For Some of Us there ARE Bad Foods
Options
Replies
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »My understanding is that the whole no bad food thing is about weight loss and only weight loss.
As in 1000 calories of deep fried mars bars is the same as 1000 calories of assorted vegetables, for weight loss.
I don't think I have ever seen someone say there are no bad foods, eat all the deep fried mars bars you like, you will fill all your macros perfectly and live in perfect health.
Of course, not being Scottish I have not tried a deep-fried Mars bar and feel deeply skeptical about it being worth eating.
Australian here, no they aren't worth it in my oppinion, not because of calories which I assume are high but they don't taste great, rather just eat a mars bar.0 -
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
But in most cases to meet one's nutritional needs with"bad foods" won't that person most likely be well over their caloric needs?0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
But in most cases to meet one's nutritional needs with"bad foods" won't that person most likely be well over their caloric needs?
I don't know if it would be possible to answer this question without knowing what someone meant by "bad foods." There are all sort of foods that are tossed into this category and many of them do contain reasonable qualities of macro- and micronutrients.0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
But in most cases to meet one's nutritional needs with"bad foods" won't that person most likely be well over their caloric needs?
Not really, particularly if one takes a multivitamin and eats a decently wide variety of foods.
The vitamin industry seems to have perpetuated the notion that it's really hard to get adequate nutrition, but when you look at the wide array of diets that humans have survived and thrived on, and the total lack of nutritional knowledge they had, our bodies seem to be very good at dealing with almost any kind of food source.0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
But in most cases to meet one's nutritional needs with"bad foods" won't that person most likely be well over their caloric needs?
He didn't say meeting your needs with "bad foods" alone, but meeting your needs and having "bad foods" as a part of your diet is very possible. No one is advocating against eating nutritious foods, but they are saying that there is some room in almost anyone's diet for some foods that are less than perfect.0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
I would say more nutritious foods help us to met daily needs easier than foods that are less nutritious. That doesn't mean one can't meet their nutritional (macro and micro) needs while eating "bad food". Once the needs are met, then health shouldn't be an issue if one isn't over/underweight.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Wait, so if someone lost a significant amount of weight on a "junk food" diet and their health improved significantly (lower body fat, lower cholesterol, better sleep patterns) then couldn't that be labeled as "good food" for that person?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I have no medical reason not to eat any food, I still maintain that there are bad and good foods. I have never seen anything on this site or elsewhere to make me think otherwise.
Examples and rationale?
I think "itos" food group is a good enough example, along with other junk food, of bad foods. Good foods would be those associated with improved health - vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meats, fish/seafood, etc.
Obviously almost all foods have a nutritional value, some much much higher than others, but just eating healthy food DOESN'T ensure improved health.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You or they can label it whatever you/they want, but no, I would not label it good food. And yes, though it seems off point, health is about more than just food. That doesn't change the fact that some foods improve our odds of being healthy and some do not. To me those that do are good and those that do not are bad.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
But in most cases to meet one's nutritional needs with"bad foods" won't that person most likely be well over their caloric needs?
The thing is that you wouldn't try to eat only high cal, low nutrient foods. You'd include them in the diet along with lots of more nutrient-dense foods.
For example, "evil lard ridden pork" or something like that was identified as a "bad food" upthread. I think that's a weird description of a pretty low cal pork chop (which is easy to fit in a day), but one thing I do make for lunches sometimes is a pork shoulder, which is a higher fat/lower protein per calorie cut of meat, but tasty enough to be worth it. When I want to include that in my diet instead of, say, the pork chop or fish or chicken breast, I might add some other leaner form of protein (maybe a snack of 0% Fage with berries) and omit cheese that I otherwise might have had after dinner. I'd still have plenty of room for lots of vegetables and my normal breakfast and dinner and even some black beans or sweet potatoes with the pork and veg I'm bringing for lunch.
Or, similarly, I like to have a breakfast of about 350-400 calories, but if I feel like splurging on a higher cal lunch and keeping dinner the same there are breakfasts (that also include an adequate amount of protein and vegetables, which are my main goals for breakfast) that I can have that are lower cal (like 200). So on a day I want to save some calories I'd do that.
It's all context.0 -
Edit: Posted before realizing this thread is already way too long, and before realizing I can't delete it.0
-
I have been using MFP for some time, but have only recently started visiting this board. I find myself surprised at the number of people who say such things as "there are no bad foods" or "you can eat whatever you want" when they no nothing of the individual circumstances of the poster.
We know that people respond differently to medicines; we know that they respond differently to alcohol. Yet people seem to assume that whatever works for them apply to everyone else.
I find that most of the "itos" food group are bad foods for me. Consider the following situation:
I typically save calories so that if I get hungry in the evening, there is room for a snack. So lets assume I am going to "spend" 160 calories.
My choices:
A. Eat 1/4 cup of nuts B. 160 calories of raw veggies with hummus or C. 160 calories of Cheetos
If I were to select A or B, I would end up more full the whole evening, and I would experiences no strong urges to eat the entire pantry. If I were to select C., I would be REALLY hungry 15 minutes later and would have to fight back INTENSE cravings to eat more.
Now my willpower is usually very good; but even if it holds up, I am starving all night. However, if I have had a really bad day or am otherwise exhausted and feeling stressed, I may be vulnerable to succumbing.
Success for me means eliminating "itos". I have gone as long as 6-7 years without touching these foods, and my weight fluctuations are within about a 15-20 pound band. This band is much larger when I eat these kind of foods.
I understand that this does not apply to everyone. But I think we need to be careful about telling people they can succeed while eating everything they like to eat, because there are people for whom this generalization is simply not true.
Of course there can be 'bad' foods for us on a personal level. In my case as long as it is not calories from sugar or any form of grain my weight will more or less manage itself.
Food is like rain.
If I am a farmer and my corn needs 2" of rain and it comes then it 'good' rain.
If I was the farmer's daughter and had planned a huge outside wedding for six month and it came a 2" rain at the wedding hour then it would be a 'bad' rain.
Same rain is called both good and bad. But like a calorie is a calorie a 2" rain is a 2" rain.
0 -
@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?0 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?
Lots of food are high in cholesterol, including many that have been part of traditional diets for years. Do you think people need to eliminate high cholesterol foods from their diet?0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?
Lots of food are high in cholesterol, including many that have been part of traditional diets for years. Do you think people need to eliminate high cholesterol foods from their diet?
Yes, if it's important for them to live a long life. 0 -
Actually there is a food that is bad for everyone - long pork.
At least if you are the long pork.0 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?
Lots of food are high in cholesterol, including many that have been part of traditional diets for years. Do you think people need to eliminate high cholesterol foods from their diet?
Yes, if it's important for them to live a long life.
It sounds like you may be working from out-dated information. Even when experts thought there was a connection between cholesterol and disease, they still didn't recommend completely eliminating high cholesterol foods -- just limiting consumption.
But even that isn't generally accepted any more.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?
Lots of food are high in cholesterol, including many that have been part of traditional diets for years. Do you think people need to eliminate high cholesterol foods from their diet?
Yes, if it's important for them to live a long life.
It sounds like you may be working from out-dated information. Even when experts thought there was a connection between cholesterol and disease, they still didn't recommend completely eliminating high cholesterol foods -- just limiting consumption.
But even that isn't generally accepted any more.
So I was right. It was a trick question.
I try to eliminate high cholesterol foods but still get a high number in the blood work report. Imagine if I only tried to "limit"...0 -
If people are going to use strawman arguments like eating 1000 calories of Mars bars I will as well. What would keep you alive longer eating nothing but ice cream or nothing but celery? Not the celery, that's for sure.
Anyone who eats nothing but foods with low nutrients is asking for trouble. No one is saying to eat a large amount of those foods but it is not going to hurt to eat them sparingly. If they are binge-triggering foods for you, avoid them, otherwise, live!0 -
If people are going to use strawman arguments like eating 1000 calories of Mars bars I will as well. What would keep you alive longer eating nothing but ice cream or nothing but celery? Not the celery, that's for sure.
Anyone who eats nothing but foods with low nutrients is asking for trouble. No one is saying to eat a large amount of those foods but it is not going to hurt to eat them sparingly. If they are binge-triggering foods for you, avoid them, otherwise, live!
Would you ever leave the bathroom eating celery alone?0 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »@lemurcat12
Sorry I meant lard laden pork. Whatever.
But isn't it common knowledge that lard is very high in cholesterol?
Lots of food are high in cholesterol, including many that have been part of traditional diets for years. Do you think people need to eliminate high cholesterol foods from their diet?
Yes, if it's important for them to live a long life.
It sounds like you may be working from out-dated information. Even when experts thought there was a connection between cholesterol and disease, they still didn't recommend completely eliminating high cholesterol foods -- just limiting consumption.
But even that isn't generally accepted any more.
So I was right. It was a trick question.
I try to eliminate high cholesterol foods but still get a high number in the blood work report. Imagine if I only tried to "limit"...
Your blood work would likely be the same. It was once widely believed that saturated fat and cholesterol in the diet caused higher levels of cholesterol in the blood, but newer and better designed studies have shown that is not true in general; your blood cholesterol is unrelated to your dietary cholesterol.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions