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
-
French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:2 -
cmriverside wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:
Look at me, I can combine both porn and agrarian issues: BROWN CHICKEN BROWN COW!!!!9 -
French_Peasant wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:
Look at me, I can combine both porn and agrarian issues: BROWN CHICKEN BROWN COW!!!!
Just don't fearmonger and suggest that the porn may stop flowing.
That's like 9/11 times 1000!4 -
French_Peasant wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:
Look at me, I can combine both porn and agrarian issues: BROWN CHICKEN BROWN COW!!!!
lolololol I hope you didn't fabricate that whole conversation to use that.
Wait. I hope you did. Well done. 4 -
French_Peasant wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:
Look at me, I can combine both porn and agrarian issues: BROWN CHICKEN BROWN COW!!!!
Just don't fearmonger and suggest that the porn may stop flowing.
That's like 9/11 times 1000!
I do note that the collapse of the Roman Empire is suspiciously concurrent with the flow of Roman porn being stopped....barbarians...famine....zombie mutant biker vikings....hmmm...we might be onto something here.4 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »MJ2victory wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Yeah. I didn't really care about my weight until my health suffered and my doctor told me that weight-loss was the single best thing I could do to manage my condition. So, yeah, I can only speak for myself, but weightloss and avoidance of lymphedema flare-ups are pretty well intertwined at this point. Health is the goal and weightloss is the process.
I don't agree with your doctor
Are you a HAES proponent?
Because I can tell you, as someone who undertook weight loss specifically because reaching a healthy body weight is recommended to manage my particular medical condition, it is totally FALSE that weight is not tied to health in many medical conditions.
In fact, although I am a healthy weight, my goal is to get to the very low end of BMI for optimal management of my medical condition.
I have two forms of arthritis. Arthritis is not a weight-neutral disease. Reaching and maintaining a healthy body weight is the best thing you can do for it, much as it was the same thing estherdragon could do for lymphedema. And yes, weight loss is the best thing you can do for that condition.
Losing weight has normalized my blood sugar, blood pressure, and lipid profile. My triglycerides are down nearly 4 fold. This is one of the weirdest cases of "la la la I can't hear you" I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot, including flat earthers and people who believe in high society reptilians. Obesity is strongly linked to some diseases and the correlation is quite direct and demonstrable.
I would argue that the lifestyle changes that you made normalized your blood sugar, blood pressure, etc. Weight loss is a byproduct of healthy lifestyle changes.
Is this like the chicken and the egg? What does it matter? :huh:
Weight loss is not an automatic byproduct. It's purely based on deficit eating, regardless of the food eaten.
So the real question is, would you get the same results if the same changes were made, but enough had never eaten at a deficit? Therefore, there would have been no weight loss.2 -
French_Peasant wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
This and the anti-GMO pro famine hyperbole are two of my unpopular opinions that actually get me a little angry and hot under the collar.
We might not be able to turn famine ridden sub-Saharan Africa and southwest asia into Garden spots with trees and rivers. But we could at least make them a little less hellish to live in.
Anti-GMO = pro-famine? Wow.
War, corruption, and other forms of bad government, not lack of GMOs, cause famine.
War and corruption, not droughts, are responsible for famines
... as the famed aphorism of Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen puts it, “no famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.”
That economist either wasn't strong in the classics and missed the section on Livy or didn't include republics like Rome and the U.S. in the definition of democracies, because there was a famine in Rome in 441 BC (Rome became a republic in 509 BC). Lucius Minucius was appointed prefect of the granaries and started handing out a free or steeply discounted portion of grain to the plebes, thereby kicking off the famous "panem et circenses" blamed for later Roman problems (but preserving their functioning society in the meantime).
I think the statement would be more accurate if appended with "Thanks to agricultural innovations from the Industrial Revolution to the Green Revolution and beyond (which includes technologies from the tractor to synthetic fertilizers to hybrid and transgenic seed technologies), no famine has taken place in the past century in a functioning democracy." This would be more easily defended, because democracies beyond the classical examples have been a very recent political innovation, and anyways the normal course of agrarian history runs as follows: functioning society > drought/crop failure > non-functioning society/peasant rebellions/war > famine. In fact, the Green Revolution and industrialized agriculture makes it a lot easier for a democracy to exist in the first place.
In the US, although we are a republic and not a democracy, we would likely cease to be a functioning society before the actual famine set in, once all that panem et circensem stopped flowing, say, in the event of an EMP or the gas and oil stopped flowing.
I had high hopes for John Varley's Slow Apocalypse, about what could happen when the oil stopped flowing, but alas it wasn't especially well executed. Feels like someone else has been writing his books since "The Golden Globe."0 -
French_Peasant wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »Also, while I am sad that the debate has moved on from porn, at least now I feel like I can make a more valuable contribution to the discussion, being pure as the driven snow.
Porn will circle back around.
Especially when you scare us with that "EMP or the oil stops flowing" talk. :noway:
Look at me, I can combine both porn and agrarian issues: BROWN CHICKEN BROWN COW!!!!
Just don't fearmonger and suggest that the porn may stop flowing.
That's like 9/11 times 1000!
I do note that the collapse of the Roman Empire is suspiciously concurrent with the flow of Roman porn being stopped....barbarians...famine....zombie mutant biker vikings....hmmm...we might be onto something here.
You are absolutely one of my favorites. I just scared my coworkers with a cackle.
Also to stay on topic, I'm sure zombie porn is the source of all societal woes.5 -
kshama2001 wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Do you have complete confidence that every chemical in your food Is safe for regular, repeated consumption? More power to ya. They said DDT was safe at one point. They said cigarettes were good for your health. They said BPA was safe. No one is saying if it's natural it's automatically safe, as in Hemlock. But you seem to be saying that chemicals are to be unquestionably trusted?
Every product has an inherent risk/reward.
DDT is singly responsible for saving countless lives due to malaria reduction. Was it worth the risk? Scientific evidence says yes. Media hyperbole says no.
No hall of science ever stated that cigarettes were good for you health. This is hyperbolic and patently false.
BPA is safe in the regulated dosage and form and a critical binding agent used in several medical products. Don't confuse scientific output with media hyperbole.
This and the anti-GMO pro famine hyperbole are two of my unpopular opinions that actually get me a little angry and hot under the collar.
We might not be able to turn famine ridden sub-Saharan Africa and southwest asia into Garden spots with trees and rivers. But we could at least make them a little less hellish to live in.
Anti-GMO = pro-famine? Wow.
War, corruption, and other forms of bad government, not lack of GMOs, cause famine.
War and corruption, not droughts, are responsible for famines
... as the famed aphorism of Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen puts it, “no famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.”
That economist either wasn't strong in the classics and missed the section on Livy or didn't include republics like Rome and the U.S. in the definition of democracies, because there was a famine in Rome in 441 BC (Rome became a republic in 509 BC). Lucius Minucius was appointed prefect of the granaries and started handing out a free or steeply discounted portion of grain to the plebes, thereby kicking off the famous "panem et circenses" blamed for later Roman problems (but preserving their functioning society in the meantime).
I think the statement would be more accurate if appended with "Thanks to agricultural innovations from the Industrial Revolution to the Green Revolution and beyond (which includes technologies from the tractor to synthetic fertilizers to hybrid and transgenic seed technologies), no famine has taken place in the past century in a functioning democracy." This would be more easily defended, because democracies beyond the classical examples have been a very recent political innovation, and anyways the normal course of agrarian history runs as follows: functioning society > drought/crop failure > non-functioning society/peasant rebellions/war > famine. In fact, the Green Revolution and industrialized agriculture makes it a lot easier for a democracy to exist in the first place.
In the US, although we are a republic and not a democracy, we would likely cease to be a functioning society before the actual famine set in, once all that panem et circensem stopped flowing, say, in the event of an EMP or the gas and oil stopped flowing.
I had high hopes for John Varley's Slow Apocalypse, about what could happen when the oil stopped flowing, but alas it wasn't especially well executed. Feels like someone else has been writing his books since "The Golden Globe."
Ooh, freaky. I don't have to pick up the kids tonight so I read what I could using the "look inside" feature. You're right, the writing strikes some false notes but I might Kindle it, because it is very interesting, and now I want to find out what happens. I have read The Road (gold standard), One Second After (EMP scenario--pretty good), and Lucifer's Hammer (comet-hitting-earth scenario; again, not the greatest writing, but interesting).2 -
I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen7
-
dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
Lucky. Many of my yummy healthier foods are just as high in calories as junk.12 -
dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
The only part of your statement that maybe unpopular is the phrase "eat clean", because it's a vague and arbitrary term and often difficult to discern what a poster means by it. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you would think that having the majority of your diet come from nutrient dense foods would be unpopular, thats what most people here do, even if they eschew the phrases "clean" and "junk".16 -
This details the actual Queen's (Elizabeth) diet. To be honest, I'm 100% on board with this. Pre-lunch gin, afternoon tea, biscuits, cake, afternoon tea, chocolate, chocolate mousse, steamed fish, chicken salad, steak and rounded off with a glass of champers before bed. And she's a ripe old age so she must be doing something right.
'Scuse me while I stock up on Prestat chocs and steak.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/what-the-queen-eats-and-drinks-breakfast-lunch-dinner-a7602121.html19 -
VintageFeline wrote: »This details the actual Queen's (Elizabeth) diet. To be honest, I'm 100% on board with this. Pre-lunch gin, afternoon tea, biscuits, cake, afternoon tea, chocolate, chocolate mousse, steamed fish, chicken salad, steak and rounded off with a glass of champers before bed. And she's a ripe old age so she must be doing something right.
'Scuse me while I stock up on Prestat chocs and steak.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/what-the-queen-eats-and-drinks-breakfast-lunch-dinner-a7602121.html
"She's partial to Special K, according to The Telegraph. Kellogg's, Quaker Oats, and Weetabix all hold royal warrants.
However, she likes her cereal to be served from Tupperware, which she believes keeps it fresh.
She occasionally opts for toast and marmalade...
Jam in the royal household comes from Wilkin & Sons."
I love that woman. She reminds me of my grandma, except the part where she's the queen.19 -
dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
Usually "eat clean" is said to mean "avoids processed foods." But then if you find out what the person is eating, they are eating lots of processed foods, because a huge range of foods are processed. The idea that being "processed" means "junk" or "not healthy" or, more accurately, "not particularly nutritious" is bogus.
My plan for breakfast and lunch today:
For breakfast I had a salad with an overeasy egg and pancetta on it. Clearly, pancetta is processed and some might think it is "junk," I dunno. (It is tasty, though.) On the salad, among other things, I included some apple cider vinegar and a bit of olive oil--both processed. I thought about adding some feta cheese or cottage cheese, but didn't. Either of those would have again been processed.
For lunch I am having some roasted vegetables with ground turkey (again, processed!) with a spicy sauce I made using sriracha (processed!).
I am not really sure why these meals would be considered "junk" or not healthy just because they include some processed ingredients. (My current favorite dessert other than fruit is some plain greek yogurt plus a little walnut butter -- I guess that's just terrible, terrible, very bad, but again it sure is tasty!)7 -
VintageFeline wrote: »This details the actual Queen's (Elizabeth) diet. To be honest, I'm 100% on board with this. Pre-lunch gin, afternoon tea, biscuits, cake, afternoon tea, chocolate, chocolate mousse, steamed fish, chicken salad, steak and rounded off with a glass of champers before bed. And she's a ripe old age so she must be doing something right.
'Scuse me while I stock up on Prestat chocs and steak.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/what-the-queen-eats-and-drinks-breakfast-lunch-dinner-a7602121.html
Oddly enough, I recently just listened to a podcast discussing Queen Victoria's diet. Here's an article: http://www.historyextra.com/article/bbc-history-magazine/queen-victoria’s-appetites4 -
dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
People meeting their nutritional needs and hitting their calorie goals while eating the foods they enjoy is just about the most popular opinion I've seen here. I am not sure why you think it's unpopular.12 -
dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
People just get their hackles up when anyone says, "I eat clean."
Because 1. It sounds arrogant and 2. What is clean?9 -
cmriverside wrote: »dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
People just get their hackles up when anyone says, "I eat clean."
Because 1. It sounds arrogant and 2. What is clean?
I assume it means you washed your hands first, used a clean dish and utensils and didn't drop your sammich on the floor before you put it in your mouth.14 -
janejellyroll wrote: »dragonfly_66 wrote: »I "eat clean" most of the time and would rather eat tons of yummy healthier food then eating less yummy junk. Seems unpopular around these parts. Works for me though I eat like a queen
People meeting their nutritional needs and hitting their calorie goals while eating the foods they enjoy is just about the most popular opinion I've seen here. I am not sure why you think it's unpopular.
I actually, on further reading of this post, think the poster is suggesting they eat entirely "clean" (whatever it means to them) and prefer it because they feel they can eat more that way, than if they ate entirely junk. I could be mistaken, and the poster is striking a balance, which is in fact, what most people here strive for - primarily nutrient dense foods with a smaller focus on treats in moderation.
I'd be interested in the clarification if @dragonfly_66 is interested in sharing.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions