Apples...a zero calorie food??

Options
1810121314

Replies

  • vickiwheeler1153
    Options
    Apples are a free food if you are following Slimming World dieting rules, not calorie counting.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    Apples are a free food if you are following Slimming World dieting rules, not calorie counting.

    Apples have calories and are never free food. If a plan has them as free, then it is overvaluing something else, or giving you too low of a food goal to compensate.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    mph323 wrote: »
    Apples are a free food if you are following Slimming World dieting rules, not calorie counting.

    But we're not talking about "free foods", which is a weight-loss plan construct. We're talking about negative calorie foods that take more calories to digest than they contain. Which don't exist. <frustration> Eric has derailed the thread so thoroughly that the OP has been completely lost in the noise.

    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FOOD THAT TAKES MORE ENERGY TO DIGEST THAN IT CONTAINS
    .

    http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/expert-answers/negative-calorie-foods/faq-20058260

    exactly
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Although Eric-buddy there is clearly a troll and I have little interest in engaging him directly (heeeeere trolly trolly!), I do think there's an interesting point buried in the horse hockey about how best to ease someone into calorie counting who isn't a complete numbers nut. I mean, I'm basically built for MFP: I find playing with numbers and databases and spreadsheets *soothing.* But my mom, for example, gets really flustered by that kind of thing and I can't imagine her sticking with the kind of tracking I'm doing. So if she said to me, Mega Moose, you look great these days and I want to give calorie counting a try, I probably would recommend a simplified form that did not include low calorie/volume foods, probably using hand-size portion estimates instead of a scale, and modest cardio without eating back exercise calories. And, of course, regular weigh-ins to adjust as needed.

    It might depend on the person, but that way of doing it would be more burdensome to me and something I'd find completely uninteresting and annoying and not stick to.

    What I did do before I discovered options like MFP existed was write down what I ate (just forcing myself to be mindful is really what works for me), and focus on serving sizes (although not the hand method which has always irritated me as not making any sense). But being able to write down things I was happy about eating -- like vegetables -- was a motivator. I'd never stick to a plan where I logged but ignored a lot of the foods I liked being able to log and just focused on calories as something to keep low.

    If one wants a simplified plan, and finds logging burdensome, I happen to think WW is probably a good option, and some versions don't track vegetables or the first 2 servings of fruit or some such. I'd hate it, but lots of people love it.
  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    Options
    How is this thread still going on?

    It's all about the drama.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    It not calorie free, BUT, better for you than a lot of other things. For instance, a Frito Chili Pie has like 500+ calories in just one cup and loads of fat. Whereas an apple pie you make lighter will have a lot less calories and virtually no fat. What I look at is not only the calorie count but the fat content which is what most diet plans also look at. Like a salad with ranch dressing may be the equivalent to a hamburger on the caloric side, but on the artery side it's much healthier because it doesn't have as much fat.

    But it wasn't being marketed as "better for you," it was being marketed as a "free food." Which doesn't exist.

    If I created a salad with enough ranch dressing to equal the calories in a hamburger, I'm guessing the fat content would be pretty high. Most of the calories in it would probably be ranch dressing and that's typically high in fat.
  • shaunshaikh
    shaunshaikh Posts: 616 Member
    edited September 2017
    Options
    It's debatable whether any dietary fat has any negative effect on the health of your arteries. If anything, the "healthy" fats make it better. Saturated fats seems to be a current point of debate.
    ...
    ...
    ..
    Damnit I got roped in.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited September 2017
    Options
    It not calorie free, BUT, better for you than a lot of other things. For instance, a Frito Chili Pie has like 500+ calories in just one cup and loads of fat. Whereas an apple pie you make lighter will have a lot less calories and virtually no fat. What I look at is not only the calorie count but the fat content which is what most diet plans also look at. Like a salad with ranch dressing may be the equivalent to a hamburger on the caloric side, but on the artery side it's much healthier because it doesn't have as much fat.

    A normal apple pie will have a LOT of calories and a LOT of fat. I usually make a crust using plenty of butter, for example (and you need some kind of fat for a crust).

    Apples themselves are lower cal than a lot of things, but hardly calorie free. No one is saying avoid apples.

    I have no clue what a frito chili pie is (I hate fritos, so it doesn't sound good to me), but presumably it has meat, so would be a better meal in some ways (protein) than an apple pie (which no one considers a regular meal, although it might make a nice post Thanksgiving breakfast).

    You seem to assume fat is bad, it's not.

    A salad with ranch dressing could very easily have far more fat than a burger, if you make the burger with very lean ground beef (as I normally do) and if the majority of calories in the salad are from ranch dressing (but maybe you added a bunch of croutons or something, I dunno). But again fat isn't all that -- the burger has protein, which you need, and the salad (especially if you use a variety of vegetables) has a lot of micros.

    (I'm eating a quite caloric salad at the moment with a bunch of vegetables, some chicken for protein, some feta cheese and olives (FAT), and some dressing made with olive oil and red wine vinegar (I hate ranch, but this also has FAT). Pretty sure it's not actually bad for me, and it fits into my day.)
  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Although Eric-buddy there is clearly a troll and I have little interest in engaging him directly (heeeeere trolly trolly!), I do think there's an interesting point buried in the horse hockey about how best to ease someone into calorie counting who isn't a complete numbers nut. I mean, I'm basically built for MFP: I find playing with numbers and databases and spreadsheets *soothing.* But my mom, for example, gets really flustered by that kind of thing and I can't imagine her sticking with the kind of tracking I'm doing. So if she said to me, Mega Moose, you look great these days and I want to give calorie counting a try, I probably would recommend a simplified form that did not include low calorie/volume foods, probably using hand-size portion estimates instead of a scale, and modest cardio without eating back exercise calories. And, of course, regular weigh-ins to adjust as needed.

    It might depend on the person, but that way of doing it would be more burdensome to me and something I'd find completely uninteresting and annoying and not stick to.

    What I did do before I discovered options like MFP existed was write down what I ate (just forcing myself to be mindful is really what works for me), and focus on serving sizes (although not the hand method which has always irritated me as not making any sense). But being able to write down things I was happy about eating -- like vegetables -- was a motivator. I'd never stick to a plan where I logged but ignored a lot of the foods I liked being able to log and just focused on calories as something to keep low.

    If one wants a simplified plan, and finds logging burdensome, I happen to think WW is probably a good option, and some versions don't track vegetables or the first 2 servings of fruit or some such. I'd hate it, but lots of people love it.

    Yeah, that makes sense. It wouldn't work for me, but I was really just spitballing.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    Although Eric-buddy there is clearly a troll and I have little interest in engaging him directly (heeeeere trolly trolly!), I do think there's an interesting point buried in the horse hockey about how best to ease someone into calorie counting who isn't a complete numbers nut. I mean, I'm basically built for MFP: I find playing with numbers and databases and spreadsheets *soothing.* But my mom, for example, gets really flustered by that kind of thing and I can't imagine her sticking with the kind of tracking I'm doing. So if she said to me, Mega Moose, you look great these days and I want to give calorie counting a try, I probably would recommend a simplified form that did not include low calorie/volume foods, probably using hand-size portion estimates instead of a scale, and modest cardio without eating back exercise calories. And, of course, regular weigh-ins to adjust as needed.

    Holy cow--I never would have thought that this thread and the "Why don't people use MFP to set their calorie goals?" threads would converge. And yet they have...
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    Kullerva wrote: »
    I weigh garlic and I don't eat lettuce. (I do, however, weigh spinach.) I don't find it "daunting." In fact it helps sometimes, as it is easy for me to add waaay too much garlic. (I would eat it anyway, but not everyone would.)

    I love apples but they do have calories (typically 80-150). They don't make me hungrier, but they only give me a 1-2 hour boost so I try to eat them shortly before a meal.

    Why don't you eat lettuce? It's a zero calorie food. Maybe even negative.

    Lettuce is low calorie, not zero calorie.

    [sarcasm] Why don't you eat lettuce? It's a zero calorie food. Maybe even negative. [/sarcasm]

    One can never be sure on here.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    It not calorie free, BUT, better for you than a lot of other things. For instance, a Frito Chili Pie has like 500+ calories in just one cup and loads of fat. Whereas an apple pie you make lighter will have a lot less calories and virtually no fat. What I look at is not only the calorie count but the fat content which is what most diet plans also look at. Like a salad with ranch dressing may be the equivalent to a hamburger on the caloric side, but on the artery side it's much healthier because it doesn't have as much fat.

    A normal apple pie will have a LOT of calories and a LOT of fat. I usually make a crust using plenty of butter, for example (and you need some kind of fat for a crust).

    Apples themselves are lower cal than a lot of things, but hardly calorie free. No one is saying avoid apples.

    I have no clue what a frito chili pie is (I hate fritos, so it doesn't sound good to me), but presumably it has meat, so would be a better meal in some ways (protein) than an apple pie (which no one considers a regular meal, although it might make a nice post Thanksgiving breakfast).

    You seem to assume fat is bad, it's not.

    A salad with ranch dressing could very easily have far more fat than a burger, if you make the burger with very lean ground beef (as I normally do) and if the majority of calories in the salad are from ranch dressing (but maybe you added a bunch of croutons or something, I dunno). But again fat isn't all that -- the burger has protein, which you need, and the salad (especially if you use a variety of vegetables) has a lot of micros.

    (I'm eating a quite caloric salad at the moment with a bunch of vegetables, some chicken for protein, some feta cheese and olives (FAT), and some dressing made with olive oil and red wine vinegar (I hate ranch, but this also has FAT). Pretty sure it's not actually bad for me, and it fits into my day.)

    Beat me to it.

    Not sure how you would make an apple pie(or any pie) with No/Low fat.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    edited September 2017
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    It not calorie free, BUT, better for you than a lot of other things. For instance, a Frito Chili Pie has like 500+ calories in just one cup and loads of fat. Whereas an apple pie you make lighter will have a lot less calories and virtually no fat. What I look at is not only the calorie count but the fat content which is what most diet plans also look at. Like a salad with ranch dressing may be the equivalent to a hamburger on the caloric side, but on the artery side it's much healthier because it doesn't have as much fat.

    A normal apple pie will have a LOT of calories and a LOT of fat. I usually make a crust using plenty of butter, for example (and you need some kind of fat for a crust).

    Apples themselves are lower cal than a lot of things, but hardly calorie free. No one is saying avoid apples.

    I have no clue what a frito chili pie is (I hate fritos, so it doesn't sound good to me), but presumably it has meat, so would be a better meal in some ways (protein) than an apple pie (which no one considers a regular meal, although it might make a nice post Thanksgiving breakfast).

    You seem to assume fat is bad, it's not.

    A salad with ranch dressing could very easily have far more fat than a burger, if you make the burger with very lean ground beef (as I normally do) and if the majority of calories in the salad are from ranch dressing (but maybe you added a bunch of croutons or something, I dunno). But again fat isn't all that -- the burger has protein, which you need, and the salad (especially if you use a variety of vegetables) has a lot of micros.

    (I'm eating a quite caloric salad at the moment with a bunch of vegetables, some chicken for protein, some feta cheese and olives (FAT), and some dressing made with olive oil and red wine vinegar (I hate ranch, but this also has FAT). Pretty sure it's not actually bad for me, and it fits into my day.)

    Beat me to it.

    Not sure how you would make an apple pie(or any pie) with No/Low fat.

    it was crustless...*shudders at the thought*