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
-
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
But that's the thing...those diets tell people what they can and cannot eat, and most people cannot adhere to that. CICO has nothing to do with WHAT you eat, just how much.
I find it easier to say "oh yes I can have a cookie, but just one" much more sustainable than "NO cookie, ever"
How about "have as many cookies as you want, just fast 23 hours after you eat"? I eat one meal till I'm stuffed. Don't really stick to counting calories, although I do log, but I can't eat over 1900 calories in one sitting. I eat as much as I want, including cookies or cake or whatever. I just fast for the next 23 hours.1 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
But that's the thing...those diets tell people what they can and cannot eat, and most people cannot adhere to that. CICO has nothing to do with WHAT you eat, just how much.
I find it easier to say "oh yes I can have a cookie, but just one" much more sustainable than "NO cookie, ever"
How about "have as many cookies as you want, just fast 23 hours after you eat"? I eat one meal till I'm stuffed. Don't really stick to counting calories, although I do log, but I can't eat over 1900 calories in one sitting. I eat as much as I want, including cookies or cake or whatever. I just fast for the next 23 hours.
Sure you can do that. I have done that.
My point is that fad diets don't work ever. People should be able to eat whatever they want and just stick to a calorie goal, whether it's one cookie or 100 cookies. Fad diets don't do anything except divert you from the real problem and waste your money and time.2 -
I can eat well over 1900 calories in a sitting if it is the wrong type of food.4
-
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
trust me the one thing I am not is "weak willed"...I yoyo'd 25lbs+ for 15 years because of "diets"
following a diet is one thing but what about once you are done losing what then? you gain it back...rinse repeat...
once I got it "eat fewer calories" which means log and count calories I haven't regained in over 4 years...
Most people lack education that's why they got fat...call it natural food selection but it comes down to not knowing that to maintain weight you need CI=CO..I mean come on people come on the forums and say
"what is this CICO diet I've never ehard of it...how does it work, what can I eat..etc'
hold on, what? So once you get to a goal weight you just go right back to eating the same way you were before you started losing? How exactly is that the "fad" diet's fault? I dont' think any of these diets are designed to be "lose weight and stop" plans. They're supposed to be long-term lifestyle changes. If you stop paying attention to what you eat because you get to a healthy weight, yeah, I would say that's a willpower problem.
that's the point...of lack of education. Eating types of foods is not the reason people gain weight it's the amount so any of these fad diets don't teach you how to maintain weight...none of them...that's the fault of the "fad diet"
If they aren't designed to Lose then stop then how come they don't teach about calories etc instead they say "carbs are bad don't eat them"
The 17day diet is not a lifestyle thing...I did it...you follow it for 17 days...then phase 2 add in starches...phase 3 extra stuff added and more exercise then in phase 4 it says "eat reasonable portions"...okay so what is that?
for me it could be 500 calories...for you it might 250...education.
So again it's not what you eat it's how much you eat and that is the issue
and for you to call people weak willed because they can't follow a fad diet and maintain it afterwards shows your lack of understanding about what it takes to maintain as well...
see education is key4 -
robm1brown wrote: »I can eat well over 1900 calories in a sitting if it is the wrong type of food.
But how can something so calorific be wrong when it tastes so right?10 -
robm1brown wrote: »I can eat well over 1900 calories in a sitting if it is the wrong type of food.
Hey for some people trying to bulk on heavy cals that would be all kinds of right
4 -
blackhawkgirl91 wrote: »-I think keto/paleo/etc. are unsustainable fad diets.
-You're not going to keel over if you enjoy fast food responsibly.
-Ditto with pop/soda (diet and regular).
-There are good carbs and bad carbs, good fats and bad fats.
-Treat is treat, regardless of keto/paleo/low-fat/sugar-free/etc, some are just "less bad" than others. Halo Top is still ice cream
-Protein shakes and snacks (soy or whey based) are pointless and a waste of money. Not even my friend who lifts competitively will touch the stuff, her protein for building and maintaining muscle mass and strength comes from actual food.
-Also, fruit smoothies are not as healthy as actually eating a piece of fruit.
-You only need vitamins if you are truly deficient; if you eat a healthy balanced diet and have no medical conditions, you'll get all your body needs.
