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.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Options
Replies
-
What / how much they can eat and still deliver a viable life form with is the basis for this discussion and I am going by what multiple studies have shown.janejellyroll wrote: »What malnourished women can do and have their children somehow survive probably isn't the best basis for determining how much weight gain is optimal for a woman with regular access to food. I'm assuming we share the base assumption that we're going for "optimal," not just "what we can live through."
Moving the goalpost to what is "best" or "optimal" is changing the subject and far more arbitrary.
"Aversions" to food is a First-World luxury. What difference does it make?
If you are starving and have to live on flies and grubs for protein you will get over your "aversions" in short order.
Many First-World women frequently like to try to come up with excuses for their excessive weight gain and habits while pregnant like it is a special biological process in for them compared to everyone else.
Special snowflakes, different from the most of the world. Sound familiar?
https://www.fitpregnancy.com/nutrition/prenatal-nutrition/women-gain-too-much-weight-while-pregnant
https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-pregnant-women-weight-gain-20151105-story.html
http://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/healthy-weight-gain
The average healthy, recommended amount of weight gain is around 25lbs. Less is you are already fat, more if you are underweight.
Like I said. Unpopular, but true.
Are you kidding me? Hormones don't care if you're a first world or third world pregnant woman. If just the smell of certain foods causes you to vomit, you're not going to be able to keep them down. Even if you're starving.
edited for clarity16 -
What / how much they can eat and still deliver a viable life form with is the basis for this discussion and I am going by what multiple studies have shown.janejellyroll wrote: »What malnourished women can do and have their children somehow survive probably isn't the best basis for determining how much weight gain is optimal for a woman with regular access to food. I'm assuming we share the base assumption that we're going for "optimal," not just "what we can live through."
Moving the goalpost to what is "best" or "optimal" is changing the subject and far more arbitrary.
"Aversions" to food is a First-World luxury. What difference does it make?
If you are starving and have to live on flies and grubs for protein you will get over your "aversions" in short order.
Many First-World women frequently like to try to come up with excuses for their excessive weight gain and habits while pregnant like it is a special biological process in for them compared to everyone else.
Special snowflakes, different from the most of the world. Sound familiar?
https://www.fitpregnancy.com/nutrition/prenatal-nutrition/women-gain-too-much-weight-while-pregnant
https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-pregnant-women-weight-gain-20151105-story.html
http://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/healthy-weight-gain
The average healthy, recommended amount of weight gain is around 25lbs. Less is you are already fat, more if you are underweight.
Like I said. Unpopular, but true.
Are you kidding me? Hormones don't care if you're a first world or third world pregnant woman. If just the smell of certain foods causes you to vomit, you're not going to be able to keep them down. Even if you're starving.
edited for clarity
Studies suggest that cravings and revulsions are less a factor of hormones and more a factor of nutrient balance.
In other words, If you're malnourished you're unlikely to be nauseated by anything that will provide nourishment/nutrients.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »
What / how much they can eat and still deliver a viable life form with is the basis for this discussion and I am going by what multiple studies have shown.janejellyroll wrote: »What malnourished women can do and have their children somehow survive probably isn't the best basis for determining how much weight gain is optimal for a woman with regular access to food. I'm assuming we share the base assumption that we're going for "optimal," not just "what we can live through."
Moving the goalpost to what is "best" or "optimal" is changing the subject and far more arbitrary.
"Aversions" to food is a First-World luxury. What difference does it make?
If you are starving and have to live on flies and grubs for protein you will get over your "aversions" in short order.
Many First-World women frequently like to try to come up with excuses for their excessive weight gain and habits while pregnant like it is a special biological process in for them compared to everyone else.
Special snowflakes, different from the most of the world. Sound familiar?
https://www.fitpregnancy.com/nutrition/prenatal-nutrition/women-gain-too-much-weight-while-pregnant
https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-pregnant-women-weight-gain-20151105-story.html
http://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/healthy-weight-gain
The average healthy, recommended amount of weight gain is around 25lbs. Less is you are already fat, more if you are underweight.
Like I said. Unpopular, but true.
Are you kidding me? Hormones don't care if you're a first world or third world pregnant woman. If just the smell of certain foods causes you to vomit, you're not going to be able to keep them down. Even if you're starving.
edited for clarity
Studies suggest that cravings and revulsions are less a factor of hormones and more a factor of nutrient balance.
In other words, If you're malnourished you're unlikely to be nauseated by anything that will provide nourishment/nutrients.
Could you provide those studies please. I'm skeptical.3 -
Live well below the poverty level for a decade or two, go days at a time without eating, and then get back to me.Are you kidding me? Hormones don't care if you're a first world or third world pregnant woman. If just the smell of certain foods causes you to vomit, you're not going to be able to keep them down. Even if you're starving.
edited for clarity
That aside, explain how being nauseated makes you eat more than necessary.
Must be some magical-pregnancy-reverse-osmosis-anti-CI:CO thing.
In my experience I tend to eat less when my stomach is upset.
Another change of subject, another new goalpost, another excuse.
5 -
What / how much they can eat and still deliver a viable life form with is the basis for this discussion and I am going by what multiple studies have shown.janejellyroll wrote: »What malnourished women can do and have their children somehow survive probably isn't the best basis for determining how much weight gain is optimal for a woman with regular access to food. I'm assuming we share the base assumption that we're going for "optimal," not just "what we can live through."
Moving the goalpost to what is "best" or "optimal" is changing the subject and far more arbitrary.
"Aversions" to food is a First-World luxury. What difference does it make?
If you are starving and have to live on flies and grubs for protein you will get over your "aversions" in short order.
Many First-World women frequently like to try to come up with excuses for their excessive weight gain and habits while pregnant like it is a special biological process in for them compared to everyone else.
Special snowflakes, different from the most of the world. Sound familiar?
https://www.fitpregnancy.com/nutrition/prenatal-nutrition/women-gain-too-much-weight-while-pregnant
https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-pregnant-women-weight-gain-20151105-story.html
http://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/healthy-weight-gain
The average healthy, recommended amount of weight gain is around 25lbs. Less is you are already fat, more if you are underweight.
Like I said. Unpopular, but true.
I think most potential parents are shooting for a better situation than "probable viability." We *know* that prenatal nutrition has a strong impact on a child's health. Why you are completely dismissing this is beyond me.
"Aversion" doesn't mean "Oh, I don't want that" or "Oh, I don't like that." I'm talking about gagging or being unable to keep things down. It does happen to some women. It seems like your personal experience with pregnancy might be limited to living with a woman who didn't realize she was pregnant until it was time to give birth, but not all pregnancies are so tranquil.
And look -- you even say that the amount of recommended weight can vary depending on what a person's weight is at the beginning of their pregnancy. That's exactly what I'm saying -- that a blanket recommendation doesn't make sense and the amount of weight someone should gain is an issue best left to them in partnership with their OB/GYN. It should be based on up-to-date medical research and how the pregnancy is progressing, not determined by someone on the internet with a one-size-fits-all recommendation or what North Korean woman somehow manage to survive on.12 -
Because -again- we are discussing how unnecessarily fat many pregnant women become, not what is "optimal" for prenatal health. Please stop changing the subject.janejellyroll wrote: »I think most potential parents are shooting for a better situation than "probable viability." We *know* that prenatal nutrition has a strong impact on a child's health. Why you are completely dismissing this is beyond me.
If your assertion is that an over-fat mother means the child is going to automatically be healthier in the long-term then that is a different topic.
I will disagree with you, but that is a different subject.
As for things like my wife's eating habits, my experiences with pregnant women, etc. you are making several invalid assumptions which have little bearing on the discussion.4 -
Oh boy.1
-
5
-
Because -again- we are discussing how unnecessarily fat many pregnant women become, not what is "optimal" for prenatal health. Please stop changing the subject.janejellyroll wrote: »I think most potential parents are shooting for a better situation than "probable viability." We *know* that prenatal nutrition has a strong impact on a child's health. Why you are completely dismissing this is beyond me.
If your assertion is that an over-fat mother means the child is going to automatically be healthier in the long-term then that is a different topic.
I will disagree with you, but that is a different subject.
As for things like my wife's eating habits, my experiences with pregnant women, etc. you are making several invalid assumptions which have little bearing on the discussion.
Nobody is arguing for people to become fat or unnecessarily fat. The comment that started the whole thing was this: " I think being pregnant in later stages you can eat 300kcal more than usual and shouldn't gain more than 20lbs including the baby in you." My response is that there is no one-size-fits-all answer for how much a person should or shouldn't gain while pregnant. It's going to depend on their starting weight and the circumstances of their pregnancy.
The subject isn't "Can women who are malnourished sometimes find a way to carry a pregnancy to term?" so I don't understand why you're so insistent that if women in North Korea can undereat there's no problem if a woman in the US gains *less than she should* because she arbitrarily limits herself to 20 pounds of weight gain when *medical advice* would indicate she should gain more.
I didn't say anything about your wife's eating habits. I simply observed that if you think that strong food aversions are no big deal for any pregnant women, your experience with pregnancy may be limited. If it is a problem that is only experienced in the first world, so what? That doesn't make it less real for the women who are struggling with them.17 -
I think that on the forums as a whole, about 10-15% of those who comment have read only the thread title (not even the whole OP, let alone the whole thread).
Oh, wait . . . maybe that could turn out to be a popular opinion.10 -
-
I am not going to debate if it is a unpopular opinion about health or fitness.I think that on the forums as a whole, about 10-15% of those who comment have read only the thread title (not even the whole OP, let alone the whole thread).
Oh, wait . . . maybe that could turn out to be a popular opinion.
That would not be as enlightening.0 -
My unpopular opinion? Not everyone's end goal is to be at peak performance and look like a Greek deity - some just want to be better off than they were but not completely rework their entire life. And we're all just gonna have to live with that.
Me, well, I'm losing weight to reverse my minor liver condition and train myself out of a bad overall diet due to an intermittently untreated mental illness. I could not care less about having some hot sculpted body or living a super long time. Speaking realistically, and this might make a few people here faint, but I'm almost definitely going to eat an entire box of cheez-its by myself again someday in the distant future. I'm gonna make some pretty cringey food choices somewhere down the line. The difference is now I'm not doing this every day, week, etc, and that I won't want to kill myself over doing it because it's never going to be a daily occurrence again. My end goal was to get better, not perfect, and I'm not a lesser person or less deserving of basic respect because of it.33 -
Wait, are women who have had actual pregnancies, some multiples, being mansplained about pregnancy?!57
-
VintageFeline wrote: »Wait, are women who have had actual pregnancies, some multiples, being mansplained about pregnancy?!
Yup. I'm here to learn what a failure as a woman I am.
I should be barefoot in the kitchen, sorry.21 -
But to your point, most of the studies I recall seeing made it clear that women gaining more than around 25lbs during pregnancy is completely unnecessary.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »But 20 lbs is a completely arbitrary choice to throw out there, even if you do admit it's completely arbitrary.
They are not "eating for two."
My wife gained so little weight that she didn't know she was pregnant until she went to the hospital with a kidney stone.
But it wasn't a kidney stone; she delivered our perfectly healthy daughter not long afterwards.
Yes, she was still having her period.
Malnourished women in Third-World countries make new humans all the time without becoming unnecessarily fat in the process.
They do it without eating whole boxes of crackers, tubs of ice cream, or anything else.
No need to eat like a piggy -pregnant or not- just because you are "craving" something, eh?
Now that is an "unpopular opinion" but the science backs my statement.
Which opinion is that? That women shouldn't gain more than 20 lbs. or that women shouldn't gain more then 25 lbs.? Or are you now promoting malnourishment during pregnancy? Or paying so little attention to your own body that you can't feel a baby moving within it?16 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Wait, are women who have had actual pregnancies, some multiples, being mansplained about pregnancy?!
That is indeed the situation.
Fortunately there are men, like my husband, who tolerate their wives putting on the amount of weight recommended by an actual OBGYN for the trade off of knowing their music-loving little tyke had enough energy to quicken at the thunderous rumble of a cathedral-quality pipe organ ("A Mighty Fortress Is Our God") and to rock out at a Kid Rock concert (in Detroit...it doesn't get any better than flames, strippers, fur coats, and some assertive head banging going on in one's belly).31 -
NorthCascades wrote: »I think a bag of peanut M&Ms is great bike food. The bag stores easily, you can eat a few at a time then fold the corner so they don't spill out in your pocket, the sugar processes quickly so you can put the energy back into the pedals.
Standard snack food for me on canoe trips.
1 -
French_Peasant wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Wait, are women who have had actual pregnancies, some multiples, being mansplained about pregnancy?!
That is indeed the situation.
Fortunately there are men, like my husband, who tolerate their wives putting on the amount of weight recommended by an actual OBGYN for the trade off of knowing their music-loving little tyke had enough energy to quicken at the thunderous rumble of a cathedral-quality pipe organ ("A Mighty Fortress Is Our God") and to rock out at a Kid Rock concert (in Detroit...it doesn't get any better than flames, strippers, fur coats, and some assertive head banging going on in one's belly).
Lol! ZZ Top for me and my little one!4 -
NorthCascades wrote: »I think a bag of peanut M&Ms is great bike food. The bag stores easily, you can eat a few at a time then fold the corner so they don't spill out in your pocket, the sugar processes quickly so you can put the energy back into the pedals.
Standard snack food for me on canoe trips.
personally I prefer gummy bears because chocolate can melt but YMMV
1
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
- 388 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions