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?

1194195197199200358

Replies

  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    SezxyStef 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.

    QFT. I need starches (and honestly do prefer whole grains, tubers, and legumes to be the source) to fuel my activity levels.

    I have autoimmune conditions that bring fatigue along for the ride as a nasty companion. The best way to manage fatigue is through exercise. The best way to fuel exercise is with carbohydrates.

    When I first started dieting, I ate a moderate level of carbs and rarely included grains because I didn't have the calorie allowance for them. As my activity levels increased, I needed the boost that starches gave me to fuel that activity.

    I'm eating a bowl full of oatmeal with raspberries, flax meal, and greek yogurt right now. I'm having brown basmati rice with dinner.

    I ran 2.5 miles this morning and walked briskly for 3 and will be lifting once this oatmeal settles. I expect tomorrow morning's run to be spectatcular.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    But as I have said on more than one post about this...it's an individual choice and it's apparently unpopular...who knew.

    I don't care about popular/unpopular, it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction.

    okay then let me ask you a couple of questions then.

    how many people log their food accurately? (guesstimate)
    Do you need physical activity to lose weight?
    was is done to improve your health and/or fitness? (if yes then it's exercise)

    If all are answered no or none..then there is why I make the distinction, because that activity is moot when it comes down to it and in the larger scheme of things that one activity is not going to make or break your weight loss but if you log them all that could break it.

    To me it makes sense to you maybe not...

    I do
    No
    Anything I do that is not sitting on my backside helps my fitness. Yes, even spading and tilling our extremely heavy clay soil.

    I only log what is out of the norm. All other household/living activity gets added in to my steps so yes, I get extra calories.

    It neither makes or breaks my weight loss because I pay attention to both calories in and calories out and make adjustments as needed. Working very well so far.

    58841349.png

    I think my point is being missed on purpose...

    No one is 100% accurate in logging...we can't be, we can do what we can but in the long run it's all just a guesstimate and usually people are on the wrong side of it

    No you don't need exercise to lose weight

    and the question was "was it done to improve your health and/or fitness" and you don't till for that you till to have a garden, to mix the soil etc...it might help it a bit but it wasn't done for that sole purpose which is what exercise is...done for the sole purpose of increasing health and/or fitness.

    anyway I won't be changing people's minds they have their own way which is fine, great even...

    the difference here is I can say I see why people see it the other way...I don't agree but I can see why...

    I do see why you see it your way. If someone is basically sedentary but going out of their way to log every little thing to get more calories, it can result in them eating too much. It may suggest that they are being unrealistic about what is already included even in a sedentary TDEE or about how much they are burning from cooking dinner or whatever.

    If you don't eat less on a day where you are extra sedentary but hasten to log and eat back calories for a slightly more active day, then that could cause a problem.

    But I think it's at least as common to be getting a calorie count based on "sedentary" when you are not really or to be logging these things more accurately. Or to jokingly log "50 calories for making an effort to keep my patience with my teenage daughter" as a joke and cover for going over 50 cals when they know they are over in reality. Or to log 1000 calories for an hours doing weights or a 55 min Zumba class or 500 calories for some yoga. So I'd be inclined to look at results rather than have a hard and fast rule.
  • Jonesuna64
    Jonesuna64 Posts: 233 Member
    What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?

    Eat Less
    Exercise
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    But as I have said on more than one post about this...it's an individual choice and it's apparently unpopular...who knew.

    I don't care about popular/unpopular, it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction.

    okay then let me ask you a couple of questions then.

    how many people log their food accurately? (guesstimate)
    Do you need physical activity to lose weight?
    was is done to improve your health and/or fitness? (if yes then it's exercise)

    If all are answered no or none..then there is why I make the distinction, because that activity is moot when it comes down to it and in the larger scheme of things that one activity is not going to make or break your weight loss but if you log them all that could break it.

    To me it makes sense to you maybe not...

    I get what you are saying, and I agree, it is a personal decision--everyone's body is going to respond differently, and people should be cautious about logging something that they might not be burning. If it's a half hour of light weeding or planting, it's not going to be a significant burn.

    For me, post-kids-and-weight-gain, even before I started weighing/tracking calories on MFP, every summer I would lose a considerable amount of weight (going from a size 12 to a size 10; one summer a size 8) with my only activity being gardening. Of course, once that activity stopped in the winter I would go back to a size 12, because I did not adapt my eating habits. Thank God for MFP, where I had the tools I needed to maintain natural summer loss for the winter.

    So, gardening represents a considerable portion of my calorie burn, both during my losing period, and recomp (now at size 6) over the past year+.

    The people on my friends list know that, especially in the spring and early summer, I am posting out "Gardening, 8 hours, 2400 calories burned," especially on the weekends, but even on a lot of the weekdays I will be working from when I get home till it gets too dark--4 or 5 hours or so. It is frequent enough and long enough that it represents a considerable caloric output, but not consistent enough that I would care to set my "normal activity" to that level. But that work HAS to be fueled in order for me to be an effective peasant.

    Granted, I have a fairly unique situation, with 7000 square feet under cultivation (across 3 gardens) and doing everything by hand and hand tools: digging, flipping compost, hauling around buckets and large cans of water and wet straw bales ("farmer carry")--if you think about it, even weeding and harvesting is a series of @ss to grass bodyweight squats. I definitely classify what I do as "for health and fitness": it's a free outdoor gym that additionally produces beautiful flowers, a pleasant landscape, a couple hundred pounds of valuable organic produce, and psychological therapy, all rolled into one.

    I have "DB woodchoppers" come up every few weeks in my lifting program, and while I do them, I always feel like such a tool, because it is such a patently fake replacement for the actual functional work that people used to do back when just about everyone was thin. Give me a maul, a big stack of logs, and a beautiful fall afternoon any day. (Note: I do NOT feel the same way about trading in deadlifts for a nasty hot afternoon spent baling hay. :p )

    Of course, if I ever wanted to get absolutely shredded and clearly define my abs, I would have to make adjustments, but as a 44-year old mom, I'm pretty happy with where I'm at, other than the bottoms of my arms being a little too jiggly, but I don't think much can be done about that, alas.

    Yep, same here. I was going to write a similar response since gardening is 100% of my exercise for part of the year and I definitely do it for my health and well being. But since I don't log anything I didn't bother. But gardening is serious work when the garden is big enough. Easily as much as many people put in at the gym.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,937 Member
    I can see both sides of the equation in this. But I see a distinction. If I am doing a little yard work for an hour or 2, I'm not going to log that. I see it as part of N.E.A.T. and it will all come out in the wash with any overestimating of burns and underestimating of calories over the week. If I am going out and splitting firewood for the afternoon, I might log it. In either event, I have a Fitbit, so if it is an "increase in HRM type activity", it'll get captured. And while the Fitbit is not 100% accurate, I know the windage on it well enough.

    That being said, I don't do a high deficit and I may only slightly eat more no matter what I log or what Fitbit says because I think there is enough inaccuracy on all sides of the equation that I am going to be conservative. I eat around 2000 cals per day. I'm not close to the edge. I've got margin for error.

    I try to always bear in mind that the 2 most common reasons why people struggle to lose when tracking calories is overestimating burns and underestimating food intake.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    mmapags wrote: »
    I can see both sides of the equation in this. But I see a distinction. If I am doing a little yard work for an hour or 2, I'm not going to log that. I see it as part of N.E.A.T. and it will all come out in the wash with any overestimating of burns and underestimating of calories over the week. If I am going out and splitting firewood for the afternoon, I might log it. In either event, I have a Fitbit, so if it is an "increase in HRM type activity", it'll get captured. And while the Fitbit is not 100% accurate, I know the windage on it well enough.

    That being said, I don't do a high deficit and I may only slightly eat more no matter what I log or what Fitbit says because I think there is enough inaccuracy on all sides of the equation that I am going to be conservative. I eat around 2000 cals per day. I'm not close to the edge. I've got margin for error.

    I try to always bear in mind that the 2 most common reasons why people struggle to lose when tracking calories is overestimating burns and underestimating food intake.

    I agree totally with this.

    I think that there are exceptions to my rule as well...someone mentioned a 36 mile bike ride...yah I would log it.

    But like you I expect most of those one offs are going to net with CI as accuracy can be questionable.

    I have my fitbit too and try to leave wiggle room...I am considering changing my activity level to light active to eliminate the "left over calories" I have every day as I am active with non exercise stuff...on purpose.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    But as I have said on more than one post about this...it's an individual choice and it's apparently unpopular...who knew.

    I don't care about popular/unpopular, it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction.

    okay then let me ask you a couple of questions then.

    how many people log their food accurately? (guesstimate)
    Do you need physical activity to lose weight?
    was is done to improve your health and/or fitness? (if yes then it's exercise)

    If all are answered no or none..then there is why I make the distinction, because that activity is moot when it comes down to it and in the larger scheme of things that one activity is not going to make or break your weight loss but if you log them all that could break it.

    To me it makes sense to you maybe not...

    I do
    No
    Anything I do that is not sitting on my backside helps my fitness. Yes, even spading and tilling our extremely heavy clay soil.

    I only log what is out of the norm. All other household/living activity gets added in to my steps so yes, I get extra calories.

    It neither makes or breaks my weight loss because I pay attention to both calories in and calories out and make adjustments as needed. Working very well so far.

    58841349.png

    I think my point is being missed on purpose...

    No one is 100% accurate in logging...we can't be, we can do what we can but in the long run it's all just a guesstimate and usually people are on the wrong side of it

    No you don't need exercise to lose weight

    and the question was "was it done to improve your health and/or fitness" and you don't till for that you till to have a garden, to mix the soil etc...it might help it a bit but it wasn't done for that sole purpose which is what exercise is...done for the sole purpose of increasing health and/or fitness.

    anyway I won't be changing people's minds they have their own way which is fine, great even...

    the difference here is I can say I see why people see it the other way...I don't agree but I can see why...

    Why does the logging of activity calories burned have to be used solely for something that's being done to improve health or fitness?

    If that's a rule you want to apply to your own logging, that's cool, but can't you see that it's really not cool to expect everyone else to apply that same rule to their own logging?

    My Fitbit logs extra activity as calories out. It doesn't make the discrimination between purposeful exercise and NEAT. It sends and adjustment to MFP for calories out for anything I burned beyond my activity setting. I see no need for people logging activity manually to do anything differently. If something goes above and beyond their activity setting for calories out, they should account for it in some way. IF THEY CHOOSE.

    It's fine if your experience didn't bring anything to bear on your weight, but others have said that they've had success accounting for incidental increases in NEAT.

    How about you do you?

    that is what exercise is...done to improve health and/or fitness...and IMO only exercise should be logged for additional calories to be eaten. That is my opinion. Why because I feel that logging those extra life activities that are not exercise leads people down a slippery slope of trying to find reasons to eat more without exercise.

    It is a rule I apply to my own logging and when the question is asked in the forums if a one of life activity should be logged as exercise my answer is no...every time. With a response of typically unless it's purposeful exercise then leave it alone as logging inaccuracies will typically override any extra calories you have burned.

    I have a fitbit I know how they work...but I don't eat all my calories back and have actually considered changing my activity level to lightly active to alleviate having to not eat to goal (extra calories added make it appear I am always about 500 under goal). As for others logging it and eating those calories and it working for them...I think it's great. And I think they should continue with what works for them...but there are others who have agreed with me too...

    As for your last statement..."how about you do you" are you saying that you are going to stop answering questions based on your opinion in the forums? because that is basically what you just told me to do...

    This particular topic fits quite well in this particular thread (unpopular opinions).

    Just sayin' *shrugs*

    The "how about you do you" applied to the idea that logging activity had to be just purposeful exercise.

    People use this site in different ways.

    You raised a good example here, and I can contrast the point I'm trying to make by elaborating on something you said about your Fitbit and your activity setting.

    Bear with me.

    I'm very active. I get anywhere from 20-24K or more steps a day, and at a good chunk of that is purposeful exercise.

    And yet, I keep all my settings here on MFP and Fitbit as sedentary.

    Why? Because I go to bed early and don't like the drop you get in your Fitbit adjustment when that happens if you have a different activity setting.

    That is how I choose to use activity logging, because it works with my lifestyle and preferences.

    For you and your preferences, you've stated that you want to change to a more active activity level because that will work best for you.

    I am trying to say that some people select "sedentary" and are fully aware they aren't really sedentary all the time and use MFP in different ways. Extra activity for them can be accounted for, not necessarily as a slippery slope (though I'm sure some people might use it that way), but because it's extra activity above and beyond the activity level they are accounting for in the NEAT level base calories MFP is giving them.

    Even though the site calls that part of logging "exercise", it's still "calories out", and it doesn't matter whether it's purposeful exercise or NEAT. It's just free software that we can all make work for us as we best see fit for our own individual goals and preferences.

    I agree with using the site as you see fit.

    And like you I haven't changed my level yet as I go to bed early as well...but I still somehow manage to get on average 800 extra calories to eat....I usually eat half of it...that is at sedentary.

    and I think how people choose to do it is totally up to them.

    Don't get me wrong I am not saying my way is the only way...I have said many times...people can do it how they want but when I see that question come up I will give my response as No don't log it...do people have to listen...nope...and it seems it is now unpopular.

    A few years ago I was in the majority...it's funny how these forums change over time depending on who posts.
  • French_Peasant
    French_Peasant Posts: 1,639 Member
    I think the "don't log it" perspective is an important and valuable perspective for people to hear and consider. How many of us have people on our feeds who regularly log 20 minutes of light cleaning, and then complain that they don't lose weight?

    In thinking about this, I have my maintenance calories set at 1380 when they should be somewhat higher; I tend to be sloppy on a lot of my logging and this buffer accommodates for the sloppiness, as well as the gardening days where I am, say, spending too much time working on a knot or repairing some netting or staking tomatoes instead of digging the potatoes or some such. I guess we all have our work-arounds.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,937 Member
    I think the "don't log it" perspective is an important and valuable perspective for people to hear and consider. How many of us have people on our feeds who regularly log 20 minutes of light cleaning, and then complain that they don't lose weight?

    In thinking about this, I have my maintenance calories set at 1380 when they should be somewhat higher; I tend to be sloppy on a lot of my logging and this buffer accommodates for the sloppiness, as well as the gardening days where I am, say, spending too much time working on a knot or repairing some netting or staking tomatoes instead of digging the potatoes or some such. I guess we all have our work-arounds.

    This is exactly why I think most people should not. I had one person in my feed that would log light cleaning, shopping and walking the dog for 10 minutes. After 6 years they had lost 20 lbs and complained constantly about how hard it was to lose. They had to go.

    Something vigorous and or sustained, I can see it. But a little weeding the front flower bed? Not so much.
This discussion has been closed.