There are 'BAD' foods

robertw486 wrote: »

Well this died down quick. I'm sure since it's near 1000 replies that everyone is in agreement on everything correct?


I decided long ago that I can label my foods any way I like. As long as I know the context it doesn't matter if I call them good, bad, ugly, stupid, or delicious. It's simply a label beyond just calling it food. And I really don't care what the majority of the internet or anyone else thinks of it.


As for assuming everything science currently accepts is safe really is.... I'm old enough to know better. For all we know, the things being promoted as the most healthy right now will end up killing us all early. On the bright side, since I think to some extent it's just the luck that will determine what ended up being not so healthy, we can eat crazy things and know we were going to die regardless.

On internet as in real life, a group of vocal people does not necessarily represent what the majority thinks.

Annie_01 wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

Annie_01 wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

Well this died down quick. I'm sure since it's near 1000 replies that everyone is in agreement on everything correct?


I decided long ago that I can label my foods any way I like. As long as I know the context it doesn't matter if I call them good, bad, ugly, stupid, or delicious. It's simply a label beyond just calling it food. And I really don't care what the majority of the internet or anyone else thinks of it.


As for assuming everything science currently accepts is safe really is.... I'm old enough to know better. For all we know, the things being promoted as the most healthy right now will end up killing us all early. On the bright side, since I think to some extent it's just the luck that will determine what ended up being not so healthy, we can eat crazy things and know we were going to die regardless.

Then why are you posting on the internet

Because he doesn't care what you think...he shouldn't post on the internet???

I don't care either...guess that means I should post on the internet...oh well...I have been known to do as I choose.

I just find the hypocrisy in that statement amusing. "I don't care what people think on the internet, but I will keep debating them on the internet." It profess an a "holier than thou" attitude that again, is amusing and hypocritical at the same time.

So you came in here to tell me that you don't care about what I say on the internet, because you don't like posting on internet forums ,but you you just posted on an internet forum …..if you don't care what I said then why did you bother to quote me on the internet? I guess deep down my posting affected you on some level, because you would not have taken the time to respond, unless you really did care….

No...I didn't come in here just to respond to you...I have been reading this thread the entire time.

What I don't care about is...

That other people feel differently than I do...I applaud diversity...different opinions...different ways of doing things.

It also makes no difference to me if you don't agree with me...if you don't approve of the way that I eat...choices that I make.

Does any of that mean that either of us should quit posting...no...or that one of us shouldn't respond to the other...no again. It just means that neither of us should care about what the other thinks...we are after all...just strangers on the internet whose interaction probably doesn't affect each others personal lives.

I think that for some people, it is the opposite: it is their personal life (empty/sad/frustrating/unsatisfying) that affects how they interact with other people on the internet...

ndj1979 wrote: »

Annie_01 wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

Annie_01 wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

Well this died down quick. I'm sure since it's near 1000 replies that everyone is in agreement on everything correct?


I decided long ago that I can label my foods any way I like. As long as I know the context it doesn't matter if I call them good, bad, ugly, stupid, or delicious. It's simply a label beyond just calling it food. And I really don't care what the majority of the internet or anyone else thinks of it.


As for assuming everything science currently accepts is safe really is.... I'm old enough to know better. For all we know, the things being promoted as the most healthy right now will end up killing us all early. On the bright side, since I think to some extent it's just the luck that will determine what ended up being not so healthy, we can eat crazy things and know we were going to die regardless.

Then why are you posting on the internet

Because he doesn't care what you think...he shouldn't post on the internet???

I don't care either...guess that means I should post on the internet...oh well...I have been known to do as I choose.

I just find the hypocrisy in that statement amusing. "I don't care what people think on the internet, but I will keep debating them on the internet." It profess an a "holier than thou" attitude that again, is amusing and hypocritical at the same time.

So you came in here to tell me that you don't care about what I say on the internet, because you don't like posting on internet forums ,but you you just posted on an internet forum …..if you don't care what I said then why did you bother to quote me on the internet? I guess deep down my posting affected you on some level, because you would not have taken the time to respond, unless you really did care….

No...I didn't come in here just to respond to you...I have been reading this thread the entire time.

What I don't care about is...

That other people feel differently than I do...I applaud diversity...different opinions...different ways of doing things.

It also makes no difference to me if you don't agree with me...if you don't approve of the way that I eat...choices that I make.

Does any of that mean that either of us should quit posting...no...or that one of us shouldn't respond to the other...no again. It just means that neither of us should care about what the other thinks...we are after all...just strangers on the internet whose interaction probably doesn't affect each others personal lives.

If it makes no difference why do you keep engaging me?

Oh...I don't know...maybe I am bored this morning.

Back to the subject...

I don't agree with the OP...I don't label foods. Are there some foods that don't fit my goals...sure...but I don't assign them a value for anyone else but myself. How the OP labels foods makes no difference in how I label the foods that I choose eat. Does that mean that I can't communicate with the OP...no...it just means that I think differently than she does.

Annie_01 wrote: »

How the OP labels foods makes no difference in how I label the foods that I choose eat. Does that mean that I can't communicate with the OP...no...it just means that I think differently than she does.

I agree with this, and wouldn't try to convince OP that she should not label foods as she wishes, as she said it was helpful to her.

What I found odd was that it seemed important to her to try and make the rest of us admit that we really do secretly label foods or, if we don't, we are being dishonest with ourselves.

I also think this comes down to a difference of opinion as to what "bad" means, as to me it means "shouldn't ever be eaten" (so I find the notion that one happily includes "bad" foods in one's diet inconsistent with my own usage of the term). To others it seems to simply mean "high cal and low nutrient" or "fewer nutrients than other foods" so they seemed to think that in saying "no bad foods" we were denying that some foods provide more nutrients than others (which is of course not the case).

I like these discussions when people are able to better understand where others are coming from. I'm not sure that happened here (I'd be curious if OP accepts that using "bad" as a label isn't helpful for all of us, but that we aren't pretending cookies have the same micros as spinach or eating poor diets as a result), but maybe in part?

the wheels on the bus go round and round...

Hornsby wrote: »

the wheels on the bus go round and round...

phyllis731 wrote: »

I make it a point to stay away from processed and fast food. If I can't say the ingredients, I assume it's not in my best interest to put it into my body.

It's so true. This is why most young children should never eat spaghetti and many of us should be cautious about eating French food. One question: If I struggle with the proper pronunciation of "croissant," but am okay with "crossan'wich," I'm good to order the latter and just have to avoid the former, right?

No such thing as bad food. My biggest lifts have come from eating fast food a few hours before my workouts. Matter fact, when I know I'm lifting heavy, I have McDonald's for lunch, as I usually workout after the work day.

suziecue20 wrote: »

I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?

I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?

There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.

I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.

So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.

I agree that there are bad foods. I know some folks here disagree, but if I eat a bag of Nibs, there isn't a single bit of valuable nutrition in that. Even the sugar is bad for me. How can this food be considered okay? It's like eating plastic laced with sugar - and yes, I do still eat them sometimes! But I fully consider them a bad food because they may be edible, but they BARELY qualify as food at all! LOL!

Foods that are calorie rich and high in fats and sugars can still be okay and offer some nutritional value if eaten on occasion. I may consider myself naughty when I eat things like pastries, but that's because I know what they do to my body. They still offer some nutritional value, unlike the sugar plastic candy. So I'm not sure if I'd consider these bad foods so much as more fattening and ultimately not the healthiest choice for every day ... but they are fine if consumed once in awhile as a special treat, provided you have willpower and can stop at one portion. I struggle with the portion control (hence why I'm here)!

KittyHeaven74 wrote: »

suziecue20 wrote: »

I see lots of posts stating that there are no 'bad' foods but if this is the case why do we have expressions like 'naughty but nice' when we have eaten something scrumptious we know we shouldn't have?

I know that with CICO I could spend all or most of my daily calories on foods like full fat cheeses, cakes, pastries, biscuits [cookies], ice cream, deep fried chips [fries], sausages, fatty meat and still lose weight but at what cost to my health?

There are lots of foods that are 'bad' but obviously only when they are eaten in high volume and too frequently.

I eat 'bad' foods occasionally under the premise that 'a little bit of what you fancy does you good' and the fact that they stop me feeling deprived and becoming a self-righteous martyr.

So come on, admit it folks, there are 'bad' foods.

I agree that there are bad foods. I know some folks here disagree, but if I eat a bag of Nibs, there isn't a single bit of valuable nutrition in that. Even the sugar is bad for me. How can this food be considered okay? It's like eating plastic laced with sugar - and yes, I do still eat them sometimes! But I fully consider them a bad food because they may be edible, but they BARELY qualify as food at all! LOL!

Foods that are calorie rich and high in fats and sugars can still be okay and offer some nutritional value if eaten on occasion. I may consider myself naughty when I eat things like pastries, but that's because I know what they do to my body. They still offer some nutritional value, unlike the sugar plastic candy. So I'm not sure if I'd consider these bad foods so much as more fattening and ultimately not the healthiest choice for every day ... but they are fine if consumed once in awhile as a special treat, provided you have willpower and can stop at one portion. I struggle with the portion control (hence why I'm here)!

Like Twizzler Nibs candy? Those have fat and carbohydrates. I don't know about you, but my body uses both of those macronutrients.

How are they harming you?

Holy crap this is still going on?

everything in moderation

rabbitjb wrote: »

edack72 wrote: »

everything in moderation

Except this thread of course

Lol!! Isn't that the truth!