What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

SezxyStef wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

mmapags wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

Before I started using MFP I honestly never realized that so many people have food on their mind all of the time.

Maybe it just comes up a lot since this is a diet and fitness site?

And a 500 calorie piece of cake is the perfect food for someone looking to eat a nutritional low calorie diet?

Depends. Low calorie compared to what. And what is the composition of the rest of said persons diet that day/week. Context and dose dude. Context and dose. It always amazes me how some people consistently struggle with this concept.

Cakes, cookies and other grain based desserts make up the highest percentage of calories out of 25 food groups in the US diet.
http://www.businessinsider.com/foods-that-make-up-most-of-the-calories-american-consume-2015-2

70% of Americans are overweight/obese.

Yep, context and dose dude, context and dose.

It's great that 5-6 posters on this topic have no issue with controlling these item, not like that out in the real world.

No one said that there aren't many people who have their dosages wrong.
Plus, I'd wager than "cake culture" makes up an extremely tiny percentage compared to little Debbie's, hostess, nabisco and Keebler that people stock their own cabinets with.

True, the amount of these items (cakes, cookies, brownies, etc, things I would consider part of the cake culture food group) eaten at work, may be relatively small for some, but the calories are the same regardless of where they are consumed.

What's really sad is grain based desserts, soda/energy drinks and alcohol, items with virtually no nutritional value, make up 3 of the top 5 sources of calories. Fruits and veggies (with the exception of fried white potatoes) don't even make the top 25 items

I totally agree that it's terrible that the average person in the US eats so few veg, but veg would never rank high on what people eat ranked by calories in that they are quite low cal. I aim for 10+ servings of veg per day, and still they don't rank #1 on my calorie sources, or even close.

I wish I logged better, but looking at a day last week where I logged and ate about 10 servings of veg (total calories were less than 1700), and was trying to eat lower carb, higher fat and had 127 g protein, 34 g sugar, my main sources of calories were:


1) Meat (consisting of salmon and turkey) (388 kcal)
1) Nuts (nuts and nut butter, which I dipped chocolate in) (388 kcal)
3) Veg (more carrots and red peppers and less greens than usual, so might skew higher) (280 kcal)
4) Dairy (190 kcal)
5) Oil (all olive on that day) (180 kcal)
6) Eggs (154 kcal)
7) Chocolate (85 kcal)
8) Fruit (I juiced half a lime) (about 5 kcal -- normally would have more, but was lowering carbs)

If you wanted to critique my diet, oil has essentially no nutrients, chocolate is not insignificant, fruit is really low, and dairy and nuts probably higher than nutrition would really justified (but it's one day). Still a reasonably nutritious day and well below my personal TDEE (which suggests to me there's some room for 138 kcal of less nutritious stuff) and still veg are not top and would not reasonably be (unless I were a vegan or vegetarian and even then aren't legumes and all grains (like corn) and potatoes in separate categories from veg?

Wondering if sweet oats would count as "grain-based dessert"? No real reason why they shouldn't, as some would eat them (or cereal) as such.

This. I eat a ton of fruit and vegetables, yet they never appear in my top calorie sources on Cronometer. If you were looking at where the bulk of my calories came from for the last week, the top sources are things like gumbo, lentils, and cashew cheese. The only time vegetables show up is when they're mixed in a dish with more calorie-dense foods like rice, coconut milk, or plant oils.

Lentils are vegetables

I imagine most days more calories come from fat than vegetables for me.

Technically, yes. I tend to consider legumes a somewhat separate category, but I realize not everyone does.

Can I ask why?

Hypothesis: Since Jane is a vegan, she considers them in a protein category.

Oh. Protein makes them not a vegetable? I don't get it, but I suppose it doesn't matter.

They aren't really veggies because legumes add nitrogen to the soil where veggies don't.

Seriously? Where did you hear/read that? Legumes count toward servings of vegetables in the food plate/pyramid.

You'd think. But curiously, not exactly. First, they count as meat . . . er, protein. For example:

https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2000/document/build.htm

This next is from memory, so could be off, but I researched USDA veggie counting based on the (UK origin IIRC) 10 servings a day challenge here. I believe that if you dig deep into gory textual details behind the cute charts, they say that if your protein allotment isn't filled yet, you count most legumes as protein, but after that they can count as veggies to an unlimited degree. IIRC, the UK counting rules said you could only count beans you ate as one veggie serving ever, no matter how many (metric) tons of them you ate.

In the details, there is much, much more madness about how to count things - exceptions, qualifications, limits, bizarre and improbable categorizations.

The official counting rules are bats**t crazy, and anyone in the US who follows them in detail is unhealthily compulsive . . . if not so originally, certainly so after they've followed them for a couple of weeks.

Edited: typo

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

mmapags wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

Before I started using MFP I honestly never realized that so many people have food on their mind all of the time.

Maybe it just comes up a lot since this is a diet and fitness site?

And a 500 calorie piece of cake is the perfect food for someone looking to eat a nutritional low calorie diet?

Depends. Low calorie compared to what. And what is the composition of the rest of said persons diet that day/week. Context and dose dude. Context and dose. It always amazes me how some people consistently struggle with this concept.

Cakes, cookies and other grain based desserts make up the highest percentage of calories out of 25 food groups in the US diet.
http://www.businessinsider.com/foods-that-make-up-most-of-the-calories-american-consume-2015-2

70% of Americans are overweight/obese.

Yep, context and dose dude, context and dose.

It's great that 5-6 posters on this topic have no issue with controlling these item, not like that out in the real world.

No one said that there aren't many people who have their dosages wrong.
Plus, I'd wager than "cake culture" makes up an extremely tiny percentage compared to little Debbie's, hostess, nabisco and Keebler that people stock their own cabinets with.

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

earlnabby wrote: »

Since we are on the subject of classification, how do you classify yeast? Plant, animal, or somewhere in between?

Hmm, never thought about that. I've never thought about classifications of things like baking soda, baking powder, vinegar etc.

janejellyroll wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

mmapags wrote: »

Packerjohn wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

Before I started using MFP I honestly never realized that so many people have food on their mind all of the time.

Maybe it just comes up a lot since this is a diet and fitness site?

And a 500 calorie piece of cake is the perfect food for someone looking to eat a nutritional low calorie diet?

Depends. Low calorie compared to what. And what is the composition of the rest of said persons diet that day/week. Context and dose dude. Context and dose. It always amazes me how some people consistently struggle with this concept.

Cakes, cookies and other grain based desserts make up the highest percentage of calories out of 25 food groups in the US diet.
http://www.businessinsider.com/foods-that-make-up-most-of-the-calories-american-consume-2015-2

70% of Americans are overweight/obese.

Yep, context and dose dude, context and dose.

It's great that 5-6 posters on this topic have no issue with controlling these item, not like that out in the real world.

No one said that there aren't many people who have their dosages wrong.
Plus, I'd wager than "cake culture" makes up an extremely tiny percentage compared to little Debbie's, hostess, nabisco and Keebler that people stock their own cabinets with.

True, the amount of these items (cakes, cookies, brownies, etc, things I would consider part of the cake culture food group) eaten at work, may be relatively small for some, but the calories are the same regardless of where they are consumed.

What's really sad is grain based desserts, soda/energy drinks and alcohol, items with virtually no nutritional value, make up 3 of the top 5 sources of calories. Fruits and veggies (with the exception of fried white potatoes) don't even make the top 25 items

I totally agree that it's terrible that the average person in the US eats so few veg, but veg would never rank high on what people eat ranked by calories in that they are quite low cal. I aim for 10+ servings of veg per day, and still they don't rank #1 on my calorie sources, or even close.

I wish I logged better, but looking at a day last week where I logged and ate about 10 servings of veg (total calories were less than 1700), and was trying to eat lower carb, higher fat and had 127 g protein, 34 g sugar, my main sources of calories were:


1) Meat (consisting of salmon and turkey) (388 kcal)
1) Nuts (nuts and nut butter, which I dipped chocolate in) (388 kcal)
3) Veg (more carrots and red peppers and less greens than usual, so might skew higher) (280 kcal)
4) Dairy (190 kcal)
5) Oil (all olive on that day) (180 kcal)
6) Eggs (154 kcal)
7) Chocolate (85 kcal)
8) Fruit (I juiced half a lime) (about 5 kcal -- normally would have more, but was lowering carbs)

If you wanted to critique my diet, oil has essentially no nutrients, chocolate is not insignificant, fruit is really low, and dairy and nuts probably higher than nutrition would really justified (but it's one day). Still a reasonably nutritious day and well below my personal TDEE (which suggests to me there's some room for 138 kcal of less nutritious stuff) and still veg are not top and would not reasonably be (unless I were a vegan or vegetarian and even then aren't legumes and all grains (like corn) and potatoes in separate categories from veg?

Wondering if sweet oats would count as "grain-based dessert"? No real reason why they shouldn't, as some would eat them (or cereal) as such.

This. I eat a ton of fruit and vegetables, yet they never appear in my top calorie sources on Cronometer. If you were looking at where the bulk of my calories came from for the last week, the top sources are things like gumbo, lentils, and cashew cheese. The only time vegetables show up is when they're mixed in a dish with more calorie-dense foods like rice, coconut milk, or plant oils.

Lentils are vegetables

I imagine most days more calories come from fat than vegetables for me.

Technically, yes. I tend to consider legumes a somewhat separate category, but I realize not everyone does.

Can I ask why?

There's not a specific logical reason I can pin down, but it's probably because when I was growing up they were always presented as separate from vegetables. In my mind, they're in a grouping all of their own. I consider fruits and vegetables to be the things that I buy in the produce section (or the canned or frozen equivalents). So when I'm personally thinking of how much fruit and vegetables I'm eating, the beans just fall in a different mental category.

diannethegeek wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

French_Peasant wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

Honestly, barring a jeopardy/trivia/botany challenge, I consider legumes not a vegetable in the exact same way I consider a tomato not a fruit.

It's an interesting fact, but not a particularly useful one.

I consider tomatoes to be both vegetable and fruit. Much like I consider all fruits that aren't sweet to be both vegetable and fruit. Except for avocados, which I only consider fruits. Maybe because they grow on trees and I generally don't think of vegetables as coming from a tree.

But I've never not considered pulses and legumes as vegetables. I guess because I can't imagine what else they would be. Not a fruit. Not meat. Never occurred to me that people would consider them a grain.

I consider shelled legumes and grains to be seeds, and would also group them in with pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, etc. nutritionally speaking.

For Jeopardy purposes, any legume pod or head of grain is a fruit (corn on the cob for example would botanically be a fruit).

If you at the corn at a very immature stage and on the cob (baby corn, exp.) it would be nutritionally similar to a lower-calorie vegetable. The more it matures, the more nutritional power is concentrated in the grain, and the less edible the cob would be. Same with beans in the pod--green beans function nutritionally similar to low-cal veg, but black beans out of the (now dried out and inedible) pod are energy powerhouses like shelled corn or wheat berries. It's a continuum. Same, with, say, a squash--if you eat a tiny pattypan, not many calories, but mature pumpkin seeds will have a lot of calories.

They can be both awesome and dangerous nutritionally. I was happily mowing down refried beans and black bean soup the other night at our favorite Mexican restaurant, but I wouldn't pat myself on the back for consuming a lot of veg if I had overeaten them, which would be quite easy to do. Same for peanuts.

Well now that's an interesting take. I've never considered nutritional content or whether I overate when thinking whether a food is a vegetable or not.

I really only think of food in five categories - grains, vegetables, fruits, sugars, meat. Seeds are the only odd balls. Seeds can be vegetables (beans, squash, nuts) or grains (rice, buckwheat, quinoa). Maybe I need a seed category. But then it would just get weird with fruits and vegetables where the seeds are typically eaten with the flesh. And I'd still think of beans as vegetables.

Edit: I always think of mushrooms and other edible fungi as vegetables too.

I don't usually think of my foods broken down into quite so few categories. I suppose I sort of lump them together the same way my DVD shelf is sort of lumped together by categories. I'd be hard-pressed to spell out exactly how that works in my head, though.

But with only 5 options, how do you classify something like cheese or yogurt? Are those meats?

French_Peasant wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

French_Peasant wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

Honestly, barring a jeopardy/trivia/botany challenge, I consider legumes not a vegetable in the exact same way I consider a tomato not a fruit.

It's an interesting fact, but not a particularly useful one.

I consider tomatoes to be both vegetable and fruit. Much like I consider all fruits that aren't sweet to be both vegetable and fruit. Except for avocados, which I only consider fruits. Maybe because they grow on trees and I generally don't think of vegetables as coming from a tree.

But I've never not considered pulses and legumes as vegetables. I guess because I can't imagine what else they would be. Not a fruit. Not meat. Never occurred to me that people would consider them a grain.

I consider shelled legumes and grains to be seeds, and would also group them in with pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, etc. nutritionally speaking.

For Jeopardy purposes, any legume pod or head of grain is a fruit (corn on the cob for example would botanically be a fruit).

If you at the corn at a very immature stage and on the cob (baby corn, exp.) it would be nutritionally similar to a lower-calorie vegetable. The more it matures, the more nutritional power is concentrated in the grain, and the less edible the cob would be. Same with beans in the pod--green beans function nutritionally similar to low-cal veg, but black beans out of the (now dried out and inedible) pod are energy powerhouses like shelled corn or wheat berries. It's a continuum. Same, with, say, a squash--if you eat a tiny pattypan, not many calories, but mature pumpkin seeds will have a lot of calories.

They can be both awesome and dangerous nutritionally. I was happily mowing down refried beans and black bean soup the other night at our favorite Mexican restaurant, but I wouldn't pat myself on the back for consuming a lot of veg if I had overeaten them, which would be quite easy to do. Same for peanuts.

Well now that's an interesting take. I've never considered nutritional content or whether I overate when thinking whether a food is a vegetable or not.

I really only think of food in five categories - grains, vegetables, fruits, sugars, meat. Seeds are the only odd balls. Seeds can be vegetables (beans, squash, nuts) or grains (rice, buckwheat, quinoa). Maybe I need a seed category. But then it would just get weird with fruits and vegetables where the seeds are typically eaten with the flesh. And I'd still think of beans as vegetables.

Edit: I always think of mushrooms and other edible fungi as vegetables too.

I started to think about it after noticing people with their heads spinning with GRAINZ IZ DE DEBBIL N MAKE YOU FAT!!!! and yet touting Chia seeds or Amaranth seeds or some such as magical; it's all basically the same damn thing along a continuum and they are all calorie dense, more so if they have a higher amount of oil, and of course offering differing micronutrients.

Here is a Harvard link showing beans and nuts as "proteins" on a Healthy Plate (seeds have disappeared) yet saying it is complemented by a Healthy Pyramid (in which seeds, nuts and legumes are their own individual category). Probably the discussions of seeds reach brass-knuckle fisticuffs level when attempting to suggest national eating policies.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-plate/

I used to teach research and writing for the sciences & humanities, and one of the things we would dive into was critical thinking about categories and the huge political debates lying under the surface therein, which you have to uncover and examine (whereas most people don't question the inherently false constructs of categorization). This would be a great example.

Interestingly, in your categories, you separate sugars (including cane, agave, beet, stevia, honey, etc.) from their vegetative roots (ha ha) but do you include oils with vegetables?

ETA: I see you would add an oils category too....but then, is butter a meat or an oil? Lard? Bacon fat?