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.
Discover what's new & improved in the MyFitnessPal app!
We’re dedicated to helping you achieve your health and nutrition goals. And our newest features and updates? They do just that. Learn how we're making tracking your progress easier, faster, and more motivating than ever.

Scared at what I am reading

Options
16781012

Replies

  • ryry_
    ryry_ Posts: 4,966 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ryry_ wrote: »
    What the hell is even being debated here?

    The merits of keto apparently...IDK how that happened exactly...

    All debates end up being about keto.

    It's like all tapes if left long enough turn into Best of Queen...

    Or Jock Jams
  • rzales
    rzales Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    Wow; a lot of heat on this one. I hear the 2 sides. What people intend/mean is different than one others hear/understand. That is especially true on line where you lose intonation, and can't read the face/body for understanding and clarification.

    I try to use the words "Train" (instead of exercice) and "Fuel" instead of Diet. Not because one is bad or one is good. But because for me, I know I struggle. And the word diet (again, for ME) inherently means a deficit situation to try to reach some weight loss goal. So I have chosen words that help my head space think of these things in the way I WANT to see them.

    But to each his own. I think the important thing is that you realize that the words may have a meaning somewhere in your psyche that does not serve you, and if that is the case, it's worth considering a different word.
  • HazyEyes93
    HazyEyes93 Posts: 89 Member
    Options
    I have never seen someone here advocate for a starvation diet. Never. Now, I have seen people look for others to validate their own starvation diets but those people are often shot down with helpful advice and suggest therapy. So, idk what you're even talking about.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,413 MFP Moderator
    edited August 2016
    Options
    You are absolutely right! Research is now beginning to prove that dieting can lead to being overweight, and in some cases be the cause of eating disorders. I've been on MFP for 6 years now. I've lost weight (50 pounds), been at goal, and gained it all back TWICE in that period of time. Not only that, but all my MFP friends either gained all their weight back or have been struggling on the losing, gaining crazy cycle. I have not known ONE person here who lost weight and maintained. Yes you can lose weight on a diet, but if you can't maintain the loss, then diets don't really work. Research is now beginning to prove that the old "calories in-calories out" is garbage. In fact, it may not even be calories that determine weight loss or gain. I've been hearing the buzz about this for the past year or so and it's becoming louder. Unfortunately, MFP is calorie-based (you can't log food without calories on MFP, nor can you log exercise without a "calorie burn.")

    I have been hear for 7 years. Lost most of my weight 3 or 4 years ago and have been within a few lbs of my low for the majority of that. Now I am working to get abs which wasn't a part of my initial goal.

    What research are you reading? I would be interested.
  • Jcl81
    Jcl81 Posts: 154 Member
    edited August 2016
    Options
    I think the reason diet is a "bad choice" for some is how the word is associated. Short term It's often associated on how a person changes the amount, types of foods, and quality of food for a short period of time to achieve a certain goal.

    Example; Jane, wants to fit in her Wedding dress. She wants to lose 8 pounds and goes on a diet. Theoretically people who think this way usually go back to how they were before losing or gaining after the goal is achieved. This is because a time frame is associated with this word and once the goals are achieved there is no more unless a new goal is inspired. Then they switch over to a Lifestyle change, because it becomes never ending.

    I've never heard a person say; I will diet forever.


    People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!

    Individuals with long term goals really don't fit the "diet wording". (of course, there are exemptions as not everything is black or white but we're talking in generic terms.)

    Lifestyle change. This for the people who think LONG TERM

    This is for those that follow a plan and follow it forever. Adapting is possible but they stick to basic principles of their plan. The vast majority of these individuals rarely "YOYO" with weight, although they may go 1-2 bulks or cuts settling in for the long haul.

    These people have figured out there is no time frame. To them it's about health, and is not a sprint it's a marathon! These people want to look good forever. Meaning looking good for as long as physically and mentally possible!

    "Warning" This is how I've come to see it, and I find it often is describes to me this way.
    Example; "Are you still on a diet?" The dictionary might say what the word diet means, but society changed it.


    The overall ignorance can be a cause of media and magazines with the "loose 10 pounds in 2 weeks" headline.

    I myself choose the words "lifestyle change" instead of "diet" because I believe there's no time frame and it makes more sense to my goals. It seems goals will have to be taken into consideration of what words are used.

    I know I am not wrong or right, but ask yourself what makes more sense for you, if what you do needed a label.

  • Budjola
    Budjola Posts: 148 Member
    Options
    rather then word diet i like to use meal planing
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    You are absolutely right! Research is now beginning to prove that dieting can lead to being overweight, and in some cases be the cause of eating disorders. I've been on MFP for 6 years now. I've lost weight (50 pounds), been at goal, and gained it all back TWICE in that period of time. Not only that, but all my MFP friends either gained all their weight back or have been struggling on the losing, gaining crazy cycle. I have not known ONE person here who lost weight and maintained. Yes you can lose weight on a diet, but if you can't maintain the loss, then diets don't really work. Research is now beginning to prove that the old "calories in-calories out" is garbage. In fact, it may not even be calories that determine weight loss or gain. I've been hearing the buzz about this for the past year or so and it's becoming louder. Unfortunately, MFP is calorie-based (you can't log food without calories on MFP, nor can you log exercise without a "calorie burn.")

    I've been on MFP for 3 years, lost 50 pounds also, kept it all off, know multiple successful longterm maintainers personally and even more from seeing them on the boards. They're all people who have a lot of posts on these forums giving advice and they're all swearing by CICO, me included. The scientific consensus also is very firm in their assessment that calories are what matters on the bottom line, that includes the WHO.

    My anecdote beats yours I think.

  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    d4_54 wrote: »
    Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.

    Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.

    If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
  • LINIA
    LINIA Posts: 1,147 Member
    Options
    Nothing is ever "TRUE" for everyone but I'm short, older and have many health issues, yes 1200 calories is my number; some older females can do more, eat more etc ......but many just can't.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    d4_54 wrote: »
    Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.

    Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.

    If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.

    True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.

    Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Jcl81 wrote: »
    People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!

    You seem to be talking about people who yo yo diet, not people who bulk and cut (who normally look fine all the time, IME, but of course it depends on the person). I associate bulking and cutting with the opposite of someone who signs up for the gym as a New Years resolution or is just focused on gaining and losing the same 5 lbs.
    Individuals with long term goals really don't fit the "diet wording". (of course, there are exemptions as not everything is black or white but we're talking in generic terms.)

    Again, diet means "the way a person or group of people eat." For example, the traditional Okinawan diet or the Med diet or the (sigh) western pattern diet.

    It also means cutting calories, and, as such, is something we need to do only short term in that at some time you will get to a goal. No, you should not then go back to eating in a way that would lead to weight gain, but using the term diet has nothing to do with whether you will or not.

    As I said above, I have been maintaining. I'd like to lose another 5-10 lbs as I think it would help me run faster and I'd look better in certain clothes I want to wear (yeah, vanity lbs). Why would it make sense to describe this as a "lifestyle change." It's a diet. (Or, if I want to sound cooler, I suppose, I'm cutting.)
    This is for those that follow a plan and follow it forever. Adapting is possible but they stick to basic principles of their plan. The vast majority of these individuals rarely "YOYO" with weight, although they may go 1-2 bulks or cuts settling in for the long haul.

    Nice theory, but I suspect not actually true. I'm cynical, because I did this before and then stuff happened. (No biggie, I eventually knew how to get back on track.) That you approach something as a lifestyle change doesn't protect you against weight gain. It would be pretty to think so, and it probably is helpful to have a long-term plan, no argument. I actually agree it's about adopting and maintaining health habits and fitness goals and so on, not thinking of it as something with an endpoint. But a particular cut (or diet) may have an endpoint when you choose to focus on other fitness goals besides weight loss. Or, hey, maybe you just keep going until it stops at a weight you like (that's what I did the one other time I lost weight), but that's not necessarily the only approach that works.

    So again, agree about long-term approach being important. Don't agree that it's harmful to use the term diet (and don't care a whit about headlines in magazines I don't read). Don't agree that "lifestyle change" is a better term -- it rubs me the wrong way and plenty of people doing fad diets and yo yoing refer to their "journey" or "lifestyle change." It probably happens on MFP every day!
  • hikernut53
    hikernut53 Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    I totally get what the OP is saying. I've had a lifelong "battle" with weight so I know the drill. I've tried many different "diets" to lose the excess fat: low carb, WW, South Beach, Diet Center, grapefruit, etc... In the end, it is really all about what I do every day for the rest of my life (food/exercise/mind) and there are no "cheat days". I make choices and eat whatever I choose to eat. But, I also know that if I eat something that has a lot of calories, I need to compensate with exercise (or reducing the calories later.) It's about paying attention to my health. I'm still learning what works for me. I will always be learning, I think. Thank you for the rant, d4_54!
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    rml_16 wrote: »
    d4_54 wrote: »
    Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.

    Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.

    If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.

    True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.

    Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.

    There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    edited August 2016
    Options
    rml_16 wrote: »
    d4_54 wrote: »
    Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.

    Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.

    If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.

    True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.

    Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.

    There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.

    Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
  • Jcl81
    Jcl81 Posts: 154 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Jcl81 wrote: »
    People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!

    You seem to be talking about people who yo yo diet, not people who bulk and cut (who normally look fine all the time, IME, but of course it depends on the person). I associate bulking and cutting with the opposite of someone who signs up for the gym as a New Years resolution or is just focused on gaining and losing the same 5 lbs.
    Individuals with long term goals really don't fit the "diet wording". (of course, there are exemptions as not everything is black or white but we're talking in generic terms.)

    Again, diet means "the way a person or group of people eat." For example, the traditional Okinawan diet or the Med diet or the (sigh) western pattern diet.

    It also means cutting calories, and, as such, is something we need to do only short term in that at some time you will get to a goal. No, you should not then go back to eating in a way that would lead to weight gain, but using the term diet has nothing to do with whether you will or not.

    As I said above, I have been maintaining. I'd like to lose another 5-10 lbs as I think it would help me run faster and I'd look better in certain clothes I want to wear (yeah, vanity lbs). Why would it make sense to describe this as a "lifestyle change." It's a diet. (Or, if I want to sound cooler, I suppose, I'm cutting.)
    This is for those that follow a plan and follow it forever. Adapting is possible but they stick to basic principles of their plan. The vast majority of these individuals rarely "YOYO" with weight, although they may go 1-2 bulks or cuts settling in for the long haul.

    Nice theory, but I suspect not actually true. I'm cynical, because I did this before and then stuff happened. (No biggie, I eventually knew how to get back on track.) That you approach something as a lifestyle change doesn't protect you against weight gain. It would be pretty to think so, and it probably is helpful to have a long-term plan, no argument. I actually agree it's about adopting and maintaining health habits and fitness goals and so on, not thinking of it as something with an endpoint. But a particular cut (or diet) may have an endpoint when you choose to focus on other fitness goals besides weight loss. Or, hey, maybe you just keep going until it stops at a weight you like (that's what I did the one other time I lost weight), but that's not necessarily the only approach that works.

    So again, agree about long-term approach being important. Don't agree that it's harmful to use the term diet (and don't care a whit about headlines in magazines I don't read). Don't agree that "lifestyle change" is a better term -- it rubs me the wrong way and plenty of people doing fad diets and yo yoing refer to their "journey" or "lifestyle change." It probably happens on MFP every day!

    No one said the word diet is harmful, and thanks for always ongoing opinion.

    "Diet" related to fitness doesn't just mean what a person eats. If you believe that you would not be able to use the sentence like this as it would make no sense. "How long do you diet for?" How long do you eat for, that won't work.

    The rest of what you wrote is just opinion, doesn't make it wrong or right just opinion and everyone has one.

    Lastly the dictionary doesn't determine how people use slang, and how things change like the word gay has changed over the years. Cool is another one. Things change. Official definitions are not what we are talking about, we are talking about how it's used when achieving a goal as in this situation.

  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    edited August 2016
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    You are absolutely right! Research is now beginning to prove that dieting can lead to being overweight, and in some cases be the cause of eating disorders. I've been on MFP for 6 years now. I've lost weight (50 pounds), been at goal, and gained it all back TWICE in that period of time. Not only that, but all my MFP friends either gained all their weight back or have been struggling on the losing, gaining crazy cycle. I have not known ONE person here who lost weight and maintained. Yes you can lose weight on a diet, but if you can't maintain the loss, then diets don't really work. Research is now beginning to prove that the old "calories in-calories out" is garbage. In fact, it may not even be calories that determine weight loss or gain. I've been hearing the buzz about this for the past year or so and it's becoming louder. Unfortunately, MFP is calorie-based (you can't log food without calories on MFP, nor can you log exercise without a "calorie burn.")

    I have been hear for 7 years. Lost most of my weight 3 or 4 years ago and have been within a few lbs of my low for the majority of that. Now I am working to get abs which wasn't a part of my initial goal.

    What research are you reading? I would be interested.

    I found my abs recently by a fairly restrictive (1800 net) diet at the end of a six month calorie restricted diet. They showed up somewhere around the time I made it to 13% BF (down from 22% six months earlier). I reached the net calories by sometimes doing a little more exercise and sometimes eating a little less, or some combination of the two.

    I supposed OP might argue that I did it wrong though, so you might want to try a different approach. Like maybe do the exact same thing I did but call it a lifestyle or a WOE or something else. But know that the crucial element is and always will be a calorie deficit. I haven't figured out a way around that yet. If someone ever does, I hope they give it a catchy name.