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.
So. What's the worst weight loss myth?
Options
Replies
-
Myth: Oreos are bad for you.
I just sacrificed my own body by eating a package to test the myth, and I'm fine.
I'll show myself out now....24 -
Cutting out bread. Bread specifically. Not carbs, or white carbs, or anything like that, just bread. I had someone tell me that they were going to lose weight by cutting out the bread they usually have for lunch and replace them with.... noodles. The instant kind. Because bread is the devil, but noodles are fine.12
-
Not sure if this is a myth or truth, but I hope that fasted cardio is on its way out. I just think that's a dangerous shortcut to fitness that's prone to make you pass out instead.
Well, there are myths about any supposed benefits to it, but as to it being dangerous?
Nah.
Plenty of people work out fasted all the time.
I'm one of them, because as Annie stated, I cannot do cardio with food in my stomach without experiencing nausea. Running is so much easier without food sloshing around in there.
I do eat an hour before lifting, though1 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »PS. Alcohol doesn't contain sugar. It's lost in distillation.
It's converted to simple carbohydrates, which convert instantly to glucose within your system without any length of time required to digest it, meaning it's effectively the same as ingesting sugar; surely you're not this daft?
Please do link your research article showing long term negative effects of moderate marijuana usage; I'll show you 15 that disprove it.
Damnit, I was really hoping this one WAS a myth.0 -
lunaticfish7 wrote: »That you have to lose weight to have value.
That myth only exists in fat acceptance circles and is perpetuated as a false belief that thin people supposedly have. It's nonsense.
It's usually self-loathing that people have for themselves being projected.4 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »PS. Alcohol doesn't contain sugar. It's lost in distillation.
It's converted to simple carbohydrates, which convert instantly to glucose within your system without any length of time required to digest it, meaning it's effectively the same as ingesting sugar; surely you're not this daft?
Please do link your research article showing long term negative effects of moderate marijuana usage; I'll show you 15 that disprove it.
Depends on the booze. A lot of it doesn't have much in the way of carbohydrates.
Insulting people isn't an effective debate technique.
Also, I said the research was new, and I heard a news report and allowed for it to be bad science reporting. You refuting it with old studies won't impress me against newer research, and I'm in the middle of cooking dinner.6 -
You get the respect you give; I've been respectful to a point, but having people refute stated evidence and state "Oh you're cherry picking", "Oh that's not right" while making no attempt to engage in a proper debate or discussion gets tiresome, and to that point, if you're propogating the same old *kitten* repeatedly that isn't accurate, I'm not going to keep nodding and smiling.
Take this for example "Oh I've seen recent research indicating moderate marijuana usage has long term health impacts" - but you won't post the research.
Sure, your clique of friends will like/awesome/inspiring your posts and you'll get a lot of kudos, but you're wrong.
Compare that to my responses to people who actually post their own research, debate the subject and don't rely on either "HAH, SUGAR ISN'T ADDICTIVE" when that has never been a point of contention I've made, or "HAH, WE ALL KNOW THE TRUTH" when the reality is you don't seem to.6 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »cahubbard6421 wrote: »Losing weight will make you happy.
OMG, so much this!!
I'd never heard most of these 'myths' before joining this site, but this right here ^ is a huge one I think.
I can personally say it doesn't get rid of depression. I am happier with my new me, however. Am I really happy? I don't know.
0 -
Also... don't all carbohdrates converting to glucose, so aren't they all just as bad as eating sugar?
Oh well. So much for our evening's stir fry. Might as well dump a chocolate bar on everyone's plate and be done with it.10 -
All I'm going to write is "Glycemic Index" and let you catch up on that statement.2
-
SymbolismNZ wrote: »All I'm going to write is "Glycemic Index" and let you catch up on that statement.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27901033
http://www.prevention.com/eatclean/glycemic-index
FTR, I have very little time when I post on these boards and would appreciate it if you'd stop insulting my intelligence. Don't mistake me not replying in depth for a lack of understanding.
Also? Occasional wrong word choice happens due to a benign brain tumor I have. Most people here know that, thought I'd clue you in.23 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »All I'm going to write is "Glycemic Index" and let you catch up on that statement.
Wasn't there a recent study that show how wildly unpredictable the GI is?6 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »leanjogreen18 wrote: »Which is kinda my point...everything in moderation:).
Which is cool, like I said in the thread he's quoting, the point I made in that thread is that refined sugar itself has been linked to a number of health risks in oncogenes, neurological disorders and appetite disorders and therefore consuming it in moderation is very similar to a moderate drug user, i/e the genesis of this debate.
Yeah, no. Very few drugs are used in moderation. I would love to agree with you but just no. I've not once seen a post where folks go full on the bag of sugar if they run out of cookies nor have I seen folks attack bananas, or any fruit because they are out of sweets. Have I known of folks going after mouthwash or cough syrup when they are out of alcohol or drugs, oh yeah. Sorry I want to believe you but it's just not proven other than the anti sugar folks. Please really think long and hard, folks would full on go for not only bags of sugar but any fruit if this were true.
...I don't know, Jo....I have done things for the sugar...I'm not sugar if it's addictive to everyone...but I'm not proud of the things I have done for sugar. The low doses like apples do nothing (not strong enough). Its the hard core dried fruits and processed sugar sources that get me. I have gone after the bag of sugar or wheat or corn when my fix wasn't available...
This is my shame.
2 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »All I'm going to write is "Glycemic Index" and let you catch up on that statement.
Wasn't there a recent study that show how wildly unpredictable the GI is?
There are a bunch that show it's not as helpful in appetite control as some had hoped. Also, that individuals have different glycemic responses to the same foods.
There is a correlation between a low GI diet and good health results, but that's probably because the average person eating a healthful diet probably also has a lower GI diet than the average person eating an unhealthful diet.
In other words, lots of foods that help make up a healthful diet are low GI, but that doesn't mean that they are healthful BECAUSE they are low GI.
Especially since it's glycemic load that actually would matter, not GI, and the overall glycemic effect of a meal is what would matter, not how the foods would affect you if they were hypothetically eaten on their own.
Um, after all that I have to come up with a myth that I dislike. ;-)
How about that specific foods are extra fattening and cause weight gain independent of overall calories and, related to that, that the weight gain will be in one specific spot. My best friend's mom, years ago, insisted that cheese made your butt big. (Clearly cheese is missing out on what should be an excellent marketing opportunity today!)12 -
It's more so the principle of fast release glucose versus slow release glucose; in effect with processed foods (sugar, chocolate, most juices) that are high carb and no fiber, you get an instant rush of glucose which your body and brain loves and thinks "Oh, I must be about to do something here!" so certain genes activate within your system, ten to twenty minutes later..
It's the principle behind say Lucozade, a glucose drink that immediately enhances the amount of glucose within your system, meaning you feel more energetic and your brain willa lso process things quicker; however recent research indicates that it's not actually the glucose, but more so an increased synthesis of acetylcholine which is now becoming to be more interesting in research as for its impact on the brain long term....
In any case, three hours later, you finally do a task like walking or maybe some exercise, you've eaten/drunk a ton of calories reasonably quickly and you had that initial fast release of glucose, but now your body feels like it doesn't have enough energy in its system, which some research indicates in turn leads towards neural receptors responsible for appetite being heightened; hence refined sugar may not be addictive, but it is likely responsible for playing tricks on appetite.
Glycemic Index is a laymans way (seems to be important here, people don't like research) of attempting to describe things, but lemurcat12 is right, it's the process of gylcemic load and release that is important.
All foods create glucose in some shape or form within your system, be them from fat, carb or protein; however carbohydrates are the easiest for your body to process into glucose, especially when you're pouring them down your throat in an added sugar juice.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
Still waiting on your research around marijuana; but in regards to a literature review that reviews evidence as it relates to "carbohydrate-insulin theory of obesity" is a completely different story; again, you're focused on weight loss, I'm focused on wellness.
The Wellness debate is "How is your body utilising the calories you've just ingested and how can it draw on them as it needs throughout the day", the weightloss perspective is "If I eat this, do I get fat?"2 -
Nvm, not worth it5
-
SymbolismNZ wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
Still waiting on your research around marijuana; but in regards to a literature review that reviews evidence as it relates to "carbohydrate-insulin theory of obesity" is a completely different story; again, you're focused on weight loss, I'm focused on wellness.
The Wellness debate is "How is your body utilising the calories you've just ingested and how can it draw on them as it needs throughout the day", the weightloss perspective is "If I eat this, do I get fat?"
You know, I don't give a rats *kitten* about marijuana, putting up the strawman of marijuana instead of interacting with what has been posted about sugar is completely unhelpful. Having said that, if you want to debate this, do so in a message thread that has to do with it, and get out of this one as frankly I was enjoying it and finding it informative until you turned it into yet another sugar debate.
Here is on for you http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10371298/sugar-addiction-like-drug-abuse-study-reveals#latest12 -
I've already interacted on sugar; the problem is you keep linking it to weight gain and addiction which I never make statements about. I've pointed out refined sugar increases your risks of heart disease, of digestive issues, of neuro-degenerative diseases and posted my research on it.
The only thing I've gotten back is either statements that are so wrong it's funny, or research that is linked to an entirely different topic. I'm just responding to what others write, if you don't want me writing in here, don't give me something to respond to
i.e the genesis of me being here, someone quoting my point that moderate refined sugar and moderate marijuana use have similar factors of risk towards different health ailments and saying it was the dumbest thing he's heard; yet, no one can disprove it, hard to disprove facts.2 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »I've already interacted on sugar; the problem is you keep linking it to weight gain and addiction which I never make statements about. I've pointed out refined sugar increases your risks of heart disease, of digestive issues, of neuro-degenerative diseases and posted my research on it.
The only thing I've gotten back is either statements that are so wrong it's funny, or research that is linked to an entirely different topic.
If you want to debate sugar addiction, do it in the one i posted. It actually has human models and not just rat studies. The conclusions in human trials does not support your hypothesis.12
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K 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
- 390 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
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions