PDA

View Full Version : What's worse, 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy???



DanX47
04-06-2010, 10:48 PM
What's worse? 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy?
I know that the mayo has of course all it's cals from fat but the fat free candy has it's cals from the sugar.

gooseguy312
04-06-2010, 10:49 PM
What's worse? 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy?
I know that the mayo has of course all it's cals from fat but the fat free candy has it's cals from the sugar.

Im gonna go with the mayo because most mayonaise is made from soybean oil and soy is an estrogen.

determined4000
04-06-2010, 10:49 PM
What's worse? 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy?
I know that the mayo has of course all it's cals from fat but the fat free candy has it's cals from the sugar.

mayo is oil and eggs=fine
candy is plain sugar

Rykari
04-06-2010, 10:54 PM
Im gonna go with the mayo because most mayonaise is made from soybean oil and soy is an estrogen.

broscience ftL

hankst
04-06-2010, 10:57 PM
a duck..

aelio
04-06-2010, 10:57 PM
Mayo is healthy.....

Vigilante_Inc
04-06-2010, 10:59 PM
I'll take "What's worse?" for $1000 Alex

Ok here is your clue... "Which is worse 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy"

"What is a calorie is a calorie so don't sweat it"

"You are correct and now have control of the board"

Vigilante_Inc
04-06-2010, 11:01 PM
Mayo is healthy.....

Mayo isn't awful for you. Your body needs fat, your body needs protein... it contains both. It is very high in calories because it's mostly oil (fat) which is very calorie dense.

FunkymonkAW
04-06-2010, 11:05 PM
I'll take "What's worse?" for $1000 Alex

Ok here is your clue... "Which is worse 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy"

"What is a calorie is a calorie so don't sweat it"

"You are correct and now have control of the board"

Repped sir.

mac520
04-06-2010, 11:11 PM
The candy is worse. If you thought it was a close competition you are very mistaken. You need dietary fat, and mayonnaise has it. I would only be concerned about the high n-6 PUFA in the oils typically used in commerial mayonnaise, but this is still much less harmful than the sugar in candy.

Vigilante_Inc
04-06-2010, 11:16 PM
The candy is worse. If you thought it was a close competition you are very mistaken. You need dietary fat, and mayonnaise has it. I would only be concerned about the high n-6 PUFA in the oils typically used in commerial mayonnaise, but this is still much less harmful than the sugar in candy.

What's wrong with sugar? HARMFUL! That's a bit harsh considering that it courses through your veins at any given moment (glucose = blood sugar)

Rumpelstiltskin
04-06-2010, 11:40 PM
I would rather eat the candy. Although I wouldn't want it to be fat-free because I don't think there is a point to that.

Although I understand the idea about sugar increasing your appetite I doubt that an equal number of calories from sugar would somehow magically make you gain fat. If there is some evidence for the calories being stored as fat and the metabolism slowing down I'd like to see it.

gdLife
04-06-2010, 11:49 PM
Mayo is healthy.....

This, y do ppl, to this day still believes in the whole saturated fats are bad for u myth.

Vigilante_Inc
04-06-2010, 11:51 PM
Because most people get their information from tv and the media and the diet industry is a HUGE business. If everyone knew that it was as simple as calories in vs. calories out.... the diet industry would faulter.

Rumpelstiltskin
04-07-2010, 01:30 AM
This, y do ppl, to this day still believes in the whole saturated fats are bad for u myth.

or "don't eat eggs they have too much cholesterol".

or low-fat Peanut Butter...wow...I can't believe that exists.

addictR3
04-07-2010, 02:21 AM
eat the mayo with the candy. :D

almalorena1
04-07-2010, 03:14 AM
the candy is worst ofcourse even my daughter could answer that for you lol.

SwiftyX
04-07-2010, 04:57 AM
100 calories of any food isn't going to make or break a single meal, let alone an entire day or your progress in general. If you want 100 cals of mayo have it. Same with the candy. It's 100 ****ing calories.

TheNewestGuy
04-07-2010, 05:07 AM
Im gonna go with the mayo because most mayonaise is made from soybean oil and soy is an estrogen.

headslap

MJFan1
04-07-2010, 05:07 AM
I'd rather have 100 calories of candy, haha.

BunkMoreland
04-07-2010, 05:53 AM
whats heavier- 100 pounds of steel or 100 pounds of down feathers?

BunkMoreland
04-07-2010, 06:01 AM
Im gonna go with the mayo because most mayonaise is made from soybean oil and soy is an estrogen.

no wonder you're in the red

RiverRock
04-07-2010, 06:03 AM
a duck..

this made me laugh

and mayo based on the fact that it is gross.

gooseguy312
04-07-2010, 06:16 AM
no wonder you're in the red

Phytoestrogens, sometimes called "dietary estrogens", are a diverse group of naturally occurring nonsteroidal plant compounds that, because of their structural similarity with estradiol (17-β-estradiol), have the ability to cause estrogenic or/and antiestrogenic effects

The use of phytoestrogens (as soy protein) in fast food meals and other processed foods as a low-cost substitute for meat products may lead to excessive consumption of isoflavonoids by fast food eaters. A research team at the Queen's University in Belfast, in a review article, speculate that such intake may lead to a slight decrease in male fertility, including a decrease in reproductive capability if isoflavones are taken in excess during childhood.[21]

If they can decrease youre fertility it can probably decrease your lifting gains right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogens

Thats from wikipedia genious, i guess thier wrong too. Show me a reliable source you have that isnt influenced by the Soy industry? Thumbs down to you

SwiftyX
04-07-2010, 06:21 AM
Phytoestrogens, sometimes called "dietary estrogens", are a diverse group of naturally occurring nonsteroidal plant compounds that, because of their structural similarity with estradiol (17-β-estradiol), have the ability to cause estrogenic or/and antiestrogenic effects

The use of phytoestrogens (as soy protein) in fast food meals and other processed foods as a low-cost substitute for meat products may lead to excessive consumption of isoflavonoids by fast food eaters. A research team at the Queen's University in Belfast, in a review article, speculate that such intake may lead to a slight decrease in male fertility, including a decrease in reproductive capability if isoflavones are taken in excess during childhood.[21]

If they can decrease youre fertility it can probably decrease your lifting gains right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogens

Thats from wikipedia genious, i guess thier wrong too. Show me a reliable source you have that isnt influenced by the Soy industry? Thumbs down to you


If a research team from Queens speculates something it must be 100% true.

bseidl
04-07-2010, 06:30 AM
Im gonna go with the mayo because most mayonaise is made from soybean oil and soy is an estrogen.

http://www.paradoxplaza.com/DarkHorizon/admin/img/homer_doh.png

mmmdonuts
04-07-2010, 06:40 AM
i think this thread should have been named "what's yummier, 100 cals of mayo or 100 cals of candy?".

the answer, of course, is CANDY! NOM NOM NOM

zepplin92
04-07-2010, 07:19 AM
Mayo is an excellent source of omega-3 (nearly half the daily recommended value).

What exactly are you getting out of eating 'fat free' candy, besides sugar?

AbAbber2k
04-07-2010, 07:28 AM
Phytoestrogens, sometimes called "dietary estrogens", are a diverse group of naturally occurring nonsteroidal plant compounds that, because of their structural similarity with estradiol (17-β-estradiol), have the ability to cause estrogenic or/and antiestrogenic effects

The use of phytoestrogens (as soy protein) in fast food meals and other processed foods as a low-cost substitute for meat products may lead to excessive consumption of isoflavonoids by fast food eaters. A research team at the Queen's University in Belfast, in a review article, speculate that such intake may lead to a slight decrease in male fertility, including a decrease in reproductive capability if isoflavones are taken in excess during childhood.[21]

If they can decrease youre fertility it can probably decrease your lifting gains right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogens

Thats from wikipedia genious, i guess thier wrong too. Show me a reliable source you have that isnt influenced by the Soy industry? Thumbs down to you

I bolded the most important word in your post. Might want to hunt that one down.

News Flash, Walter Cronkite... phytoestrogens found in soy have weaker estrogenic effects than the actual estrogen in your body. One could speculate that having phytoestrogens bonding to your receptors would actually be a good thing in terms of gains.

Also...

LOL at you acting like citing Wikipedia = argument won! Wikipedia is neither an acceptable, nor 100% reliable source of information. It's fine most of the time when it comes to internet 'I know more than you' ePeen-ery, but good luck turning in a research project with a list of references from en.wikipedia.org.

Anyway, my vote is that the candy (sugar) is worse. The fat from mayo will at least help you absorb fat-soluble vitamins. Plus Mayo is awesome and delicious and I don't have much of a sweet tooth.

LEX-UA
04-07-2010, 07:34 AM
the candy is worst ofcourse even my daughter could answer that for you lol.

I'm interested to hear the reasoning behind your statement...

beeeyandizzle
04-07-2010, 07:54 AM
the only reason why i'd say candy is worse is because it has the potential to give you cavities. but if your dental hygiene habits are up to par, then even that wouldn't be an issue :)

kingleviathan
04-07-2010, 08:35 AM
100 calories of fat free candy. Most candy is full of sugar not fat anyways which spikes insulin levels. Fat on the other hand does not. Fat is essential to human existence especially in the brain. I can argue that sugar (glucose) is also just as important but considering where you are getting the sugar is the what the problem.

The fat free (sugar-filled) candy is far worse than the mayo. I wish people would stop with the whole fat is evil hypothesis. The lipid hypothesis, from which it is based, is so wrong its not even funny. I suggest people look at some reputable studies about weight loss, heart disease, and obesity. FAT IS HEALTHY. Especially saturated fat.

Tiffany_P
04-07-2010, 08:43 AM
Mayo is an excellent source of omega-3 (nearly half the daily recommended value).



Really? What brand?

darkshines
04-07-2010, 09:26 AM
Depending on the mayo you can walk away with 6g of polyunsaturates and 2.5 g monounsaturates. Granted, the poly's contain much more 6 than 3, but still, I'd rather have some healthy fats than a bunch of candy.

zepplin92
04-07-2010, 09:32 AM
Really? What brand?

Hellman's. 650mg per serving (1 Tbsp).

Easy way to get omega3 and fits perfectly into my macros for my cut!

Way better than candy..

SwiftyX
04-07-2010, 10:13 AM
Hellman's. 650mg per serving (1 Tbsp).

Easy way to get omega3 and fits perfectly into my macros for my cut!

Way better than candy..

650mg of ALA is going to convert to far less EPA/DHA in the body. That and it's not that much to begin with even if it were 100% EPA/DHA. I wouldn't call mayo an "excellent source of omega 3s" at all.

You'd be better off touting the benefits of monounsaturated fatty acids.

mac520
04-07-2010, 11:02 AM
Mayo is an excellent source of omega-3 (nearly half the daily recommended value).

What exactly are you getting out of eating 'fat free' candy, besides sugar?

The PUFA in mayonnaise comes from the soybean oil. Soybean oil is, according to wikipedia:


The major unsaturated fatty acids in soybean oil triglycerides are 7% alpha-Linolenic acid (C-18:3); 51% linoleic acid (C-18:2); and 23% oleic acid (C-18:1). It also contains the saturated fatty acids 4% stearic acid and 10% palmitic acid.

In layman's terms, that's 7% n-3 and 51% n-6. Or a 7:1 n-6:n-3 ratio. 1:1 is ideal. The standard american diet (SAD) has around 30:1, so I suppose it's better than other choices at least.

So how can they claim that it's a good source of n-3, even though it has a 7:1 ratio? Because the FDA says you only need so many grams of n-3. What does the FDA know? The FDA also has a cap on saturated fat and cholesterol which means absolutely nothing.

Furthermore, the absolute quantity of n-3 doesn't matter as much as it's ratio relative to n-6. So while you may be getting half your recommended n-3 according to the FDA's meaningless standards, you are getting seven times as much n-6, which does more harm than good to your body.

Just because a manufacturer advertises something about their product doesn't automatically mean it's good for you. "Fat-free" foods and yogurt are other classic examples.

zepplin92
04-07-2010, 11:16 AM
650mg of ALA is going to convert to far less EPA/DHA in the body. That and it's not that much to begin with even if it were 100% EPA/DHA. I wouldn't call mayo an "excellent source of omega 3s" at all.

You'd be better off touting the benefits of monounsaturated fatty acids.


The PUFA in mayonnaise comes from the soybean oil. Soybean oil is, according to wikipedia:



In layman's terms, that's 7% n-3 and 51% n-6. Or a 7:1 n-6:n-3 ratio. 1:1 is ideal. The standard american diet (SAD) has around 30:1, so I suppose it's better than other choices at least.

So how can they claim that it's a good source of n-3, even though it has a 7:1 ratio? Because the FDA says you only need so many grams of n-3. What does the FDA know? The FDA also has a cap on saturated fat and cholesterol which means absolutely nothing.

Furthermore, the absolute quantity of n-3 doesn't matter as much as it's ratio relative to n-6. So while you may be getting half your recommended n-3 according to the FDA's meaningless standards, you are getting seven times as much n-6, which does more harm than good to your body.

Just because a manufacturer advertises something about their product doesn't automatically mean it's good for you. "Fat-free" foods and yogurt are other classic examples.

Thanks for the clarification, seems like I have a lot to learn lol.

MikeK46
04-07-2010, 11:19 AM
What's worse? 100 calories of mayo or 100 calories of fat free candy?
I know that the mayo has of course all it's cals from fat but the fat free candy has it's cals from the sugar.

The mayo.

Dietary fat has many roles essential for survival: Fats are required for brain structure, nerves, cell walls and membranes, hormones production, digestion and elimination of the waste products, etc. etc. etc.

Sugar has no roles essential for survival.

Eating mayo (the fat is from soybean or olive oil) without exceeding caloric limits poses no harm.

Eating sugar without exceeding caloric limits still poses increased risk for diabetes & heart disease.

darkshines
04-07-2010, 12:40 PM
The PUFA in mayonnaise comes from the soybean oil. Soybean oil is, according to wikipedia:



In layman's terms, that's 7% n-3 and 51% n-6. Or a 7:1 n-6:n-3 ratio. 1:1 is ideal. The standard american diet (SAD) has around 30:1, so I suppose it's better than other choices at least.

So how can they claim that it's a good source of n-3, even though it has a 7:1 ratio? Because the FDA says you only need so many grams of n-3. What does the FDA know? The FDA also has a cap on saturated fat and cholesterol which means absolutely nothing.

Furthermore, the absolute quantity of n-3 doesn't matter as much as it's ratio relative to n-6. So while you may be getting half your recommended n-3 according to the FDA's meaningless standards, you are getting seven times as much n-6, which does more harm than good to your body.

Just because a manufacturer advertises something about their product doesn't automatically mean it's good for you. "Fat-free" foods and yogurt are other classic examples.

By eating something that has a 7:1 ratio, you're consuming something that has a higher prevalence of n-3 to n-6 than the rest of the diet, effectively lowering your diet's ratio. You basically echoed this by saying "it's better than other choices at least." In this thread, the "other choice" is fat-free candy. Considering fat-free candy has neither omega 3 nor omega 6, it obviously won't contribute or modify your diet's n-6:n-3 ratio. So between the two, is it difficult to see why mayonnaise is the better choice?


The mayo.

Dietary fat has many roles essential for survival: Fats are required for brain structure, nerves, cell walls and membranes, hormones production, digestion and elimination of the waste products, etc. etc. etc.

Sugar has no roles essential for survival.

Eating mayo (the fat is from soybean or olive oil) without exceeding caloric limits poses no harm.

Eating sugar without exceeding caloric limits still poses increased risk for diabetes & heart disease.


Hah, I think you meant to say the candy, because the question is "which is worse?".

MikeK46
04-07-2010, 01:12 PM
Hah, I think you meant to say the candy, because the question is "which is worse?".

Woops :)

THE CANDY!!

Seriously...the fact that weight is calories in vs. calories out does not imply that all calories have the same essentiality and effects on the complex chemical dynamics of human physiology.

It can not parallel the statement "a pound of bricks is the same as a pound of feathers."

Money Shot
04-07-2010, 01:18 PM
eat neither?

MikeK46
04-07-2010, 01:43 PM
eat neither?

^^

He goes with option 3: 100 calories of egg whites!

Here's something I posted in another thread:

I'll take some guesses based on the roles of the macronutrients, assume a total 2000 calories, not think too deep (although that would be fun) and order them starting with the one I think will kill you the slowest...

What happens if you got ALL your calories from fat?

A massive breakdown of your muscle tissue, including your heart will begin (muscle atrophy). For as long as possible, the body will cannibalize the muscle tissue to obtain amino acids for cellular repair, immune system function, and hormone and enzyme production. Essential amino acids will be missing. Eventually each of these processes will be starved of amino acids and begin to degrade and shut down. In the absence of much insulin, however, lipolysis will occur and stored fat will be oxidized and released into the blood to provide fatty acids and glycerol (will be converted to glucose in the liver, with ketone bodies as by-products).

What happens if you got ALL your calories from protein?

In the absence of much insulin, lipolysis will increase and stored fat will be released, as the body struggles to compensate. Essential fatty acids will still be missing. Brain, nervous sytem structure and function, and digestive system function will begin to degrade. Cell membranes (and therefore cellular function) and hormone production will deteriorate. Eventually, each of these processes will be starved of fat and begin to degrade and shut down.

What happens if you got ALL your calories from carbs?

The above two scenarios would happen simultaneously and their rate would increase tremendously. The insulin secreted by the pancreas from the constant carbohydrate overload would work against the body's desire to oxidize stored fat or break down muscle into amino acids. Deterioration and death will be extremely rapid.

jcosley
04-07-2010, 01:48 PM
Worse?

Glycemic wise I guess = candy.

Macronutrient wise = candy.

100 calories is pretty much nothing compared to your overall expenditure so....I dunno what the right answer would even be to this question. Kinda dumb. Sorry.

gooseguy312
04-07-2010, 10:22 PM
I bolded the most important word in your post. Might want to hunt that one down.

News Flash, Walter Cronkite... phytoestrogens found in soy have weaker estrogenic effects than the actual estrogen in your body. One could speculate that having phytoestrogens bonding to your receptors would actually be a good thing in terms of gains.

Also...

LOL at you acting like citing Wikipedia = argument won! Wikipedia is neither an acceptable, nor 100% reliable source of information. It's fine most of the time when it comes to internet 'I know more than you' ePeen-ery, but good luck turning in a research project with a list of references from en.wikipedia.org.

Anyway, my vote is that the candy (sugar) is worse. The fat from mayo will at least help you absorb fat-soluble vitamins. Plus Mayo is awesome and delicious and I don't have much of a sweet tooth.


I never said wikipedia was 100% reliable, accusing me of "i know more then you epeen-ery, take a look at yourself? i was just defending my viewpoint but youre just speaking like that out of nowhere? I can post a million articles on soy dangers due to its estrogenic effects, i figured wikipedia would be the best 1 though. But you know what i think its impossible now to prove anything over the internet because theirs so many false articles everywhere.

Heres some logic for you, look at the people with Asian descent? They pound the soy heavily, is it any surprise they have such low testosterone? So tell me mr smart 1 why is thier testosterone so low u think?


Also, if wikipedia isnt a reliable source of information, what makes you a more reliable source? The answer is nothing, all i see is what youre ego is "speculating" about how soy estrogenic effects "help" people, you might seem more convincing because you sound like a jackass but it doesnt mean you are!

im done in this thread though its obviously pointless trying to prove anything when articles are 100% unreliable to some, goodbye!