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
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
no I don't think it is just semantics...as the poster mentioned things like KFC and pizza being fattening but salad and chicken not being fattening.
When in fact a lot of salads can have more calories than even a quarter pounder at Micky Dees.
even the definition of "fattening" says " if you ate a lot of it"
Not sure I understand your point here. Yes, like pizza or soup, 'salad' is more a method of preparing food than a food. Some salads are fattening and some are not.1 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
I HATE grazing/snacking. I do think it works for some so wouldn't say people shouldn't do it, but I strongly dislike how eating lots of mini meals is promoted and dislike snacking quite a lot for myself.
.
Oh really? Why is that.. I've just noticed if i have several healthy snacks instead of a sandwich or something more of a meal for lunch I can manage my calorie goals much better.
Like I said, I hate it for me.
I find eating a bunch of mini meals or snacks unsatisfying.
I also like home cooked foods, and find preparing a bunch of snacks would be way too much work. I eat better overall if I eat 3 meals.
I hate how it's promoted because people are different (so they shouldn't tell everyone that they should eat 5-6 meals when some do better on 1-2). Also, I suspect that this idea that we should be eating all the time plays a role in the increase in obesity (but that's just a suspicion, I wouldn't insist it's really true without more, I'm basing it on observation and how I see the culture as having changed since I was a kid). The culture of snacking is fine if one plans healthful calorie-appropriate snacks, but I find if in the habit of snacking I want a snack at the usual time and if what's available if just a Kind bar or even chips I'll want that, when I wouldn't if not in the habit of snacking.
But that is a genuine "unpopular idea" of mine because I know I sound a bit curmugeonly -- it's my kids, get off my lawn thing. Snacks, go away! ;-)8 -
Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I have struggled with emotional eating. I still think claiming that some kind of "epidemic" of emotional eating (which probably is common, sure) is why the obesity rate is higher now is odd. I also think it's really odd to go to emotional eating from the posts on experiencing pleasure from food.
IME, emotional eating isn't about enjoying food at all. It's about self comfort and stuffing feelings. To claim it's about appreciating food strikes me as rather like thinking that alcohol abuse is fundamentally about being an oenophile or enjoying the taste of craft beers.
Humans are good at using all kinds of things to dysfunctionally deal with feelings, sure, and I doubt the tendency to do that has changed much over time. (I used to do it with food even as a teen, when I wasn't fat at all, so it also does not necessarily result in obesity.)
Why people are obese now is because food is really easily available and low cost (including the time of preparation), it tends to be around a lot and there are few cultural restrictions on eating, servings and the calorie costs of the most easily available foods are generally up, and people don't really notice, and activity that is required in daily life today is really low and for some people not easy to get without making an effort. Culturally hedonic eating is somewhat encouraged and mindless eating is common.
Indeed, I suspect mindless eating is way more responsible for obesity than emotional eating. Despite my tendency to the latter I think mindless eating was more of a culprit for me, even.
I don't get the impression from the average MFP poster who is struggling that being a foodie or enjoyment of a thought-out evening indulgence is the main stumbling block. Seems like more of them feel guilt and shame about food, eating, and almost don't really seem to enjoy food, to struggle with appreciating more than a really narrow range of foods, sometimes.
So going to "finding pleasure in an evening snack" = "emotional eating" = "the cause of obesity!" strikes me as, well, again, kind of odd.
I would say a fair part of mindless eating is out of boredom which I would consider an emotion.
I would disagree. Boredom eating is seeing food as "something to do" and not about addressing difficult feelings or self comfort, IMO.
Point remains that none of this has anything to do with the comments about desserts.5 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
I get it! I have read this several times. The thing is portion size is so small for the amount of calories you eat in a lot of the foods were talking about and thats partly what makes people put on weight. Therefore if its eaten regulary it is generally fattening for most people that dont think about the fact that they just ate 1500 calories at mcdonalds and then go on to eat normally for the rest of the day maybe1000or 1500 ish calories.. 3000 calories is too high for most people and if you dont count and you dont have the knowlede it can lead to weight gain.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I am extremely confused by purposely making food not taste good because "it's fuel". Or maybe the argument is the old parent argument of "poor children in Africa can't enjoy their food so you aren't allowed to either"?
So am I, who stated that?
What is your point?
I will agree that you're not explicitly against food tasting good, but you seem to have an issue with people enjoying it. It would follow, logically, that part of enjoying food is enjoying how it tastes.
You seem to have very black or white thinking on this issue. Reading between the lines of what you posted, it's almost as if it's not okay in your books for fat people to enjoy food for pleasure because they're fat.
Why?
Why can't food be good, and pleasurable and still within the realm of someone's correct energy balance?
I think your cut-and-dried, rather dull "food is fuel" and your initial point was that maybe fat people should remove emotions from eating as... what? Punishment for being fat? OR is that your solution to the obesity crisis?
Whatever you're doing, I don't think people who ignore the nuances of humankind's relationship with food have a balanced relationship with it. Food as fuel is just one aspect.
You might want to do some soul searching.
There are millions of people with a destructive, dysfunctional relationship with food - I will leave the deep soul searching to them, and not waste a moment of my time dissecting something that I do actually enjoy and is giving me great results. I'm former military and I think that there is a disconnect between my perception of discipline and delayed gratification and the mindset of others.
You're right. If you use the search function for these forums and search for emotional eating and stress eating (IMO just a subset of emotional eating) you will get 1,000 hits (which is apparently the max) for each of them.
The emotional ties to food surely are resulting in weight issues.
For some people.
Not all.
This is besides the original point, but you two are too busy back-patting each other to realize that you've strayed from it.
OR..
Are you deflecting from the original point BryLander made about the "epidemic" of emotional eating and the need to diminish the prevalence of eating for pleasure?
So emotional eating isn't an epidemic? So what is your theory on why so many people are overweight, did 68.8% of the people in the US just spontaneously get fat?
They don't move and eat too many calories
Surely not the only reason, but couldn't emotional eating be the reason some of the overweight and obese eat too many calories?
Some != "epidemic"
Because we live in a very fast paced and lazy society. And fattening foods are so easily and quickly available...... oh and the advertiaing we are subjected to.
Not so much lazy as convenience oriented. it's easier to drive than to walk, even if walking isn't that inconvenient.
But it depends... It's harder in a city like New York or LA where parking is a premium. and its observable that folks in cities where walking is easier... walk more.
Very true. I rarely drive anywhere unless there is a specific reason, because parking is a hassle and likely to be expensive. It's not just that it's so easy here to walk (although that is part of it), but that it's also not easy to drive.1 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.
Depends on how much dressing (and what kind) is on that salad.
I agree that if you cook at home and make chicken (even with skin and bones, like I normally do) and salad it's easier to control calories than if you are eating lots of inherently calorie-dense foods, but people think that salad is "not fattening" and donuts are, so might be more sparing in getting a donut (when I was fat I was actually surprised to find out a particular donut I got occasionally was 300 calories, I'd assumed much more) and think they are fine with a salad when a restaurant salad can be 1000 calories and even a homemade one if you load on high cal dressing and nuts or cheese and what not can be high cal if one is not counting.
When I was gaining it wasn't much from sweets or "fattening foods" (other than cheese, which I love). It was being careless with the olive oil and portion sizes of supposedly "healthy" foods.4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I am extremely confused by purposely making food not taste good because "it's fuel". Or maybe the argument is the old parent argument of "poor children in Africa can't enjoy their food so you aren't allowed to either"?
So am I, who stated that?
What is your point?
I will agree that you're not explicitly against food tasting good, but you seem to have an issue with people enjoying it. It would follow, logically, that part of enjoying food is enjoying how it tastes.
You seem to have very black or white thinking on this issue. Reading between the lines of what you posted, it's almost as if it's not okay in your books for fat people to enjoy food for pleasure because they're fat.
Why?
Why can't food be good, and pleasurable and still within the realm of someone's correct energy balance?
I think your cut-and-dried, rather dull "food is fuel" and your initial point was that maybe fat people should remove emotions from eating as... what? Punishment for being fat? OR is that your solution to the obesity crisis?
Whatever you're doing, I don't think people who ignore the nuances of humankind's relationship with food have a balanced relationship with it. Food as fuel is just one aspect.
You might want to do some soul searching.
There are millions of people with a destructive, dysfunctional relationship with food - I will leave the deep soul searching to them, and not waste a moment of my time dissecting something that I do actually enjoy and is giving me great results. I'm former military and I think that there is a disconnect between my perception of discipline and delayed gratification and the mindset of others.
You're right. If you use the search function for these forums and search for emotional eating and stress eating (IMO just a subset of emotional eating) you will get 1,000 hits (which is apparently the max) for each of them.
The emotional ties to food surely are resulting in weight issues.
For some people.
Not all.
This is besides the original point, but you two are too busy back-patting each other to realize that you've strayed from it.
OR..
Are you deflecting from the original point BryLander made about the "epidemic" of emotional eating and the need to diminish the prevalence of eating for pleasure?
So emotional eating isn't an epidemic? So what is your theory on why so many people are overweight, did 68.8% of the people in the US just spontaneously get fat?
They don't move and eat too many calories
Surely not the only reason, but couldn't emotional eating be the reason some of the overweight and obese eat too many calories?
Some != "epidemic"
Because we live in a very fast paced and lazy society. And fattening foods are so easily and quickly available...... oh and the advertiaing we are subjected to.
Not so much lazy as convenience oriented. it's easier to drive than to walk, even if walking isn't that inconvenient.
But it depends... It's harder in a city like New York or LA where parking is a premium. and its observable that folks in cities where walking is easier... walk more.
Very true. I rarely drive anywhere unless there is a specific reason, because parking is a hassle and likely to be expensive. It's not just that it's so easy here to walk (although that is part of it), but that it's also not easy to drive.
Yes! Where I live it's very hard not to drive everywhere because it's a rural area and everything is far away. I'd have to walk at least 45 min at a fairly brisk pace to get to anything other than a house or church. It's almost a mile to my nearest neighbors house, even further to our mailbox, and almost 5 miles to the nearest bus stop. Nobody around here is going to walk to the store or work (unless they work from home
) 1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.
Depends on how much dressing (and what kind) is on that salad.
I agree that if you cook at home and make chicken (even with skin and bones, like I normally do) and salad it's easier to control calories than if you are eating lots of inherently calorie-dense foods, but people think that salad is "not fattening" and donuts are, so might be more sparing in getting a donut (when I was fat I was actually surprised to find out a particular donut I got occasionally was 300 calories, I'd assumed much more) and think they are fine with a salad when a restaurant salad can be 1000 calories and even a homemade one if you load on high cal dressing and nuts or cheese and what not can be high cal if one is not counting.
When I was gaining it wasn't much from sweets or "fattening foods" (other than cheese, which I love). It was being careless with the olive oil and portion sizes of supposedly "healthy" foods.
Of course you can have delicious very high calorie salads. Just an example of a generally healthy food. Lets assume we are talking a 300Cal garden salad lolol.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
No, you'd think so but no.. they rekon KFC isnt fattening.3 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
no I don't think it is just semantics...as the poster mentioned things like KFC and pizza being fattening but salad and chicken not being fattening.
When in fact a lot of salads can have more calories than even a quarter pounder at Micky Dees.
even the definition of "fattening" says " if you ate a lot of it"
Not sure I understand your point here. Yes, like pizza or soup, 'salad' is more a method of preparing food than a food. Some salads are fattening and some are not.
my point is that food itself is not fattening...that the quantity of food is and to say "salad" is not fattening is false.
To say pizza is fattening is false.
4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I have struggled with emotional eating. I still think claiming that some kind of "epidemic" of emotional eating (which probably is common, sure) is why the obesity rate is higher now is odd. I also think it's really odd to go to emotional eating from the posts on experiencing pleasure from food.
IME, emotional eating isn't about enjoying food at all. It's about self comfort and stuffing feelings. To claim it's about appreciating food strikes me as rather like thinking that alcohol abuse is fundamentally about being an oenophile or enjoying the taste of craft beers.
Humans are good at using all kinds of things to dysfunctionally deal with feelings, sure, and I doubt the tendency to do that has changed much over time. (I used to do it with food even as a teen, when I wasn't fat at all, so it also does not necessarily result in obesity.)
Why people are obese now is because food is really easily available and low cost (including the time of preparation), it tends to be around a lot and there are few cultural restrictions on eating, servings and the calorie costs of the most easily available foods are generally up, and people don't really notice, and activity that is required in daily life today is really low and for some people not easy to get without making an effort. Culturally hedonic eating is somewhat encouraged and mindless eating is common.
Indeed, I suspect mindless eating is way more responsible for obesity than emotional eating. Despite my tendency to the latter I think mindless eating was more of a culprit for me, even.
I don't get the impression from the average MFP poster who is struggling that being a foodie or enjoyment of a thought-out evening indulgence is the main stumbling block. Seems like more of them feel guilt and shame about food, eating, and almost don't really seem to enjoy food, to struggle with appreciating more than a really narrow range of foods, sometimes.
So going to "finding pleasure in an evening snack" = "emotional eating" = "the cause of obesity!" strikes me as, well, again, kind of odd.
I would say a fair part of mindless eating is out of boredom which I would consider an emotion.
I would disagree. Boredom eating is seeing food as "something to do" and not about addressing difficult feelings or self comfort, IMO.
Point remains that none of this has anything to do with the comments about desserts.lemurcat12 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I have struggled with emotional eating. I still think claiming that some kind of "epidemic" of emotional eating (which probably is common, sure) is why the obesity rate is higher now is odd. I also think it's really odd to go to emotional eating from the posts on experiencing pleasure from food.
IME, emotional eating isn't about enjoying food at all. It's about self comfort and stuffing feelings. To claim it's about appreciating food strikes me as rather like thinking that alcohol abuse is fundamentally about being an oenophile or enjoying the taste of craft beers.
Humans are good at using all kinds of things to dysfunctionally deal with feelings, sure, and I doubt the tendency to do that has changed much over time. (I used to do it with food even as a teen, when I wasn't fat at all, so it also does not necessarily result in obesity.)
Why people are obese now is because food is really easily available and low cost (including the time of preparation), it tends to be around a lot and there are few cultural restrictions on eating, servings and the calorie costs of the most easily available foods are generally up, and people don't really notice, and activity that is required in daily life today is really low and for some people not easy to get without making an effort. Culturally hedonic eating is somewhat encouraged and mindless eating is common.
Indeed, I suspect mindless eating is way more responsible for obesity than emotional eating. Despite my tendency to the latter I think mindless eating was more of a culprit for me, even.
I don't get the impression from the average MFP poster who is struggling that being a foodie or enjoyment of a thought-out evening indulgence is the main stumbling block. Seems like more of them feel guilt and shame about food, eating, and almost don't really seem to enjoy food, to struggle with appreciating more than a really narrow range of foods, sometimes.
So going to "finding pleasure in an evening snack" = "emotional eating" = "the cause of obesity!" strikes me as, well, again, kind of odd.
I would say a fair part of mindless eating is out of boredom which I would consider an emotion.
I would disagree. Boredom eating is seeing food as "something to do" and not about addressing difficult feelings or self comfort, IMO.
Point remains that none of this has anything to do with the comments about desserts.
I think that if your life is so boring that you routinely view over-eating as your preferred source of entertainment, then emotionally, you are not in a healthy place.11 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
no I don't think it is just semantics...as the poster mentioned things like KFC and pizza being fattening but salad and chicken not being fattening.
When in fact a lot of salads can have more calories than even a quarter pounder at Micky Dees.
even the definition of "fattening" says " if you ate a lot of it"
Not sure I understand your point here. Yes, like pizza or soup, 'salad' is more a method of preparing food than a food. Some salads are fattening and some are not.
my point is that food itself is not fattening...that the quantity of food is and to say "salad" is not fattening is false.
To say pizza is fattening is false.
That doesn't seem to match the meaning of the word to me, but that's okay.5 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
No, you'd think so but no.. they rekon KFC isnt fattening.
Well to be fair KFC is a fast food restaurant and not a food. There are foods that are fattening at KFC but there are also foods that are not fattening. Same with saying things like pizza is fattening (some are and some are not) and salad is not fattening (some are and some are not).
Meat lovers pan pizza is fattening. Thin crust veggie pizza light on oil and cheese may not be fattening. Salad drowned in creamy ranch dressing and cheese with bacon crumbles is fattening. A salad of leafy vegetables and lean chicken wo cheese and lightly dressed with vinaigrette would not be fattening.
This is why I say it's and argument of semantics. Too many assumptions are being made.4 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I am extremely confused by purposely making food not taste good because "it's fuel". Or maybe the argument is the old parent argument of "poor children in Africa can't enjoy their food so you aren't allowed to either"?
So am I, who stated that?
What is your point?
I will agree that you're not explicitly against food tasting good, but you seem to have an issue with people enjoying it. It would follow, logically, that part of enjoying food is enjoying how it tastes.
You seem to have very black or white thinking on this issue. Reading between the lines of what you posted, it's almost as if it's not okay in your books for fat people to enjoy food for pleasure because they're fat.
Why?
Why can't food be good, and pleasurable and still within the realm of someone's correct energy balance?
I think your cut-and-dried, rather dull "food is fuel" and your initial point was that maybe fat people should remove emotions from eating as... what? Punishment for being fat? OR is that your solution to the obesity crisis?
Whatever you're doing, I don't think people who ignore the nuances of humankind's relationship with food have a balanced relationship with it. Food as fuel is just one aspect.
You might want to do some soul searching.
There are millions of people with a destructive, dysfunctional relationship with food - I will leave the deep soul searching to them, and not waste a moment of my time dissecting something that I do actually enjoy and is giving me great results. I'm former military and I think that there is a disconnect between my perception of discipline and delayed gratification and the mindset of others.
You're right. If you use the search function for these forums and search for emotional eating and stress eating (IMO just a subset of emotional eating) you will get 1,000 hits (which is apparently the max) for each of them.
The emotional ties to food surely are resulting in weight issues.
For some people.
Not all.
This is besides the original point, but you two are too busy back-patting each other to realize that you've strayed from it.
OR..
Are you deflecting from the original point BryLander made about the "epidemic" of emotional eating and the need to diminish the prevalence of eating for pleasure?
So emotional eating isn't an epidemic? So what is your theory on why so many people are overweight, did 68.8% of the people in the US just spontaneously get fat?
They don't move and eat too many calories
Surely not the only reason, but couldn't emotional eating be the reason some of the overweight and obese eat too many calories?
Some != "epidemic"
Because we live in a very fast paced and lazy society. And fattening foods are so easily and quickly available...... oh and the advertiaing we are subjected to.
foods in general are not "fattening" it's the amount of food we eat that makes us fat and lack of movement...
As for the "advertiaing" please we are all grown ups and get to choose what we put in our mouth...*rolls eyes* that sounds like a cop out to me....
Yeah okay so donuts and maccas fries arent fattening, right? If we ate these every day we would most likely put on weight if you eat an apple every day obviously not.
I think its a cop out the amount of people that say that sort of thing. *rolls eyes*
Obviously you wont gain weight if you maintain a balanced diet and stay in you calorie needa etc, but to say foods in generel aren't fattening is a cop out.
And sure maybe you are the 1 in a million person that isnt influenced by advertising.....
It is designed to influence us on so many levels obvious and subconsciously. You might not want to buy a big mac or a honda or a certain insurance policy emmidiately... but those messages stick with you wether you think its a cop out or not.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2015/04/28/research-shows-millennials-dont-respond-to-ads/#14a9bff75dcb8 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
No, you'd think so but no.. they rekon KFC isnt fattening.
Well to be fair KFC is a fast food restaurant and not a food. There are foods that are fattening at KFC but there are also foods that are not fattening. Same with saying things like pizza is fattening (some are and some are not) and salad is not fattening (some are and some are not).
Meat lovers pan pizza is fattening. Thin crust veggie pizza light on oil and cheese may not be fattening. Salad drowned in creamy ranch dressing and cheese with bacon crumbles is fattening. A salad of leafy vegetables and lean chicken wo cheese and lightly dressed with vinaigrette would not be fattening.
This is why I say it's and argument of semantics. Too many assumptions are being made.
Well of course! 100%. But! The high calorie options are... fattening!
But to say that there is no such thing as fattening is *kitten*.6 -
Huh. I guess my unpopular opinion is that there is no such thing as a "fattening food."21
-
sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
No, you'd think so but no.. they rekon KFC isnt fattening.
Well to be fair KFC is a fast food restaurant and not a food. There are foods that are fattening at KFC but there are also foods that are not fattening. Same with saying things like pizza is fattening (some are and some are not) and salad is not fattening (some are and some are not).
Meat lovers pan pizza is fattening. Thin crust veggie pizza light on oil and cheese may not be fattening. Salad drowned in creamy ranch dressing and cheese with bacon crumbles is fattening. A salad of leafy vegetables and lean chicken wo cheese and lightly dressed with vinaigrette would not be fattening.
This is why I say it's and argument of semantics. Too many assumptions are being made.
Well of course! 100%. But! The high calorie options are... fattening!
But to say that there is no such thing as fattening is *kitten*.
The point is, the high calorie options of *any* food on the planet are only fattening if you eat them too frequently or to a degree that prevents you from either being in a caloric deficit or in maintenance. The foods themselves are not to blame.13 -
Nice article, but the power of advertising is still very strong otherwise they wouldnt spend millions of dollars on it. We are however becoming much less susceptible to advertising like billboards and posters.. have a think about what advertisement billboard or sign you remember seeing today? Not many.
Other forms of advertisements are booming though.2 -
sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »sophie9492015 wrote: »Yes you can certainly argue that all foods can be fattening but you'd have to eat a shitload more chicken and salad than doughnuts to gain weight.sophie9492015 wrote: »Also the majority of people don't count their calories therefore eating more "fattening" foods like pizza and KFC will make most people gain weight. Therefore generally they are fattening.
Thats why we have such a big problem with obesity because these foods are so readily available and heavily advertised.
you really don't get it do you....
food itself is not fattening. Period end of discussion.
The Quantity aka amount, total volume of the food eaten is what is causing the weight gain.
I can eat appx 10-15 plain cake dunkin donuts a day and still lose weight...each donut is 160 calories..
As well eating more of any food will make you gain weight it doesn't have to be KFC or Pizza...there is nothing wrong with either of those things...
There is a problem in NA with obesity because of lack of education about nutrition and how to maintain or lose weight and your posts are proving that point quite nicely..thanks you.
Isn't this just an argument in semantics?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fattening
fattening
adjective us /ˈfæt·ən·ɪŋ/
(of food) containing a lot of fat, sugar, etc., that would make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
Sure, you could probably eat enough of any food to get fatter (though honestly that is arguable) but I think most people know what someone means when they say "fattening". It's almost always calorie dense and nutrient poor.
No, you'd think so but no.. they rekon KFC isnt fattening.
Well to be fair KFC is a fast food restaurant and not a food. There are foods that are fattening at KFC but there are also foods that are not fattening. Same with saying things like pizza is fattening (some are and some are not) and salad is not fattening (some are and some are not).
Meat lovers pan pizza is fattening. Thin crust veggie pizza light on oil and cheese may not be fattening. Salad drowned in creamy ranch dressing and cheese with bacon crumbles is fattening. A salad of leafy vegetables and lean chicken wo cheese and lightly dressed with vinaigrette would not be fattening.
This is why I say it's and argument of semantics. Too many assumptions are being made.
Well of course! 100%. But! The high calorie options are... fattening!
But to say that there is no such thing as fattening is *kitten*.
Where did I say there is no such thing as fattening...???? No where.
fattening is defined above but since you seem to have missed it here it is again under the Webster meaning...
Definition of fatten
fattened; fattening play \ˈfat-niŋ, ˈfa-tə-niŋ\
transitive verb
1
a : to make fat, fleshy, or plump; especially : to feed (an animal) for slaughter
b : to make more substantial
2
: to make fertile
intransitive verb
: to become fat
Cambridge definition
Fattening food contains a lot of fat, sugar, etc. that would quickly make you fatter if you ate a lot of it:
you see the bolded part...that's what is the key...
regardless of how people interpret or want to see it food itself is not fattening and if you want to get to the nitty gritty and say Pizza is a way of prepping food fine...but a piece of meat lovers is not fattening...a large meat lover eaten by one person could make them fat but it may not if they don't eat over maintenance...
*sighs*
food itself is not fattening...it's the amount we eat.13 -
My unpopular opinion (on MFP at least) is that not every diabetic or pre-diabetic has to go low carb or keto. It is NOT an all or nothing, it is a sliding scale based on your individual disease and body.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