Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should junk food be taxed?
Options
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.4 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.1 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.
You seem to be the only one who read her post that way. To me, it was crystal clear she meant exactly how AmusedMonkey explained it.
You also seem to be ignoring the rest of her post which gives more context.3 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.
You seem to be the only one who read her post that way. To me, it was crystal clear she meant exactly how AmusedMonkey explained it.
It also seems like I'm the only one that read the words written as some apparently missed the word "carbs" entirely.queenliz99 wrote: »She said nothing about carbs.
Perhaps she will come back and clarify / explain what she meant when she used "carbs" rather than "junk food."0 -
dude...midwesterner85 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.
You seem to be the only one who read her post that way. To me, it was crystal clear she meant exactly how AmusedMonkey explained it.
It also seems like I'm the only one that read the words written as some apparently missed the word "carbs" entirely.queenliz99 wrote: »She said nothing about carbs.
Perhaps she will come back and clarify / explain what she meant when she used "carbs" rather than "junk food."
9 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.
You seem to be the only one who read her post that way. To me, it was crystal clear she meant exactly how AmusedMonkey explained it.
It also seems like I'm the only one that read the words written as some apparently missed the word "carbs" entirely.queenliz99 wrote: »She said nothing about carbs.
Perhaps she will come back and clarify / explain what she meant when she used "carbs" rather than "junk food."
One person. One. Person. Missed the word carbs. The overall post was clearly not about carbs so it's not like she missed the entire point.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
You completely misunderstood her. She wasn't saying carbs are bad. She was saying that in that day she didn't eat any of the foods that people typically think of as junk food: cookies, chips, candy -relative to this tax discussion. She also wasn't saying she never eats them or they are bad. She was describing one meal, in which she ate none of them, yet still exceeded her calories, which too much of over time would lead to be obese and potentially at risk for diabetes. The only mention of carbs was that she is overweight NOT because of carbs but because of too many calories. I'm requoting it below for context.kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
Her post was completely relevant to the topic of the thread. The tangent about carbs that you've taken us on, not so much...
It is not one meal, it is one meal "EVERY DAY of my life." If she had replaced "binging on carbs" with "eating junk food," then I could see how a vague idea of what junk food really means could be interpreted. That isn't what she wrote... she specifically used "carbs" inter-changeably with "junk food." This, along with the examples that all fit the "carbs" definition make it very clear that she is defining "junk food" defined as "carbs."amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
It doesn't matter. The point of her post wasn't the carbs and whether or not it was a "carb binge". The point is that none of the things in the burrito would be considered junk food, yet could most definitely be eaten in high enough calorie content to make a person obese which would increase his or her risk factor for diabetes.
She used the word "carb binge" as a null hypothesis.
As I pointed out, it wasn't "null" at all. If that was really the intent, then she provided evidence to defeat her own point.
How is saying that she would gain weight, not because she binged on carbs, but because she consumed too many calories, defeating her own point?nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Well, since junk food doesn't make people fat, too much food does, I don't see why it would help.
Trust me, too much of anything will make one gain weight.
Nailed it!!
I mean, I can go to Chipolte and down a 1,200 calorie burrito stuffed with "healthy food" for lunch, plus a 500 calorie breakfast of eggs and veggies, then a 500 calorie dinner of grilled chicken and veggies EVERY DAY of my life. That's 2,200 calories a day. 300 calories over what my body needs. All of that extra food made me fat, but all of it is considered healthy. There wasn't one chip, cookie, candy, etc in that whole day. But guess what? I'm 40lbs overweight because I ate too much food and didn't burn off the extra 300 calories a day. I didn't eat junk, but I'm fat and I'm at risk of diabetes. Not because I was binging on carbs, because I ate too many calories.
A Chipotle burrito is anything but low carb. Unless you get a salad instead of a burrito, skip the rice, skip the beans... then it can be considered low carb.
Did she say it was low carb, or that she was low carb? I'm trying to understand why you are qualifying her statement, which was meant to support her stance (which I agree with, btw) that it isn't junk food that makes people fat, it is too many calories in general, regardless of their source.
"not because I was binging on carbs" after describing a meal that was a carb binge. I know she got rice and/or beans in her burrito for this, as the tortilla itself isn't quite a binge level of carbs and 1,200 calories shows that it had to have included at least beans (all other available ingredients even with the highest calorie meat still don't add up to 1,200 unless adding at least beans).
How is a single meal, even at 70-80% carbs, a "binge", especially in context of the other hypothetical meals described?
That is where it becomes subjective. I would see a single food item with more than 100g of carbs to be a "carb binge." There was a time in my life when it wouldn't be considered a "binge" until 800g of carbs, so definitely subjective... that can't be argued.
I wasn't aware that binges are now being defined by carb count. So if I stuff myself to the point of wanting to vomit with plain chicken breast, that's fine, but if it's with rice, then it's a binge? What's the cutoff for number of carbs that's allowed before it's considered a binge?
"binging on carbs" would be a binge of carbs. Binging on plain chicken breast would not be considered "binging on carbs." As to the number of carbs considered a binge, I've already said it is subjective... that is the comment you just quoted.
So, you're picking at words and derailing the debate for entertainment?
That isn't the point I saw at all. She says she ate "healthy" and did not eat "cookies, chips, candy" (implying that carbs are unhealthy). Then she described a meal that is as high in carbs as if she had actually eaten cookies, chips, and candy. Finally, she finishes by saying she is not overweight because she was "binging on carbs" with evidence that she was eating "healthy" (clearly defined as low carb based on the foods described and the final mention of carbs). And even though she ate "healthy" (low carb), she still gained weight. Except she did not eat "healthy" by her own definition. The evidence she provided to show she was not "binging on carbs" actually proves that she was, in fact, binging on carbs.
I'm not saying I agree nor that I disagree with the point that low carb is "healthy," but you can't tell me you ate "healthy," demonstrate that your definition of "healthy" iss low carb, and then tell me you ate a bunch of carbs every single day. By doing so, you are telling me that you did not eat "healthy" by your own definition.
This is just looking for something to pick at. It's full clear what she said. "cookies chips and candy" are what people commonly describe as junk, and "binging on carbs" is what people describe as eating too much of these foods often labeled as junk. It's simple to understand a post when you don't take apart the words and analyze them. And this is yet another reason while "junk" is a poor label.
I'll give you one from my own experience: I ate predominantly home-cooked food and mostly foods close to their natural state, not out of choice but out habit and I gained weight, a lot of it. My diet back then could have been described as healthy if not for the copious amounts of oil and nuts I used to consume and the larger than normal portions of most foods.
I disagree. I believe reading and understanding the actual words used is paramount to understanding the post as a whole. Otherwise, I would just be guessing what is meant.
You seem to be the only one who read her post that way. To me, it was crystal clear she meant exactly how AmusedMonkey explained it.
You also seem to be ignoring the rest of her post which gives more context.
^ This. I thought her post was very clear - Chipotle is "whole food", would probably not fall under a "junk food" tax, and it would be very easy to get fat and diabetic eating that.2 -
If adding a monetary default worked to dissuade people from doing things, then speeders who got tickets would stop speeding, people who don't pay taxes would pay taxes, people who live in high tax states would flat out leave, etc.
People are going to do what they want to do even if it costs them more. Most taxes increases are just guises of increasing revenue and justifying it with some sort of pacification law.
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
4 -
Bottled water isn't junk food and there are probably more plastic bottles used by any nation with the same issue of littering.GaleHawkins wrote: »It would be nice if there was no junk food perhaps but it could lead to major protests I expect. I can see how junk food adds to the litter since it comes in packages that get tossed. A tossed apple will decompose or be eaten by critters.
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
3 -
Bottled water isn't junk food and there are probably more plastic bottles used by any nation with the same issue of littering.GaleHawkins wrote: »It would be nice if there was no junk food perhaps but it could lead to major protests I expect. I can see how junk food adds to the litter since it comes in packages that get tossed. A tossed apple will decompose or be eaten by critters.
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
Good point. Some areas have bottle deposits. My state has a bottle deposit, but it doesn't apply to water. Also, it hasn't changed for decades so the value of returning the bottle is no longer enough to make much (if any) difference on littering.0 -
I think a more interesting and possibly more feasible idea would be to restrict advertising. But again, I think defining junk food would be the barrier to this solution.2
-
CatherineThorsdottir wrote: »I think a more interesting and possibly more feasible idea would be to restrict advertising. But again, I think defining junk food would be the barrier to this solution.
I would support requiring companies to show the calories in a clear way both in print and media advertising. Awareness is lacking in how many calories people consume on a daily basis. If people saw how many calories Doritos, regular soda or whatever has everytime they are advertised, they might stop overeating them.
1 -
I am against government penalizing people for making a perfectly legal choice. I am also against governments being required to assist people with consequences relating to their personal circumstances.
7 -
CatherineThorsdottir wrote: »I think a more interesting and possibly more feasible idea would be to restrict advertising. But again, I think defining junk food would be the barrier to this solution.
I would support requiring companies to show the calories in a clear way both in print and media advertising. Awareness is lacking in how many calories people consume on a daily basis. If people saw how many calories Doritos, regular soda or whatever has everytime they are advertised, they might stop overeating them.
This has been a thing for a long time in many places. It's not helping. I can give you all of the numbers in the world, but if you don't know what they mean, and don't actually track them, it's pointless.
ETA: not necessarily in TV adverts, etc., but I have been seeing more and more nutrition info in big bolded numbers on chip stands, and things of that nature. Also, restaurants in certain cities are required to have the information on their menus. Honestly though, you could have a banner go across the middle of the screen during Super Bowl commercials saying "600 calories per bag", and that's not going to stop anyone from eating it, that wants to eat the stuff to begin with. Hell, just take a look around this website, and these people are on a damned forum that's attached to a nutrional database (though many of the entries are suspect).0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Yes, i'd certainly like to see some kind of "sugar" tax, but not to the extent that we would create "prohibition" conditions.
This isn't something to be taken lightly but otoh neither is a 30% obesity rate.
Not enough is being done to help people control their weight, overeating is a hugely popular hobby.
why in the world do you want the government trying to regulate weight?????? And there is absolutely nothing wrong with sugar when consumed in moderation...
Because the government pays over 50% of healthcare costs and that percentage is rising. Obesity ialong with smoking ate the biggest controllable health risks.
Agree nothing wrong with sugar in modreatiom, just like nothing wrong with booze in moderation and there is tax on that above.the typical sales tax.
not sure how the flawed/unconstitutional right for the government to pay for healthcare costs somehow turns into a right for the government to regulate everyone's weight..
that is a ridiculous argument.
Don't think the government paying for health care has been declared unconstitutional. MedI care and Medicaid have been around for years.
please tell me what section of the constitution provides the government the authority to pay for healthcare costs?
Sure right after you show us where medicare and Medicaid plus insurance for government employees is unconstitutional
there is no inherent power in the constitution for the government to provide healthcare or medicare or medicaid payments....that is your answer...
unless you want to point to a specific authority in the constitution that grants said power?1 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Yes, i'd certainly like to see some kind of "sugar" tax, but not to the extent that we would create "prohibition" conditions.
This isn't something to be taken lightly but otoh neither is a 30% obesity rate.
Not enough is being done to help people control their weight, overeating is a hugely popular hobby.
why in the world do you want the government trying to regulate weight?????? And there is absolutely nothing wrong with sugar when consumed in moderation...
Because the government pays over 50% of healthcare costs and that percentage is rising. Obesity ialong with smoking ate the biggest controllable health risks.
Agree nothing wrong with sugar in modreatiom, just like nothing wrong with booze in moderation and there is tax on that above.the typical sales tax.
not sure how the flawed/unconstitutional right for the government to pay for healthcare costs somehow turns into a right for the government to regulate everyone's weight..
that is a ridiculous argument.
Don't think the government paying for health care has been declared unconstitutional. MedI care and Medicaid have been around for years.
please tell me what section of the constitution provides the government the authority to pay for healthcare costs?
Sure right after you show us where medicare and Medicaid plus insurance for government employees is unconstitutional
there is no inherent power in the constitution for the government to provide healthcare or medicare or medicaid payments....that is your answer...
unless you want to point to a specific authority in the constitution that grants said power?
It's definitely not there, but unfortunately, our population is shifting it's mentality toward "well the Constitution doesn't say they can't", instead of the opposite.
It also doesn't say that they can't make you smoke crack while standing on one foot for their amusement. Cool with that one, everybody?1 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Yes, i'd certainly like to see some kind of "sugar" tax, but not to the extent that we would create "prohibition" conditions.
This isn't something to be taken lightly but otoh neither is a 30% obesity rate.
Not enough is being done to help people control their weight, overeating is a hugely popular hobby.
why in the world do you want the government trying to regulate weight?????? And there is absolutely nothing wrong with sugar when consumed in moderation...
Because the government pays over 50% of healthcare costs and that percentage is rising. Obesity ialong with smoking ate the biggest controllable health risks.
Agree nothing wrong with sugar in modreatiom, just like nothing wrong with booze in moderation and there is tax on that above.the typical sales tax.
not sure how the flawed/unconstitutional right for the government to pay for healthcare costs somehow turns into a right for the government to regulate everyone's weight..
that is a ridiculous argument.
Don't think the government paying for health care has been declared unconstitutional. MedI care and Medicaid have been around for years.
please tell me what section of the constitution provides the government the authority to pay for healthcare costs?
Sure right after you show us where medicare and Medicaid plus insurance for government employees is unconstitutional
there is no inherent power in the constitution for the government to provide healthcare or medicare or medicaid payments....that is your answer...
unless you want to point to a specific authority in the constitution that grants said power?
It's definitely not there, but unfortunately, our population is shifting it's mentality toward "well the Constitution doesn't say they can't", instead of the opposite.
It also doesn't say that they can't make you smoke crack while standing on one foot for their amusement. Cool with that one, everybody?
the standard response is that it is "implied" which is a way of saying "it is not in there, but we are going to make it up because we know better" Technically, the Supreme Court never had the authority to rule a law unconstitutional, and they just made that up in Marburry VS Madison...4 -
Nah, it'd be pointless. I'd be angry about it, but I'd still be ordering crap off of GrubHub, buying bakery stuff in-store, etc.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 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
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions