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
-
Carlos_421 wrote: »annaskiski wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
But guarantee it will get eaten, even if it's *kitten* cake, while the fresh fruit will be barely touched.
I guess I really live in a weird part of the country, or work in a field with a lot of weird peeps.
We get a huge box of fruit from our Peapod delivery service every week, one for every floor. The fruit is very popular and def gets eaten. Even stuff that you would think would be hard to share, like large cantaloupes and other melons.
But someone always cuts one up and puts it on the counter. Gone in a few hours...
This is what cake culture could become if it got a healthy makeover. I have no issues with bonding over food at work, I just have the opinion that it's not nice to offer people unhealthy foods and then get all offended if they refuse to eat it. Far nicer to offer a person something that is good for them as well as being yummy.
People keep talking about people getting offended when you refuse their food. I've refused a lot of food in my time on this earth and I've never, not once, had anyone get/act offended that I graciously refused their offer.
And if they did, that's their problem...2 -
I honestly never thought this much about it until now...1
-
janejellyroll wrote: »Don't know what the point is from those saying they've never ( as far as they know) offended anyone by turning down treats in the office. Are you all saying that because you haven't encountered it, it doesn't or can't happen? Or what?
I'm one who said it and while I don't doubt it does happen to sometimes, I'm pointing out it may not be as widespread or culturally dominant as you claim it is.
It's like families. Some people have parents or grandparents who encourage hearty eating, other people have parents or grandparents that are different.
By "it" do you mean cake culture or people taking offence? It's obvious that cake culture is dominant...it is plainly evidenced by the sheer numbers of people on this thread defending it vs. the few ( myself included ) who have some mild criticisms of it ( I've said only that it's "unhealthy" and "not nice"). As for people taking offence....well I don't think I ever made any statement as to the frequency or dominance of that occurrence.
By "it," I mean the idea of a dominant "cake culture" where one must either eat cake or pretend to eat it in order to avoid offending co-workers. I have no doubt that some workplaces do have a culture like that, but I would view it as an issue within that workplace, not a cultural trend.
Mentions of tasty food (or food commonly perceived to be tasty) on MFP frequently turn into celebrations of the food, but that doesn't mean we have a "french fry culture" or a "bacon culture" or that people aren't perfectly free to turn down those foods if they are offered to them.
To turn offering of food into something "not nice," that just doesn't resonate with me. If someone offers me food, that is a pleasant and social thing to do. I may choose to turn it down, that's up to me. If I take it and wind up eating more than I should, that's the consequence of my action, not a consequence of theirs.13 -
Don't know what the point is from those saying they've never ( as far as they know) offended anyone by turning down treats in the office. Are you all saying that because you haven't encountered it, it doesn't or can't happen? Or what?
I'm saying that if it were as rampant as you seem to believe, I would likely have encountered it at least once in my life.5 -
I believe human beings have been misclassified as omnivores and that we are actually carnivores (this would take paragraphs to explain, especially since it *appears* that it is possible to be a 'healthy vegan'), and essentially for alot of people it is impossible to be healthy without eating red meat alot more than what is recommended in mainstream views of human nutrition.14
-
janejellyroll wrote: »To turn offering of food into something "not nice," that just doesn't resonate with me. If someone offers me food, that is a pleasant and social thing to do. I may choose to turn it down, that's up to me. If I take it and wind up eating more than I should, that's the consequence of my action, not a consequence of theirs.
^^^This. All of it...3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
I think anything that creates overload will cause some muscle growth if nutritional conditions are right. But, as I said, in the sources I read, it was not addressed. Sadly, many of the studies on HIIT seem to have been done on college campuses utilizing untrained students and the subjects. In Lyle McDonalds articles, he talks about this and how it confounds much of the results.
Obviously, if someone is working, say legs, a couple of times in the gym per week, running or bike riding is not likely to cause lots of muscle development. I can't say it wouldn't cause any though as the act of running or riding is slightly different than weight lifting. So, I'm sure there would be some muscular adaptation that would take place. Whether that would result in hypertrophy though may be questionable. More likely neuromuscular recruitment adaptations.
I'm not going to argue hard for hypertrophy, because I really don't know, but as an n=1, I did lose a couple of clothing sizes over a period of a few years at roughly the same body weight from something most people consider cardio (rowing, mostly boats, some machines), with negligible ancillary strength training. I don't know that NM adaptations can account for size reduction, unless "toning" really is a thing after all (heh).
This really represents a lot of reps (4000-5000 weekly, often, maybe more), with some small workload progressivity via technical improvements along the way.
Clearly, a well designed progressive weight training program would produce similar results much faster, with less workout time investment . . . but, for me, less fun. I'm not well-muscled like the lifting women around here, especially not in a well-rounded, balanced way . . . but neither am I stick-like. IMO only, of course.
A couple of questions for you Ann; were you in a trained and fit state when you started? Could the reduction in clothing sizes have been from BF loss? Muscle gain (hypertrophy) would cause size increases in a lean individual. But in an individual with high to average body fat, not so much and fat loss with weight staying the same would result in size reduction. Eg. the oft referred to recomp.
I've seen your profile pic. Good muscle development!
Definitely in an untrained state to start - depleted even (chemotherapy, other life challenges) . Certainly there was fat loss - a fair bit. But if weight stays the same, something of equivalent weight was gained. Not just water, I think. That'd be a lot of water, over quite a time scale. Fat loss alone, with no compensating gain elsewhere, would mean lower body weight.
Recomp is fat loss with muscle gain, resulting in smaller body size at the same weight, because muscle is more compact than fat pound for pound . . . as I understand it.
And thank you.
Essentially, yes. And that is what I believe happened to you. Especially given that you started in an untrained state.
In the HIIT studies, that is what happened with untrained subjects. The gained muscle mass. So, the wrong conclusion was jumped to that HIIT universally causes muscle mass growth. McDonald's contention is that in untrained individuals, yes. In trained individuals, "no _____ way" is the how he expressed it.
Just as a minor point of clarification: Rowing is not mostly HIIT. In fact it's rarely HIIT - HIIT workouts are typically used as you'd expect: As a fraction of the workouts leading to a key competition, presumably to move VO2 max. Most of rowing (especially at my level) is LISS or regular intervals.
But yes, what you say is what I think happened: Newbie gains and recomp . . . from "cardio", mostly LISS and regular intervals. It's a strength endurance sport.
Another n=1 anecdote: Elite rowers weight train extensively, of course, and do
absurd volumes of cardiovascular work, mostly rowing (boat, machine) but also some cardio cross-training such as running or biking. On water, there are two types of rowing: Sculling, two oars per person, so laterally symmetric; and sweep, one oar per person so laterally asymmetric. Many sweep rowers specialize in a particular side, starboard or port. A former member of my rowing club had been a competitive collegiate, then US national team, rower. After her rowing career, one of her (non-sports specialist) doctors asked her if she knew that her muscular development was asymmetric - more muscle development on the side she most rowed with. (Of course she did.) Trained individual, effect of very high volume "cardio".
Yup, rowing is not HIIT pretty much any exercise from an untrained state is going to cause muscle development and cause certain hormonal fat burning adaptations. HIIT causes that to happen faster initially but LISS will cause it to happen also over a longer time frame.
I think rowing has a much more intense resistance component to it than biking or running. I'm not a spectacular runner but there are times I can get in the right rhythm with my stride and breathing that it feels fairly effortless. It's just a matter of how long my legs can go until they are past their point of conditioning and the energy runs out. Maybe once you get the muscles condition rowing is like that also? But I'm guessing getting in good rowing shape takes some work.
A peculiar thing about rowing is that you can increase your effort for quite a long time, essentially increasing the workload per stroke (you also increase your strokes per minute if your technique and conditioning allow). Doing so makes you go faster. You can keep getting faster (diminishing returns of course) until you age out or injure out, maybe. Strength improvements facilitate this, of course, but technique improvements also do so in ways that might not be superficially obvious. If it ever gets to feel effortless, other than by applying less effort, I haven't come close to finding that point.
When you see very skilled rowers race, it can look almost effortless. It isn't. Races are essentially two anaerobic sprints with varying amounts of AT in between. Watch what elite crews do after the finish line; collapse is not unusual.So, it would not surprise me that there would be muscular development at the very least and building of muscle mass in an untrained subject.
On the subject of cross training, most elite athletes have resistance training as part of their regimen. There is just no downside to it. My lifting helps my running or biking immensely and I am not even close to elite level. They would need to just to stay competitive. Do elite rowers use HIIT either before big meets or going into the season to get V02 max improvements for the most serious competitions?
I don't know details of training planning at the national team level. Based on my experience with friends and coaches of mine who coach at the collegiate level, as well having pursued coaching certification myself via education & training led by such folks, collegiate coaches at major programs use periodized training plans that include a component of high intensity work as part of prep for the most important competition(s). The training plans include quite a few variations in intensity and duration of workouts to train various capabilities, with the emphasis shifting at different times during the season in a series of macrocycles and microcycles. There's a parallel strength track, technique work (often as a component of LISS or interval workouts), and attention to nutrition.
Thanks Ann. Fascinating stuff! BTW, Philly is a great rowing city. During prime season there is always lots of activity down on Boathouse Row.
Boathouse Row is gorgeous and iconic.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Don't know what the point is from those saying they've never ( as far as they know) offended anyone by turning down treats in the office. Are you all saying that because you haven't encountered it, it doesn't or can't happen? Or what?
I'm one who said it and while I don't doubt it does happen to sometimes, I'm pointing out it may not be as widespread or culturally dominant as you claim it is.
It's like families. Some people have parents or grandparents who encourage hearty eating, other people have parents or grandparents that are different.
By "it" do you mean cake culture or people taking offence? It's obvious that cake culture is dominant...it is plainly evidenced by the sheer numbers of people on this thread defending it vs. the few ( myself included ) who have some mild criticisms of it ( I've said only that it's "unhealthy" and "not nice"). As for people taking offence....well I don't think I ever made any statement as to the frequency or dominance of that occurrence.
Mentions of tasty food (or food commonly perceived to be tasty) on MFP frequently turn into celebrations of the food, but that doesn't mean we have a "french fry culture" or a "bacon culture" or that people aren't perfectly free to turn down those foods if they are offered to them.
Where is this wonderful place where I will be offered free bacon? I NEED to know...6 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »
And that is all because a certain % of the population make personal choices that are destructive. Lot's don't. These things are amoral. They have no ability to make choices or make people do things by their existence.Bry_Lander wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
Yes food is an inanimate object, as are cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. And yet millions of people are overweight, smoke, are alcoholics, and are drug addicts - tell them to knock it off.
Peer pressure and the need for social acceptance play an enormous role in addiction. I don’t find the value in stuffing my face with cake with obese people or doing shots at the bar with alcoholics, even though I am not obese and not an alcoholic. There are social events that can further relationship building without perpetuating destructive habits.
As to the 2nd bolded line, I'd say that depends on the event. If were talking about someone bringing baked goods into work, I think the "cake culture" analogy has been drawn to a ridiculous extreme if it is called "destructive habits". Destructive for whom? Are we really attempting to reduce what has happened with obesity over the last 75 years to people bringing cake into the office. Absurd really.
Totally missing my point. If people want to eat cake until they literally explode at work every day they are perfectly free to do that. If an alcoholic wants to drown himself in vodka that is his business. You can smoke until your lungs are two lumps of charred coal, have at it. I just don’t care to perpetuate it or glorify it.
Who eats cake every day?? Seriously?
I see cake in the office maybe once a year when someone retires.4 -
What's next? Cake free zones? Where is the personal accountability for one's own actions? If you want to move forward you have to stop blaming others for your situation...
who's saying cake should be banned from work?
It's a huge leap to say "I wish people wouldn't try to pressure coworkers into eating junkfood" is somehow akin to "junk food should be banned!"4 -
I believe human beings have been misclassified as omnivores and that we are actually carnivores (this would take paragraphs to explain, especially since it *appears* that it is possible to be a 'healthy vegan'), and essentially for alot of people it is impossible to be healthy without eating red meat alot more than what is recommended in mainstream views of human nutrition.
No. There is simply too much anecdotal evidence proving this wrong to even imagine that there is science behind it. We are omnivores.
But even if we were carnivores, why would it have to be red meat?3 -
I believe human beings have been misclassified as omnivores and that we are actually carnivores (this would take paragraphs to explain, especially since it *appears* that it is possible to be a 'healthy vegan'), and essentially for alot of people it is impossible to be healthy without eating red meat alot more than what is recommended in mainstream views of human nutrition.
I suggest you take a look at the dentition of a carnivore, like a lioness, and then look at the dentition of an herbivore, like a sheep. Then look at the dentition of an omnivore, like a baboon. Then ask yourself, which one is most like human dentition?
We simply do not have the teeth to be carnivores.7 -
The claim that people are celebrating/defending "cake culture" is a false dichotomy.
Several of us commented on the fact that we like cake (or pie if you prefer) but no one is saying "Yay! Cake culture is the best!"
What we are actually doing is debating:
1) The existence of a legitimate "cake culture"
2) The prevalence of "cake culture" if it is a real thing
3) Whether cake and/or other treats in the office are actually significant contributors to obesity12 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »
And that is all because a certain % of the population make personal choices that are destructive. Lot's don't. These things are amoral. They have no ability to make choices or make people do things by their existence.Bry_Lander wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
Yes food is an inanimate object, as are cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. And yet millions of people are overweight, smoke, are alcoholics, and are drug addicts - tell them to knock it off.
Peer pressure and the need for social acceptance play an enormous role in addiction. I don’t find the value in stuffing my face with cake with obese people or doing shots at the bar with alcoholics, even though I am not obese and not an alcoholic. There are social events that can further relationship building without perpetuating destructive habits.
As to the 2nd bolded line, I'd say that depends on the event. If were talking about someone bringing baked goods into work, I think the "cake culture" analogy has been drawn to a ridiculous extreme if it is called "destructive habits". Destructive for whom? Are we really attempting to reduce what has happened with obesity over the last 75 years to people bringing cake into the office. Absurd really.
Totally missing my point. If people want to eat cake until they literally explode at work every day they are perfectly free to do that. If an alcoholic wants to drown himself in vodka that is his business. You can smoke until your lungs are two lumps of charred coal, have at it. I just don’t care to perpetuate it or glorify it.
Who eats cake every day?? Seriously?
I see cake in the office maybe once a year when someone retires.
Every day and once a year both seem almost unbelievably extreme examples. We have cake occasionally. Often just leftovers someone brings in from a home party. We have food frequently. Donuts and leftover pizza are the most common.
Also, our company hosts a lot of meetings so leftovers from a catered lunch is very common, though obviously that would not apply to every office.0 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »
And that is all because a certain % of the population make personal choices that are destructive. Lot's don't. These things are amoral. They have no ability to make choices or make people do things by their existence.Bry_Lander wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
Yes food is an inanimate object, as are cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. And yet millions of people are overweight, smoke, are alcoholics, and are drug addicts - tell them to knock it off.
Peer pressure and the need for social acceptance play an enormous role in addiction. I don’t find the value in stuffing my face with cake with obese people or doing shots at the bar with alcoholics, even though I am not obese and not an alcoholic. There are social events that can further relationship building without perpetuating destructive habits.
As to the 2nd bolded line, I'd say that depends on the event. If were talking about someone bringing baked goods into work, I think the "cake culture" analogy has been drawn to a ridiculous extreme if it is called "destructive habits". Destructive for whom? Are we really attempting to reduce what has happened with obesity over the last 75 years to people bringing cake into the office. Absurd really.
Totally missing my point. If people want to eat cake until they literally explode at work every day they are perfectly free to do that. If an alcoholic wants to drown himself in vodka that is his business. You can smoke until your lungs are two lumps of charred coal, have at it. I just don’t care to perpetuate it or glorify it.
What's your solution?
You're on a very slippery slope here.
What social gathering is the threshold wherein these things start becoming allowed vs. these things should not be allowed so as not to "perpetuate or glorify? obesity (as if they are doing that in the first place, you have a narrow view of what causes obesity if you think one isolated food at one isolated gathering is the problem).6 -
Cake and treats in the office, "cake culture," is a SYMPTOM of a wider societal ignorance and lack of concern for health and fitness.6
-
I believe human beings have been misclassified as omnivores and that we are actually carnivores (this would take paragraphs to explain, especially since it *appears* that it is possible to be a 'healthy vegan'), and essentially for alot of people it is impossible to be healthy without eating red meat alot more than what is recommended in mainstream views of human nutrition.
Are you aware, evolutionarily speaking, of the diet of the very first humans? Of the function of the wisdom teeth?
If you were, you'd realize that your opinion is incorrect, and meat-eating came after we were mostly eating fruit and tubers.2 -
What's next? Cake free zones? Where is the personal accountability for one's own actions? If you want to move forward you have to stop blaming others for your situation...
who's saying cake should be banned from work?
It's a huge leap to say "I wish people wouldn't try to pressure coworkers into eating junkfood" is somehow akin to "junk food should be banned!"
Seems to be an underlying "tone" of a few. Personally I could care less...0 -
What's next? Cake free zones? Where is the personal accountability for one's own actions? If you want to move forward you have to stop blaming others for your situation...
who's saying cake should be banned from work?
It's a huge leap to say "I wish people wouldn't try to pressure coworkers into eating junkfood" is somehow akin to "junk food should be banned!"
Seems to be an underlying "tone"...
people bemoaning a specific cultural norm is the remotely the same as wanting to ban that norm. I would be quite surprised if you could find very many people who thought people should be banned from bringing treats to the office.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 902 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions