What are some of your unpopular opinions about food?
Replies
-
My #1: Corn, in any form other than popped, salted, and buttered, is overrated and a waste of everyone's time.
others receiving votes:
- bananas are gross
- I strongly dislike the texture of beans, in all forms
- Granny Smith > any other apple variety... fight me.
- I don't like avocado unless made into guacamole
YESSSS to the italics. Also--avocadoes, fish, seafood (especially lobster), kale, coconut water, plain greek yogurt, most condiments, and a lot of other things are just GROSS.
Here are my other unpopular opinions:
Coffee in any form is the worst-tasting thing on the planet.
Some foods I won't even try because of how they look--Brussel sprouts and asparagus being two of those.
If the dessert was not made in house, it's probably not worth ordering.
Artificial sweeteners are disgusting.
I don't really eat bread any more but when I did, I thought the cheap, unhealthy white bread tasted the best. Especially with PB&J.
Buffets are horrible, germ-infested places to stay far away from.
Apples are really boring unless they are baked into something, like a pie.2 -
The worst pie is better than the best cake.5
-
The KFC zinger burrito is the best item on the kfc menu1
-
CarvedTones wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »A substantiated opinion - the case against using GMO products is complete woo. Every major health organization around the world (CDC, WHO, EUPHA, etc) endorses them as safe. Purposefully avoiding GMO products is pretty much anti-science. A lot of common products avoid them because of public perception so we end up avoiding them without trying. There are reasons to hate Monsanto's business practices with respect to GMO crops. It's a real shame; GMO crops have more yield per acre, reducing the amount of farmland that needs to be cleared. They are more tolerant of drought, increasing the food supply in some areas that need it most. They are more bug resistant, decreasing the need for pesticides that often pollute water supplies.CarvedTones wrote: »A substantiated opinion - the case against using GMO products is complete woo. Every major health organization around the world (CDC, WHO, EUPHA, etc) endorses them as safe. Purposefully avoiding GMO products is pretty much anti-science. A lot of common products avoid them because of public perception so we end up avoiding them without trying. There are reasons to hate Monsanto's business practices with respect to GMO crops. It's a real shame; GMO crops have more yield per acre, reducing the amount of farmland that needs to be cleared. They are more tolerant of drought, increasing the food supply in some areas that need it most. They are more bug resistant, decreasing the need for pesticides that often pollute water supplies.
Agreed. I have zero issue with GMOs.
There is no more rational basis for having a blanket opinion about all GMOs than there is for having a blanket opinion about all possible non GMO organisms. Some will be generally safe for all people, with a very low incidence of allergies. Some will be toxic. And there will be foods that fall somewhere between those extremes.
The process of genetically modifying something doesn't make it automatically safe to eat, anymore than the fact that something isn't genetically modified (by humans through gene manipulation) makes it safe to eat.
Please identify an example of a food that wasn't toxic before modification and is afterwards.
The CDC, WHO, EUPHA and all the other major health organizations are making evidence based scientific conclusions. IMO, trusting science is more rational than dismissing it because I don't like blanket conclusions. There is no rational basis for assuming that modification makes something unsafe to eat when there is no evidence to support that. Science rarely if ever claims 100% certainty of anything only because it is logistically impossible to ever be 100% certain. That doesn't put an unproven hypothesis that isn't based on any evidence on equal footing.
EDIT - Also, they don't just create some new GMO variant and start selling it as food without extensive testing. Mostly they are making sure there is a benefit to the modification, but they do test to make sure the food is acceptable (taste, texture and doesn't kill anyone) as well as achieving their objective (better, yield, more nutrition, higher tolerance to adverse conditions, world peace, etc).
Each GMO food is its own individual case, so having "zero issues" with GMOs is like having "zero issues" with all potential foods There is nothing magical about the GMO process that guarantees that all foods will be safe for all people. I'm perfectly happy to eat GMOs if they have been well-vetted AND if I am allowed access to information about what the modification is. I'm about basing judgments on as much information as possible, so don't try to insinuate that I'm anti-science or anti-evidence. If the evidence is there, there shouldn't be any objection to letting consumers have access to it in each case.
What if they've inserted protein-generating sequences from wheat into a tomato, and I have celiac disease?
I forget the details, but there was a GMO fish that was being brought to market, and they had subbed some gene sequences from a fish that reaches adult weight more quickly than the original fish they were modifying. I would not eat that UNTIL I was able to obtain further information about the fish they were getting the fast-growth genes from. It was a fish that was also commonly eaten by humans, so for me, it was not a concern.
Given the number of drugs that have been approved and brought to market with horrific consequences during my lifetime, due to inadequate vetting, I reserve the right to make my own judgment about each instance of something new that has been "extensively tested" (in the case of GMOs, these extensive tests appear to be on the order of a year or two, which is hardly enough to judge long-term effects).
Long winded way of saying that no, you can't identify a single instance of the issue that you are worried about. But since I can't prove the sky isn't falling I guess you might as well wear the tin foil hat for protection in case it is.
You are taking the very unscientific position that if something is produced by a particular process, it must be healthful, regardless of what ingredients were used to produce it. I think you better check your own headgear.
And the headgear of the CDC, WHO, EUPHA and other major health organization scientists, who I trust more than other internet posters and that should be trusted more than me. They all endorse GMO. Many GMO crops would allow us to feed more people using less resources. But the fear of them is too widespread, and even though that fear isn't based on hard science (it actually discredits hard science), farmers and merchants are reluctant to use them. Less people would die if it weren't for the irrational fear of GMO crops.
No, they endorse individual GMO foods/crops, or they endorse GMO as a useful way to quickly develop crops that grow better than conventional crops under certain adverse conditions or have a higher yield. There is no scientific basis for saying that because GMO Foods (1 to X) are safe, than then all GMO Foods (x+1 to infinity) will be safe. You really seem to be missing the point.
Edited to fix typo.
Yes, there is scientific basis to say that the odds of GMO introducing an unsafe variant are not higher than natural mutations or cross breeding without GMO which are not as carefully monitored as GMO. There is unfounded fear in the face of science; this is nothing new. I am not missing your point at all; it just isn't based on anything meaningful. A little more education and understanding would help you get past your fear.
I don't have "fear," so it is impossible for me to have "unfounded fear." And questioning someone's education and understanding is an ad hominem attack -- the refuge of those who have run out of logical support for their own arguments.
You might want to expand the old comments to find the part where you asked me to check my headgear. My childish personal attack was retaliatory. No, I haven't run out of logical support. You just don't seem to believe the scientists at all the large health organizations so I have given up on reasoning with you. We are at an impasse - I can't convince you and I can't make you right. I am dropping the discussion because it is frustrating, not because I lack logical support.
That's just funny. My remark about checking your own headgear followed your suggestion that I put on a tinfoil hat, and was meant as the least confrontational way I could think of to point out that your tinfoil hat comment was inappropriate.
But I too feel we are at an impasse, because to me your position seems to be that a finite set of scientific conclusions about a finite number of GMO products is a basis for concluding that the GMO process will always produce safe food products. I have tried to make my position clear, but to me, you seem to be treating me as a stand-in for people who say they don't think any GMO foods are safe.
I'm sorry you feel frustrated. I too am frustrated, and I appreciate your being the bigger person in deciding to drop the conversation.6 -
I thought CarvedTone's point was that the hypothetical safety of non studied and approved GMO products was irrelevant, since the only ones that would come on the market would be studied and approved. Not that any possible hypothetical GMO product would inherently be safe -- that seemed like a misrepresentation of what he had said.
Am I misunderstanding, CarvedTone?6 -
I thought CarvedTone's point was that the hypothetical safety of non studied and approved GMO products was irrelevant, since the only ones that would come on the market would be studied and approved. Not that any possible hypothetical GMO product would inherently be safe -- that seemed like a misrepresentation of what he had said.
Am I misunderstanding, CarvedTone?
That was a point I made early. Where we got off in the weeds is in the discussion about how likely it is that any hypothetical future GMO products would be unsafe. We aren't absolutely sure they would all be safe, only almost absolutely sure. IMO, it's far more likely that people will eat unsafe food because of contaminants like pesticides because the crops aren't as resistant as GMO variants or get less nutrition or go hungry due to lower yields and/or failed crops due to drought.
My concern is that the backlash could actually have a negative effect or at least stand in the way of some positive ones. You would think they would be in the lab working on creating Romaine lettuce that retards or prevents the growth of e coli. They probably aren't only because it would not sell.
I only want to answer your question, not re-open the discussion. The other poster who disagreed with me seems to believe that we can't assume that the chance of something being unsafe and making it to market is as insignificant as I think or at least that is the impression I got. I infer that the poster believes more lives would be lost due to those hypothetical safety problems than would be saved by properly feeding more people from less land using existing GMO strains with an eye toward creating more.
There appears to be near zero chance that either of us will change our minds, so we had just agreed to drop the debate. The other poster may come back and clarify their position if I misstated it above, but it is pointless for us to continue the back and forth.7 -
CarvedTones wrote: »I thought CarvedTone's point was that the hypothetical safety of non studied and approved GMO products was irrelevant, since the only ones that would come on the market would be studied and approved. Not that any possible hypothetical GMO product would inherently be safe -- that seemed like a misrepresentation of what he had said.
Am I misunderstanding, CarvedTone?
That was a point I made early. Where we got off in the weeds is in the discussion about how likely it is that any hypothetical future GMO products would be unsafe. We aren't absolutely sure they would all be safe, only almost absolutely sure. IMO, it's far more likely that people will eat unsafe food because of contaminants like pesticides because the crops aren't as resistant as GMO variants or get less nutrition or go hungry due to lower yields and/or failed crops due to drought.
My concern is that the backlash could actually have a negative effect or at least stand in the way of some positive ones. You would think they would be in the lab working on creating Romaine lettuce that retards or prevents the growth of e coli. They probably aren't only because it would not sell.
I only want to answer your question, not re-open the discussion. The other poster who disagreed with me seems to believe that we can't assume that the chance of something being unsafe and making it to market is as insignificant as I think or at least that is the impression I got. I infer that the poster believes more lives would be lost due to those hypothetical safety problems than would be saved by properly feeding more people from less land using existing GMO strains with an eye toward creating more.
There appears to be near zero chance that either of us will change our minds, so we had just agreed to drop the debate. The other poster may come back and clarify their position if I misstated it above, but it is pointless for us to continue the back and forth.
Thank you.1 -
2
-
I like machine cappuccinos and lattes.2
-
I like machine cappuccinos and lattes.
I liked them better before I started going to the gym. Huh? The reason for that odd correlation is that we have a machine at work that I would get coffee and the occasional latte from and that was pretty much my only common source of coffee. Now I often go to the gym before work. I go to a gym near my office and have time to drink a cup of coffee before I get there. I make a cup from the Keurig at home and we get better coffee than what is at my office, so I am becoming conditioned to that as normal.2 -
Brussel sprouts are disgusting and need to go away. Lately every GF menu I look at has brussel sprouts in the salad, or as a side vegetable to a main course or hidden in whatever random dish that looks good but...brussel sprouts. I even ordered a quiche once in San Francisco and bit into one of the multitude tiny brussel sprouts that were baked into the thing. I gagged. This has to stop.
OK, here's an update. I went to a restaurant last night that I go to on a regular basis. I often order the planked salmon, which comes with a side of seasonal vegetables, usually broccolini or green beans. Last night it came with - tiny brussel sprouts
They were halved and sautéed in butter and garlic and I was about to dump them all on my husbands plate and order a side salad, except for THIS THREAD. So I tried one, and basically it tasted like butter and garlic, and not like a brussel sprout. And the texture turned out not to be an issue, it wasn't much different than cabbage. I ended up eating about half. I'm still not converted to eating them plain, but I'll concede that roasting or sautéing veg can make them tolerable 
12 -
CarvedTones wrote: »MoveitlikeManda wrote: »
Are you talking about the actual "real" sweet potato from the produce department properly cooked? The canned orange sludge (which I admit to eating) is a completely different thing IMO.
I mean the things that are next to my lovely maris pipers in the super market, pretending to be a real potato but taste like crap. (didnt even know the come in a can? only ever seen fresh or frozen)
my kids all used to love it as was one of the foods I gave when weaning and even now when I make them mash I add one sweet potato in the pan and they eat the lot.
but it baffles me why people like them, same as avocados, another food I fed when weaning the kids but omg they are awful0 -
RelCanonical wrote: »I've discovered, in another thread, that I've got some unpopular views regarding tinned chicken, microwave rice and steam fresh veggies.
IMO, they're great. Convenience is a wonderful thing.
Others aren't as enamoured with them.
I thought canned chicken sounded terrible until I tried it. Definitely very much like canned tuna. I feel like people expect something like what Ashens tested in his video (whole canned chicken).
Props to you for mentioning Ashens! I have no idea how he manages to eat some of the scary products he gets (such as WWII-vintage rations).2 -
SweetLove1988 wrote: »I HATE ONIONS. Absolutely hate them.
I used to hate onions, then I realized onions are in like, everything. Now I love onions. I will eat just plain roasted red onion. red onion on my pizza. etc. so good.
I love onion and mayo toasties, people think Im crazy because I dont have anything else on it1 -
CarvedTones wrote: »I thought CarvedTone's point was that the hypothetical safety of non studied and approved GMO products was irrelevant, since the only ones that would come on the market would be studied and approved. Not that any possible hypothetical GMO product would inherently be safe -- that seemed like a misrepresentation of what he had said.
Am I misunderstanding, CarvedTone?
That was a point I made early. Where we got off in the weeds is in the discussion about how likely it is that any hypothetical future GMO products would be unsafe. We aren't absolutely sure they would all be safe, only almost absolutely sure. IMO, it's far more likely that people will eat unsafe food because of contaminants like pesticides because the crops aren't as resistant as GMO variants or get less nutrition or go hungry due to lower yields and/or failed crops due to drought.
My concern is that the backlash could actually have a negative effect or at least stand in the way of some positive ones. You would think they would be in the lab working on creating Romaine lettuce that retards or prevents the growth of e coli. They probably aren't only because it would not sell.
I only want to answer your question, not re-open the discussion. The other poster who disagreed with me seems to believe that we can't assume that the chance of something being unsafe and making it to market is as insignificant as I think or at least that is the impression I got. I infer that the poster believes more lives would be lost due to those hypothetical safety problems than would be saved by properly feeding more people from less land using existing GMO strains with an eye toward creating more.
There appears to be near zero chance that either of us will change our minds, so we had just agreed to drop the debate. The other poster may come back and clarify their position if I misstated it above, but it is pointless for us to continue the back and forth.
Not wanting to reopen the discussion either, but just correcting your incorrect inference about my position. I am not saying that there shouldn't be GMO products brought to market, so I am not suggesting any kind of utilitarian weighing of one product against another. Each product should stand on its own.3 -
Eating something you hate 2/3 meals a day every day isn’t sustainable.
Breakfast cereal is garbage and should be catapulted directly to the moon.
The dairy industry is bullhonky and so is milk.
Hard granola bars are he dwarf bread of the pantry. You can go a long way with a granola bar. Miles and miles before you eat it. You can traverse mountains looking for something to eat that isn’t the granola bar slowly being crushed to powder at the bottom of your backpack.14 -
RelCanonical wrote: »I've discovered, in another thread, that I've got some unpopular views regarding tinned chicken, microwave rice and steam fresh veggies.
IMO, they're great. Convenience is a wonderful thing.
Others aren't as enamoured with them.
I thought canned chicken sounded terrible until I tried it. Definitely very much like canned tuna. I feel like people expect something like what Ashens tested in his video (whole canned chicken).
Props to you for mentioning Ashens! I have no idea how he manages to eat some of the scary products he gets (such as WWII-vintage rations).
I love seeing Ashens mentioned here!! That is all.0 -
Variety is not that important. A caveat to that is that I have to make sure to get more veggies in there sometimes. I can make a batch of really tasty marinated chicken breasts and enjoy them for lunch for a full work week. I often go weeks eating the same breakfast of PB2 in yogurt. My favorite protein bar is Pure Protein Salted Caramel - why should I buy others? Actually, I do buy some 30g bars also; I just bought a pack of 15, all the same flavor - chocolate brownie.
I do try and enjoy a wide variety of things, but the idea of not repeating meals very often doesn't make sense to me.10 -
"Cauliflower rice" is the least pleasurable way to eat cauliflower. I totally don't see the point. (But I can take or leave rice, so don't need a sub - maybe that's the problem.)
I had cauliflower "rice" for the first time last night with stir fry. My husband thinks he's going to go Keto (if you knew my husband, you'd understand why I said that) so he thought he'd try cauliflower rice instead of our usual Jasmine. He really liked it. I didn't hate it, but it definitely is no true substitute for the real thing.2 -
I really like cauliflower rice. I don’t use it as a substitute for rice, but as a tasty veggie dish. I like to sauté it in a little olive oil, adding onion powder, pepper, and pecorino romano cheese.4
-
CarvedTones wrote: »Variety is not that important. A caveat to that is that I have to make sure to get more veggies in there sometimes. I can make a batch of really tasty marinated chicken breasts and enjoy them for lunch for a full work week. I often go weeks eating the same breakfast of PB2 in yogurt. My favorite protein bar is Pure Protein Salted Caramel - why should I buy others? Actually, I do buy some 30g bars also; I just bought a pack of 15, all the same flavor - chocolate brownie.
I do try and enjoy a wide variety of things, but the idea of not repeating meals very often doesn't make sense to me.
I completely agree with this. I essentially eat the same breakfast every day of my life and it is usually the meal I look forward to the most each day.5 -
workinonit1956 wrote: »I really like cauliflower rice. I don’t use it as a substitute for rice, but as a tasty veggie dish. I like to sauté it in a little olive oil, adding onion powder, pepper, and pecorino romano cheese.
I tend to like my vegetables cut into larger pieces, not sure why, but the tiny size of cauliflower rice is for me a bug, not a feature.3 -
if you bake true name brand Pop Tarts just a few minutes in toaster oven instead of toasting, they are actually really good. It's like the pastry isn't quite done and toasting really doesn't finish it the best. I bake at ~375 for ~5 minutes. It varies and toaster ovens can be wildly inconsistent, or at least our current one is.3
-
I’m the opposite-I like a lot of foods diced up. Not sure why either:). lolworkinonit1956 wrote: »I really like cauliflower rice. I don’t use it as a substitute for rice, but as a tasty veggie dish. I like to sauté it in a little olive oil, adding onion powder, pepper, and pecorino romano cheese.
I tend to like my vegetables cut into larger pieces, not sure why, but the tiny size of cauliflower rice is for me a bug, not a feature.
3 -
MaryContrary1972 wrote: »Haggis is food of the gods
@MaryContrary1972
My goodness I love haggis!!
I lived in Edinburgh a while back and there was a place on the Royal Mile that had the best haggis, neeps and tatties!
0 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »Variety is not that important. A caveat to that is that I have to make sure to get more veggies in there sometimes. I can make a batch of really tasty marinated chicken breasts and enjoy them for lunch for a full work week. I often go weeks eating the same breakfast of PB2 in yogurt. My favorite protein bar is Pure Protein Salted Caramel - why should I buy others? Actually, I do buy some 30g bars also; I just bought a pack of 15, all the same flavor - chocolate brownie.
I do try and enjoy a wide variety of things, but the idea of not repeating meals very often doesn't make sense to me.
I completely agree with this. I essentially eat the same breakfast every day of my life and it is usually the meal I look forward to the most each day.
My 6', 170lb husband who has never had to consider watching what he eats in his life, eats dry cheerios for breakfast 95% of the time(as in every weekday and most weekend days unless someone makes pancakes or waffles). He also eats a banana and a bag of baby carrots with lunch everyday, which is 4 slices of wheat bread, 2 sad slices of ham and two of the ultra thin cheddar cheese slices (two sandwiches) with French's Mustard. This has been his lunch for at least 15 years and continues to be his lunch even though he now works from home. He also eats dry cheerios as an evening snack sometimes.
I couldn't do that, but as I said, he doesn't have to watch his weight and is healthy.
I do however pack and eat the exact same thing all day for my 3 work days a week, it just varies week to week what that is. Two meals and a snack. That doesn't bother me.2 -
nicsflyingcircus wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »CarvedTones wrote: »Variety is not that important. A caveat to that is that I have to make sure to get more veggies in there sometimes. I can make a batch of really tasty marinated chicken breasts and enjoy them for lunch for a full work week. I often go weeks eating the same breakfast of PB2 in yogurt. My favorite protein bar is Pure Protein Salted Caramel - why should I buy others? Actually, I do buy some 30g bars also; I just bought a pack of 15, all the same flavor - chocolate brownie.
I do try and enjoy a wide variety of things, but the idea of not repeating meals very often doesn't make sense to me.
I completely agree with this. I essentially eat the same breakfast every day of my life and it is usually the meal I look forward to the most each day.
My 6', 170lb husband who has never had to consider watching what he eats in his life, eats dry cheerios for breakfast 95% of the time(as in every weekday and most weekend days unless someone makes pancakes or waffles). He also eats a banana and a bag of baby carrots with lunch everyday, which is 4 slices of wheat bread, 2 sad slices of ham and two of the ultra thin cheddar cheese slices (two sandwiches) with French's Mustard. This has been his lunch for at least 15 years and continues to be his lunch even though he now works from home. He also eats dry cheerios as an evening snack sometimes.
I couldn't do that, but as I said, he doesn't have to watch his weight and is healthy.
I do however pack and eat the exact same thing all day for my 3 work days a week, it just varies week to week what that is. Two meals and a snack. That doesn't bother me.
My go-to breakfast every day (with variations in brands and flavors):
Simple Truth - Instant Chia Oatmeal - Maple and Brown Sugar Flavor
Kirkland Signature - 100% Columbian Supremo Bean Coffee
Klarbrunn - Sparkling Water - Natural Lime Flavor, 12 fl oz
Quest Bar White Chocolate Raspberry, 1 bar (60g)
Dannon - Strawberry Cheesecake Light & Fit Greek Yogurt, 5.3 oz
Mp Combat Powder - Protein Powder- Cookies N Cream, 0.6 scoop (mixed with yogurt)
534 calories, 65 carbs, 12 fat, 51 protein0 -
I do not like cold pizza. I will gag if I bite into it.
Not sure if that is an unpopular opinion, but have never met anyone who's at least not OK with cold pizza.3 -
Traditional American Thanksgiving dinner is over rated. When’s the last time you went out to a nice dinner and ordered turkey?
On the other hand in left over sandwich form it’s delicious.
That has more to do with the difficulty of making the turkey for a restaurant then a lack of interest. Ted's Montana Grilll has turkey dinner on the menu every Sunday as its special. It's enough to feed two people and delicious.1 -
FireOpalCO wrote: »Traditional American Thanksgiving dinner is over rated. When’s the last time you went out to a nice dinner and ordered turkey?
On the other hand in left over sandwich form it’s delicious.
That has more to do with the difficulty of making the turkey for a restaurant then a lack of interest. Ted's Montana Grilll has turkey dinner on the menu every Sunday as it's special. It's enough to feed two people and delicious.
It's often available in restaurants and it's a big seller in frozen dinners. The comment about it being overrated was @lalabank's unpopular opinion in keeping with the thread. The question about others ordering it was probably meant to be rhetorical but it isn't always. I don't eat mammals, so I am looking at fish, poultry or vegetarian options when I eat out. There are a few places where I sometimes order turkey with dressing because the other poultry and seafood options are batter fried or just don't appeal to me as much, nor does a vegetarian option (if there really is one).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions