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.
Unpopular opinions
RealWorldStrengthLLC
Posts: 552 Member
in Debate Club
What unpopular/controversial opinions do you have regarding fitness/exercise/food? No BS broscience, just things that other people find harsh/do not necessarily agree with. It's better if you can back these opinions up with some sort of decent argument. I'll start, I've got a couple I wholeheartedly believe.
Unpopular opinion: Food is fuel, not therapy.
Argument - food is about giving your body what it needs, not what your brain craves. The occasional cheat is ok and mentally healthy, but the bulk of what a person consumes should be for a purpose; weight loss, weight gain, maintenence, hit macro goals, stay within calorie goals, hit micro goals, and try to fill all nutritional gaps. This is not to say you can't eat foods you enjoy and occasionally cheat, but that one should make a conscious effort to give the body what it needs with good, quality food.
Unpopular opinion: Walking is not exercise
Argument - this one is probably the most controversial of my beliefs. I do not believe walking is true exercise. Walking is good - and is a lot better than nothing, but walking does not fall into the same intensity category as things like running, cycling, swimming, weightlifting, etc. A lot of this belief stems from the quote "The human body was not designed for a sedentary lifestyle, it evolved to walk 40 miles a day and hunt saber tooth tigers". I hold that quote to be true...humans are bipedal - walking is what we evolved as our main mode of transportation. True exercise pushes the limits - walking is good and everyone should make an effort to walk more, but it is not enough on it's own to qualify a person as more than sedentary or lightly active at best.
What opinions do you have that might seem harsh or controversial?
Unpopular opinion: Food is fuel, not therapy.
Argument - food is about giving your body what it needs, not what your brain craves. The occasional cheat is ok and mentally healthy, but the bulk of what a person consumes should be for a purpose; weight loss, weight gain, maintenence, hit macro goals, stay within calorie goals, hit micro goals, and try to fill all nutritional gaps. This is not to say you can't eat foods you enjoy and occasionally cheat, but that one should make a conscious effort to give the body what it needs with good, quality food.
Unpopular opinion: Walking is not exercise
Argument - this one is probably the most controversial of my beliefs. I do not believe walking is true exercise. Walking is good - and is a lot better than nothing, but walking does not fall into the same intensity category as things like running, cycling, swimming, weightlifting, etc. A lot of this belief stems from the quote "The human body was not designed for a sedentary lifestyle, it evolved to walk 40 miles a day and hunt saber tooth tigers". I hold that quote to be true...humans are bipedal - walking is what we evolved as our main mode of transportation. True exercise pushes the limits - walking is good and everyone should make an effort to walk more, but it is not enough on it's own to qualify a person as more than sedentary or lightly active at best.
What opinions do you have that might seem harsh or controversial?
22
Replies
-
Here is mine: BMI is a really really good measuring tool for 99.9% of us.53
-
chris_in_cal wrote: »Here is mine: BMI is a really really good measuring tool for 99.9% of us.
I'll bite
That's one I definitely disagree with, but that's what this thread is about.
My counterargument is this - bmi is great for the inactive, and even pretty good for endurance athletes. With strength athletes, it becomes innacurate with a couple years of solid nutrition and lifting.
A perfect example is me vs a friend I actually have... We are both 6'1, and both right around 250.
Therefore, we both have an obesity class 1 BMI - yet my waist measures significantly smaller, my arms/quads/neck all larger, and most bodyfat calculations put me around 25% which, while still overweight, is not obese. I have roughly 7 years weightlifting under my belt, with 6 consecutive, a 2 year break, and then the last 8 months consecutive. Even though me and my friend have the exact same BMI, our body composition is vastly different, due to my strength training and diet.5 -
Guys from 25 to 35 with six years consecutive weightlifting under their belts pretty much comprise the 0.01% I was referring to.55
-
Exercise is a perfectly valid form of weight control.27
-
scandalous proposition1
-
chris_in_cal wrote: »Guys from 25 to 35 with six years consecutive weightlifting under their belts pretty much comprise the 0.01% I was referring to.
Having 6 years of weightlifting under my belt does not make me a .01% of the population.19 -
I'm going to go with LISS > HIIT despite popular opinion & general hate towards long bouts of cardio. In practice, HIIT is very difficult to perform correctly, consistently (requires more recovery), & quantitatively (post "burn" kcals) for your average person vs. LISS (includes walking).
I just believe the HIIT hype is a general excuse to hate on LISS (sure HIIT is superior when looking @ efficiency/time spent working out). I have nothing against HIIT; some is perfectly fine (hell, any form of activity is better than none...even crossfit ><).22 -
This content has been removed.
-
I don't understand why you're making a distinction between "foods I enjoy" and "good, quality food." Your first point is written as if these are two separate categories, but in my experience they are not.
17 -
modusoperandi1412 wrote: »youcantflexcardio wrote: »chris_in_cal wrote: »Guys from 25 to 35 with six years consecutive weightlifting under their belts pretty much comprise the 0.01% I was referring to.
Having 6 years of weightlifting under my belt does not make me a .01% of the population.
I certainly couldn't get away with an obese bmi and telling myself it's okay because I lift. I'm very far from that.
I'm not telling myself that having an obese BMI is ok because I lift, I said BMI is crap because my friend and I have the same BMI yet I am carrying a lot less bodyfat. I never said 25% is acceptable or where I am maintaining - I am currently cutting 2 lbs a week. As I said, I took 2 years off and in those 2 years off I got fat and gained almost 100lbs, I've only cut 50 off so far.19 -
youcantflexcardio wrote: »modusoperandi1412 wrote: »youcantflexcardio wrote: »chris_in_cal wrote: »Guys from 25 to 35 with six years consecutive weightlifting under their belts pretty much comprise the 0.01% I was referring to.
Having 6 years of weightlifting under my belt does not make me a .01% of the population.
I certainly couldn't get away with an obese bmi and telling myself it's okay because I lift. I'm very far from that.
I'm not telling myself that having an obese BMI is ok because I lift, I said BMI is crap because my friend and I have the same BMI yet I am carrying a lot less bodyfat. I never said 25% is acceptable or where I am maintaining - I am currently cutting 2 lbs a week. As I said, I took 2 years off and in those 2 years off I got fat and gained almost 100lbs, I've only cut 50 off so far.
your comment on the boxers and saying 200lbs is not even "overweight". At 6'1, overweight bmi starts at 190, which is pretty easily attainable while uber 18% BF.5 -
My main one is how much rest certain muscles require. Many people will claim you need to give muscles a day of rest before you work them again, but it definitely depends on the person and programming. For example I have run programs where I do full body lifting on consecutive days, or I work glutes 5-6x per week. Both work because of proper load and volume management.
Another one is glute activation, many people find this one controversial. I think not everyone requires it of course, especially if you have a great feeling for particular muscle activation, but I find it really helps me and many other people with achieving mind-muscle connection which IMO is very important aspect of achieving maximal muscle growth.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I don't understand why you're making a distinction between "foods I enjoy" and "good, quality food." Your first point is written as if these are two separate categories, but in my experience they are not.
Absolutely this.2 -
My probably unpopular (around here at least) opinion is that some women are perfectly satisfied at a healthy weight but relatively higher bf% with softer curves, and that's fine. I dabble with weights at the gym, mainly because I know resistance training is important, but I don't love it.25
-
youcantflexcardio wrote: »chris_in_cal wrote: »Here is mine: BMI is a really really good measuring tool for 99.9% of us.
I'll bite
That's one I definitely disagree with, but that's what this thread is about.
My counterargument is this - bmi is great for the inactive, and even pretty good for endurance athletes. With strength athletes, it becomes innacurate with a couple years of solid nutrition and lifting.
A perfect example is me vs a friend I actually have... We are both 6'1, and both right around 250.
Therefore, we both have an obesity class 1 BMI - yet my waist measures significantly smaller, my arms/quads/neck all larger, and most bodyfat calculations put me around 25% which, while still overweight, is not obese. I have roughly 7 years weightlifting under my belt, with 6 consecutive, a 2 year break, and then the last 8 months consecutive. Even though me and my friend have the exact same BMI, our body composition is vastly different, due to my strength training and diet.
Actually as a male with 25% bodyfat you are in the obese range
https://www.builtlean.com/2010/08/03/ideal-body-fat-percentage-chart/21 -
My unpopular opinion:
A whole food based, LCHF diet should be the default diet used most of the time by the majority of people to help achieve improved health.
By that I mean that avoiding refined and highly processed carbs (flours, sugars, etc) and fats ( vegetable oils from seeds or beans) and eating a diet based on meat, seafood, eggs, possibly dairy, and lower GL vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruits, the majority of the time, would lead to better health and outcomes, especially for IR, CVD, cognitive issues, and some AI issues or cancers, for most people.
I get that moderation in all things where CI<CO (and eventually CI=CO) may work well for some in terms of weight control, which then may improve health issues, but I think that adding LCHF to the mix could improve things further for many, and may work well to help health when weight loss absent.
Avoiding, or at least minimizing, refined and highly processed foods is, calorie for calorie and macro for macro, a healthier way to eat. IMO
18 -
My unpopular opinion:
A whole food based, LCHF diet should be the default diet used most of the time by the majority of people to help achieve improved health.
By that I mean that avoiding refined and highly processed carbs (flours, sugars, etc) and fats ( vegetable oils from seeds or beans) and eating a diet based on meat, seafood, eggs, possibly dairy, and lower GL vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruits, the majority of the time, would lead to better health and outcomes, especially for IR, CVD, cognitive issues, and some AI issues or cancers, for most people.
I get that moderation in all things where CI<CO (and eventually CI=CO) may work well for some in terms of weight control, which then may improve health issues, but I think that adding LCHF to the mix could improve things further for many, and may work well to help health when weight loss absent.
Avoiding, or at least minimizing, refined and highly processed foods is, calorie for calorie and macro for macro, a healthier way to eat. IMO
Saying a lchf diet will lead to a better outcome for people with cancer is irresponsible at best39 -
Lifting heavy weights does make a lot of women look bulky. Yes.7
-
This content has been removed.
-
My maybe unpopular opinion: beyond getting enough protein (which if you eat meat you really have to try hard not to do in the US), macros don't really have anything to do with what a healthy diet is.20
-
Runaroundafieldx2 wrote: »My unpopular opinion:
A whole food based, LCHF diet should be the default diet used most of the time by the majority of people to help achieve improved health.
By that I mean that avoiding refined and highly processed carbs (flours, sugars, etc) and fats ( vegetable oils from seeds or beans) and eating a diet based on meat, seafood, eggs, possibly dairy, and lower GL vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruits, the majority of the time, would lead to better health and outcomes, especially for IR, CVD, cognitive issues, and some AI issues or cancers, for most people.
I get that moderation in all things where CI<CO (and eventually CI=CO) may work well for some in terms of weight control, which then may improve health issues, but I think that adding LCHF to the mix could improve things further for many, and may work well to help health when weight loss absent.
Avoiding, or at least minimizing, refined and highly processed foods is, calorie for calorie and macro for macro, a healthier way to eat. IMO
Saying a lchf diet will lead to a better outcome for people with cancer is irresponsible at best
I did not say it will always lead to better outcomes for all people with cancer. It may for some cancers. It will usually not hurt whatever cancer therapy you are using, but it should be researched first. (For example, it appears helpful to breast cancer but possibly harmful in kidney cancer.) Once deemed safe, a dietary change is usually a small risk to take, IMO.
There is a fair bit of emerging evidence that LCHF or keto can help with cachexia, as well as affecting some tumor growth, and quality of life. Much is still in mouse, dog and other animal studies. There is some in human studies, but it is still limited.
Ignoring diet when treating cancer, or chronic disease, is irresponsible IMO... possibly another unpopular opinion.7 -
modusoperandi1412 wrote: »My unpopular opinion:
A whole food based, LCHF diet should be the default diet used most of the time by the majority of people to help achieve improved health.
By that I mean that avoiding refined and highly processed carbs (flours, sugars, etc) and fats ( vegetable oils from seeds or beans) and eating a diet based on meat, seafood, eggs, possibly dairy, and lower GL vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruits, the majority of the time, would lead to better health and outcomes, especially for IR, CVD, cognitive issues, and some AI issues or cancers, for most people.
I get that moderation in all things where CI<CO (and eventually CI=CO) may work well for some in terms of weight control, which then may improve health issues, but I think that adding LCHF to the mix could improve things further for many, and may work well to help health when weight loss absent.
Avoiding, or at least minimizing, refined and highly processed foods is, calorie for calorie and macro for macro, a healthier way to eat. IMO
And here we have the thing most people call you out for. Your constant claims, without proper proof whatsoever, that lchf is somehow "better" in some form, than any other diet.
Not to mention that you can lchf with a diet that consists 100% of refined and highly processed foods.
This thread is about unpopular opinions. I wasn't aware that everyone needed to provide proper proof for the basis of their opinion.
I think LCHF whole foods diet would be a better starting point than many other diets for most people for health... you'll note that I did not give any absolutes that LCHF beats ALL diets for EVERYONE. There are other diets out there that work for other people. Never said there was not.
You must have some other diet that works well for you in improving or maintaining good health. That's great. Likewise, it won't work for everyone. You may be of the opinion that it would work for most, or maybe only a few...
Plus, you may want to note that I said a LCHF that is whole foods based is healthy, specifically:Avoiding, or at least minimizing, refined and highly processed foods is, calorie for calorie and macro for macro, a healthier way to eat. IMO
I know that you "can lchf with a diet that consists 100% of refined and highly processed foods." It's not ideal. I advised against it....14 -
Mustard kicks ketchup's butt to the curb.
Sorry, not sorry.37 -
5
-
-
Mayonnaise looks like the secreta of deep sea inhabitants. It doesn't taste much better than said secreta likely would.8
-
-
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
- 424 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