-Slow metabolism? Then boost it naturally with good food, good sleep, and good exercise. (Certain medical conditions are different.)
-Drink water when you're thirsty.
-I have trust issues with anyone who says a fruit or vegetable is "bad" (potatoes, carrots, bananas, seriously???).
Whew! Glad to get this all off my chest
Total horse excrement.
I can maintain keto for months at a time (once I get past the induction, which is a little rough) and never get hungry or even getting carb cravings.
I usually do about 3 months in the spring to shake off the "comfort food, holiday treats, and alcohol induced fat that I build up in winter (never shirtless so why not LOL)
CICO is definitely at least partially bunk because I eat the same 3300ish calories on or off keto and my workout regimen doesn't change much either but I drop 2 or 3 percent fat (I get a Dexa regularly) in that 3 months.
Through summer I live mostly IIFYM, because my regular activity level is a little higher... walking, swimming, biking... And when the fall kicks in and my shirt goes back on regularly I eat a little cleaner until around Christmas... Then I definitely allow myself to enjoy all the holidays offer.18 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
I think structure is important, but I think success is related to learning to create structure and to make good food decisions, not being dependent on some set diet.
I actually think a diet like low carb/LCHF/keto or paleo CAN be a tool for creating structure and learning what works for you, even though I personally think the distinctive things about paleo (no legumes, dairy, or grains) are not based on good science. IMO, low carb (including keto) can be a way of eating that for some people is easier to stick to, makes them feel more satisfied (and I don't think it means you can never have a cookie).
What I don't think is a tool for learning is following a set diet that tells you what to eat. For me, a meal plan that detailed or that doesn't involve figuring out what works best for you and understanding nutrition more over time is basically infantilizing, and that's what I find kind of icky about it. Plus, no one will want to eat a set eating plan forever.
In my mind, structure is more like: I do better eating 3 meals (or however many) and not snacking (or having 2 set snacks), and I structure my meals around protein, vegetables, and a starch, with fat used in cooking, most of the time. (Or whatever, although I personally think that focusing on adequate protein and lots of vegetables are, on average, helpful for people.)
On the other hand, I got fat eating nutritious meals for the most part, so what was ALSO important for me was understanding where my extra calories come from. I think when people look at that and fix it, it can become easy.
I do think a lack of structure is a problem for a lot of people starting out, though. Those posts "over my goal by lunch, what should I do about dinner" used to puzzle me until I realized people were not planning or imposing any structure.5 -
robm1brown wrote: »I can eat well over 1900 calories in a sitting...
I could too.1 -
robm1brown wrote: »I can eat well over 1900 calories in a sitting if it is the wrong type of food.
Hey for some people trying to bulk on heavy cals that would be all kinds of right
Of course I have just been bulking for the last 20 years, just nobody told me I had to lift weights
On a serious note I can't wait until I get to 'bulk up' I am never going to be a body builder but once I am down to a sensible weight might be nice to see if I can put on a bit of muscle. Years away at the moment.5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
I think structure is important, but I think success is related to learning to create structure and to make good food decisions, not being dependent on some set diet.
I actually think a diet like low carb/LCHF/keto or paleo CAN be a tool for creating structure and learning what works for you, even though I personally think the distinctive things about paleo (no legumes, dairy, or grains) are not based on good science. IMO, low carb (including keto) can be a way of eating that for some people is easier to stick to, makes them feel more satisfied (and I don't think it means you can never have a cookie).
What I don't think is a tool for learning is following a set diet that tells you what to eat. For me, a meal plan that detailed or that doesn't involve figuring out what works best for you and understanding nutrition more over time is basically infantilizing, and that's what I find kind of icky about it. Plus, no one will want to eat a set eating plan forever.
In my mind, structure is more like: I do better eating 3 meals (or however many) and not snacking (or having 2 set snacks), and I structure my meals around protein, vegetables, and a starch, with fat used in cooking, most of the time. (Or whatever, although I personally think that focusing on adequate protein and lots of vegetables are, on average, helpful for people.)
On the other hand, I got fat eating nutritious meals for the most part, so what was ALSO important for me was understanding where my extra calories come from. I think when people look at that and fix it, it can become easy.
I do think a lack of structure is a problem for a lot of people starting out, though. Those posts "over my goal by lunch, what should I do about dinner" used to puzzle me until I realized people were not planning or imposing any structure.
Well said.
Use all the tools in your toolbox that are appropriate to the situation.
LOL even when I am in ketosis (I am not right now) I will have a few low carb beers, or if I'm getting close to my self imposed carb limit a mixed drink with diet pop or diet lemonade... Yup alcohol is 7 calories per gram and you should track that too but it's not a carb ;-)
I actually have a Sleeman Clear in my other hand right now. :-D1 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »blackhawkgirl91 wrote: »-I think keto/paleo/etc. are unsustainable fad diets.
-You're not going to keel over if you enjoy fast food responsibly.
-Ditto with pop/soda (diet and regular).
-There are good carbs and bad carbs, good fats and bad fats.
-Treat is treat, regardless of keto/paleo/low-fat/sugar-free/etc, some are just "less bad" than others. Halo Top is still ice cream
-Protein shakes and snacks (soy or whey based) are pointless and a waste of money. Not even my friend who lifts competitively will touch the stuff, her protein for building and maintaining muscle mass and strength comes from actual food.
-Also, fruit smoothies are not as healthy as actually eating a piece of fruit.
-You only need vitamins if you are truly deficient; if you eat a healthy balanced diet and have no medical conditions, you'll get all your body needs.
-Slow metabolism? Then boost it naturally with good food, good sleep, and good exercise. (Certain medical conditions are different.)
-Drink water when you're thirsty.
-I have trust issues with anyone who says a fruit or vegetable is "bad" (potatoes, carrots, bananas, seriously???).
Whew! Glad to get this all off my chest
Total horse excrement.
I can maintain keto for months at a time (once I get past the induction, which is a little rough) and never get hungry or even getting carb cravings.
I usually do about 3 months in the spring to shake off the "comfort food, holiday treats, and alcohol induced fat that I build up in winter (never shirtless so why not LOL)
CICO is definitely at least partially bunk because I eat the same 3300ish calories on or off keto and my workout regimen doesn't change much either but I drop 2 or 3 percent fat (I get a Dexa regularly) in that 3 months.
Through summer I live mostly IIFYM, because my regular activity level is a little higher... walking, swimming, biking... And when the fall kicks in and my shirt goes back on regularly I eat a little cleaner until around Christmas... Then I definitely allow myself to enjoy all the holidays offer.
Offer yourself to science then.12 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
I got into that situation because I didn't understand how CICO worked. Once I figured that out I lost the extra weight and improved all my health markers-all without making a lot of changes to the kinds of foods I ate. I just started eating them in the correct calorie amounts.
6 -
RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »blackhawkgirl91 wrote: »-I think keto/paleo/etc. are unsustainable fad diets.
-You're not going to keel over if you enjoy fast food responsibly.
-Ditto with pop/soda (diet and regular).
-There are good carbs and bad carbs, good fats and bad fats.
-Treat is treat, regardless of keto/paleo/low-fat/sugar-free/etc, some are just "less bad" than others. Halo Top is still ice cream
-Protein shakes and snacks (soy or whey based) are pointless and a waste of money. Not even my friend who lifts competitively will touch the stuff, her protein for building and maintaining muscle mass and strength comes from actual food.
-Also, fruit smoothies are not as healthy as actually eating a piece of fruit.
-You only need vitamins if you are truly deficient; if you eat a healthy balanced diet and have no medical conditions, you'll get all your body needs.
-Slow metabolism? Then boost it naturally with good food, good sleep, and good exercise. (Certain medical conditions are different.)
-Drink water when you're thirsty.
-I have trust issues with anyone who says a fruit or vegetable is "bad" (potatoes, carrots, bananas, seriously???).
Whew! Glad to get this all off my chest
I was so with you on the first three, then it went down hill from there.
Same here!!
2 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
This! ^ Any awareness they create is only short term and they people rebound from all the restrictions and regain. They don't teach people how to eat in a healthy sustainable way. One of the top reasons for weight gain rebound and yoyo dieting.6 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
Weak willed? Seriously? Kind of judgmental wouldn't you say. Let's hope you are a success in your efforts and your own words and judgement don't come back and bit you on the *kitten*.
I think your viewpoint is really ill informed, naive' and unnecessarily harsh.8 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
Weak willed? Seriously? Kind of judgmental wouldn't you say. Let's hope you are a success in your efforts and your own words and judgement don't come back and bit you on the *kitten*.
I think your viewpoint is really ill informed, naive' and unnecessarily harsh.
I'm extremely weak willed when it comes to dieting, I admit that freely. It takes a ton of effort and assistance for me to stick to a healthy diet for any period of time.2 -
stevencloser wrote: ».
Offer yourself to science then.[/quote]
LOL Gladly but the US has already performed the DEFINITIVE study lasting several decades with tens of millions of participants...
I will acknowledge up front that correlation does not prove causation... But.
From the time the US Food Guide came out turning the wisdom of lifetimes (eat meat and vegetables and supplement with a little starch 'cause it's cheap calories... remember you feed prisoners bread and water, or your poor bread and beer) completely upside down with carbs as the majority on the base of a "food pyramid" Obesity and diabetes have gone up in a logarithmic scale every year.
"Adult Onset Diabetes" was NEVER (yes I'm using an absolute) seen In ANYONE under 25 before this. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease had also NEVER been seen in a child.
Both of these conditions are now common. There is a PERFECT 1:1 correlation.
Not proof? Sure, the same way there was no "proof" that smoking was harmful in the 70s.
I can also just look in a mirror or at my Dexa history.
The thermogenic effect of food has also shown numerous times that while carbs and protein each provide 4 calories per gram, protein requires energy expenditure to process.18 -
jamesakrobinson wrote: »stevencloser wrote: ».
Offer yourself to science then.
LOL Gladly but the US has already performed the DEFINITIVE study lasting several decades with tens of millions of participants...
I will acknowledge up front that correlation does not prove causation... But.
From the time the US Food Guide came out turning the wisdom of lifetimes (eat meat and vegetables and supplement with a little starch 'cause it's cheap calories... remember you feed prisoners bread and water, or your poor bread and beer) completely upside down with carbs as the majority on the base of a "food pyramid" Obesity and diabetes have gone up in a logarithmic scale every year.
"Adult Onset Diabetes" was NEVER (yes I'm using an absolute) seen In ANYONE under 25 before this. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease had also NEVER been seen in a child.
Both of these conditions are now common. There is a PERFECT 1:1 correlation.
Not proof? Sure, the same way there was no "proof" that smoking was harmful in the 70s.
I can also just look in a mirror or at my Dexa history.
The thermogenic effect of food has also shown numerous times that while carbs and protein each provide 4 calories per gram, protein requires energy expenditure to process.
related: The HBO documentary series The Weight of a Nation is one of the most insightful and terrifying things I've ever watched.10 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
Weak willed? Seriously? Kind of judgmental wouldn't you say. Let's hope you are a success in your efforts and your own words and judgement don't come back and bit you on the *kitten*.
I think your viewpoint is really ill informed, naive' and unnecessarily harsh.
I'm extremely weak willed when it comes to dieting, I admit that freely. It takes a ton of effort and assistance for me to stick to a healthy diet for any period of time.
I'd suggest that may be because you may approach it in a way that is less than optimal based on some of your comments. There are ways that depend less on pure will power and more on managing hunger/ satiety and learning long term skills for good eating habits. Will power is a part but not the whole story.10 -
My unpopular opinion: the more people I see throwing around DEXA numbers, the more I am convinced they unjustifiably have an unearned "gold standard" reputatation and likely have a pretty significant margin of error. At least enough margin of error to account for some of the fat gains/losses which people attribute to diet/fitness regimens.
I don't know that it was so obvious before so many people had them so frequently.16 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I see the quoted all the time but this is not the standard MFP uses. It starts at 2500 for sedentary and goes up in 2500 increments. I know this because I am (in combination with my tracker missing lots of pottering round the flat steps because i'm not exactly striding in a 1 bed flat) and after about 2500 I start getting extra calories.
Yep, and I think that's a recent change for MFP, because my cals per MFP and Fitbit used to match up. Now they don't and it's fecking annoying. MFP is basically giving me an extra 100 cals a day over Fitbit.
ETA: just checked back over the last few days, and it seems to be doing that sorting itself out at midnight thing, which I was sure I'd solved somehow. Still annoying.
Is it? That's annoying. I'm glad I pretty much do a TDEE method with how I have things set up and just eat a consistent caloric level. I look at my adjustment, but don't pay too much attention to it.
I was doing that, and maybe that's why I didn't 'notice' the adjustment inconsistency, but my activity level and cal burn is a bit all over the place atm, so my daily intake is also all over the place!0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »My unpopular opinion: the more people I see throwing around DEXA numbers, the more I am convinced they unjustifiably have an unearned "gold standard" reputatation and likely have a pretty significant margin of error. At least enough margin of error to account for some of the fat gains/losses which people attribute to diet/fitness regimens.
I don't know that it was so obvious before so many people had them so frequently.
I also use a Skulpt device daily, and it's usually within 1 or 2 percent of the Dexa. Calipers really depend on the person doing the pinching but for comparison they give me an even lower reading than the other two methods.
Impedance measurements are definitely a joke. I can be up or down 8 to 10 percent in the same day depending on hydration... LOL I can make those things read 3% if I don't pee and slam a Gatorade, or 16% if I intentionally drop all the water I possibly can...
I have never had an opportunity to try a bod pod or underwater weighing but I would certainly be game if it were available.
All body fat measuring techniques are best used to track changes.
Personally if I can continue to keep my Dexa numbers below 9% I am happy... Next spring I may challenge myself to see if I can hit 7 but it would be very temporary. Just a challenge to see if I can muster the self discipline. (would probably lose muscle mass to get that low though)4 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
Will power is a limited resource, though some people have more than others. Nonetheless, it makes good, rational sense to find a healthy, successful eating strategy that requires the minimum of it.
The weight loss process is an ideal time to experiment and develop such a strategy. Therefore, I'll argue that people should do nothing while "dieting" that they're unwilling to do forever (other than a moderate calorie deficit).
In most cases, fad diets don't facilitate this experimentation and learning process. Some folks can enjoy keto, or paleo, or whatever, forever - but many can't. Perhaps a minority will enjoy gutting it out through sheer steely willpower forever, and more power to them. But I'm too lazy, and too much of a pleasure seeker.
I suspect that's fairly common. 8 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »My UO: fad diets are helpful because at a minimum they make people be more aware of their food and conscious about what they put in their bodies. The human body is massively adaptable, if you feed it a steady Paleo, South Beach, Vegan, Keto, or whatever diet it'll adapt to use it most efficiently. People don't pay enough attention to what they eat, so I'm not giving anybody *kitten* for paying attention, even if their ideas about why are total hokum.
I think it's more about the sustainability of those diets that causes the issue rather than the awareness. People know when they are fat. For many reasons, people can't stick to them. So they rebound on their weight and are back to square one and lost time. They wouldn't be so successful if they actually worked, therefore they don't help anyone because if they did we'd all be at a healthy weight.
I attribute failure more to people just being weak willed. I think it's silly to believe somebody who can't follow diet that tells them exactly what to eat and when would somehow how more success just being told "eat fewer calories." Maybe a minority of them can, but there's always a minority that can achieve something the majority can't.
Most people who need to lose weight, like me, got into that situation because our natural food decisions are incredibly poor.
Structure is important. But maybe I just believe that because I was in the military, like everybody else in my family for the last 300 years.
Weak willed? Seriously? Kind of judgmental wouldn't you say. Let's hope you are a success in your efforts and your own words and judgement don't come back and bit you on the *kitten*.
I think your viewpoint is really ill informed, naive' and unnecessarily harsh.
I'm extremely weak willed when it comes to dieting, I admit that freely. It takes a ton of effort and assistance for me to stick to a healthy diet for any period of time.
I'd suggest that may be because you may approach it in a way that is less than optimal based on some of your comments. There are ways that depend less on pure will power and more on managing hunger/ satiety and learning long term skills for good eating habits. Will power is a part but not the whole story.
I agree...and this coming from ex military too...not just reg army either combat arms...
dieting doesn't require as much will power etc as you are letting on...not really.
You don't have to be hungry, you don't have to give up the foods you love/want/crave...
it doesn't take a lot of effort to lose the weight...not really.
You look at what you want to eat and eat less of it...that's it...you don't even have to exercise.
Once I learned that (and no "diet" taught me that) bam 50+lbs gone..and I learned it here on the MFP forums as I defended a "diet" that I was on for the 4th time...smh.8 -
In most cases, fad diets don't facilitate this experimentation and learning process. Some folks can enjoy keto, or paleo, or whatever, forever - but many can't. Perhaps a minority will enjoy gutting it out through sheer steely willpower forever, and more power to them. But I'm too lazy, and too much of a pleasure seeker.
I suspect that's fairly common.
It's inaccurate to suppose that it's a matter of "sheer steely willpower" for everyone, and also that these diets are incompatible with pleasure seeking. Depending on one's food preferences, losing/maintaining while eating low carb (or any other specialized diet) can actually be easier. But I enjoy protein and have little interest in starches or sweets, so it works for me. For someone who's my opposite, I doubt it would suit them at all. I don't require willpower to stick to my way of eating because I genuinely love it. I think everyone should find the way of eating that they can actually enjoy while staying healthy.
I agree that the #1 important thing in losing and maintaining is sustainability. What really counts as sustainable varies wildly with the individual, though. For example, I could never stay on the wagon eating vegetarian or vegan, but many lovely people do and get just as good results as I have going the opposite way.
4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »My unpopular opinion: the more people I see throwing around DEXA numbers, the more I am convinced they unjustifiably have an unearned "gold standard" reputatation and likely have a pretty significant margin of error. At least enough margin of error to account for some of the fat gains/losses which people attribute to diet/fitness regimens.
I don't know that it was so obvious before so many people had them so frequently.
I agree.
And I'm lazy but that's not unpopular so I'm not quoting the person I'm responding to but a difference of 2 or 3 percent isn't really proof of anything and within the margins of error of any of the methods.2 -
MySweetLavinia wrote: »In most cases, fad diets don't facilitate this experimentation and learning process. Some folks can enjoy keto, or paleo, or whatever, forever - but many can't. Perhaps a minority will enjoy gutting it out through sheer steely willpower forever, and more power to them. But I'm too lazy, and too much of a pleasure seeker.
I suspect that's fairly common.
It's inaccurate to suppose that it's a matter of "sheer steely willpower" for everyone, and also that these diets are incompatible with pleasure seeking. Depending on one's food preferences, losing/maintaining while eating low carb (or any other specialized diet) can actually be easier. But I enjoy protein and have little interest in starches or sweets, so it works for me. For someone who's my opposite, I doubt it would suit them at all. I don't require willpower to stick to my way of eating because I genuinely love it. I think everyone should find the way of eating that they can actually enjoy while staying healthy.
I agree that the #1 important thing in losing and maintaining is sustainability. What really counts as sustainable varies wildly with the individual, though. For example, I could never stay on the wagon eating vegetarian or vegan, but many lovely people do and get just as good results as I have going the opposite way.
Just for the record: I was basically agreeing with you, and vehemently disputing the person (whose quote you did not incorporate) who seemed to say that failure of will was the key reason people regain.
If keto (or whatever) is your permanent happy place, we're on the same side. I'm all about "find your permanent happy place, whatever it is, and don't rely on steely willpower". A few people's happy place is steely willpower - G. Gordon Liddy comes to mind (LOL) - but not true for most of us.
If that was unclear, I was communicating poorly . . . as I too often do.
P.S. I'm vegetarian - 43 years. 6 -
MySweetLavinia wrote: »In most cases, fad diets don't facilitate this experimentation and learning process. Some folks can enjoy keto, or paleo, or whatever, forever - but many can't. Perhaps a minority will enjoy gutting it out through sheer steely willpower forever, and more power to them. But I'm too lazy, and too much of a pleasure seeker.
I suspect that's fairly common.
It's inaccurate to suppose that it's a matter of "sheer steely willpower" for everyone, and also that these diets are incompatible with pleasure seeking. Depending on one's food preferences, losing/maintaining while eating low carb (or any other specialized diet) can actually be easier. But I enjoy protein and have little interest in starches or sweets, so it works for me. For someone who's my opposite, I doubt it would suit them at all. I don't require willpower to stick to my way of eating because I genuinely love it. I think everyone should find the way of eating that they can actually enjoy while staying healthy.
Agree.
It's interesting, I think there are a couple of different categories that low carb seems to work for. First, those for whom it's just naturally their preference anyway (which is me too, although not keto levels), and, second, those for whom it makes a big difference to things like cravings or hunger.
I think this is similar to other ways of eating that help reduce the need for willpower. For example, for me not snacking, or for some others, IF. If I don't snack, I don't perceive it as deprivation, but as taking away times that I would otherwise think about food (because when I don't eat between meals I tend not to think about food or crave it between meals), and reducing the need for willpower.
Some people find abstinence generally easier than eating something in small amounts. For me it's not that helpful to think of it as never eating that food again (although for some it might be), but just taking it off the table as a possibility other than for special occasions can make it easier.
But generally these aren't what I normally think of as "fad diets," which are a short-term plan to get to goal. They are broader changes or trying different things out.
What I find problematic about how trendy things like keto are is not that I think keto is unsustainable (although I do think it's unnecessary and not great that under 20 g of carbs is pushed currently, as I think it's hard to get adequate vegetables on that). It's that I think people latch onto the current trend because they are desperate for a magic pill that will make them just naturally eat at a deficit without having to think about it, without wanting foods they cannot have or cannot have in amounts they want (they will lose the taste for them), so on. It seems like people are thinking that if they find the right diet they will be thin next week and won't have to go through the work (and it can be work) of habit changing.
But certainly this doesn't apply to everyone who finds they enjoy eating low carb or whatever and sticks with it.
One thing that doesn't get acknowledged enough, IMO, is that sometimes it's helpful to have something more to keep you going with a chosen way of eating that involves some sacrifice (even if the sacrifice is only "I cannot have the entire pizza"). Plant-based diets provide that with the ethical commitment sometimes, or (although I think it's buying into a lie) with the "it's necessary for health" thing. A lot of the other big name diets do the latter too (paleo, clean, keto, so on). Even if it's a lie/exaggeration, the idea that it's important for health probably does serve as a motivator, but that it's not accurate bothers me -- doing something based on a lie would blow up in my face if I figured out later that that's what it was. Better for me to be really honest that other things can be just as healthy, but this is what I've decided I enjoy. I also think some of the desire to attach to a named diet is about perceived community and identification, which probably also helps with motivation/commitment. So I kind of get it.6 -
Regarding leftovers, I tend to keep a small cooler in my car in the summer and throw some reusable ice packs in before we head out. If I forget the ice packs, I will ask for a to-go container with ice in it. Sometimes the server might look at you funny, but when you explain why you need it, they get it. The practice has prevented a great deal of food waste, and saved me money over the years (because yay, two or three meals now for the price of one). I have also handed restaurant leftovers to homeless people instead of taking them home or back to the hotel, even when I've had the cooler ready.
And I am on team "I don't care what other people think of the way I eat". They aren't the ones that have to pay my medical bills if I go back to being obese and eventually start dealing with obesity-related illnesses. I don't ask for their opinions and they don't have any rights to opinions about what I eat unless I DO ask. That doesn't prevent them from making comments sometimes (mostly coworkers spotting my healthy lunch while chowing down on fast food), but I call them out on it if they do.
And I also don't believe in cheat days, simply because I don't consider it as cheating. I will occasionally eat differently than my standard plan, but usually it's a special event and it IS planned for in advance. Or I go over my daily calorie target but not by enough to erase all of the deficit. If I want fudge, I have it. Thankfully I only want it once or twice a year. But it's not cheating, because nothing is off limits.
Edited to correct a typo.
I live in a country where medical is free so guess what I do pay...and sometimes even in the US the tax payers do pay too...medicad I believe it's called and the AHCA (afforable health care act...aka obamacare) isn't that tax payer funded as well?
IMO that still gives no one the right to care about what I eat.
There are many paths to the tragedy of the commons. 3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions