detoxing... does it work?
Replies
-
I don't know what that is honestly. How much is enough? What do you get it from?0
-
Dietary fat?pepsicolaho wrote: »I don't know what that is honestly. How much is enough? What do you get it from?
It's the fat in food. It's needed for hormone regulation and a few other bodily functions that I can't think of right now.
USDA recommends 20-30% I think.0 -
The best "detox" is to make sure you get enough fiber, fat, and fluids in you and let your liver, kidneys, and digestive system do their job. If given the right conditions, (fat, fiber, fluids) they normally do their job very well. If they aren't, you don't need a detox tea, you need a medical professional.0
-
pepsicolaho wrote: »I
i'm no longer breast feeding (my little guy is 3 next month and it been a battle lol). But I dont't want a 5 second fix with no benefits anyway, so sounds uselessWinoGelato wrote: »pepsicolaho wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Hi there. This is a really frequently asked question. So frequently asked that we have this great post in the General Diet "must read" stickied posts to try and help. Have you checked those out yet? There's good information there.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1159755/looking-for-a-detox-cleanse/p1
Thanks so much. I will check it out. Google is so conflicting, likely because of fad dieting. I picked up a detoxing tea (twice a day) last month but didn't use it as I was breast feeding. I'm not big on tea, and don't want to drink my calories at all, so wasn't sure of it was just useless or not
Thanks so much for all of your help.
Besides the fact that as others have pointed out, there is no specific benefit to these "detox" teas that your liver/kidneys don't take care of - they basically cause you to expel a lot of um... waste.... in a not so pleasant manner and they can be very dehydrating - which would definitely not be good for you if you are breastfeeding!
The best thing you can do is develop good eating habits.... concentration on whole foods (fruits, veggies, whole grains, lean meats, fish or whatever combination of food that helps you achieve your goals) and the occasional treat (for mental sanity). And then exercise... specifically, some combination of resistance training and cardio so you work both the skeletal and cardiovascular systems.
This is always my thought. When I think of something I myself would potentially "detox" from I think of the tons of processed foods, sugary garbage and all that stuff I was consuming on a daily basis. The remedy for that is shopping the perimeter of the grocery store. Produce, lean meats, ect.... And staying hydrated.
0 -
Are you trying to stop cravings? I find going cold turkey on certain foods can help. If you eat sugar a lot, you will crave it a lot. I read the processed food industry hires scientists to design certain foods to fool the hunger sensors. "You just can't eat one." The food essentially has a good mix of sweet, salty, sour ,bitter --sidetracking the signal of satiety.
Just figure out what you need in your diet to reach your macros and keep foods simple.
Cutting out foods entirely is a fairly good way to lead to a binge. There is nothing wrong with eating sugar and salt in moderation. And there are many different levels of 'processing' when it comes to food. Freezing, pasteurizing, canning - those are all processes. Even dehydrating pasta is a process.
Learning to eat foods you like in portions that fit into a rational calorie goal is a much more solid way to find long-term success.0 -
Are you trying to stop cravings? I find going cold turkey on certain foods can help. If you eat sugar a lot, you will crave it a lot. I read the processed food industry hires scientists to design certain foods to fool the hunger sensors. "You just can't eat one." The food essentially has a good mix of sweet, salty, sour ,bitter --sidetracking the signal of satiety.
Just figure out what you need in your diet to reach your macros and keep foods simple.
Cutting out foods entirely is a fairly good way to lead to a binge. There is nothing wrong with eating sugar and salt in moderation. And there are many different levels of 'processing' when it comes to food. Freezing, pasteurizing, canning - those are all processes. Even dehydrating pasta is a process.
Learning to eat foods you like in portions that fit into a rational calorie goal is a much more solid way to find long-term success.
Agree. I am just offering a way to stop craving certain foods. The more complex foods may be engineered to create a binge. I'm not talking about simple processing.0 -
Are you trying to stop cravings? I find going cold turkey on certain foods can help. If you eat sugar a lot, you will crave it a lot. I read the processed food industry hires scientists to design certain foods to fool the hunger sensors. "You just can't eat one." The food essentially has a good mix of sweet, salty, sour ,bitter --sidetracking the signal of satiety.
Just figure out what you need in your diet to reach your macros and keep foods simple.
Cutting out foods entirely is a fairly good way to lead to a binge. There is nothing wrong with eating sugar and salt in moderation. And there are many different levels of 'processing' when it comes to food. Freezing, pasteurizing, canning - those are all processes. Even dehydrating pasta is a process.
Learning to eat foods you like in portions that fit into a rational calorie goal is a much more solid way to find long-term success.
Agree. I am just offering a way to stop craving certain foods. The more complex foods may be engineered to create a binge. I'm not talking about simple processing.
I think it is very sinister to assume that food manufacturers are engineering their food to create binge scenarios for their customers. Do food scientists want their products to hit craveable factors (sweet, salty, crunchy, fatty, etc)? Of course. Doesn't every company that produces a product want it to be something that people desire and spend their money on? That doesn't mean that people have to binge. Self control is still in play. People can learn moderation. Even binge eaters can learn techniques so that they can enjoy all foods, even trigger foods. It may not be easy, and for some, elimination is a better route, but the food manufacturers are not to blame for wanting to produce a product that consumers desire.
0 -
Not assuming. They're evil maniacal corporate fiends out to get your money. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Bon appetite.0
-
I think it depends on the person, the purpose or your goal, and method. I have been dealing with a sluggish gallbladder. If it acts up I hit the apple juice and it straightens things right up. I do well as long as I keep the apple juice as part of my diet. As soon as I miss a week no fail it starts acting up. In general though detox is not going to be a significant help with weight loss.0
-
Are you trying to stop cravings? I find going cold turkey on certain foods can help. If you eat sugar a lot, you will crave it a lot. I read the processed food industry hires scientists to design certain foods to fool the hunger sensors. "You just can't eat one." The food essentially has a good mix of sweet, salty, sour ,bitter --sidetracking the signal of satiety.
Just figure out what you need in your diet to reach your macros and keep foods simple.
Cutting out foods entirely is a fairly good way to lead to a binge. There is nothing wrong with eating sugar and salt in moderation. And there are many different levels of 'processing' when it comes to food. Freezing, pasteurizing, canning - those are all processes. Even dehydrating pasta is a process.
Learning to eat foods you like in portions that fit into a rational calorie goal is a much more solid way to find long-term success.
Agree. I am just offering a way to stop craving certain foods. The more complex foods may be engineered to create a binge. I'm not talking about simple processing.
Wait. There is really only one food that I have real issues binging on. It's fresh, ripe, apricots.0 -
-
I don't know about evil or maniacal, but they certainly do their best to make food that is as tasty as it can be so people will want it and buy lots of it. Can't fault them there!Not assuming. They're evil maniacal corporate fiends out to get your money. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Bon appetite.
I avoid most of it, but lots if people want to eat it, so it works out for the company and the consumer.
Bon Appétit.
0 -
Not assuming. They're evil maniacal corporate fiends out to get your money. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Bon appetite.
How do these food scientist engineer food? Or by engineer, do you mean, just make food taste good with the right combination of ingredients?0 -
Not assuming. They're evil maniacal corporate fiends out to get your money. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Bon appetite.
How do these food scientist engineer food? Or by engineer, do you mean, just make food taste good with the right combination of ingredients?
Food companies don't do this the same way or for the same reasons you and I combine ingredients in our kitchens.
Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us
Q. How did you land on salt, sugar, and fat as your way to write about the industry? Why these three ingredients?
A. I’d been investigating a surge in deadly outbreaks of E. coli in meat when an industry source, a microbiologist, suggested that if I wanted to see an even bigger public health hazard, I should look at what food companies were intentionally adding to their products, starting with salt. And sure enough, when I looked at this--by gaining access to high level industry officials and a trove of sensitive, internal records--a window opened on how aggressive the industry was wielding not only salt, but sugar and fat, too. These are the pillars of processed foods, the three ingredients without which there would be no processed foods. Salt, sugar and fat drive consumption by adding flavor and allure. But surprisingly, they also mask bitter flavors that develop in the manufacturing process. They enable these foods to sit in warehouses or on the grocery shelf for months. And, most critically to the industry's financial success, they are very inexpensive.
Q. So, how big is the processed food industry, exactly? What kind of scale are we talking about here?
A. Huge. Grocery sales now top $1 trillion a year in the U.S., with more than 300 manufacturers employing 1.4 million workers, or 12 percent of all American manufacturing jobs. Global sales exceed $3 trillion. But the figure I find most revealing is 60,000: That’s the number of different products found on the shelves of our largest supermarkets.
Q. How did this get so big?
A. The food processing industry is more than a century old--if you count the invention of breakfast cereals--so it’s been steady growth. But things really took off in the 1950s with the promotion of convenience foods whose design and marketing was aimed at the increasing numbers of families with both parents working outside the home. The industry's expansion, since then, has been entirely unrestrained. While food safety is heavily regulated, the government has been industry's best friend and partner in encouraging Americans to become more dependent on processed foods.
Q. What three things should a health-conscious supermarket shopper keep in mind?
A. The most alluring products--those with the highest amounts of salt, sugar and fat--are strategically placed at eye-level on the grocery shelf. You typically have to stoop down to find, say, plain oatmeal. (Healthier products are generally up high or down low.) Companies also play the better-nutrition card by plastering their packaging with terms like "all natural," "contains whole grains," “contains real fruit juice,” and "lean," which belie the true contents of the products. Reading labels is not easy. Only since the 1990s have the manufacturers even been required to reveal the true salt, sugar, fat and caloric loads of their products, which are itemized in a box called the "nutrient facts." But one game that many companies still play is to divide these numbers in half, or even thirds, by reporting this critical information per serving--which are typically tiny portions. In particular, they do this for cookies and chips, knowing that most people can't resist eating the entire three-serving bag. Check it out sometime. See how many “servings” that little bag of chips contains.0 -
Are you trying to stop cravings? I find going cold turkey on certain foods can help. If you eat sugar a lot, you will crave it a lot. I read the processed food industry hires scientists to design certain foods to fool the hunger sensors. "You just can't eat one." The food essentially has a good mix of sweet, salty, sour ,bitter --sidetracking the signal of satiety.
Just figure out what you need in your diet to reach your macros and keep foods simple.
Cutting out foods entirely is a fairly good way to lead to a binge. There is nothing wrong with eating sugar and salt in moderation. And there are many different levels of 'processing' when it comes to food. Freezing, pasteurizing, canning - those are all processes. Even dehydrating pasta is a process.
Learning to eat foods you like in portions that fit into a rational calorie goal is a much more solid way to find long-term success.
Agree. I am just offering a way to stop craving certain foods. The more complex foods may be engineered to create a binge. I'm not talking about simple processing.
We have less of these semantic round-and-rounds about "processed" foods when people say Ultra Processed and refer to the Brazilian definition: http://189.28.128.100/dab/docs/portaldab/publicacoes/guia_alimentar_populacao_ingles.pdf0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Not assuming. They're evil maniacal corporate fiends out to get your money. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Bon appetite.
How do these food scientist engineer food? Or by engineer, do you mean, just make food taste good with the right combination of ingredients?
Food companies don't do this the same way or for the same reasons you and I combine ingredients in our kitchens.
Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us
Q. How did you land on salt, sugar, and fat as your way to write about the industry? Why these three ingredients?
A. I’d been investigating a surge in deadly outbreaks of E. coli in meat when an industry source, a microbiologist, suggested that if I wanted to see an even bigger public health hazard, I should look at what food companies were intentionally adding to their products, starting with salt. And sure enough, when I looked at this--by gaining access to high level industry officials and a trove of sensitive, internal records--a window opened on how aggressive the industry was wielding not only salt, but sugar and fat, too. These are the pillars of processed foods, the three ingredients without which there would be no processed foods. Salt, sugar and fat drive consumption by adding flavor and allure. But surprisingly, they also mask bitter flavors that develop in the manufacturing process. They enable these foods to sit in warehouses or on the grocery shelf for months. And, most critically to the industry's financial success, they are very inexpensive.
Q. So, how big is the processed food industry, exactly? What kind of scale are we talking about here?
A. Huge. Grocery sales now top $1 trillion a year in the U.S., with more than 300 manufacturers employing 1.4 million workers, or 12 percent of all American manufacturing jobs. Global sales exceed $3 trillion. But the figure I find most revealing is 60,000: That’s the number of different products found on the shelves of our largest supermarkets.
Q. How did this get so big?
A. The food processing industry is more than a century old--if you count the invention of breakfast cereals--so it’s been steady growth. But things really took off in the 1950s with the promotion of convenience foods whose design and marketing was aimed at the increasing numbers of families with both parents working outside the home. The industry's expansion, since then, has been entirely unrestrained. While food safety is heavily regulated, the government has been industry's best friend and partner in encouraging Americans to become more dependent on processed foods.
Q. What three things should a health-conscious supermarket shopper keep in mind?
A. The most alluring products--those with the highest amounts of salt, sugar and fat--are strategically placed at eye-level on the grocery shelf. You typically have to stoop down to find, say, plain oatmeal. (Healthier products are generally up high or down low.) Companies also play the better-nutrition card by plastering their packaging with terms like "all natural," "contains whole grains," “contains real fruit juice,” and "lean," which belie the true contents of the products. Reading labels is not easy. Only since the 1990s have the manufacturers even been required to reveal the true salt, sugar, fat and caloric loads of their products, which are itemized in a box called the "nutrient facts." But one game that many companies still play is to divide these numbers in half, or even thirds, by reporting this critical information per serving--which are typically tiny portions. In particular, they do this for cookies and chips, knowing that most people can't resist eating the entire three-serving bag. Check it out sometime. See how many “servings” that little bag of chips contains.
How does this even answer my question? this, in no way, discusses how the engineer the food.
And I rarely ever take information from a booking, I rather have actual research.0 -
-
The idea of using purgatives is as old as bloodletting, and just as lacking in science. Now that we know what all our organs are for, the pursuit of these imaginary toxins has to die.
The science says I would feel a lot better when I lost my first twenty to thirty pounds (starting at obese). And guess what? I did!
The science says I will have a lot better stamina if I exercise regularly, as little as three times a week. And guess what? I do!0 -
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
It's amazing how they manage to engineer that much into nutrition into "empty" calories.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
Read past the first sentence. The article is not about Snickers. And I know our bodies have an amazing way of converting any food into the basic fuel we need--in the short term, anyway.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
Read past the first sentence. The article is not about Snickers. And I know our bodies have an amazing way of converting any food into the basic fuel we need--in the short term, anyway.
Your article thinks salt contains calories.
The article is more junk than the food it depicts.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
Read past the first sentence. The article is not about Snickers. And I know our bodies have an amazing way of converting any food into the basic fuel we need--in the short term, anyway.
Your article thinks salt contains calories.
The article is more junk than the food it depicts.
The article mentions salt as an additive in foods. It also mentioned the ingredient can be in excess. I didn't see anything about salt calories.
You may be more interested in reading studies. Or not.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
Read past the first sentence. The article is not about Snickers. And I know our bodies have an amazing way of converting any food into the basic fuel we need--in the short term, anyway.
Your article thinks salt contains calories.
The article is more junk than the food it depicts.
The article mentions salt as an additive in foods. It also mentioned the ingredient can be in excess. I didn't see anything about salt calories.
There's only one problem with junk food: It's junk. Junk food, by definition, is food that contains little or no nutritional value while delivering staggering amounts of calories in the form of fat, sugar and salt.0 -
I'm pretty sure salt lacks calories. I also wasn't aware of junk food having an agreed upon definition, but I can let that slide a lot more than salt calories.Junk food, by definition, is food that contains little or no nutritional value while delivering staggering amounts of calories in the form of fat, sugar and salt.0 -
Read it how you like. That phrase to me suggests salt as an over abundant ingredient (along with fat and sugar) creating a higher caloric designed food.
0 -
I think the belief in detoxes come from people noticing an association. Frankly, overweight, and particularly obese people are less healthy on average than people that are a proper weight (not in all instances, just on the average).
People therefore are easily persuaded that being overweight is caused by poor health, rather than overweight causing poor health. It comes with a belief that the body has some kind of natural drive to be at a healthy weight, and that gaining weight is a symptom of things not working right.
I'd say the exact opposite is true. Organisms seek to burn as few calories as it can to survive. That has been the history of evolution for the last 2 billion years. Burning calories doing nothing would certainly keep us thinner, but it is exactly what your body is looking to avoid. People that have a truly high metabolism (incredibly rare) have chronic conditions that you would not want. Gaining weight is, if anything, the sign that systems are working right.0 -
That's not how the English language works.
The way the sentence is written, it indicates that salt contributes to the Calorie count.
Ergo, the person writing this has no clue what he is talking about.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pure silliness.
A regular Snickers has 11g of fat, 28g of carbs, and 3g of protein. Fat, carbs, and protein aren't junk.
Read past the first sentence. The article is not about Snickers. And I know our bodies have an amazing way of converting any food into the basic fuel we need--in the short term, anyway.
Your article thinks salt contains calories.
The article is more junk than the food it depicts.
The article mentions salt as an additive in foods. It also mentioned the ingredient can be in excess. I didn't see anything about salt calories.
You may be more interested in reading studies. Or not.
You may also want to read more studies. That article is.... NOT one.
0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions