Phrases that drive me crazy on CC
1. Starvation mode - this has been complained about a million times before. Yes you need to eat enough calories and not operate at too high of a deficit - yes it will slow your weight loss and possibly make you plateau. Starvation mode isn't a scientific thing and it's not the answer to everything.
2. "Will this make me gain weight?" Short answer: unless the question is "will eating 500 calories over my maintenance everyday make me gain weight" - the answer is no. Eating a cupcake will not make you gain weight. Eating a little too much on one day will not make you gain weight. You know how one day of eating and working out won't make you lose weight? Gaining weight is the same. One day of overeating will not make you gain weight. It's one thing to be upset about a mess up - it's perfectly understandable, but no one isolated incidence will gain weight. You gain weight because of poor habits, not because you went out to dinner once and got something fattening.
3. "I've eaten 700 cals today and I can't eat another bite or I feel like I'll throw up". You are not stuffing yourself silly on 700 calories. It's not a lot of food. And if you really couldn't stomach that much food without feeling like vomiting, you probably wouldn't be overweight.
4. "Omg such a bad binge today, I had a cookie for desert" - That's not a binge. If you were hungry and you ate something to fill you up - you didn't binge. When did you binge? If you didn't need food, didn't want food, got upset or emotional about something and stuffed yourself with anything in sight to cope with it.
5. "I gained 2 pounds yeseterday!" - No you didn't. You are retaining water because of excess sodium, you didn't poo yet today, you may be getting your period soon, your muscles are swollen from lifting, it could be any number of things but I can almost guarentee you that unless you ate 10,000 calories and laid in bed then you did not gain 2 pounds of fat yesterday.
That felt good :-P Anyone else want to rant?
Although I can understand your frustrations, I find this type of negative post/neagative thinking to be nearly as bad as what you are complaining about :\
Anyways, I am only posting here to clarify that starvation mode is actually "a scientific thing" and is being studied/debated in the scientific literature by nutritionists, researchers and scientists constantly ... it is called adaptive thermogenesis. For example, here are some peer reviewed scientific papers (from 100s of them) published in the past year or so:
The ranting and raving about chemicals bugs the gebus out of me. I find it very judgemental to critizing something somebody is eating based on the fact that "there are chemicals in it" well duh everything is a "chemical".
I also find it funny when people are ranting and raving about chemicals then in the same breath post about "everything in moderation is ok". Like whining about the HFCS commercials. Highly annoying.
arg!
eta: I agree with everything the OP said. #1 - this is a rant thread for a reason.
nycgirl: I'm sorry! I don't mean to spew negativity, I've just been frustrated on the forums. If you think this would be more appropriate somewhere else (lounge?) feel free to move it.
The starvation mode information is interesting and I guess I was too quick to dismiss it in my rant but I do feel it gets thrown around here a lot.
LOL. Someone had to say it. Thanx for the laugh.
sorry but I kind of agree with nycgirl. People post here because they're seeking advice. Not everybody is just posting for attention. Those phrases probably drive you crazy because they're about common issues that affect a lot of people. Most of the people who ask the same questions are probably not regular posters on the forums and don't know that the same questions have been asked millions of times already.
I think it's helpful to people who have trouble getting past these myths that have been driven for ages into our diet-frenzied society. Who doesn't know somebody who believes that the best way to lose weight is to not eat, period?
One of the biggest things that drives me crazy is people saying that muscle weighs more than fat! Since when did 1lb of muscle not weigh the same as 1lb of fat? I understand the concept of muscle not taking up as much space, so 1 inch of muscle will weigh more than 1 inch of fat, but it's definately a misused phrase that needs to be set straight!
some of the things people post..like the 1 cookie binge, makes me think that someone is possibly using this sight for UNHEALTHY reasons... 700 cals seems kind of anorexic to me.... I think that eating disorders should be discouraged from this site of people who are over weight and need support to maintain a HEALTHY lifestyle.
I feel the same way laf. Those statments that you pointed out are very unhealthy and do not promote a healthy way of life.
When people post them, it makes me think of a calorie counting diet as driving people to make unhealthy choices and ideas.
Original Post by lafoutloud01:
3. "I've eaten 700 cals today and I can't eat another bite or I feel like I'll throw up". You are not stuffing yourself silly on 700 calories. It's not a lot of food. And if you really couldn't stomach that much food without feeling like vomiting, you probably wouldn't be overweight.
HERE HERE!
I'm going to add to this list, because these phrases make me sad:
"I totally screwed up"
"I fell off the wagon"
"I've ruined myself"
"I am afraid of going to restaurants"
"I feel guilty for <insert participation in a "normal" food culture activity>"
"OMGZ why would you eat a regular brownie when you could make a healthy batch from beans?"
"OMGZ you shouldn't eat <this> because it is bad for you!"
"I NEED to lose <x amount> of pounds in <x amount> of time!"
"I try not to 'go over' 1200 calories / day"
"I hate my <insert body part>"
Original Post by lafoutloud01:
3. "I've eaten 700 cals today and I can't eat another bite or I feel like I'll throw up". You are not stuffing yourself silly on 700 calories. It's not a lot of food. And if you really couldn't stomach that much food without feeling like vomiting, you probably wouldn't be overweight.
This isn't always true. Suppose someone had 700 calories worth of vegetables all day. Granted, I'm sure that rarely ever happens, but it could. I certainly know it would fill me up, bloat me out, and make me feel like I'm gonna burst! lol
Original Post by tennisjess1701:
One of the biggest things that drives me crazy is people saying that muscle weighs more than fat! Since when did 1lb of muscle not weigh the same as 1lb of fat? I understand the concept of muscle not taking up as much space, so 1 inch of muscle will weigh more than 1 inch of fat, but it's definately a misused phrase that needs to be set straight!
I really think "muscle weighs more than fat" is the simplest way to put it, and it's just common sense and to be inferred that one is referring to the same size of each. For example, a basketball-sized wad of muscle would weigh more than a basketball-sized wad of fat. I mean of course a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.. just as a pound of feathers weighs the same as a pound of iron. But one can reasonably say that iron weighs more than feathers.
Which brings me to my own addition to the rant-- when someone tells a person who has been working out a lot, is looking more fit than before, yet has gained weight on the scale that muscle weighs more than fat, and someone else feels the need to correct it and say that a pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat! In the context people were clearly talking about fat and muscle of similar volume.
The problem is that some people don't operate on common sense and many times I've seen the phrase (verbatim): A pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat. So I was referring more to those people than to everyone else who uses the phrase more loosely.
Ok all negativity of the original thread aside, 1 thing that annoys me, is when you excercise and try to eat right, and you dont lose any weight for weeks (perhaps you didnt get the balance right and you aren't infact losing bc you are eating too much) but instead they say
"oh maybe you are gaining muscle"
as though I could gain any SIGNIFICANT amount of muscle in a few weeks, like pounds of it!!! Thats why I calorie count bc otherwise I would go crazy from not knowing what was going on...
Everything in Moderation: It should mean making a wide variety of healthy choices with the odd somewhat less healthy but not harmful indulgence thrown in once in a while. From what I see, most people use it as a justification to eat mostly different kinds of crap a little at a time, all the time.
Everything has chemicals in it: Really? I didn't realize that an apple was designed from scratch in a laboratory as a way of enticing people to buy it as a food additive by tricking your brain into thinking something was sweet when it wasn't. Laboratory created ingredients are not food and I don't need to die or get deathly ill from consuming them to have the incentive to avoid them.
Muscle is Heavier than Fat: This is an easy myth to dispel. Muscle is in fact denser than fat, by about 15%. That means for example, if you remain the same physical size but gain muscle and lose fat, you can in fact be gaining weight and looking the same. You could lose body size and still be gaining a bit of weight if you are building muscle and losing fat. That's why it's just as important to go by feel and how you look in the mirror as it is by the scale.
Besides, unless you are already very slim and start seriously body-building, you won't bulk up that much muscle as to start gaining weight. What will likely happen is your weight will STAY THE SAME and your size will go down. So the majority of people can stop the self-delusion.
And don't get me started on the almighty Starvation Mode.
Yeah starvation mode really kind of freaks me out a bit, it seems like when someone can't figure out the answer to your question thats what they think. Starvation mode does not happen for extended periods of time when there is FAT to lose. Like if you are 300 lbs, your body is not going to eat up the whole 100 or so pounds of muscle first. Or just not do anything, the body is programmed to survive, and it will burn fat, but in its intelligence it will reserve its energy a bit as well, so you may not burn optimally, but its not just going to POOF and stop completely... When you dont eat enough your body thinks you are in famine, but its not going to shut donwn burning completely, come on...
Original Post by nycgirl:
Although I can understand your frustrations, I find this type of negative post/neagative thinking to be nearly as bad as what you are complaining about :\
Anyways, I am only posting here to clarify that starvation mode is actually "a scientific thing" and is being studied/debated in the scientific literature by nutritionists, researchers and scientists constantly ... it is called adaptive thermogenesis. For example, here are some peer reviewed scientific papers (from 100s of them) published in the past year or so:
Its really difficult to gleen specific details from the abstract of a paper only. But these are my veiws on these articles:
1. I think this study was not very thorough, both weight loss groups should have had their body compositions checked both BEFORE and AFTER the documented loss. A lowered TER ('metabolism') could simply be due to a reduced muscle mass, especially in those who have maintained the weight over a year. They should have also listed the WAY that was used to lose the body weight, cardio, cardio + weights, etc.
Because basically they are saying your metabolism is screwed if you lose 10% weight loss in a year, for a 200lb person that is 20lbs per YEAR, or 1.67lbs per MONTH, far less than what is considered SAFE by 99% of doctors and nutritionists. I am always suspicious of new research that is totally contradicting something that is so well established.
2. Isn't only about starvation mode as such, its talking about other possible ways that adaptive thermogenesis can occur, based on non diet related phenomena (eg sleep apnea, organochlorides) as well. No basis in using this as an arguement on whether or not some one is infact in "starvation mode"
3. This one is more about future possibilities of making drugs to make people WARM basically so that they burn more calories all the time.
None of these is is really significant as far as giving specific information about the connection between weight loss and higher than expected thermogenic adaptation. I personally think it goes back to the bodies being programmed to survive famine, and a general decrease in muscle mass during the weight loss. and as the 2nd article mentioned there can also be several environmental factors involved to differing degrees.
What I would like to see is some articles linking different types of weight loss methods to Therm. Adaptation. I think that that would be very useful if one is trying to quote research. Very RECENT research mind you (these articles are debunked, sometimes just as fast as they are printed).
Why I am talking about it, I studied Biochemistry, BSc Biochemistry with dual minors in Bio-informatics and microbiology (with Honours). Just in case anyone was wondering how I know anything about it.
Someone starts a diet, doesn't weigh themselves for a month, and then finds out that they've lost 1 pound. Inevitably, someone else chimes in with "are you eating enough?".
Well, they probably followed the AMA's guidelines and did diet+cardio and left out the strength training. Ever since Kenneth Cooper's incredibly misguided and damaging book "Aerobics" in 1968, strength training has been a totally neglected part of weight management because of the cardio junkies trying to justify their endorphin habit as "healthy".
Once you pick up something heavy, you see very different results - Hunter et.al. : Resistance Training Conserves Fat-free Mass and Resting Energy Expenditure Following Weight Loss.
People who chime in on threads saying "I eat a ton of this and I'm fine" How many times do you see a thread about sugar or salt or artificial sweetener intake for example and lots of posts come up about the horrors of excess and lots of bad personal experiences and then someone pops up saying, "I put salt (or fill in the blank) on everything and I'm fine" Do they really believe that because they are 22 and eat poorly that somehow the long term effects of over consumption of anything will not affect them? Do you have to be hit over the head with an iron bar to know that it hurts?
Even funnier are the ones that say stuff for example, like, "I can't drink a lot of diet coke (or fill in the blank) because it gives me a headache and I feel sick afterwards, so I have to moderate my intake". Do you not realize that having a headache and feeling sick is your body's way of telling you not to eat something? Do you have to wait until your kidneys or pancreas or liver starts acting up before you do something?
Where can I see 1/8th or 1/6th of a pie or angel food cake?
This is the best way to picture a portion of pie or cake: Draw a circle to represent the circumference of the cake or pie (9" pie? 10" cake?... Read more