Your favorite bogus nutrition/health "advice"

1235»

Replies

  • ladyreva78
    ladyreva78 Posts: 4,080 Member
    Simply the phrase "leaky gut syndrome". And the everything about the GAPS diet to cure it.

    Leaky gut also came up at the functional med appointment.

    I'm thinking that if I have to go back to him, I really do need a bingo card.

    Make sure to yell bingo when your card is full :tongue:
  • ryenday
    ryenday Posts: 1,540 Member
    edited April 2018
    ryenday wrote: »
    beerfoamy wrote: »
    ''There is no point counting calories because companies are allowed to be 20% out when putting numbers on their foods''

    I mean, okaaaayyy, may be true, probably is, but surely logging and tracking calories along with any weight loss or gain will give you a better plan to work with. If you gain when 'in a deficit' then eat less and take into account the possible 20% discrepancy.

    Every time this guy starts with the 20% argument I nearly lose my eyes from rolling them so hard. I have lost around 50lbs and have not struggled against the lying companies lying about calorie numbers!

    This is why a food scale is so handy. The packaging may say one cookie is 100 calories, but it will also say one cookie is 50 grams. Weigh the cookie. If it's really 75 grams, then you know it's 150 calories. Negates the 20% argument.

    Got to agree that some plan is way better than no plan, and weighing is very helpful - but what does weighing have to do with the 20% discrepancy arguments? As I understand it, if my frozen lasagne is listed as 350 calories for a 300 gram serving that means the actual calories could be up to 20% lower (280) or higher (420) and that label is still ‘correct’. Weighing doesn’t change that.

    There actually are a whole lot of calories in play with the 20% wiggle room. I would have been concerned with that when I was losing if I ate a lot of pre-packaged foods with high calories per serving. Can’t say that makes a convincing case not to weigh or count calories tho! Just might make things hard for some people.

    Weighing changes the fact that it isn't 300 grams. That's what they're talking about when they say the packaging can be off by up to 20%. That is due to weight discrepancies.
    I believe the government allows a label discrepancy on calorie estimates of 20% - and 300 grams is always 300 grams. http://www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/nutrition/article/can-you-trust-calorie-counts
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,878 Member
    ryenday wrote: »
    ryenday wrote: »
    beerfoamy wrote: »
    ''There is no point counting calories because companies are allowed to be 20% out when putting numbers on their foods''

    I mean, okaaaayyy, may be true, probably is, but surely logging and tracking calories along with any weight loss or gain will give you a better plan to work with. If you gain when 'in a deficit' then eat less and take into account the possible 20% discrepancy.

    Every time this guy starts with the 20% argument I nearly lose my eyes from rolling them so hard. I have lost around 50lbs and have not struggled against the lying companies lying about calorie numbers!

    This is why a food scale is so handy. The packaging may say one cookie is 100 calories, but it will also say one cookie is 50 grams. Weigh the cookie. If it's really 75 grams, then you know it's 150 calories. Negates the 20% argument.

    Got to agree that some plan is way better than no plan, and weighing is very helpful - but what does weighing have to do with the 20% discrepancy arguments? As I understand it, if my frozen lasagne is listed as 350 calories for a 300 gram serving that means the actual calories could be up to 20% lower (280) or higher (420) and that label is still ‘correct’. Weighing doesn’t change that.

    There actually are a whole lot of calories in play with the 20% wiggle room. I would have been concerned with that when I was losing if I ate a lot of pre-packaged foods with high calories per serving. Can’t say that makes a convincing case not to weigh or count calories tho! Just might make things hard for some people.

    Weighing changes the fact that it isn't 300 grams. That's what they're talking about when they say the packaging can be off by up to 20%. That is due to weight discrepancies.
    I believe the government allows a label discrepancy on calorie estimates of 20% - and 300 grams is always 300 grams. http://www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/nutrition/article/can-you-trust-calorie-counts

    I have found packaged foods where the weight is different from what is listed on the package.

    There may or may not be calorie discrepancies within the given weight of a food itself (I don't have the equipment to determine that), but I know for a fact that I've purchased foods that had more food, by weight, in a package or in a piece than the label would indicate. In many cases, the weight difference was enough to be of interest to someone who is using calorie counting to manage their weight.

    300 grams on the package doesn't always mean 300 grams *in* the package.
  • ryenday
    ryenday Posts: 1,540 Member
    ryenday wrote: »
    ryenday wrote: »
    beerfoamy wrote: »
    ''There is no point counting calories because companies are allowed to be 20% out when putting numbers on their foods''

    I mean, okaaaayyy, may be true, probably is, but surely logging and tracking calories along with any weight loss or gain will give you a better plan to work with. If you gain when 'in a deficit' then eat less and take into account the possible 20% discrepancy.

    Every time this guy starts with the 20% argument I nearly lose my eyes from rolling them so hard. I have lost around 50lbs and have not struggled against the lying companies lying about calorie numbers!

    This is why a food scale is so handy. The packaging may say one cookie is 100 calories, but it will also say one cookie is 50 grams. Weigh the cookie. If it's really 75 grams, then you know it's 150 calories. Negates the 20% argument.

    Got to agree that some plan is way better than no plan, and weighing is very helpful - but what does weighing have to do with the 20% discrepancy arguments? As I understand it, if my frozen lasagne is listed as 350 calories for a 300 gram serving that means the actual calories could be up to 20% lower (280) or higher (420) and that label is still ‘correct’. Weighing doesn’t change that.

    There actually are a whole lot of calories in play with the 20% wiggle room. I would have been concerned with that when I was losing if I ate a lot of pre-packaged foods with high calories per serving. Can’t say that makes a convincing case not to weigh or count calories tho! Just might make things hard for some people.

    Weighing changes the fact that it isn't 300 grams. That's what they're talking about when they say the packaging can be off by up to 20%. That is due to weight discrepancies.
    I believe the government allows a label discrepancy on calorie estimates of 20% - and 300 grams is always 300 grams. http://www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/nutrition/article/can-you-trust-calorie-counts

    I have found packaged foods where the weight is different from what is listed on the package.

    There may or may not be calorie discrepancies within the given weight of a food itself (I don't have the equipment to determine that), but I know for a fact that I've purchased foods that had more food, by weight, in a package or in a piece than the label would indicate. In many cases, the weight difference was enough to be of interest to someone who is using calorie counting to manage their weight.

    300 grams on the package doesn't always mean 300 grams *in* the package.

    No doubting one is better off weighing out their serving to verify. Merely responding to the misinformed statement that weighing out a serving negates the label calorie 20% discrepancy allowance.
  • cazwood
    cazwood Posts: 6 Member
    Starvation mode :D:|
  • ShellyPru84
    ShellyPru84 Posts: 56 Member
    h1udd wrote: »
    Can I defend the waffle + peanut butter + blueberries .... I think that would make a great breakfast with a big cup of coffee

    Sub a banana for the blueberries and that’s a quick breakfast for me.
  • concordancia
    concordancia Posts: 5,320 Member
    edited April 2018
    I almost didn't join the gym after listening to the membership person's spiel, including that she could only lose weight if she lifts weights before doing cardio. Certainly won't be in a hurry to hire any of the trainers after that spiel.

    She also asked me if I had ever had my BMI measured while showing me a body fat comparison chart.
  • hcdo
    hcdo Posts: 202 Member
    edited April 2018
    You don't have to count fruits or vegetables.

    It's not unusual for me to get several hundred calories a day from fruits and vegetables.

    I was surprised when my co-worker, who's doing WW, told me that fruits, veggies, and even chicken have no points so "you can eat as much of them as you want." Uh, no.

    Other favorites include anything that detoxifies your system, any superfoods, starvation mode, and eating according to your blood type/body type/facial shape.
  • Ninkasi
    Ninkasi Posts: 173 Member
    sarahbums wrote: »
    what sad, sad soul eats just an egg, spinach and some damn beans and feels satisfied?

    Sometimes I make a quick dinner of a tortilla spread with refried beans and topped with sauteed spinach and a fried egg.

    I'm a happy person, I promise! :)

  • MelanieCN77
    MelanieCN77 Posts: 4,053 Member
    Ninkasi wrote: »
    sarahbums wrote: »
    what sad, sad soul eats just an egg, spinach and some damn beans and feels satisfied?

    Sometimes I make a quick dinner of a tortilla spread with refried beans and topped with sauteed spinach and a fried egg.

    I'm a happy person, I promise! :)

    That tortilla makes all the difference.
  • frankiesgirlie
    frankiesgirlie Posts: 666 Member
    edited April 2018
    That carbs make you fat. Too many calories for your body/activity level makes you fat.

    I gotta say that several of those meals are a little normal for me. I don’t eat breakfast so I have breakfast foods for dinner at least once a week. A few days ago it was a cracker barrell pecan pancake and two eggs over easy. Today was a bowl of steamed brocolli and chick peas with salsa mixed in. I don’t eat meat so my meals are simple but creative and I try to stay away from vegan or vegetarian soy products.
  • frankiesgirlie
    frankiesgirlie Posts: 666 Member
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    all i need to say here....My aunt. Like if you know what im saying xD Been a while since i posted about her maybe later ill let you in on some more of her nonsense

    Has she buttered your coffee lately?!?

    Thankfully that stopped, Instead she got mad and aparently suddenly hates all coffee and wont allow me to drink it near her, Aparently ever since pregnancy she gets sick from the smell...like 25years ago? Seems shes butthurt i yelled at her lol


    Lol!! Seems like I’m not the only one with some doozies in their family.
  • karahm78
    karahm78 Posts: 491 Member
    glassyo wrote: »
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    Waffles with peanut butter and blueberries actually doesn't sound that bad though? I might hit it with some extra honey but still, it seems sound in principle.

    Give up loneliness? Are there actually people out there who actively choose loneliness? As an introvert, I might change that one to "stop trying to please everybody" since you extroverts tend to get way too stressed out about what other people think.

    How is fish, carrots, and green beans a 5 minute dinner? Are they eating everything raw? Ditto brown rice - what kind of miracle cooking grains do nutritionists buy that they can cook brown rice in less than 5 minutes?

    I know nutritionists get a bad rap but do you not own a microwave oven? :) All can be zapped in the microwave for under 5 minutes.

    It is impossible to go from regular dry brown rice to edible/cooked brown rice in 5 minutes... a microwave wouldn't do it. If you have pre-cooked brown rice you CAN heat it up in a microwave in a couple of minutes.

    True... but the Trader Joe’s frozen brown rice is darn good, 3 mins and you have 2 cups brown rice. Totally worth it, I haven’t cooked rice the old fashioned way since I discovered it LOL