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?
Replies
-
OliveGirl128 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Doesn't seem strange to one who suspends the judgey, judgey stuff and understands what IIFYM really is. It's all about context and dose. About sustainability and taking perfectionism and deprivation out of the equation for long term success.
If someone ate a bunch of junk food and alcohol, to use the example you put forward, they wouldn't hit the FYM part of IIFYM. Most of us IIFYM folks use the 80/20 rule, whole foods/ whatever. People who criticize it always want to focus on the 20 and exclude the middle. Once you hit your macros and had a balanced diet with diverse micro-nutrients, you don't get any extra credit.
Dose and context and sustainability, man. Dose and context and sustainability.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/excluding-the-middle.html/
I have a very good understanding of IIFYM and the 80/20 idea. Thank you. My point is when someone says they are planning on reducing sugar and fat in their diet there are boos in the responses. Someone mentions they were able to include wine or ice cream every day there are high fives.
Apples and oranges. One doesn't relate to the other.
ETA: whether, sugar or fat should be reduced is specific to the individual. There is nothing inherently good or bad about it. If I were to "high five" someone for including some wine and or ice cream, it would be because they both hit thier targets and enjoyed life through food and drink a little. That person is more likely to comply long term and achieve thier goal. I don't get the value judgement you put on either of these. Eliminating fat and sugar isn't necessarily good. Having wine and ice cream isn't necessarily bad. Again, context and dose.
I agree with what you are saying 100%. However, MY PERCEPTION (be it right, wrong or indifferent) is there is much more praise in the responses on these forums when someone gets some wine or ice cream (as examples of higher calorie, lower nutrient foods) in vs when someone mentions a reasonable reduction in sugar or fat.
In my mind, both should be equally praiseworthy
Ok so?
Does that not meet some unspoken standard that you value. I think it's for the reasons @AnnPT77 and @janejellyroll and @GottaBurnEmall have detailed. Seems that many of those here get that but the logic escapes you. I get that it can be hard to read tone. But to me, it comes off very judgmental. As though you feel you can be the arbiter of others values in terms of diet and fitness. Maybe I'm reading it wrong and if so, my apologies.
As I said earlier (and if you care you can go back in history to check my prior postings) I believe in the 80/20 nutritionally dense vs not so nutritionally dense.
My point, MY PERCEPTION, is discussions related to foods on these boards seem to be the other way around. 80% how to fit more treats into a nutrition plan, vs comparatively little discussion on including an appropriate amount of nutritionally dense foods in one's diet.
I mean, we all know virtually nobody gets the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies. To me, on a health and fitness site, this would be a higher priority.
Well, how would you know this really? Maybe they are and maybe they aren't. What is that to you? Personally, I do me and other do them. I'm not looking to control or or be the diet judge of what others are eating.
FTR, I don't agree with your perception about what is discussed 80% of the time. Or maybe I do a little but I'm not out to save the world. I'm running my own race. I see dopey posts every day about stuff. They're everywhere. It's not my job to be the correctness police and fix people. Is it yours?
Also, I see lots and lots of discussion of of what is an appropriate amount of nutrient dense foods. I'd suggest if you don't, you are either not paying close enough attention or need to have more discretion about which threads you wander into.
FTR 2: I get more than the recommended amount of fruits and veggies pretty much every day. I am not the only one. So that pretty much invalidates your "virtually nobody" statement. Either way, what business is it of yours?
Suggestion. You may want to consider dialing back the judgmental thing in regard to other people and focus on being a better you. Just sayin...
There's actually quite a few of us here who eat larger amounts of veg/fruit-more than the current recommendations. And then there's also quite a few here who are working on upping their produce consumption-it's a pretty popular thread topic. A bit surprised at pp's statement, since it's so obviously not accurate, if one spends any amount of time on the forums.
And then there are those of us who get way more than the recommended amount of vegetables, but not much fruit because of medical conditions where carbs need to be modified. Together, I get over the recommendations, but if you separate fruit from veggies it is (necessarily) unbalanced.1 -
im vegan and eat wayyy more veggies than fruit.. but thats because of all the rain its ruined this years fruit crops and none of it has tasted good.. so sad!!1
-
OliveGirl128 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Doesn't seem strange to one who suspends the judgey, judgey stuff and understands what IIFYM really is. It's all about context and dose. About sustainability and taking perfectionism and deprivation out of the equation for long term success.
If someone ate a bunch of junk food and alcohol, to use the example you put forward, they wouldn't hit the FYM part of IIFYM. Most of us IIFYM folks use the 80/20 rule, whole foods/ whatever. People who criticize it always want to focus on the 20 and exclude the middle. Once you hit your macros and had a balanced diet with diverse micro-nutrients, you don't get any extra credit.
Dose and context and sustainability, man. Dose and context and sustainability.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/excluding-the-middle.html/
I have a very good understanding of IIFYM and the 80/20 idea. Thank you. My point is when someone says they are planning on reducing sugar and fat in their diet there are boos in the responses. Someone mentions they were able to include wine or ice cream every day there are high fives.
Apples and oranges. One doesn't relate to the other.
ETA: whether, sugar or fat should be reduced is specific to the individual. There is nothing inherently good or bad about it. If I were to "high five" someone for including some wine and or ice cream, it would be because they both hit thier targets and enjoyed life through food and drink a little. That person is more likely to comply long term and achieve thier goal. I don't get the value judgement you put on either of these. Eliminating fat and sugar isn't necessarily good. Having wine and ice cream isn't necessarily bad. Again, context and dose.
I agree with what you are saying 100%. However, MY PERCEPTION (be it right, wrong or indifferent) is there is much more praise in the responses on these forums when someone gets some wine or ice cream (as examples of higher calorie, lower nutrient foods) in vs when someone mentions a reasonable reduction in sugar or fat.
In my mind, both should be equally praiseworthy
Ok so?
Does that not meet some unspoken standard that you value. I think it's for the reasons @AnnPT77 and @janejellyroll and @GottaBurnEmall have detailed. Seems that many of those here get that but the logic escapes you. I get that it can be hard to read tone. But to me, it comes off very judgmental. As though you feel you can be the arbiter of others values in terms of diet and fitness. Maybe I'm reading it wrong and if so, my apologies.
As I said earlier (and if you care you can go back in history to check my prior postings) I believe in the 80/20 nutritionally dense vs not so nutritionally dense.
My point, MY PERCEPTION, is discussions related to foods on these boards seem to be the other way around. 80% how to fit more treats into a nutrition plan, vs comparatively little discussion on including an appropriate amount of nutritionally dense foods in one's diet.
I mean, we all know virtually nobody gets the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies. To me, on a health and fitness site, this would be a higher priority.
Well, how would you know this really? Maybe they are and maybe they aren't. What is that to you? Personally, I do me and other do them. I'm not looking to control or or be the diet judge of what others are eating.
FTR, I don't agree with your perception about what is discussed 80% of the time. Or maybe I do a little but I'm not out to save the world. I'm running my own race. I see dopey posts every day about stuff. They're everywhere. It's not my job to be the correctness police and fix people. Is it yours?
Also, I see lots and lots of discussion of of what is an appropriate amount of nutrient dense foods. I'd suggest if you don't, you are either not paying close enough attention or need to have more discretion about which threads you wander into.
FTR 2: I get more than the recommended amount of fruits and veggies pretty much every day. I am not the only one. So that pretty much invalidates your "virtually nobody" statement. Either way, what business is it of yours?
Suggestion. You may want to consider dialing back the judgmental thing in regard to other people and focus on being a better you. Just sayin...
There's actually quite a few of us here who eat larger amounts of veg/fruit-more than the current recommendations. And then there's also quite a few here who are working on upping their produce consumption-it's a pretty popular thread topic. A bit surprised at pp's statement, since it's so obviously not accurate, if one spends any amount of time on the forums.
And then there are those of us who get way more than the recommended amount of vegetables, but not much fruit because of medical conditions where carbs need to be modified. Together, I get over the recommendations, but if you separate fruit from veggies it is (necessarily) unbalanced.
And those of us who get way more than the recommended amount of vegetables and absolutely no fruit, because fruit is the devil's poo, and that's fine because there's nothing in fruit which you can't get from veg and the only reason they recommend 5/2 is because it's more palatable to people to recommend some fruit instead of all veg.3 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Exactly. These people who are mfp "vets" really seem to attack those who put down processed foods. Over and over again.
This is why I stand by my first unpopular opinion pages ago...this is NOT a health and fitness site. It's a weight loss site.
I don't attack anyone. I just want to know why smoked salmon and plain greek yogurt and tempeh all deserve to be put down. I find them to be helpful foods.
I also have a similar idea about nutrition to Ann -- I think basing meals around protein (I aim for .65-.85 g per lb, now that I am at a healthy weight) and vegetables (I aim for 8-10 servings per day), and generally including sources of healthy fats, whole food forms of starches (right now I am overrun with corn, so it's corn), especially legumes, and so on are great. Some of the foods I use to meet these requirements (like the smoked salmon and yogurt) are processed.
I also eat indulgent foods to make my diet more satisfying to me. Cheese is a huge one here (processed) and I also enjoy occasional dark chocolate and ice cream and more rarely other sweets (again, all this is processed or contains processed ingredients).
If I forget or am too lazy to pack lunch, I may go to SnapKitchen or local places like Protein Bar or a good salad bar near my office. I also like to go out to dinner at least once per week, usually an interesting local place, sometimes inexpensive (often ethnic so not something I could do at home as well), sometimes a casual local Italian place with good pizza, sometimes more farm-based or fine dining. Again, as this is prepared by people other than me, it's processed.
I don't see why this means I am not interested in health or nutrition.
To my mind, thinking nutrition is about demonizing all processed foods as if they were the same, rather than about what you do eat (like focusing on including vegetables, protein, etc., which by definition will not leave you with room to eat a ton of junk, if you like that phrase, within calories) demonstrates a lot more knowledge about nutrition and focusing on "no processed" usually means the person doesn't know much about nutrition and is looking to simplify in a way that IMO is not helpful (especially since invariably the person does not even know what processed means).8 -
cmriverside wrote: »lol, Olive. Someone is going to make you define "modified" and then they'll tell you you're doing it wrong.
I haven't noticed DASH followers being likely to do that at all. It's more guidelines/a template.0 -
An unpopular opinion about nutrition: processed foods are FANTASTIC. Processing foods has led to better preservation, less food waste, lower overall food costs, reduced food prep time, greater accessibility to wider varieties of foods in large parts of the USA, Canada, and world at large, and reduced food poisoning dramatically. There are enormous economical and social benefits to processed foods.
That doesn't mean I think any particular processed food is tasty or enjoyable to eat, or that anyone's diet should consist solely of it (i.e. a diet built around spaghetti-o's would be terrible, although my 7 year old nephew might endorse it). I also think, in general, that most of them have way too much salt, being a cheap way to satisfy people's flavor receptors (and as over time people have become accustomed to eating a lot of salt, almost mandatory for palpable food to many people).
24 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Exactly. These people who are mfp "vets" really seem to attack those who put down processed foods. Over and over again.
This is why I stand by my first unpopular opinion pages ago...this is NOT a health and fitness site. It's a weight loss site.
I mean, yeah, if you ignore all the people here who are hugely enthusiastic about exercise, fitness, eating more vegetables, meeting macronutrient needs, etc . . . .
Look, just because someone doesn't share your exact same biases about what constitutes a healthful diet it doesn't mean that they somehow don't care about health.16 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Doesn't seem strange to one who suspends the judgey, judgey stuff and understands what IIFYM really is. It's all about context and dose. About sustainability and taking perfectionism and deprivation out of the equation for long term success.
If someone ate a bunch of junk food and alcohol, to use the example you put forward, they wouldn't hit the FYM part of IIFYM. Most of us IIFYM folks use the 80/20 rule, whole foods/ whatever. People who criticize it always want to focus on the 20 and exclude the middle. Once you hit your macros and had a balanced diet with diverse micro-nutrients, you don't get any extra credit.
Dose and context and sustainability, man. Dose and context and sustainability.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/excluding-the-middle.html/
I have a very good understanding of IIFYM and the 80/20 idea. Thank you. My point is when someone says they are planning on reducing sugar and fat in their diet there are boos in the responses. Someone mentions they were able to include wine or ice cream every day there are high fives.
Apples and oranges. One doesn't relate to the other.
ETA: whether, sugar or fat should be reduced is specific to the individual. There is nothing inherently good or bad about it. If I were to "high five" someone for including some wine and or ice cream, it would be because they both hit thier targets and enjoyed life through food and drink a little. That person is more likely to comply long term and achieve thier goal. I don't get the value judgement you put on either of these. Eliminating fat and sugar isn't necessarily good. Having wine and ice cream isn't necessarily bad. Again, context and dose.
I agree with what you are saying 100%. However, MY PERCEPTION (be it right, wrong or indifferent) is there is much more praise in the responses on these forums when someone gets some wine or ice cream (as examples of higher calorie, lower nutrient foods) in vs when someone mentions a reasonable reduction in sugar or fat.
In my mind, both should be equally praiseworthy
Ok so?
Does that not meet some unspoken standard that you value. I think it's for the reasons @AnnPT77 and @janejellyroll and @GottaBurnEmall have detailed. Seems that many of those here get that but the logic escapes you. I get that it can be hard to read tone. But to me, it comes off very judgmental. As though you feel you can be the arbiter of others values in terms of diet and fitness. Maybe I'm reading it wrong and if so, my apologies.
As I said earlier (and if you care you can go back in history to check my prior postings) I believe in the 80/20 nutritionally dense vs not so nutritionally dense.
My point, MY PERCEPTION, is discussions related to foods on these boards seem to be the other way around. 80% how to fit more treats into a nutrition plan, vs comparatively little discussion on including an appropriate amount of nutritionally dense foods in one's diet.
I mean, we all know virtually nobody gets the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies. To me, on a health and fitness site, this would be a higher priority.
You might be looking at the wrong threads. Many if not most long time members do get the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies (for perspective, I average 50-80 grams of fiber a day). There is no trick to it. Are you unconsciously skimming over the replies where bulking meals with vegetables is recommended because they're not as memorable as snack replies? Have you seen the "volume eaters" thread? Do you think adults need to be told what they already know and has been drilled into them since childhood? Most people know how to eat vegetables. Whether or not they do that's a different story. Eating a carrot is straightforward, eating a higher calorie snack is not. The skill of moderating high calorie items is valuable and not everybody understands how it's done, the skill of "eat your veggies" is seldom an issue when it comes to handling calories.
This is all true, yet I want to add that when people do post for suggestions on how to eat more vegetables, I frequently see great suggestions (including some that I, a long-time vegetable lover, haven't yet tried -- these threads even give me ideas!).7 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Exactly. These people who are mfp "vets" really seem to attack those who put down processed foods. Over and over again.
This is why I stand by my first unpopular opinion pages ago...this is NOT a health and fitness site. It's a weight loss site.
Yet even the most cursory perusal of the forums clearly shows that there are a staggering number of healthy, fit, athletic members on MFP.
What crazy talk! People can't possible be healthy and fit while also eating processed foods. It's impossible! Cosmo told me so! /s
That's the reason people who incorporate the things they love into their diet get "cheered". The sheer amount of "You can't eat this and be healthy!!!!!" BS that's around.19 -
I honestly don't get the fervent demonisation generally seen of processed foods. And by that I mean what I'd refer to as convenience foods. I look at labels and for the most part there's nothing bad in them, they're just, well, convenient. I don't even regularly go over the sodium recommendation in my diary when I have a day heavy on those things. And for me, when my brain has checked out as it regularly does, it's much safer for me to be able to stand and watch something cook for 10 minutes than to have something that takes longer and regular checking because I could very well burn the house down. I did it the other day grilling some fish, I left the kitchen to check something and clean forgot about the fish. Luckily on that occasion I didn't even burn it but you see the point.
There are lots of people who are sucked in by the idea that losing weight and maintaining a lower weight = abject healthy eating misery when "healthy" isn't what they think it means. You see it every day. "Help! I am going to xyz, what's the healthiest thing I can have?".
I have also seen some really great threads when people who want to up their veg intake ask for help in introducing them and preparing them in a flavourful way get lots and lots of great ideas and feedback.
It's really weird that there's a small group of people who think 80/20, IIFYM = *kitten* of veg, imma eat Cheetos.12 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Exactly. These people who are mfp "vets" really seem to attack those who put down processed foods. Over and over again.
This is why I stand by my first unpopular opinion pages ago...this is NOT a health and fitness site. It's a weight loss site.
do I dare ask for a link or two showing this????
where vets "attack"...those who put down processed foods.
I am with Lemurcat on this one...for me processed foods are part of my regular WoE (way of eating) and I eat "convenience" foods too like lean cuisine when I on a crunch for time...or a healthy choice steamer...I assume those are "processed" but I get in 2-4 servings of veggies and protein from those, calories are decent and it helps me hit my macros.
my yogurt, my breakfast this morning (1 egg, cheese, english muffin, 4 slices of deli ham, coffee, creamer (AMG and it was coffee mate)) all processed foods (except the egg i guess) but healthy, nutrient dense.6 -
cmriverside wrote: »lol, Olive. Someone is going to make you define "modified" and then they'll tell you you're doing it wrong.
I modify the plan by adding MORE veggies
And I try to get in a serving of beans a day, which the original plan only calls for 3 times a week.
So in a nutshell: daily I aim for 800g-1,000g+ of veg/fruit, 5-7 servings of grains (mostly whole grains), 3 servings of low fat dairy, 3-4 ounces of chicken breast or wild caught salmon, 1 serving of beans, 1tsp of olive oil/other fat and then I have an 'other' category which I designate 3-4 servings, this is for things like condiments, ice cream (HT) etc. I also aim to eat a serving of nuts/seeds 3 times a week and then olives 3 times a week.
I'm not super strict about it, but I use this as a template when planning out my day, and as I eat I check the categories off (I found a notebook that has graph paper, which is perfect for this). This system has really clicked with me and I may actually stick with it for a while
6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »lol, Olive. Someone is going to make you define "modified" and then they'll tell you you're doing it wrong.
I haven't noticed DASH followers being likely to do that at all. It's more guidelines/a template.
I think he/she meant that since I do a modified version, someone else will come along and then tell me I'm doing it all wrong, such is MFP
1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »I honestly don't get the fervent demonisation generally seen of processed foods. And by that I mean what I'd refer to as convenience foods. I look at labels and for the most part there's nothing bad in them, they're just, well, convenient. I don't even regularly go over the sodium recommendation in my diary when I have a day heavy on those things. And for me, when my brain has checked out as it regularly does, it's much safer for me to be able to stand and watch something cook for 10 minutes than to have something that takes longer and regular checking because I could very well burn the house down. I did it the other day grilling some fish, I left the kitchen to check something and clean forgot about the fish. Luckily on that occasion I didn't even burn it but you see the point.
Yeah, and I find the idea that people gained because they used these as main meals odd (I used to rely more on convenience foods of that type in my 20s and wasn't overweight at the time). Many of them are reasonably healthy (I did rice and beans packages and added vegetables often, my sister, who has never been overweight, does a variety of them).
I suspect that what people might mean really (explaining how they ignore that foods like greek yogurt, protein powder are processed) are packaged "junk" foods, like various chips (US usage) and sweets and so on, maybe things like high cal restaurant meals in a package (PF Chang meals, which I've seen and suspect are high cal; frozen pizza; frozen egg rolls and tater tots; Friday's dip in a package, on and on). But the issue here is not that the foods are processed, it's the food choice. These same foods would be every bit as caloric if made at home.
One example is the Kraft Mac & Cheese (which I liked as a kid, don't now, because I've become a mac and cheese snob after having more traditionally made versions of the dish). Yes, a meal of Kraft isn't great calorically or for nutrients (unless one, being sensible, has a small portion with some kind of protein and vegetables). But you know what is even WORSE calorically and no better on its own for nutrients? Traditionally made mac & cheese, which I love but rarely have because it's high cal (I think of it as a side for some holidays or an occasional get together).
Anyway, the usage where "processed" means those packaged junk foods is odd to me, and not a way in which I am familiar with the word being used when I was growing up -- processed is a much broader term, we'd use more specific ones.
When people seem to assume of course those are the processed foods I wonder if THEY are the ones who have or had the limited diet and so think everyone is eating lots of that stuff, and none of the more nutrient dense foods.2 -
tiffaninghs wrote: »im vegan and eat wayyy more veggies than fruit.. but thats because of all the rain its ruined this years fruit crops and none of it has tasted good.. so sad!!
Where are you located? I'm in S. Ontario (Canada) and we've had the wettest spring and summer ever.
I have found that - although the fruits *have* been a bit later than usual to ripen and get to market - they are absolutely delicious! Just had Ontario peaches available last week. They are a bit smaller in size than what would be considered normal, but my god they're sweet, juicy and delicious! Same thing with our cherries, plums, strawberries and raspberries. The apples will be out soon, and I expect them to be darned delicious , too. 2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I honestly don't get the fervent demonisation generally seen of processed foods. And by that I mean what I'd refer to as convenience foods. I look at labels and for the most part there's nothing bad in them, they're just, well, convenient. I don't even regularly go over the sodium recommendation in my diary when I have a day heavy on those things. And for me, when my brain has checked out as it regularly does, it's much safer for me to be able to stand and watch something cook for 10 minutes than to have something that takes longer and regular checking because I could very well burn the house down. I did it the other day grilling some fish, I left the kitchen to check something and clean forgot about the fish. Luckily on that occasion I didn't even burn it but you see the point.
Yeah, and I find the idea that people gained because they used these as main meals odd (I used to rely more on convenience foods of that type in my 20s and wasn't overweight at the time). Many of them are reasonably healthy (I did rice and beans packages and added vegetables often, my sister, who has never been overweight, does a variety of them).
I suspect that what people might mean really (explaining how they ignore that foods like greek yogurt, protein powder are processed) are packaged "junk" foods, like various chips (US usage) and sweets and so on, maybe things like high cal restaurant meals in a package (PF Chang meals, which I've seen and suspect are high cal; frozen pizza; frozen egg rolls and tater tots; Friday's dip in a package, on and on). But the issue here is not that the foods are processed, it's the food choice. These same foods would be every bit as caloric if made at home.
One example is the Kraft Mac & Cheese (which I liked as a kid, don't now, because I've become a mac and cheese snob after having more traditionally made versions of the dish). Yes, a meal of Kraft isn't great calorically or for nutrients (unless one, being sensible, has a small portion with some kind of protein and vegetables). But you know what is even WORSE calorically and no better on its own for nutrients? Traditionally made mac & cheese, which I love but rarely have because it's high cal (I think of it as a side for some holidays or an occasional get together).
Anyway, the usage where "processed" means those packaged junk foods is odd to me, and not a way in which I am familiar with the word being used when I was growing up -- processed is a much broader term, we'd use more specific ones.
When people seem to assume of course those are the processed foods I wonder if THEY are the ones who have or had the limited diet and so think everyone is eating lots of that stuff, and none of the more nutrient dense foods.
Here in the UK we have fridges full of ready meals that range from kids size options, gluten free, low calorie, "healthier choice", luxury, take away (Chinese, Indian), pizza, traditional etc. Literally everything you could make at home. What you choose from those things is up to you, they are all no different for the most part ingredients wise. It's a case of choosing what fits for your needs.
Move out of the fridge to the dried foods, which I think is what a lot of people truly think of as processed and again, largely they're literally just a dried in a packet version of their fresh counterpart. I still don't see where this is terrible.
Same with the options from the freezer. Not terrible nutritionally speaking, they just so happen to have been prepared and frozen.
And if we're talking about things in the snack aisle then pretty much everyone knows they should be sometimes foods. Just because people aren't consuming them only sometimes doesn't change that we know they're nutritionally light calorie dense foods. And nobody on MFP is advocating a diet solely made up of those items.
I am also waiting for someone to tell me what additives are deadly specifically, or even which ones are harmful, in so called convenience foods.4 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »tiffaninghs wrote: »im vegan and eat wayyy more veggies than fruit.. but thats because of all the rain its ruined this years fruit crops and none of it has tasted good.. so sad!!
Where are you located? I'm in S. Ontario (Canada) and we've had the wettest spring and summer ever.
I have found that - although the fruits *have* been a bit later than usual to ripen and get to market - they are absolutely delicious! Just had Ontario peaches available last week. They are a bit smaller in size than what would be considered normal, but my god they're sweet, juicy and delicious! Same thing with our cherries, plums, strawberries and raspberries. The apples will be out soon, and I expect them to be darned delicious , too.
the peaches we are getting east aren't juicy yet...*cries* and if we leave them out to ripen more they go bad so quick...
however our berries (I grow them) were so delish and I can hardly wait to see how our tomatoes are...
we have had a very dry summer...but wet spring.0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »tiffaninghs wrote: »im vegan and eat wayyy more veggies than fruit.. but thats because of all the rain its ruined this years fruit crops and none of it has tasted good.. so sad!!
Where are you located? I'm in S. Ontario (Canada) and we've had the wettest spring and summer ever.
I have found that - although the fruits *have* been a bit later than usual to ripen and get to market - they are absolutely delicious! Just had Ontario peaches available last week. They are a bit smaller in size than what would be considered normal, but my god they're sweet, juicy and delicious! Same thing with our cherries, plums, strawberries and raspberries. The apples will be out soon, and I expect them to be darned delicious , too.
the peaches we are getting east aren't juicy yet...*cries* and if we leave them out to ripen more they go bad so quick...
however our berries (I grow them) were so delish and I can hardly wait to see how our tomatoes are...
we have had a very dry summer...but wet spring.
Try this:
Wrap your unripe peaches in linen napkins for a few days and leave them somewhere inside out of direct sunlight. As soon as the top of the peaches right next to the stem 'yields' a bit when you apply gentle pressure with your fingertip, unwrap and refrigerate them. They should then be ready to eat in a day or two.
And yeah, I grow raspberries and strawberries and have had wonderful results with both this year. Again, a bit later to harvest than normal, but so worth the wait. My tomatoes are just ripening up now and they look amazing.
3 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »tiffaninghs wrote: »im vegan and eat wayyy more veggies than fruit.. but thats because of all the rain its ruined this years fruit crops and none of it has tasted good.. so sad!!
Where are you located? I'm in S. Ontario (Canada) and we've had the wettest spring and summer ever.
I have found that - although the fruits *have* been a bit later than usual to ripen and get to market - they are absolutely delicious! Just had Ontario peaches available last week. They are a bit smaller in size than what would be considered normal, but my god they're sweet, juicy and delicious! Same thing with our cherries, plums, strawberries and raspberries. The apples will be out soon, and I expect them to be darned delicious , too.
the peaches we are getting east aren't juicy yet...*cries* and if we leave them out to ripen more they go bad so quick...
however our berries (I grow them) were so delish and I can hardly wait to see how our tomatoes are...
we have had a very dry summer...but wet spring.
I had the same problem with my peaches from my tree (Reliance)--they come on at the end of July, and although they had good flavor and were juicy, many were starting to go bad on the tree even before they were ripe, and when I picked them I had to process them right away, some of them even before my "gold standard" of ripeness, or they would go bad on the counter in a day in many cases. My MIL had the same problem with the half-bushel that she bought from a farm stand in Michigan (Red Haven peaches). I had to throw so many in the compost.
We have had an overly wet and cool summer, so I don't know if that has had anything to do with it.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »shinedowness1 wrote: »What I do is basically have women's multivitamin pills, oatmeal, protein, and bananas in the morning. That usually stops me from eating things that cause me to overindulge throughout the day. My snacks, lunches, and dinners consist of a mixture of foods. That way I am not eating repetitively so much. Foods high in vitamins, minerals, and protein are what I scavenge for. I try to have foods that are not genetically modified, processed so much, and doesn't have too much sugar, fat, etc. to insure my body.
don't have a varied diet do you then if that is one of the conditions...
You don't have to have Cheeto's, pop, etc to have a varied diet.
Someone who avoids processed food is going to be eliminating a lot more than Cheetos and soda, especially if they are also eliminating foods that are higher in sugar and fat as well.
This represents one of my unpopular opinions. Someone who mentioned they are trying to limit processed foods, extra sugar, fat etc from their diet gets a lot of static on their choices on this forum. Yet someone who eats a bunch of questionable foods (i.e. junk foods) drinks alcohol on a daily basis etc, as long as it "fits their macros" and calories gets virtual high fives.
Seems strange for a health and fitness site.
Doesn't seem strange to one who suspends the judgey, judgey stuff and understands what IIFYM really is. It's all about context and dose. About sustainability and taking perfectionism and deprivation out of the equation for long term success.
If someone ate a bunch of junk food and alcohol, to use the example you put forward, they wouldn't hit the FYM part of IIFYM. Most of us IIFYM folks use the 80/20 rule, whole foods/ whatever. People who criticize it always want to focus on the 20 and exclude the middle. Once you hit your macros and had a balanced diet with diverse micro-nutrients, you don't get any extra credit.
Dose and context and sustainability, man. Dose and context and sustainability.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/excluding-the-middle.html/
I have a very good understanding of IIFYM and the 80/20 idea. Thank you. My point is when someone says they are planning on reducing sugar and fat in their diet there are boos in the responses. Someone mentions they were able to include wine or ice cream every day there are high fives.
Apples and oranges. One doesn't relate to the other.
ETA: whether, sugar or fat should be reduced is specific to the individual. There is nothing inherently good or bad about it. If I were to "high five" someone for including some wine and or ice cream, it would be because they both hit thier targets and enjoyed life through food and drink a little. That person is more likely to comply long term and achieve thier goal. I don't get the value judgement you put on either of these. Eliminating fat and sugar isn't necessarily good. Having wine and ice cream isn't necessarily bad. Again, context and dose.
I agree with what you are saying 100%. However, MY PERCEPTION (be it right, wrong or indifferent) is there is much more praise in the responses on these forums when someone gets some wine or ice cream (as examples of higher calorie, lower nutrient foods) in vs when someone mentions a reasonable reduction in sugar or fat.
In my mind, both should be equally praiseworthy
I agree with the last sentence.
I don't think that people have negative responses to those reducing sugar or fat (or junk food or whatever). I think there's a negative response to the idea that "bad foods" should be avoided or "all sugar" should be avoided or fat is always bad or the like, to the idea that the only right way to diet is to "eat clean" (which often doesn't have a coherent meaning) and that you should feel guilty or like you cheated if you ever eat a cookie.
Also, reasonable explanation if someone says "I thought avocado was good for me, but it's SO high in fat" or the like.
Contrary to what you assert, I think if you asked most of the participants in this thread how they reduced calories, most of us would talk about things like cutting lower nutrient foods or, even if that is not applicable, about the importance of making sure their diet is based on nutrient-dense and satisfying foods, but also including the extras.
You often seem to jump to the conclusion that people are encouraging unlimited drinking of sugary soda or paying no attention to the diet and just eating the (stereotypical) SAD and so on, and since I do not see that, I think that's coming from you.
Pretty much how I was going to respond to that.
The "problem" isn't those that "mentions a reasonable reduction in sugar or fat." The issue arises when people say they want to cut out all sugar - which would be (for most people) an UNreasonable reduction, as veg/fruit inherently contain sugar. Not to mention the question of if that person is going to continue with that, after they've lost the weight, or if they might have better success (both with adherence and maintenance after the weight loss) if they simply learn how to incorporate some sugary foods into their diet.
Also, on the (what seems to be quite rare, these days) occasion that someone wants to go very low-fat. Again, an UNreasonable reduction, as fat is essential to proper health.
You want to eat fewer treats, as part of your weight loss effort? Well, yeah, I can't imagine anyone saying that's a bad idea. There may be some jokes regarding it, but that's all they are.7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 902 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions