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.
Hot topics! Sugar in fruit
Options
Replies
-
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
Another item to add to the list of things someone doesn't understand... What is Trolling?
From what I've seen the ones using the phrase most often are usually the trolls. This thread is a case in point.
See here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling
If you read this thread you will see I didn't bring out the word. I was accused of trolling. Some people just can handle someone having a different viewpoint.
I think the phrase "different viewpoint" is somewhat generous for a set of beliefs that are at odds with the weight of the evidence, drizzled with pseudoscience, and often incoherent.4 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
Another item to add to the list of things someone doesn't understand... What is Trolling?
From what I've seen the ones using the phrase most often are usually the trolls. This thread is a case in point.
See here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling
If you read this thread you will see I didn't bring out the word. I was accused of trolling. Some people just can handle someone having a different viewpoint.
I think the phrase "different viewpoint" is somewhat generous for a set of beliefs that are at odds with the weight of the evidence, drizzled with pseudoscience, and often incoherent.
Incoherent is a good choice for the posters constantly attaching me and defending adding sugar to food. Most of the posts in this thread are just people attacking others that don't agree with the CICO, a calorie is a calorie mantra. That is pseudoscience to claim that it doesn't matter what you eat, just how much you eat.0 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
Another item to add to the list of things someone doesn't understand... What is Trolling?
From what I've seen the ones using the phrase most often are usually the trolls. This thread is a case in point.
See here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling
If you read this thread you will see I didn't bring out the word. I was accused of trolling. Some people just can handle someone having a different viewpoint.
I think the phrase "different viewpoint" is somewhat generous for a set of beliefs that are at odds with the weight of the evidence, drizzled with pseudoscience, and often incoherent.
Incoherent is a good choice for the posters constantly attaching me and defending adding sugar to food. Most of the posts in this thread are just people attacking others that don't agree with the CICO, a calorie is a calorie mantra. That is pseudoscience to claim that it doesn't matter what you eat, just how much you eat.
CICO is not an argument that it doesn't matter what you eat, nor do I see people in here making that claim. You've missed the mark. Again. You may want to read what has actually been posted.0 -
Once again, correcting misinformation is not attacking. It would be a good idea for you to distinguish the difference. Doing so would end needless suffering...sunnybeaches105 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
Another item to add to the list of things someone doesn't understand... What is Trolling?
From what I've seen the ones using the phrase most often are usually the trolls. This thread is a case in point.
See here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling
If you read this thread you will see I didn't bring out the word. I was accused of trolling. Some people just can handle someone having a different viewpoint.
I think the phrase "different viewpoint" is somewhat generous for a set of beliefs that are at odds with the weight of the evidence, drizzled with pseudoscience, and often incoherent.
Incoherent is a good choice for the posters constantly attaching me and defending adding sugar to food.
In no way does CICO equate to "it does not matter what you eat..."Most of the posts in this thread are just people attacking others that don't agree with the CICO, a calorie is a calorie mantra. That is pseudoscience to claim that it doesn't matter what you eat, just how much you eat.5 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...2 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...
You have no idea of what I'm doing. I'm not into any form of fear mongering, claiming that is absurd.
From everything I can find there eating fruit is generally protective and good for you. Fructose is bad but when eaten with fruit it isn't harmful but it can be harmful in highly processed food.
So what part of cutting back on added sugars being good is fear mongering? What part of saying it is more important as to what you eat instead of just watching the calories is fear mongering?4 -
I'm with you on that.
So what part of cutting back on added sugars being good is fear mongering? What part of saying it is more important as to what you eat instead of just watching the calories is fear mongering?FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...
4 -
I should have wrote that "Fructose is bad but when eaten with fruit it probably isn't harmful"
At some point we just have to make a decision what is right for ourselves. For me, I'm going to keep my fruit in my diet. Have to have something that is nice.
2 -
I understand that fructose is only harmful in large amounts and it is almost impossible to overeat fructose by eating fruit! Unless you really want to sit down and eat 2500 calories in fruit!1
-
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...
You have no idea of what I'm doing. I'm not into any form of fear mongering, claiming that is absurd.
From everything I can find there eating fruit is generally protective and good for you. Fructose is bad but when eaten with fruit it isn't harmful but it can be harmful in highly processed food.
So what part of cutting back on added sugars being good is fear mongering? What part of saying it is more important as to what you eat instead of just watching the calories is fear mongering?
This is fear mongering...
"It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm..."
I do not expect you to understand which I'm fine with. You are what yo are just as I am what I am.1 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...
You have no idea of what I'm doing. I'm not into any form of fear mongering, claiming that is absurd.
From everything I can find there eating fruit is generally protective and good for you. Fructose is bad but when eaten with fruit it isn't harmful but it can be harmful in highly processed food.
So what part of cutting back on added sugars being good is fear mongering? What part of saying it is more important as to what you eat instead of just watching the calories is fear mongering?
This is fear mongering...
"It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm..."
I do not expect you to understand which I'm fine with. You are what yo are just as I am what I am.
There are multiple studies that have verified sweeten beverages can quickly lead to fatty liver disease, so far I haven't seen any that showed that was an issue with eating fruit. There isn't any fear mongering there. Lots of people reacted the same way to health issues with tobacco and lots of people still smoke and chew tobacco. The warnings are there and it isn't fear mongering.
Drink your sugar if you want too, that is your choice. Just don't be surprised when you are called out for supporting an unhealthy choice.5 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Correcting your misinformation isn't trolling.
The people that say it doesn't matter what you eat all the matter is the calories are the ones spreading misinformation. That is exactly the message the world has gotten for the last few decades and all it has resulted in is more obesity.
It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm.
I boggles my mind the misinformation being spread and then hiding behind CICO. I see some posters actually talking about it reasonably but they are few. Sure it can and does often work, but there are also a lot of other outcomes than just burning fat. Claiming that a calorie deficit always results in fat loss doesn't make it true.
For the record I actually had to study thermodynamics and pass to get my engineering degree. That was a few decades ago, but thermodynamics hasn't changed. Most people talking about the laws of thermodynamics haven't even ever studied thermodynamics.
There are no storage of theories about what is going on with obesity and how to fix it. For working towards improving health CICO can be a useful tool. However one has to realize that not all the foods are treated the same in the body. Claiming that is the case is blatant misinformation.
You watch too many fear mongering movies and read too many blogs...
You have no idea of what I'm doing. I'm not into any form of fear mongering, claiming that is absurd.
From everything I can find there eating fruit is generally protective and good for you. Fructose is bad but when eaten with fruit it isn't harmful but it can be harmful in highly processed food.
So what part of cutting back on added sugars being good is fear mongering? What part of saying it is more important as to what you eat instead of just watching the calories is fear mongering?
This is fear mongering...
"It matters if you get your sugar form fruit or from a soft drink. It might not make a difference to your calculations but it makes a difference to your liver. In the long run that is what matters. If though it takes decades for sugar to kill doesn't mean that it isn't doing harm..."
I do not expect you to understand which I'm fine with. You are what yo are just as I am what I am.
There are multiple studies that have verified sweeten beverages can quickly lead to fatty liver disease, so far I haven't seen any that showed that was an issue with eating fruit. There isn't any fear mongering there. Lots of people reacted the same way to health issues with tobacco and lots of people still smoke and chew tobacco. The warnings are there and it isn't fear mongering.
Drink your sugar if you want too, that is your choice. Just don't be surprised when you are called out for supporting an unhealthy choice.
More fear mongering...
1 -
stevencloser wrote: »
That was my thought. Especially not if you eat a sensible and calorie appropriate diet.0 -
waiting for someone to post that not having refined sugar in your diet can/could/maybe lead to death, I, myself don't eat refined but maybe once or twice a year, but I doubt its been really proven to be harmful to humans yet
I'm good with eating uncooked, raw fruit, or cooked processed fruit, like apple sauce and jams, chutney etc.0 -
No one claims added sugar is necessary for health. What people point out is that claims that it is inherently bad for you or different in kind from sugar that happens to be paired with the rest of the stuff in a piece of fruit (or whatever) are inaccurate.1
-
Oh, and just so you can't assume that I am one of those people who clearly want to eat all of the sugar. Yes, that red line is 5, and the highest spike is eleven. This is total not "added".
0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Oh, and just so you can't assume that I am one of those people who clearly want to eat all of the sugar. Yes, that red line is 5, and the highest spike is eleven. This is total not "added".
He does assume a lot. Like you, I really don't consume all that much added sugar. But I don't fear it either.0 -
If I'm not mistaken, there is an individual who has posted in this thread (but did not state his consumption here) who consumes around 100 grams of added sugar a day, which is more than the rest of us.0
-
I consume 100 grams of added sugar pretty often.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K 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
- 391 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
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 925 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions