I called oatmeal cookies unhealthy and I got blasted - why?
Replies
-
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Can't wait!SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Where can I sign up for the initiation? I'd like to be force fed ice cream- AND cake.
PS I had a cup cake for breakfast. #hatersgonnahate
Hey, a cupcake sounds pretty darned good to me!
<SLLrunner runs to check her diary to see if the calories and macros will fit today>0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Can't wait!SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Where can I sign up for the initiation? I'd like to be force fed ice cream- AND cake.
PS I had a cup cake for breakfast. #hatersgonnahate
Hey, a cupcake sounds pretty darned good to me!
<SLLrunner runs to check her diary to see if the calories and macros will fit today>
"IF IT FITS IT FITS>>>>> AND IT FITS"
the brofessor on bulking and IIFYM0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
I volunteer as tribute!!
0 -
wrong and wrongWorkInProgress909 wrote: ». No one finishes a salad with chicken and says I could really go for another one. Or even 1 portion of steak makes you too full to have or even crave another one.
I eat double chicken salad frequently- I eat a Lebanese salad- and it's SO good- I will ask for a second one.
and on the steak note? I go to Brazilian all you can eat meat at LEAST once a month- if not twice. And I have indeed gotten more steak after eating a big giant steak.
I don't even understand what you're trying to say here.
Damn you, now I want a double chicken salad! Broke people problems, man... :laugh:0 -
watched at cooking show where a tiny little bit of a woman ate a 72 oz prime rib steak on a dare and got her photo put on the i ate it all wall....omg...love the hummus commercial where dad says put it on MEAT that would make it taste good,, snicker,,, there are no bad or good foods...we are so blessed to have full shelves in our Kroger stores we could be in a bread line in Russia with l dime and that's your choice for the day...0
-
Literally, this is the only beer I need.
0 -
-
Boulevard Brewery did an Aztec Chocolate Imperial Stout ....0
-
Excuse me...this is a thread about oatmeal...
0 -
0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »Excuse me...this is a thread about oatmeal...
that one is yum too but doesn't compare to the chocolate stout in my opinion.
0 -
lol - I totally posted in the wrong thread....
my fault.
0 -
amyrebeccah wrote: »raelynnsmama52512 wrote: »
Chocolate stouts are AMAZING. Look for a Total Wine and more near you and don't be afraid to ask for a recommendation. If I may, also check them for vanilla porters. Either makes a great dessert.
Beer float. Just sayin...0 -
amyrebeccah wrote: »raelynnsmama52512 wrote: »
Chocolate stouts are AMAZING. Look for a Total Wine and more near you and don't be afraid to ask for a recommendation. If I may, also check them for vanilla porters. Either makes a great dessert.
Beer float. Just sayin...
Had one over the weekend...just sayin'...
0 -
amyrebeccah wrote: »raelynnsmama52512 wrote: »
Chocolate stouts are AMAZING. Look for a Total Wine and more near you and don't be afraid to ask for a recommendation. If I may, also check them for vanilla porters. Either makes a great dessert.
Beer float. Just sayin...
Had one over the weekend...just sayin'...
I feel like we need to hang out.0 -
Sorry for the thread derail. I got my "windows" mixed up. These meant to be posted in this thread...
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10237904/i-read-a-thread-about-oatmeal-cookies-but-i-want-to-talk-about-beer#latest
Accident on my part.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Can't wait!SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
Where can I sign up for the initiation? I'd like to be force fed ice cream- AND cake.
PS I had a cup cake for breakfast. #hatersgonnahate
Hey, a cupcake sounds pretty darned good to me!
<SLLrunner runs to check her diary to see if the calories and macros will fit today>
"IF IT FITS IT FITS>>>>> AND IT FITS"
the brofessor on bulking and IIFYM
Yes! You go girl!0 -
Sorry for the thread derail. I got my "windows" mixed up. These meant to be posted in this thread...
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10237904/i-read-a-thread-about-oatmeal-cookies-but-i-want-to-talk-about-beer#latest
Accident on my part.
Now, this is funny! Wrong thread....yet somehow it fits.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Excuse me...this is a thread about oatmeal...
king of beers. Samuel Smith is a legend.0 -
I hear that- I only get it when I work specifically the Moroccan place- so I get to eat for free. Part of the gig.raelynnsmama52512 wrote: »
wrong and wrongWorkInProgress909 wrote: ». No one finishes a salad with chicken and says I could really go for another one. Or even 1 portion of steak makes you too full to have or even crave another one.
I eat double chicken salad frequently- I eat a Lebanese salad- and it's SO good- I will ask for a second one.
and on the steak note? I go to Brazilian all you can eat meat at LEAST once a month- if not twice. And I have indeed gotten more steak after eating a big giant steak.
I don't even understand what you're trying to say here.
Damn you, now I want a double chicken salad! Broke people problems, man... :laugh: Otherwise I never get salad- to expensive!
But free food = delicious food!!!0 -
0
-
I am in!! That looks delicious!0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Eating hepatitis from the jar is unhealthy.
Non of the items mentioned (barring medical conditions or allergies) are detrimental to health.
Of course too much of the items mentioned is detrimental to health, just as too much of *anything* is.
Too much of celery and Broccoli would not be detrimental for anyone. A diet of regularly eating cookies would cause a difference in your health or weight. So there is a difference between these 2 food groups, they are not the same and it should be OK to acknowledge that.
Actually, if you ate them to exclusion of all other foods, it would be very unhealthy. So the point at which a food becomes unhealthy may differ, but again it's the extraneous factor and not the food itself that is unhealthy.
Brocolli and celery is just 2 examples, no one is going to eat them exclusively. There's a lot of vegetables, grains, meat that can go in your diet and it would be hard to overeat. At some point I can no longer have anymore chicken.. But cookies you can still eat without feeling too full but the total calories you ate will be too high compared to your salad and chicken that made you feel full.
But that's where this is getting confused. No one has ever said to eat nothing but cookies, or broccoli or celery. It's about fitting it in with what else you eat, therefore the food, in a vacuum, is not unhealthy, but the way you fit it into your daily and weekly goals may be.
My point wasn't that someone could be eating only cookies or only broccoli. My point is that one is high in calories even if you eat a small amount and might make you feel hungry later vs one that is low in calories you can eat more and it will make you feel full. If I add a cookie to my food diary I will end up feeling hungry later but those calories will be already used up and I won't be able to eat something else. You can eat a big portion of fruit and it will only be like 60 calories and make you full and healthy, meanwhile your small cookie is 100^ calories. How would you teach this to a child who hasn't developed self control yet .. If a child thinks both foods are healthy? You would have to differentiate between the 2 somehow and explain one is better than the other.
Yes, as I suggested in response to your other post you seem to be confusing calorie dense and unhealthy.
How I would explain it to anyone (and children aren't the audience on MFP, but I was able to grasp this as a child so I do not think it's that difficult) is that some foods are more calorie dense than others and some are more nutrient dense than others and that to have an overall healthy diet we need to consider a few things:
(1) that it have appropriate calories for one's goals (neither too high NOR too low);
(2) that it be balanced -- in other words, that it have enough in the various micro and macronutrients for your goals.
Whether a particular food adds to the overall health of the diet depends on what one needs given the above considerations.
Broccoli will likely further one's goals (if one is the average person in the US) more often than an oatmeal cookie, but it really depends. (The oatmeal cookie could have more fiber, it will have more fat, relevant if the person is doing some juicing thing, it obviously has more calories which are not inherently bad, etc.).
More significantly, an absolutely okay goal is to have a diet that is enjoyable and satisfying and if someone finds that an oatmeal cookie furthers this goal and is not inconsistent with any others, I don't see how it's unhealthy. It's not identical to broccoli (and no one has ever said it is) and IMO it's neither healthy nor unhealthy in itself. It's neutral.
And like others I do regularly eat some food more for its taste than its micronutrient content (after getting plenty of food which I enjoy for both). I don't see anything wrong with this. It still contributes calories I need for my day (at the moment my deficit is as high as I think is appropriate at my current weight), and my diet is overall very healthy. Also, I am not hungry -- I find the claim that eating one cookie will make you hungry for the day awfully odd, if one is otherwise eating sensibly and at a reasonable calorie level.
I'm not against cookies or desserts, I did not ban these out of my life. I am ok with eating 1 or 2 or whatever I want as long as it fits in with my goal. My point is there is a difference between these foods and it should be ok to acknowledge it. You must have been a smart 5 year old to understand that whole explanation. You would have to somehow explain to a child one is more healthier than the other and you can't have too much of the cookie because it has a lot of sugar and you will be too full to eat other healthy food. Which means there is a difference between the 2 and in order to form self
Control when you get older you need to be able to differentiate between these at any age.
There's a difference between an avocado and a piece of celery as well. Should the avocado be deemed unhealthy because it's calorie dense?
No but I am pretty sure an avocado doesn't make you crave another one immediately after finishing it. I am sure everyone has experienced cravings for another cookie/dessert and has to practice self control in order to not act on it.
And again, you are going back to your personal physiology which doesn't reflect on the food, it reflects on you. I would absolutely crave more avocado after one because they are delicious and probably my favorite veggie. An oatmeal cookie, I could easily eat one and put them down...
And so what if a food makes you have to practice self control anyway? We are adults...
Avocado technically a fruit. So therefore it must be evil because fruit is evil, I think? Because fruit has sugar? But does an avocado? I can't remember anymore. Can we get back to cookie recipes?
0 -
Biscotti goes well with beer. Sure enough, someone has done that:
Beer goes well with anything, especially itself.
0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
Maybe (at least this was the case for me) you would crave it less if you fit in a serving more ofter...WorkInProgress909 wrote: »
The problem is the poster is probably on a lower calorie diet and has little room for treats...
Actually what we are saying, is if you eat a well balanced meal, hit your nutrient goals (macro and micros) and have room for a 255 calorie cookie, you could.WorkInProgress909 wrote: »By the way I eat oatmeal every morning (255 calories of it) based on what you are all saying I should just replace it with oatmeal cookies as long as it fits the 255 calories. And sometimes the salads with chicken for lunch that I have I should replace it with bread and butter which will have the same calories.
I love cherries as well and they require self control too, but at least you are getting more nutrients out of them than a snack of cookies. Or will you all argue that the nutrients from both are equivalent. This conversation is ridiculous. Yes it is all about your diet but your diet consists of food that are healthy and unhealthy.
Look at my diary and you will see a 250 calorie Klondike almost night.
Oh without a doubt. But she could have one serving of ice cream which is around 160 calories or a couple of oreos. I only get a high calorie treat because I am pretty active and male.
I have 2100 calorie goal on days with high cardio exercising. I still rather make room for other "healthy foods" than ice cream unless I am really craving it and haven't had it in a while.
So I need to feed myself ice cream more often when I have no craving for it so that I can be happy. Got it
No one is trying to force feed you ice cream.
What they are saying is that if you've hit your macros/micros and ice cream fits into your calories and you WANT ice cream, then said serving of ice cream is not going to undo your whole day.
Replace "ice cream" with any food of choice.
Actually force feeding people ice cream is part of the CICO cult initiation. Of course you have to consult the scripture (label) first and weight out an amount that fits the person's macros.
0 -
WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Eating hepatitis from the jar is unhealthy.
Non of the items mentioned (barring medical conditions or allergies) are detrimental to health.
Of course too much of the items mentioned is detrimental to health, just as too much of *anything* is.
Too much of celery and Broccoli would not be detrimental for anyone. A diet of regularly eating cookies would cause a difference in your health or weight. So there is a difference between these 2 food groups, they are not the same and it should be OK to acknowledge that.
Actually, if you ate them to exclusion of all other foods, it would be very unhealthy. So the point at which a food becomes unhealthy may differ, but again it's the extraneous factor and not the food itself that is unhealthy.
Brocolli and celery is just 2 examples, no one is going to eat them exclusively. There's a lot of vegetables, grains, meat that can go in your diet and it would be hard to overeat. At some point I can no longer have anymore chicken.. But cookies you can still eat without feeling too full but the total calories you ate will be too high compared to your salad and chicken that made you feel full.
But that's where this is getting confused. No one has ever said to eat nothing but cookies, or broccoli or celery. It's about fitting it in with what else you eat, therefore the food, in a vacuum, is not unhealthy, but the way you fit it into your daily and weekly goals may be.
My point wasn't that someone could be eating only cookies or only broccoli. My point is that one is high in calories even if you eat a small amount and might make you feel hungry later vs one that is low in calories you can eat more and it will make you feel full. If I add a cookie to my food diary I will end up feeling hungry later but those calories will be already used up and I won't be able to eat something else. You can eat a big portion of fruit and it will only be like 60 calories and make you full and healthy, meanwhile your small cookie is 100^ calories. How would you teach this to a child who hasn't developed self control yet .. If a child thinks both foods are healthy? You would have to differentiate between the 2 somehow and explain one is better than the other.
Yes, as I suggested in response to your other post you seem to be confusing calorie dense and unhealthy.
How I would explain it to anyone (and children aren't the audience on MFP, but I was able to grasp this as a child so I do not think it's that difficult) is that some foods are more calorie dense than others and some are more nutrient dense than others and that to have an overall healthy diet we need to consider a few things:
(1) that it have appropriate calories for one's goals (neither too high NOR too low);
(2) that it be balanced -- in other words, that it have enough in the various micro and macronutrients for your goals.
Whether a particular food adds to the overall health of the diet depends on what one needs given the above considerations.
Broccoli will likely further one's goals (if one is the average person in the US) more often than an oatmeal cookie, but it really depends. (The oatmeal cookie could have more fiber, it will have more fat, relevant if the person is doing some juicing thing, it obviously has more calories which are not inherently bad, etc.).
More significantly, an absolutely okay goal is to have a diet that is enjoyable and satisfying and if someone finds that an oatmeal cookie furthers this goal and is not inconsistent with any others, I don't see how it's unhealthy. It's not identical to broccoli (and no one has ever said it is) and IMO it's neither healthy nor unhealthy in itself. It's neutral.
And like others I do regularly eat some food more for its taste than its micronutrient content (after getting plenty of food which I enjoy for both). I don't see anything wrong with this. It still contributes calories I need for my day (at the moment my deficit is as high as I think is appropriate at my current weight), and my diet is overall very healthy. Also, I am not hungry -- I find the claim that eating one cookie will make you hungry for the day awfully odd, if one is otherwise eating sensibly and at a reasonable calorie level.
I'm not against cookies or desserts, I did not ban these out of my life. I am ok with eating 1 or 2 or whatever I want as long as it fits in with my goal. My point is there is a difference between these foods and it should be ok to acknowledge it. You must have been a smart 5 year old to understand that whole explanation. You would have to somehow explain to a child one is more healthier than the other and you can't have too much of the cookie because it has a lot of sugar and you will be too full to eat other healthy food. Which means there is a difference between the 2 and in order to form self
Control when you get older you need to be able to differentiate between these at any age.
There's a difference between an avocado and a piece of celery as well. Should the avocado be deemed unhealthy because it's calorie dense?
No but I am pretty sure an avocado doesn't make you crave another one immediately after finishing it. I am sure everyone has experienced cravings for another cookie/dessert and has to practice self control in order to not act on it.
And again, you are going back to your personal physiology which doesn't reflect on the food, it reflects on you. I would absolutely crave more avocado after one because they are delicious and probably my favorite veggie. An oatmeal cookie, I could easily eat one and put them down...
And so what if a food makes you have to practice self control anyway? We are adults...
Natural instinct is to crave more of the unhealthy food and we all have to practice self control in order to not eat it. Since one gives a craving and one doesn't .. One is healthy and one isn't. My self control isn't any better or worse than anyone else's.. I am not overweight but do need to lose few pounds. No one finishes a salad with chicken and says I could really go for another one. Or even 1 portion of steak makes you too full to have or even crave another one. With cookies ,dessert, or junk food you do crave another one and you will want another one unless you tell yourself no and move on. This to me means there is a difference between the 2 groups of food.
Why are you assuming that whatever you crave is the same as what everyone else craves? Last night I had 600 cals leftover. I had wine, and still had 300 cals to spare. I could have had some oreos or some gelato, but you know what sounded good to me? Salami. (giggity). So I ate some summer sausage and called it a night.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Eating hepatitis from the jar is unhealthy.
Non of the items mentioned (barring medical conditions or allergies) are detrimental to health.
Of course too much of the items mentioned is detrimental to health, just as too much of *anything* is.
Too much of celery and Broccoli would not be detrimental for anyone. A diet of regularly eating cookies would cause a difference in your health or weight. So there is a difference between these 2 food groups, they are not the same and it should be OK to acknowledge that.
Actually, if you ate them to exclusion of all other foods, it would be very unhealthy. So the point at which a food becomes unhealthy may differ, but again it's the extraneous factor and not the food itself that is unhealthy.
Brocolli and celery is just 2 examples, no one is going to eat them exclusively. There's a lot of vegetables, grains, meat that can go in your diet and it would be hard to overeat. At some point I can no longer have anymore chicken.. But cookies you can still eat without feeling too full but the total calories you ate will be too high compared to your salad and chicken that made you feel full.
But that's where this is getting confused. No one has ever said to eat nothing but cookies, or broccoli or celery. It's about fitting it in with what else you eat, therefore the food, in a vacuum, is not unhealthy, but the way you fit it into your daily and weekly goals may be.
My point wasn't that someone could be eating only cookies or only broccoli. My point is that one is high in calories even if you eat a small amount and might make you feel hungry later vs one that is low in calories you can eat more and it will make you feel full. If I add a cookie to my food diary I will end up feeling hungry later but those calories will be already used up and I won't be able to eat something else. You can eat a big portion of fruit and it will only be like 60 calories and make you full and healthy, meanwhile your small cookie is 100^ calories. How would you teach this to a child who hasn't developed self control yet .. If a child thinks both foods are healthy? You would have to differentiate between the 2 somehow and explain one is better than the other.
Yes, as I suggested in response to your other post you seem to be confusing calorie dense and unhealthy.
How I would explain it to anyone (and children aren't the audience on MFP, but I was able to grasp this as a child so I do not think it's that difficult) is that some foods are more calorie dense than others and some are more nutrient dense than others and that to have an overall healthy diet we need to consider a few things:
(1) that it have appropriate calories for one's goals (neither too high NOR too low);
(2) that it be balanced -- in other words, that it have enough in the various micro and macronutrients for your goals.
Whether a particular food adds to the overall health of the diet depends on what one needs given the above considerations.
Broccoli will likely further one's goals (if one is the average person in the US) more often than an oatmeal cookie, but it really depends. (The oatmeal cookie could have more fiber, it will have more fat, relevant if the person is doing some juicing thing, it obviously has more calories which are not inherently bad, etc.).
More significantly, an absolutely okay goal is to have a diet that is enjoyable and satisfying and if someone finds that an oatmeal cookie furthers this goal and is not inconsistent with any others, I don't see how it's unhealthy. It's not identical to broccoli (and no one has ever said it is) and IMO it's neither healthy nor unhealthy in itself. It's neutral.
And like others I do regularly eat some food more for its taste than its micronutrient content (after getting plenty of food which I enjoy for both). I don't see anything wrong with this. It still contributes calories I need for my day (at the moment my deficit is as high as I think is appropriate at my current weight), and my diet is overall very healthy. Also, I am not hungry -- I find the claim that eating one cookie will make you hungry for the day awfully odd, if one is otherwise eating sensibly and at a reasonable calorie level.
I'm not against cookies or desserts, I did not ban these out of my life. I am ok with eating 1 or 2 or whatever I want as long as it fits in with my goal. My point is there is a difference between these foods and it should be ok to acknowledge it. You must have been a smart 5 year old to understand that whole explanation. You would have to somehow explain to a child one is more healthier than the other and you can't have too much of the cookie because it has a lot of sugar and you will be too full to eat other healthy food. Which means there is a difference between the 2 and in order to form self
Control when you get older you need to be able to differentiate between these at any age.
There's a difference between an avocado and a piece of celery as well. Should the avocado be deemed unhealthy because it's calorie dense?
No but I am pretty sure an avocado doesn't make you crave another one immediately after finishing it. I am sure everyone has experienced cravings for another cookie/dessert and has to practice self control in order to not act on it.
And again, you are going back to your personal physiology which doesn't reflect on the food, it reflects on you. I would absolutely crave more avocado after one because they are delicious and probably my favorite veggie. An oatmeal cookie, I could easily eat one and put them down...
And so what if a food makes you have to practice self control anyway? We are adults...
Avocado technically a fruit. So therefore it must be evil because fruit is evil, I think? Because fruit has sugar? But does an avocado? I can't remember anymore. Can we get back to cookie recipes?
The cookie recipes looked delicious but the ingredients might as well have been in hiroglyphs, how much is a cup anyway?0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »WorkInProgress909 wrote: »Eating hepatitis from the jar is unhealthy.
Non of the items mentioned (barring medical conditions or allergies) are detrimental to health.
Of course too much of the items mentioned is detrimental to health, just as too much of *anything* is.
Too much of celery and Broccoli would not be detrimental for anyone. A diet of regularly eating cookies would cause a difference in your health or weight. So there is a difference between these 2 food groups, they are not the same and it should be OK to acknowledge that.
Actually, if you ate them to exclusion of all other foods, it would be very unhealthy. So the point at which a food becomes unhealthy may differ, but again it's the extraneous factor and not the food itself that is unhealthy.
Brocolli and celery is just 2 examples, no one is going to eat them exclusively. There's a lot of vegetables, grains, meat that can go in your diet and it would be hard to overeat. At some point I can no longer have anymore chicken.. But cookies you can still eat without feeling too full but the total calories you ate will be too high compared to your salad and chicken that made you feel full.
But that's where this is getting confused. No one has ever said to eat nothing but cookies, or broccoli or celery. It's about fitting it in with what else you eat, therefore the food, in a vacuum, is not unhealthy, but the way you fit it into your daily and weekly goals may be.
My point wasn't that someone could be eating only cookies or only broccoli. My point is that one is high in calories even if you eat a small amount and might make you feel hungry later vs one that is low in calories you can eat more and it will make you feel full. If I add a cookie to my food diary I will end up feeling hungry later but those calories will be already used up and I won't be able to eat something else. You can eat a big portion of fruit and it will only be like 60 calories and make you full and healthy, meanwhile your small cookie is 100^ calories. How would you teach this to a child who hasn't developed self control yet .. If a child thinks both foods are healthy? You would have to differentiate between the 2 somehow and explain one is better than the other.
Yes, as I suggested in response to your other post you seem to be confusing calorie dense and unhealthy.
How I would explain it to anyone (and children aren't the audience on MFP, but I was able to grasp this as a child so I do not think it's that difficult) is that some foods are more calorie dense than others and some are more nutrient dense than others and that to have an overall healthy diet we need to consider a few things:
(1) that it have appropriate calories for one's goals (neither too high NOR too low);
(2) that it be balanced -- in other words, that it have enough in the various micro and macronutrients for your goals.
Whether a particular food adds to the overall health of the diet depends on what one needs given the above considerations.
Broccoli will likely further one's goals (if one is the average person in the US) more often than an oatmeal cookie, but it really depends. (The oatmeal cookie could have more fiber, it will have more fat, relevant if the person is doing some juicing thing, it obviously has more calories which are not inherently bad, etc.).
More significantly, an absolutely okay goal is to have a diet that is enjoyable and satisfying and if someone finds that an oatmeal cookie furthers this goal and is not inconsistent with any others, I don't see how it's unhealthy. It's not identical to broccoli (and no one has ever said it is) and IMO it's neither healthy nor unhealthy in itself. It's neutral.
And like others I do regularly eat some food more for its taste than its micronutrient content (after getting plenty of food which I enjoy for both). I don't see anything wrong with this. It still contributes calories I need for my day (at the moment my deficit is as high as I think is appropriate at my current weight), and my diet is overall very healthy. Also, I am not hungry -- I find the claim that eating one cookie will make you hungry for the day awfully odd, if one is otherwise eating sensibly and at a reasonable calorie level.
I'm not against cookies or desserts, I did not ban these out of my life. I am ok with eating 1 or 2 or whatever I want as long as it fits in with my goal. My point is there is a difference between these foods and it should be ok to acknowledge it. You must have been a smart 5 year old to understand that whole explanation. You would have to somehow explain to a child one is more healthier than the other and you can't have too much of the cookie because it has a lot of sugar and you will be too full to eat other healthy food. Which means there is a difference between the 2 and in order to form self
Control when you get older you need to be able to differentiate between these at any age.
There's a difference between an avocado and a piece of celery as well. Should the avocado be deemed unhealthy because it's calorie dense?
No but I am pretty sure an avocado doesn't make you crave another one immediately after finishing it. I am sure everyone has experienced cravings for another cookie/dessert and has to practice self control in order to not act on it.
And again, you are going back to your personal physiology which doesn't reflect on the food, it reflects on you. I would absolutely crave more avocado after one because they are delicious and probably my favorite veggie. An oatmeal cookie, I could easily eat one and put them down...
And so what if a food makes you have to practice self control anyway? We are adults...
Avocado technically a fruit. So therefore it must be evil because fruit is evil, I think? Because fruit has sugar? But does an avocado? I can't remember anymore. Can we get back to cookie recipes?
Lol... sometimes for lunch, I have a chicken wrap with 1/2 an avocado on it. I eat the other 1/2 avocado sliced on the side because I just love 'em so much! Then after lunch, for a snack, I have a couple of cookies *ahem*. Because yum. And macros. And it fits my calorie goals.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions