Bad tasting, healthy food.
Options
Replies
-
I'm with jenilla. Also, I don't like the term "junk food". I prefer that it be called "fast food" because that's what it is, and by the by, ancient cultures had it too. We go to alot of Roman sites and there's often a "fast food" place in the ruins--facinating. Check out Pompei or Ostia Antica if you don't believe, and it went back alot further. I guess those Roman matrons got tired of cooking too.
I cook alot for a family of 5 from scratch and it's exhausting. Going out for a pizza or pasta gives me a break, and I need it. 3 -
unsuspectingfish wrote: »I don't know if I'm reading too much into this, but a lot of people here seem to think that skinnier automatically = healthier.
Well, they are also right, in most cases.
I don't find annoying, per se, this way of thinking. What is annoying is the evangelism...4 -
unsuspectingfish wrote: »I don't know if I'm reading too much into this, but a lot of people here seem to think that skinnier automatically = healthier.
Well, the fact is that simply losing weight and going from morbidly obese, obese, or even overweight to a healthy BMI has a huge impact on preventing many obesity related diseases. Losing the weight has a more significant short term impact on health than obsessing over micronutrients. Again though, I think if you are reading comments to mean that nutrition isn't important, that's on you, because I've never come across someone in this site who actually believes nutrition and overall health isn't important.6 -
unsuspectingfish wrote: »I don't know if I'm reading too much into this, but a lot of people here seem to think that skinnier automatically = healthier.
For me it definitely means that and I have years of hard data that shows this
My glucose number is directly tied to my weight. When I was overweight I was a prediabetic but as I lost weight the number trended downward. Didn't matter what I was eating though. Now I'm in maintenance and keeping my bmi in the 20-21 range keeps my glucose number in the 80s and 90s. I go in for blood work twice a year and the labs consistently show this. A nice side affect is that the lower weight also produces great cholesterol numbers and a nice blood pressure as well (the nurse always compliments me after she takes it lol).
4 -
unsuspectingfish wrote: »Also, like, I don't know about anyone else, but whole foods, like fruits, veggies, whole grains, and fresh chicken/fish/eggs fill me up better and for longer than processed or fast foods, so I actually enjoy eating less because I'm not constantly starving.
That would fill me up as well, but my mental health would be taking a dive. I don't have great mental health to begin with and by cutting out my "fast food/junk foods/convenience foods/whatever you call them", I get depressed, anxious, and start trekking down the road of an ED. I would also be angry and lash out at people for no reason.
And I'm not talking about an all "fast food/junk foods/convenience foods/whatever you call them" diet either (depends on how you feel about canned/frozen fruits, veggies, and meats). I eat "whole foods", too, but I also have sweets.3 -
2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.8 -
Once we go down the path of including the cost of our own labor that rabbit hole is pretty deep.
I have one job. It has a maximum number of hours I can work at it. I freelance occasionally in my free time. It would be difficult for me to get another job that pays as much as my first job that would fit around the hours of my first job. So I use some of my non-work hours to cook things at home. Yes, my labor isn't included in my calculation of how I can make a restaurant meal for much cheaper at home -- but in the real world, no one is going to be paying me anything else for those hours.
THere's a concept, when writing grants -- "in kind contributions." Your research partners offer their services towards the work rather than cash. When I say that I can make four loaves of bread or a pie or a roast beef dinner for less than restaurants charge, my own labor is an in-kind contribution.0 -
Also, in what world is a hamburger "nutritionally empty?"6
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.
It would seem bizarre to me to include cost of labor for food prepared at home unless someone was actually getting paid. I shop primarily at Kroger.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Rebecca0224 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »dutchandkiwi wrote: »Taste chances over time. I used to love a fair few of those highly processed junk foods - A few times I tried them again Having really looked forward to them. However they did not taste at all as I remembered, they tasted lousy, chemical and incredibly sweet and salty.
So either my memory was wrongor my taste changed - I think it was a little of both
i must admit mcdonalds doesnt taste as good as it used to. but then i guess i used to eat so mindlessly i prob couldnt taste what i was eating.
Now and then i do go back and try foods that i hated but i still hate them. i.e olives, avocados, celery, cottage cheese etc.
I absolutely hate avocados. They are so popular right now and it seems everyone loves them.
They've always been popular in my neck of the woods...
Even where I live (midwest) they've certainly been popular for quite some time, even if the good ones aren't always available (or available at an affordable price).
I thought they were weird looking as a kid and was suspicious of them, but I love them now.0 -
cerise_noir wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »
No it's not just like when i make a comment on fast food it is no concern to you...
You came in here questioning and judging everyone else's habits. I wasn't the only one to comment on it.
Wow you are still going on about this... lol
:laugh:
And yet, here you are judging others eating habits. You were claiming to be "shocked" by what everyone else likes to eat. I questioned you, but you stuck to your rant even though many quoted you and reminded you that no one advocated an all "junk" diet. I don't eat all junk- I follow a loose 80/20 rule. When I ate healthy vegetarian for 5 years I was actually at my heaviest weight ever. It wasn't until I spoke to my dietitian and people here that I realized CICO was all that I need. I take my advice from a Registered dietitian, and I trust her many years of knowledge. She's pulled me out of binge/purge cycles and stuck with me for years. Moderation is important for me as I can easily fall back or develop orthorexia... not good. I've lost 100lbs and am on my last 40. I am the only one in my immediate family who is not at risk for heart disease. My mothers death in April really opened my eyes.
No one attacked you for your eating ways, we just mentioned that you do what is best for you and let others make their own path up as they go along. I am glad that you found something that works for you. What we were trying to say to OP was that the food they eat does not have to be horrible in taste.
Lol holy you sure are upset about this, i am in the same boat of losing weight and my nutritionist tells me to avoid fast food at all costs... too much junk in it and not enough substance. Most of it is not even made here it is trucked in from far away. Now i could go and order a Big Mac and fries for 1000 calories or whatever they are or i can eat real food and be very full on 600 calories. Back when i would eat the Big Mac i was eating again in two hours. I used to eat fast food because it was quick and easy, now i would rather cook,
Dietitian > Nutritionist.
Just sayin'.
And no, not upset. Not at all. I wouldn't laugh if were upset now would I?
Lighten up and enjoy the 'debate'.0 -
Doesn't the amount of so-called "junk" vs. substance in your fast food depend on what you happen to get?
Seems like it.
But I can see a nutritionist (especially one that's not actually educated as an RD would be) despairing of explaining that and just sticking to simplistic rules. I'd hate that, personally -- I want to understand things and not have them dumbed down for me (see also the idiotic advice "shop on the perimeter") but some go for that, I suspect.5 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.
It would seem bizarre to me to include cost of labor for food prepared at home unless someone was actually getting paid. I shop primarily at Kroger.
It's only bizarre to include the cost of your time if you thnk your time is worth nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I actually love to cook, so I think it's time well spent. But I think even those of us who do enjoy it, sometimes want/need a break. And those that hate cooking in the first place? Yeah, I can totally see where they would factor in the time, and consider that in the "cost" of making certain foods at home.
3 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.
It would seem bizarre to me to include cost of labor for food prepared at home unless someone was actually getting paid. I shop primarily at Kroger.
It's only bizarre to include the cost of your time if you thnk your time is worth nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I actually love to cook, so I think it's time well spent. But I think even those of us who do enjoy it, sometimes want/need a break. And those that hate cooking in the first place? Yeah, I can totally see where they would factor in the time, and consider that in the "cost" of making certain foods at home.
No, it's bizarre because time spent preparing food doesn't cost me any money. Unless someone had to forego a money-making activity in order to prepare the food then it's silly to say it cost money to do so.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.
It would seem bizarre to me to include cost of labor for food prepared at home unless someone was actually getting paid. I shop primarily at Kroger.
It's only bizarre to include the cost of your time if you thnk your time is worth nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I actually love to cook, so I think it's time well spent. But I think even those of us who do enjoy it, sometimes want/need a break. And those that hate cooking in the first place? Yeah, I can totally see where they would factor in the time, and consider that in the "cost" of making certain foods at home.
No, it's bizarre because time spent preparing food doesn't cost me any money. Unless someone had to forego a money-making activity in order to prepare the food then it's silly to say it cost money to do so.
One could argue that it's opportunity cost. If someone works 10 hour days with a longer commute, for instance, they may have time to either cook a healthy dinner from scratch or workout, but maybe not both, since they need to get some sleep and get up early to start their day again.
The benefit to working out would be strength gains, endurance gains, cardiovascular health gains, or a combination. But they might have to have a microwave dinner.
The benefit to cooking the healthy meal would be a nutritious meal with a healthy amount of sodium, fresh ingredients, less monetary cost, and perhaps leftovers. But they'd have to skip their workout for the day, and any health benefits from the workout would be sacrificed.
The benefits of one choice that are given up in favor of the alternative choice is opportunity cost. It's a legitimate concern when considering the cost/benefit of the choices we make, usually in economics but I think it could apply to just about anything in life, TBH.
9 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
Really??? Where do you buy your groceries?
$10 divided by 4 days = 2.50 a day for dinner. Divide that by 4 people and that equals .62 1/2 cents for each meal. If you stretched it to 5 days that would be 50 cents a meal.
That's incredible...
From what I can find the average at home burger (that is comparable to a restaurant burger) is about 1/3 the cost. Add to that the cost of the fries and the soda.
There are some interesting articles out there comparing home-cooked costs to restaurant costs. Of course our at home cost is cheaper...we don't include the labor nor the overhead. How many of us include the cost of gasoline to go shopping...cost of electricity...cost of cleanup supplies...and no one that I know of includes the cost of labor for cooking and serving that dish.
While cooking at home can certainly save us money when I do eat out I certainly understand why they charge what they do. I am glad to pay the price on occasion for the chance to get out of the kitchen.
It would seem bizarre to me to include cost of labor for food prepared at home unless someone was actually getting paid. I shop primarily at Kroger.
It's only bizarre to include the cost of your time if you thnk your time is worth nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I actually love to cook, so I think it's time well spent. But I think even those of us who do enjoy it, sometimes want/need a break. And those that hate cooking in the first place? Yeah, I can totally see where they would factor in the time, and consider that in the "cost" of making certain foods at home.
No, it's bizarre because time spent preparing food doesn't cost me any money. Unless someone had to forego a money-making activity in order to prepare the food then it's silly to say it cost money to do so.
One could argue that it's opportunity cost. If someone works 10 hour days with a longer commute, for instance, they may have time to either cook a healthy dinner from scratch or workout, but maybe not both, since they need to get some sleep and get up early to start their day again.
The benefit to working out would be strength gains, endurance gains, cardiovascular health gains, or a combination. But they might have to have a microwave dinner.
The benefit to cooking the healthy meal would be a nutritious meal with a healthy amount of sodium, fresh ingredients, less monetary cost, and perhaps leftovers. But they'd have to skip their workout for the day, and any health benefits from the workout would be sacrificed.
The benefits of one choice that are given up in favor of the alternative choice is opportunity cost. It's a legitimate concern when considering the cost/benefit of the choices we make, usually in economics but I think it could apply to just about anything in life, TBH.
I would agree with all that. There is no question that cooking takes some amount of time no matter how good you are at it. But that's a different subject. While there is the old saying "time is money", it's really not.0 -
When you compare the cost of cooking at home against the cost of that same meal prepared in a restaurant you really don't get a true comparison unless you allot some value to your time that it took you to shop for the ingredients, prepare the meal and then clean up time afterwards. That was my point earlier.
I know...the thought might be bizarre to include those costs in your home made meal. I was a cost analyst many years ago in another life. I also had a home manufacturing business where when I figured the cost of making an item I had to include my overhead such as equipment, electricity, time... etc.
Don't get me wrong...I cook at least 95% of my meals at home. Part of the reason I do is cost, taste, nutrition and sadly because I can't eat out very often because of sodium content. When I do eat out I have to find low sodium items and there just aren't that many options in restaurants.4 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »2 burgers, 2 fries and 2 sodas for $10 is a good deal??
Geez, I could probably feed a family of 4 a healthy dinner for 4-5 days for $10. And I could certainly make a lot more burgers and fries than that at home for $10.
That is an awesome deal! I cant find the info, but I'm pretty sure 1 big mac meal here is around $10. I could maybe, maybe feed my husband and I for $10 a day, but there wouldn't be much meat included. It would be rice/pasta/veggie/egg dishes, even eggs are $5 a dozen here (Free range straight from the farm down the road from me).1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions