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
-
I'm not taking it personally. I just get frustrated that someone says "avoid processed foods!" Another person, perhaps because they know this can make it needlessly harder or more confusing says "what's wrong with processed foods, that includes many foods that are helpful like plain greek yogurt, smoked salmon, low cal sauces I might rely on, dried pasta which can be the base of a healthy meal, and even some more convenience foods can make my life easier on a crunch day and be nutritionally sound, especially if I add some extra veg." And then you get the response: "people who speak against processed foods are attacked" (no they are not) and "clearly MFP vets don't care about health or nutrition."
My basic point is that including processed foods says nothing about overall nutrition (or health), as those foods are so varied and overall diet is what matters.
It gets annoying that pointing out that many processed foods are nutritionally helpful, etc. results in one being told that one must be not eating veg and scarfing primarily Cheetos and soda and fast food and doesn't care about nutrition at all.10 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »GemstoneofHeart wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »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.
So let me ask y'all a question. I've been around on MFP since 2010, albeit a different username, and have repeatedly been challenged over what seems to be semantics. I say the words "processed foods" to mean boxed foods, I.e. Hamburger helper, fast food (no not a salad from McDonald's), hungry man meals, stuff with tons of preservatives etc. I am not referring to frozen veggies, GMOs, etc. WHAT should I (we, cause I'm not the only one) be saying to avoid these conundrums??? Do you want us to say "Whole Foods"? "Nutritionally dense foods?" "Cooked at home", Something else?
I ask with all due respect because when I see someone, including myself, trying to encourage people on these forums to eat more "nutritionally sense" foods, we get attacked on what seems to be nomenclature.
I want to know what additives make boxed foods terrible. What are they doing to the body/your health if someone consumes them even semi-regularly? That's my personal beef, no-one has ever named them and their negative effects.
As I replied above though, I call them convenience foods personally. But I do also understand when people use processed as a blanket term for those foods.
I appreciate your reply. I agree, occasional consumption is fine. I certainly eat these types of food occasionally, or maybe even more than occasionally. It doesn't mean I would recommend it.
My reasoning is because I personally have a 1400 calorie goal. If I eat too many convenience foods, I don't have room for foods with key nutrients. If I do this a couple of times a week, I doubt it really matters. But daily?
I started reducing calories again in December 2016. About 7 months ago, my hair started falling out. I had tests of all sorts done, lipid levels, TSH, who knows what else in addition to seeing a dermatologist. My useless GP said it was post pregnancy ... kinda late though being 15 months post partum ... and sent my on my way. A naturopath tested my vitamin levels and sure enough I'm B vitamin deficient, which causes hair loss.
I had months worth of nutritional data. I was very good at cutting calories hence my weight loss success. But I was eating plenty of cookies, cake, enchiladas, and not eating nutritionally dense foods (or whatever you want to call it). So this is why I personally cringe when I try to encourage others to eat more "Whole Foods" and get questioned/rebutted.
Aaaaaand that's just my two cents!
I'm happy to engage in this discussion. I posted my planned day above - the majority of which were processed convenience foods. I'm also curious, as @VintageFeline mentioned, what specific additives you feel are in boxed foods and fast foods (not salads) which are actively harming our health or voiding nutritional benefits?
Also, does blanket advice to restrict processed foods, or convenience foods if you prefer, many of which are nutritionally sound or can be (I eat hamburger helper on occasion and I add frozen spinach and frozen peas and serve it with bagged salad and garlic bread for a super quick family meal) always help people? Your specific situation is a B Vitamin deficiency. It's possible that you aren't consuming enough to begin with. It's also possible that your body doesn't absorb it properly. Interestingly when I googled "best sources of Vitamin B" some of the recommendations include animal products, eggs, cheese, dairy, fortified cereals, and rice milk. All of which are processed and someone who takes the advice to cut out all processed foods could absolutely be missing out on.
That you were eating too much cake, cookies and enchiladas (although I make a wicked enchilada and it includes corn, black beans, zucchini, spinach and chicken so again I'm confused how enchiladas are inherently bad for someone) does not seem sensible and sure, it makes sense for you to make some dietary improvements. However, that's possible to do without making the (likely false) claim that you've cut out all processed foods.
And I hope this doesn't come across as lambasting you. I'm genuinely interested in the discussion because I agree, much of it comes down to semantics and working to understand what a person really means, even if their choice of words doesn't initially resonate with the opposite side's perspective. I truly believe that most of the people on this site, whether they align with team clean eating or team moderation; are eating in a similar fashion. They care about their overall health and well being, they make the best dietary choices they can for their lifestyle and interests.7 -
Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!7 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!
uh oh....8 -
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.
Possibly not.
I am told quite often how limited my gluten free ketogenic diet is. It isn't. I eat beef, lamb, seafood, fish, pork, chicken, turkey, bison, eggs, dairy, berries, coconut, olives, nuts (macadamia, cashew, etc), seeds (flax, ciha, hemp, pumpkin, etc), peanuts, and veggies (greens, peppers, onions, mushrooms, celery, broccoli, cauliflower, green beans, snap peas, etc). It does not feel limited. If avoid grains and sugar I consider it a plus - nutritionally speaking, neither are great.
If one does not have a gluten issue, there is nothing nutritionally bad about grains. Quite the opposite, many whole grains are very nutritionally dense while providing a good source of fiber. Barley and brown rice (which is gluten free) are 2 good examples.
Beyond fibre, grains are not a great source of nutrition. Mediocre to poor for many grains, especially once they are processed into flours. That's why wheat flour is "enriched". Other flours usually aren't even enriched.
Nutritionally speaking (vitamins and minerals), veggies and animal products are superior to grains. IMO
I looked up a random grain that I eat frequently, oats, and I can see that it has calcium, a lot of iron, B-6, and a lot of magnesium. It's a good source of protein and fiber as well.
Would I live on just oats? No. Is it the most nutrient dense food in my pantry? Probably not. But I wouldn't call it mediocre to poor. This just doesn't make sense to me.
If I had to build a very limited diet to meet my nutritional needs, oats would be a better choice than many vegetables that I eat frequently.15 -
Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »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.
I disagree (again) when it comes to extra sugar -- people say "how do I control myself with sugary foods" and generally get lots of advice (I think helpful, but I would, I give it). I honestly can't think of any examples of people trying to cut fat, but I think other than "how much are you eating, what are the sources" kinds of questions, since some do better with more fat and there are healthy sources, they'd get helpful advice too. I often state that I cut both fat and carbs some when I started, and no one pushes back/criticizes.
When it comes to processed foods, I think processed foods are too varied for it to make sense to try to cut them (and also what does that mean -- you mean trying to cook at home from whole foods more? why not say that?).
Why is it important to worry about plain greek yogurt or smoked salmon, again?
If you WANT to cook more from whole foods, I totally support you (and give helpful advice in the threads where people say that). But if you say "cut out processed foods!" as advice to someone else -- which is common - or assert on the unpopular opinion thread that processed food is bad for us, yes, I will ask why, because I don't think being processed makes food bad or says much about it's nutrient profile at all.
And since you DO eat processed foods (as does basically everyone in this conversation) and seem not to think they are all inherently bad, I find your arguments here confusing.
Please tell me why just being processed makes a food bad for someone.
Please show me where I said why just a food being processed is bad.
I'll save you the time, I never did.
You suggested that avoiding processed foods is the equivalent of avoiding Cheetos and sodas, as if people who consume them must be eating huge amounts of those kinds of foods and having an unhealthy diet in general.
Sorry too many incorrect inferences.
To clarify my position, I have nothing against processed foods. I eat them on a regular basis. I do look at them along a simple green light/red light continuum.
Examples:
Fresh frozen berries/prebagged salads = Green light, eat anytime
Cheetos = Red light, eat rarely.
I believe most dietitians would be in general agreement with this methodology for most people.
This is a understandable spectrum. Can you understand why people might find this method more understandable than a stance like "I try to avoid processed foods" (the statement by someone else that sparked this whole thread of discussion).
Many of us feel that it makes more sense to consider the food itself rather than the mere fact that it has undergone some kind of processing when it comes to the decision whether or not to eat it frequently/in large volume.4 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »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.
So let me ask y'all a question. I've been around on MFP since 2010, albeit a different username, and have repeatedly been challenged over what seems to be semantics. I say the words "processed foods" to mean boxed foods, I.e. Hamburger helper, fast food (no not a salad from McDonald's), hungry man meals, stuff with tons of preservatives etc. I am not referring to frozen veggies, GMOs, etc. WHAT should I (we, cause I'm not the only one) be saying to avoid these conundrums??? Do you want us to say "Whole Foods"? "Nutritionally dense foods?" "Cooked at home", Something else?
I ask with all due respect because when I see someone, including myself, trying to encourage people on these forums to eat more "nutritionally sense" foods, we get attacked on what seems to be nomenclature.
My personal feeling is that people should eat in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals and that focusing on a particular food in that mix isn't all that helpful (as well as whether or not one has personally prepared it).
If someone is eating in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals, it's irrelevant whether or not they sometimes have french fries or eat a sandwich that someone else has made or have a grain that has been refined.7 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!
I'm long past online dating, and don't doubt what you're say but I would bet it works for both sexes.7 -
Packerjohn wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!
I'm long past online dating, and don't doubt what you're say but I would bet it works for both sexes.
It may very well do. However, I recall seing analysis (using OKCupid's data, or photofeeler) that suggest that a profile picture of your face (not torso) is more advisable for matches.0 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!
A local minor league hockey team allows fans to Tweet their pictures at the event and displays them on the giant scoreboard screens throughout the game. The display has their Twitter profile pic in the upper left corner of the actual picture; it is amazing the drastic difference between the profile pic and the picture spontaneously taken (and unfiltered) and posted at the event. I can understand wanting a flattering picture, but should it really be so highly produced that it bears little resemblance to reality?7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »And I hope this doesn't come across as lambasting you. I'm genuinely interested in the discussion because I agree, much of it comes down to semantics and working to understand what a person really means, even if their choice of words doesn't initially resonate with the opposite side's perspective. I truly believe that most of the people on this site, whether they align with team clean eating or team moderation; are eating in a similar fashion. They care about their overall health and well being, they make the best dietary choices they can for their lifestyle and interests.
As usual, WinoGelato said it really well.
I totally agree with this and really would like to move to a place of better communication in these discussions.8 -
I will add that I kind of do think these debates are, in some cases, just semantic, in that for some segment of the population "processed" seems to be a term for "not nutritionally dense" (although that is simply NOT what the word actually means). What I find frustrating are the assertions that we should KNOW that of course you don't really mean processed foods when you say processed foods, but mean non nutritionally dense foods (or some other subset, which can vary quite a bit). If you want to say you limit non nutritionally dense foods, why not just say that? It's not controversial, so probably you wouldn't get much pushback. I suspect most of us do limit non nutritionally dense foods.
I just don't see what that has to do with a blanket avoidance of processed foods, let alone boxed or packaged foods, as plenty of homemade foods are less nutrient dense than some other processed foods (including some that might come in a box or be made from some ingredients that do).
My guess is there's not actually much disagreement here, so why the arguing? Why the suggesting that those of us who make these points don't care about health or nutrition?7 -
apparently another unpopular opinion I have is not logging things like "cleaning" or "gardening" but only purposeful exercise done with intent on improving health and fitness....
To clarify I meant "extra" cleaning or things that are not done on a regular basis like moving furniture or throwing in wood.
But at the same time it goes for cleaning period...I feel that the only thing you should log as exercise is those things done for the betterment of health and fitness.
*note I felt an edit was due as to clarify.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GemstoneofHeart wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »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.
So let me ask y'all a question. I've been around on MFP since 2010, albeit a different username, and have repeatedly been challenged over what seems to be semantics. I say the words "processed foods" to mean boxed foods, I.e. Hamburger helper, fast food (no not a salad from McDonald's), hungry man meals, stuff with tons of preservatives etc. I am not referring to frozen veggies, GMOs, etc. WHAT should I (we, cause I'm not the only one) be saying to avoid these conundrums??? Do you want us to say "Whole Foods"? "Nutritionally dense foods?" "Cooked at home", Something else?
I ask with all due respect because when I see someone, including myself, trying to encourage people on these forums to eat more "nutritionally sense" foods, we get attacked on what seems to be nomenclature.
My personal feeling is that people should eat in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals and that focusing on a particular food in that mix isn't all that helpful (as well as whether or not one has personally prepared it).
If someone is eating in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals, it's irrelevant whether or not they sometimes have french fries or eat a sandwich that someone else has made or have a grain that has been refined.
And along with this-you also have to find a way of eating that's realistic and sustainable for you, for the long term, or you won't stick with it for any amount of time.
2 -
OliveGirl128 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »GemstoneofHeart wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »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.
So let me ask y'all a question. I've been around on MFP since 2010, albeit a different username, and have repeatedly been challenged over what seems to be semantics. I say the words "processed foods" to mean boxed foods, I.e. Hamburger helper, fast food (no not a salad from McDonald's), hungry man meals, stuff with tons of preservatives etc. I am not referring to frozen veggies, GMOs, etc. WHAT should I (we, cause I'm not the only one) be saying to avoid these conundrums??? Do you want us to say "Whole Foods"? "Nutritionally dense foods?" "Cooked at home", Something else?
I ask with all due respect because when I see someone, including myself, trying to encourage people on these forums to eat more "nutritionally sense" foods, we get attacked on what seems to be nomenclature.
My personal feeling is that people should eat in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals and that focusing on a particular food in that mix isn't all that helpful (as well as whether or not one has personally prepared it).
If someone is eating in a way that meets their nutritional needs and allows them to meet their calorie goals, it's irrelevant whether or not they sometimes have french fries or eat a sandwich that someone else has made or have a grain that has been refined.
And along with this-you also have to find a way of eating that's realistic and sustainable for you, for the long term, or you won't stick with it for any amount of time.
Yep, the best-conceived nutritional plan on earth isn't worth anything if someone can't stick to it. Better to have a plan that is realistic when it comes to personal circumstances and preferences.2 -
apparently another unpopular opinion I have is not logging things like "cleaning" or "gardening" but only purposeful exercise done with intent on improving health and fitness....
Not unpopular with me. That is N.E.A.T. and should not be logged. I think it's silly really. Looking for an excuse to log everything. Heck, food logging errors probably account for more than the cleaning or gardening someone logs. I't self defeating and sometimes leads to the "I'm not making any progress, please help" post.4 -
AskMorphis wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »jamesakrobinson wrote: »Unpopular opinions? How's this?
Obese women who call themselves "average" body type on POF and have only headshots for photos. Experience tells me that their true body type is going to be "A few extra pounds". (it's worse yet if someone claims to be "athletic" but carries 30% body fat or more)
Sadly, "average" is technically almost correct now that obesity is an epidemic.
No photos where your torso is visible in a POF profile is now an automatic assumption you carry excessive fat!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate overweight people, but I really do dislike dishonesty... especially when you know for sure that your lie will be evident on first meeting!
I'm long past online dating, and don't doubt what you're say but I would bet it works for both sexes.
It may very well do. However, I recall seing analysis (using OKCupid's data, or photofeeler) that suggest that a profile picture of your face (not torso) is more advisable for matches.
You get more than one picture on dating profiles. So it should be head shot to lure them in, variety of angles and distances for clarity. I haven't used any dating sites in a long time because bleak (in my experience, I have friends who met their partner through them) but I always had full body shots and disclosed my body type honestly. As pointed out, not everyone does, which is just stupid really.1 -
janejellyroll 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.
Possibly not.
I am told quite often how limited my gluten free ketogenic diet is. It isn't. I eat beef, lamb, seafood, fish, pork, chicken, turkey, bison, eggs, dairy, berries, coconut, olives, nuts (macadamia, cashew, etc), seeds (flax, ciha, hemp, pumpkin, etc), peanuts, and veggies (greens, peppers, onions, mushrooms, celery, broccoli, cauliflower, green beans, snap peas, etc). It does not feel limited. If avoid grains and sugar I consider it a plus - nutritionally speaking, neither are great.
If one does not have a gluten issue, there is nothing nutritionally bad about grains. Quite the opposite, many whole grains are very nutritionally dense while providing a good source of fiber. Barley and brown rice (which is gluten free) are 2 good examples.
Beyond fibre, grains are not a great source of nutrition. Mediocre to poor for many grains, especially once they are processed into flours. That's why wheat flour is "enriched". Other flours usually aren't even enriched.
Nutritionally speaking (vitamins and minerals), veggies and animal products are superior to grains. IMO
I looked up a random grain that I eat frequently, oats, and I can see that it has calcium, a lot of iron, B-6, and a lot of magnesium. It's a good source of protein and fiber as well.
Would I live on just oats? No. Is it the most nutrient dense food in my pantry? Probably not. But I wouldn't call it mediocre to poor. This just doesn't make sense to me.
If I had to build a very limited diet to meet my nutritional needs, oats would be a better choice than many vegetables that I eat frequently.
Plus, starches fuel my workouts. Largely my porridge because I tend to workout after eating it. So even if for nothing other than calories, grains are not mediocre.6 -
apparently another unpopular opinion I have is not logging things like "cleaning" or "gardening" but only purposeful exercise done with intent on improving health and fitness....
Not to cross threads but the thread wasn't about normal level of house hold chores.
Stated as you have above I would agree with you.2 -
RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »apparently another unpopular opinion I have is not logging things like "cleaning" or "gardening" but only purposeful exercise done with intent on improving health and fitness....
Not to cross threads but the thread wasn't about normal level of house hold chores.
Stated as you have above I would agree with you.
Agreed and I should have clarified more with "extra cleaning" but for me Gardening did that since it's not a constant everyday affair.
but regardless I don't think cleaning, throwing in wood or anything not done to improve health and fitness should be logged for extra calories...
3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.2K 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
- 895 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions