted to weed out all the grey area and find out exactly what the opinion was and prediction was about what my body would do and how it would perform. Pretty assumptive that people think that they know so much including how MY BODY will react to food eating behavior. This is called narcissism. I will call it what it is.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,878 Member
    edited April 2015
    Maid, it was only after I said I would do this that others started complicating the issue, like they were somehow worried that I might actually prove my point to be correct. Go back and read the thread and you will see the timeline and how the positions changed once I said I would do exactly what I was told would produce NO weight fluxuations, since it is all about CICO and has nothing to do about WHAT YOU EAT. Sorry, you are you speaking without checking your facts, once again. If you are going to nitpic, then please accurately nitpic. This is exactly why I wanted to weed out all the grey area and find out exactly what the opinion was and prediction was about what my body would do and how it would perform. Pretty assumptive that people think that they know so much including how MY BODY will react to food eating behavior. This is called narcissism. I will call it what it is.

    Nobody was ever worried that your poorly designed "study" would prove your point. As another person observed above, the only thing established is your faulty understanding of how the human body works.
  • cindyangotti
    cindyangotti Posts: 294 Member
    I very rarely eat bread because for me it's not worth the calories and doesn't keep me full. However, I do use 70 calorie wraps and sometimes use the rounds for sandwiches. BUT if you like bread you should have it.
This discussion has been closed.