Is unprocessed always better?

C

cpushm

New member
AIm currently an unemployed student, so its hard for me to afford the greatest of diet food...my question is, is unprocessed food always better? Or will weight loss work no matter what i eat, as long as i watch my calories?

For example, today for dinner i had myself a sandwich, and a bowl of campbells (processed) canned soup. It was very low in calories, but i couldnt help but feel bad for eating soup out of a can.
 
Well cpushm, that's a good question.


Yes, your weight is directly dependent on the number of calories you take in, vs the number you burn.

Eating healthy, whole foods will help you in all kinds of other ways, sometimes not right away, but down the road for sure.


Seriously though, a person can lose weight eating a big fat hamburger, and a slice of cheesecake every day > if that's all they ate.... but geeez would they feel like garbage !


I can lose weight at 3500 cals a day, of the cleanest, healthiest protein, carbs, and fats I can afford, and I feel great ! But right now I'm bulking at about 4200 ;) That's even more fun :) I LOVE to eat. Fortunately, now I'm using all those cals for something besides a lard basket :)


Peace,

Fish
 
Cpushm -


No, it isn't. Even when it comes to healthy eating, unprocessed doesn't automatically mean 'better'.


But yes, when it comes to weight loss, what matters most is calories in vs. calories out, so as long as you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight.


And a canned soup isn't unhealthy either way.
 
Canned soup is loaded with food additives that are not healthy for the body.


Check out Dr. Russell Blaylocks work on Excitotoxins - food additives like MSG, Aspartame, L'Cystine and others. The retired neurosurgeon goes over the effects that these toxins have on the brain.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEh3_JBDErw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUsC1h06OJ0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTSvlGniHok
 
Thought I'd be fair and have a look.... then the guy started quoting the bible and he lost all credibility to me.


Tourny
 
You can't possibly be serious. I mean it. You're using a guy who speaks in extremes and quotes the bible as a credible source?


A can of soup is not unhealthy for anybody. To say that is complete nonsense. The OP asked about ONE can of soup. Not if it was okay to spend the rest of his days downing 10 cans a day.


Get a grip.



I must admit, I am impressed by how many links they managed to squeeze in at the beginning of the video....just saying.


Originally Posted by Pwillows


Canned soup is loaded with food additives that are not healthy for the body.



Check out Dr. Russell Blaylocks work on Excitotoxins - food additives like MSG, Aspartame, L'Cystine and others. The retired neurosurgeon goes over the effects that these toxins have on the brain.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEh3_JBDErw



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUsC1h06OJ0



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTSvlGniHok
Click to expand...
 
You can't possibly be serious. I mean it. You're using a guy who speaks in extremes and quotes the bible as a credible source?




Thought I'd be fair and have a look.... then the guy started quoting the bible and he lost all credibility to me.



I do not share a belief in god or the bible either, it does not mean that i disreguard information because of it. I am interested in the truth, no matter what the source. I actually do the homework and use my own discernment. Now if you are going to condemn a researcher because he believes in the bible, who then loses credibility?


"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."

—Albert Einstein
 
I don't condemn him for believing, I condemn him for bringing it up at all in relation to the topic to try and lend it authority. I could not trust a word from such a man and continuing to listen to him would only negatively influence my position on the topic.


The topic remains of interest to me (particularly relating to MSG as I've already looked into it somewhat).... he does not.


Tourny
 
What Tourny said.


He can believe in whatever he wants, but if he needs it to back up his 'research', it removes all credibility he might have had to start with. Which, even without the bible references, is very little.


Quoting Einstein doesn't add anything of worth to the discussion either, just for the record. And the quote wasn't even particularly appropriate for the conversation in question.
 
So let's count the logical fallacies of Tourny and San. Instead of doing their homework they have chosen to argue using:


Faulty generalizations – reach a conclusion from weak premises. Unlike fallacies of relevance, in fallacies of defective induction, the premises are related to the conclusions yet only weakly buttress the conclusions. A faulty generalization is thus produced.


Red herring – argument given in response to another argument, which is irrelevant and draws attention away from subject of argument.


Ad hominem – attacking the arguer instead of the argument.


Poisoning the well – a type of ad hominem where adverse information about a target is presented with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says


Appeal to ridicule – an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous


Wishful thinking – a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason.


Straw man – an argument based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position


It is not my job to make you research or who to research, I just offered my opinion on the subject nothing more.
 
Originally Posted by Pwillows


So let's count the logical fallacies of Tourny and San. Instead of doing their homework they have chosen to argue using:



Faulty generalizations – reach a conclusion from weak premises. Unlike fallacies of relevance, in fallacies of defective induction, the premises are related to the conclusions yet only weakly buttress the conclusions. A faulty generalization is thus produced.



Red herring – argument given in response to another argument, which is irrelevant and draws attention away from subject of argument.



Ad hominem – attacking the arguer instead of the argument.



Poisoning the well – a type of ad hominem where adverse information about a target is presented with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says



Appeal to ridicule – an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous



Wishful thinking – a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason.



Straw man – an argument based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position



It is not my job to make you research or who to research, I just offered my opinion on the subject nothing more.
Click to expand...


care to count the how many of your own "sins" you've just committed?


Tourny
 
That is what I tried before you butted in and took the entire question way out of proportion.


And no, there is no argument that the soup is not good for the body - that is something that you made up. The question was, is a can of soup going to be bad for the person's weight loss. And the answer to that is no. As long as caloric requirements are met, it is not going to affect their weight loss.


The rest came down to you trying to shove your personal believes down people's throats, then hijacking the threat to prove how much better you are than anybody else.


Originally Posted by Pwillows


duly noted! Can we get back to the original argument that campbell's (processed) canned soup is not good for the body.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by cpushm

Im currently an unemployed student, so its hard for me to afford the greatest of diet food...my question is, is unprocessed food always better? Or will weight loss work no matter what i eat, as long as i watch my calories?
For example, today for dinner i had myself a sandwich, and a bowl of campbells (processed) canned soup. It was very low in calories, but i couldnt help but feel bad for eating soup out of a can.
Click to expand...


While i don't think there is much wrong with the occasional can of soup, i do believe that unprocessed is a much better option. I think you get more bang for your buck if you eat unprocessed food and it doens't have to be expensive. If you go vegetarian, you will save quite a bit straight away. Lean how to cook dal from all sorts of dried beans. A meal of rice dal and a vegetable dish is both yummy and healthy and filling. Its low calorie. I find if i eat low calorie foods, i can eat more, so feel more satisfied and the satisafction lasts longer and it doesn't need to cost more. You do need to learn how to cook though and for that i would suggest getting recipes from internet or borrowing library books.


for my lunch just now i've had a big plate of rice, lentils and steamed vegies. To make it all taste good i've dressed it all with garlic, balsamic vinegar and olive oil. I also added a few pumpkin and sesame seeds. After i had a banana icecream made from frozen banana and a spalsh of milk though if you haven't got a food processor then that's not going to work. another cheap dessert i've taken to lately is a piece of wholegrain toast with butter and jam. since i've already eaten a lot of healthy food, i'm not hungry now so i don't need to eat more than one piece of toast. after that i'm having tea with milk. So in this meal is protein from the lentils and seeds, carbs for energy, and lots of vitamins and fibre. You generally don't get such a good mix of nutrients from processed food.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top