nutrition and diet forum mods

Nevyn

Wasn't there a ruel stating that the person proposing a forum would not be made mod of it or have the admins gotten rid of it ?

G'em would make a great mod of the forum if she would take up the task.

The difference as i would see it between the fitness form and this one is a lot of people don't want to join a gym and lift weights, they would preger to alter thier diet with healther choices and light excerise and additional cardio and honestly a lot of the thread in the fitness forum all gym orintated.

Faith

I agree with the OP and Amz etc. I'm all for a place where people can discuss how they lost weight quickly and/or effectively, but I don't think it should cover nutrition. As far as I'm concerned, people shouldn't be handing out advice about "nutrition" unless they're qualified to.

I also like the idea of it being a sub-forum of the fitness forum. Losing weight has a lot to do with exercise, and the two fora should be linked.

+1 for g'em too.

Time Magazine

Terry wrote:

Hold your horses there, buddy.
There is no medical advice given in that forum. I'm very strict about that.

The forum is mostly analogies on how people have coped and methods they have personally used. Absolutely no medical advice is given or aallowed be given.

I see how you picked me up wrong, but you're re-enforcing my point. Giving up smoking is a medical matter. The Giving Up Smoking forum is more of a community, which avoids medical advice, that aids in this medical matter. The way I see it, that's what the Diet forum should be - a sort of Investments & Markets (sorry for linking it back to the forum I mod again) where people say "Well have you looked at Bank of Ireland shares/porridge?" or "Bank of Ireland shares/porridge served me well". I'm not equating financial loss to medical ailment but comparing the two; that bad advice about putting your house on Northern Rock at the moment is like saying Atkins for All. Neither should be allowed and any mod that did allow it should be taken out and shot. However I don't see anything wrong with suggesting porridge or RaboDirect.

It's a similar problem to the surfing forum's secret spots in some ways. Some people think it would be better to hush it up in the hope that nobody finds the dangerous methods. I think it's far, far better to say "There's a beach I really enjoyed but it's not for everyone."

homah_7ft

A dangerous precedent is set if the mod is picked just because they are an expert in the field. It leans towards being a purported source of medical advice in this case. I would equate it to asking for a legal qualification to mod on the legal discussion forum. If the mod needs to be a qualified expert then that forum should be shut down since boards cannot stand over the advice given.

catho_monster

tbh wrote:

+1 - I'm confused by the original statement there.

Sorry, I should have clarified in the original post.
My issue of attitude was with the charter, written by the mod, as a statement of intent for the forum. It is not just for weight loss, as some of the posts here suggest, it was also to include

from the charter wrote:

nutrition-related for health and well-being - cooking for diabetics, coeliacs, dairy intolerant folk and so on.

As a person who has a very limited diet for health reasons, I was really glad of this forum... but the charter continued...

from the charter wrote:

NO FOOD NAZIS. You may be into macrobiotics where everything from a jar or can is evil, but most people do not wish to live this way. If you wish to discuss the way in which to eat right from your perspective, start your own thread on the topic. Do not waste people's time by consistently correcting their choices. We cannot all live on steamed chicken and vegetables night after night. If you are not interested in the topics here, you will find people passionate about an entirely clean diet in the very excellent Fitness forum.

And to be honest, it kinda shot me down before I'd got started. I end up being a food nazi because I dont have any choice, my health places dietary restrictions on me not the other way around.

So there you go, I suppose I have issue with the tone of the whole matter. As Amz repeadly says, this stuff is fairly serious for some of us, not just the weight loss seekers. And I know I'm picking here, that the charter says nothing wrong, and its just trying to stop people flaming other people's opinions, but it was the attitude in which it was stated that got to me.

fitz

Ibid, you continual insistance on ignoring the medical implications involved in nutritional and dietary advice is staggeringly blinkered.

Dieticians have become a regulated profession in this country.

Tbh, I think this forum should be scrapped altogether.
It's hypocritical to say that we don't allow medical advice on boards.ie and yet presume, arrogantly, that we can dismiss dietary/nutritional advice as non-medical.

Admins, this is a dangerous forum to allow. I'm sure the intent is fine, but do you really want people coming back at boards.ie saying they had health problems due to advice they received on this forum?

r3nu4l

Yeah but fitz, the same can be said for workouts posted in the fitness forum...there is potential there for a moronic individual to try a routine clearly not suited to them and then say..."I followed the workout posted by [insert posters name] and I broke my back trying it...I'm suing".

Should we remove the fitness forum as a result? No. That would be ridiculous. All advice should be taken with caution.

I remember years ago, as a kid, telling my mother that I had jumped out of the three because my friend Jonathon had told me to...her response?

"If Jonathon told you to put your hand in the fire, would you?"

The same goes for this forum...just because advice is given doesn't mean it has to be taken or that a user should follow it blindly...

fitz

Fully agree, but a workout is not medical advice, and someone trying a suggested workout will most likely reach a moment where they realise that this is perhaps too much for them.
Someone eating someone doesn't have that "point of no return".

Any seemingly harmless nutritional or dietary advice which worked perfectly well for one person could have severe health risks for someone else, as a lot of people with food/GI health issues are not fully aware of what's wrong with them. GI problems can be very difficult to get a proper diagnosis for.

There is a reason why pretty much all sites you'll find on the web tell you to go to a qualified professional for advice.

r3nu4l

I understand where you are coming from but I'm sure that any poster who looks for advice on what to eat or avoid because they 'think' they have IBD or some other GI problems will be told to seek a doctor.

Fitz, have a read of the fitness forum nutritional advice and tell me if you have a problem with the advice given there. If you do then maybe we should scrap that info too?

If not then I suggest you give this new forum a chance, report any posts you have a problem with and if they are not actioned come to feedback stating your case publically.

By the way...I do think that there is potential for problems here but I think the forum should be given a chance to grow and develop too. If problems arise and aren't being dealt with quickly then the potential becomes an actuality and action will need to be taken.

I also beg to differ that fitness advice isn't medical...there are psots on the fitness forum where people have said..."my back/ligament etc. is weak...what exercises should I do/avoid?" Isn't that something a physio or sports medic or similar should be giving advice on and not a bulletin board? :eek: Oh noes! I call for the fitness forum to be closed

Evil Phil

fitz wrote:

Fully agree, but a workout is not medical advice, and someone trying a suggested workout will most likely reach a moment where they realise that this is perhaps too much for them.
Someone eating someone doesn't have that "point of no return".

Any seemingly harmless nutritional or dietary advice which worked perfectly well for one person could have severe health risks for someone else, as a lot of people with food/GI health issues are not fully aware of what's wrong with them. GI problems can be very difficult to get a proper diagnosis for.

There is a reason why pretty much all sites you'll find on the web tell you to go to a qualified professional for advice.

This is why I suggested getting on of the Biology & Medicine mods to help out and making it a sub-forum of Biology & Medicine.

6th

I'm thinking

Boards.ie (the Admins) pick a mod because they can perform the functions of a mod - grand.

But if Boards.ie pick a mod to look after a specific forum because that person is qualified on the subject does Boards check these qualifications out? And then saying that the mod is qualified ... does that mean that Boards is responsible for advice given by the mod?

I say let mods mod and let posters (and mods alike if they have an interest) share advice.

Boston

Del Griffith wrote:

I understand where you are coming from but I'm sure that any poster who looks for advice on what to eat or avoid because they 'think' they have IBD or some other GI problems will be told to seek a doctor.

Fitz, have a read of the fitness forum nutritional advice and tell me if you have a problem with the advice given there. If you do then maybe we should scrap that info too?

If not then I suggest you give this new forum a chance, report any posts you have a problem with and if they are not actioned come to feedback stating your case publically.

By the way...I do think that there is potential for problems here but I think the forum should be given a chance to grow and develop too. If problems arise and aren't being dealt with quickly then the potential becomes an actuality and action will need to be taken.

I also beg to differ that fitness advice isn't medical...there are psots on the fitness forum where people have said..."my back/ligament etc. is weak...what exercises should I do/avoid?" Isn't that something a physio or sports medic or similar should be giving advice on and not a bulletin board? :eek: Oh noes! I call for the fitness forum to be closed

The thing about diet advice on the fitness forum is that it is always advice about having a balanced diet with the appropriate level of exercise. The two arn't separated and advice on dieting (as distinct from a healthy sustainable food plan) is almost never given. If this forum is going to be a forum on how to rapidly loose weight through basically starvation, then I think its inherently flawed.

seamus

Declaration of interest: I haven't read the new forum, this thread or the thread that requested it

Dragan wrote:

To be honest, the second I first saw this forum asked for I asked myself "why?". It appears people don't like to package eating healthy and fitness together.

Why is that? Is it really so bad to be concerned about your health? Is it such an illogical step to consider that eating the foods your body needs in the correct portions at the correct times can be a part of fitness? Since when did fitness or health go hand in hand with a gym membership?

I'm guessing that there's a feeling that the fitness forum is biased towards discussing regular/proper training and weightlifting. That's not to say that it disallows other threads, but that much of the discussion and content is generated by those who are strongly interested in fitness training and weightlifting. This is not a bad thing, but when it comes to things like fitness and diet, people are generally quite shy and defensive and reluctant to wade into a room full of very fit people asking for health advice. It's probably a psychogical thing - people may feel exposed or "judged" when they see that most people on the forum are dedicated fitness fans.

So perhaps people felt there was a need for something to specifically discuss dietary issues, including weightloss or allergies, outside of the fitness board. It is unfortunate that it means that posters such as yourself and g'em now may have to stretch yourselves between giving advice on two forums (if you wish), but I'm assuming that enough people felt it was necessary to warrant a new forum.

On the topic of moderation, I don't think it's ever been a prerequisite that the moderator needed to be an expert on the subject, merely to have an interest. The role of the moderator is not to give or rate advice on the forum. Moderators usually possess some degree of intelligence and common sense, so they're well able to flag and investigate what could be dodgy advice on the forum and contributors play a valuable role in flagging these posts through reports.

Imposter

seamus wrote:

On the topic of moderation, I don't think it's ever been a prerequisite that the moderator needed to be an expert on the subject, merely to have an interest. The role of the moderator is not to give or rate advice on the forum. Moderators usually possess some degree of intelligence and common sense, so they're well able to flag and investigate what could be dodgy advice on the forum and contributors play a valuable role in flagging these posts through reports.

I obviously agree with this BUT moderators usually feel the need to get heavily involved in their forums. That's not a bad thing that's just the way it is. Similarly newbies or people that don't know any better seem to give moderators (and especially moderators of the forum the post is on) credit for knowing what they are talking about. Here in lies the problem imo.

Now I have nothing against Neuro-praxis and she seems to be making a lot of positive changes with regards to her diet but in one of the first threads on the new board (The Get Me Through The Day Thread), in a thread she started, in the opening post, she mentions chocolate bars and crisps as some of her ideas for a healthy snack. In later posts the nutritional value of such 'healthy snacks' was questioned but this is the moderator suggesting this! Whether we like it or not her view will hold more weight in some people's eyes as she is the moderator of the forum!

Similarly the food nazis thing in the charter is not a positive step imo, as has been discussed. Anyone can do all the mod things fine but commenting on such a forum, as the forum mod without an informed opinion is irresponsible imo.

neuro-praxis

I'd be really happy for g'em or another equally qualified person to co-mod. I neither expected nor asked to mod but I really don't think I have offered any poor advice.

If anyone would like to specifically complain about any dangerous advice I have given feel free.

I presume now we will be employing qualified counsellors for PI?

Boston

g'em has an absolute wealth of knowledge and I honest can't speak highly enough of that that user. Shes helped me and many many other and I really like here style of posting but who said she was qualified neuro-praxis? She may be but I don't think shes ever claimed to be a nutrition expert/professional. She prefixes her posts with 'this is what worked for me I've never seen her mention clients and anything else that would indicate qualifications.

Beruthiel

neuro-praxis wrote:

I presume now we will be employing qualified counsellors for PI?

People in PI are told on a regular basis to go see a professional.

neuro-praxis

Ber - obviously jokes forbidden here. But since we're being serious no medical advice is offered in the Diet & Nutrition forum.

Just to the post to Imposter above - I have to say, having a small chocolate bar or a pack of baked crisps once in a while is fine as part of a balanced diet. In fact, I could quote you some low-GI nutritionist advocate sources on that. But that aside: I offered some suggestions for snacks to fill gaps.

I also never wanted to call this a Nutrition forum. Because that's not really what it is - right now at least. I never offered nutritional advice to anybody to be fair.

low

Ultimately this forum is going to be for fat women who want to lose weight but probably never will, or if they do, will put it back on. It's kinda like an online version of weight watchers, it's only there for support and community. Therefore, anyone actually interested in fitness and nutrition should avoid this forum like the plague and continue to use the Fitness forum for their diet critique and nutritional advice. The regular users of both fora are going to be completely different species of poster and it's for the great good of boards.ie to keep them separate.

neuro-praxis

I've been thinking this over and I went and re-read my proposals in the request thread for the forum. Then I had a good look over what I have posted so far.

My vision for this thread was for it to be a supportive place where we can discuss sustainable long-term eating. For me that boils down to day-to-day variety in snacks and meals. I'm not doing anything different to what I said I would do.

Suggesting that there is anything dangerous in the forum is actually laughable. There is nothing dangerous about eating white bread, for example, not that anyone has yet dared suggest such a thing...

I would propose that the actual problem here is the difference in vision for the forum. What would the protesters present like it to be?? Perhaps we can add the elements that would make everyone happy with it.

fits

low wrote:

Ultimately this forum is going to be for fat women who want to lose weight but probably never will, or if they do, will put it back on. It's kinda like an online version of weight watchers, it's only there for support and community.

That wouldnt be my perception of it at all. I dont think your statement is fair either. A place where users can discuss day to day healthy choices is not a bad thing, and the subject doesnt fit in the 'fitness' forum (unless as a sub-forum). (look at my thread in N&D for an example)/

Vegeta

neuro-praxis wrote:

Just to the post to Imposter above - I have to say, having a small chocolate bar or a pack of baked crisps once in a while is fine as part of a balanced diet. In fact, I could quote you some low-GI nutritionist advocate sources on that. But that aside: I offered some suggestions for snacks to fill gaps.

You see this is my problem with the forum under the current charter rules. Of course having any food once in a while is fine (it will hinder your progress though) but I couldn't even point out that having chocolate and crisps is a terrible idea while on a diet as it is against the forum charter

the tags for that thread are healthy snacks or something like that, cruly wurly as a healthy snack??

Just want to say again I support neuro as mod but the charter needs to be changed so people can point out potential flaws in others eating plans

neuro-praxis

low wrote:

Ultimately this forum is going to be for fat women who want to lose weight but probably never will, or if they do, will put it back on. It's kinda like an online version of weight watchers, it's only there for support and community. Therefore, anyone actually interested in fitness and nutrition should avoid this forum like the plague and continue to use the Fitness forum for their diet critique and nutritional advice. The regular users of both fora are going to be completely different species of poster and it's for the great good of boards.ie to keep them separate.

Why not can the attitude?

You know what - it is you that is in the minority. This holier-than-thou attitude is one of the reasons I requested a diet forum because unless you are frightened at the prospect of your two hour workout four times a week and subsist on protein shakes and steamed chicken breasts, the implication is that you're a fat failure.

Some (most) people prefer light exercise 3-4 times a week and a varied sustainable diet. In fact this is what your doctor will recommend for you if you need to lose weight. And obviously it shows results. In fact it's actually really hard when previously your lifestyle was sedentary and calorie-packed.

As for there being two species of poster - what on earth is wrong with that?? I guess it's viewed as bad when posters such as yourself, low, obviously have health, diet, nutrition and fitness down to a T, and anyone who doesn't reach your bar is obviously some kind of dull-minded lazy moron.

The Sweeper

I +1 that nutrition and diet not be under food and drink.

At the moment, Food and Drink is a happy place for us eating hedonists, and anyone chiming in that, for instance, deep frying food shouldn't be done because it's unhealthy - well they usually get trodden on in short order.

In theory we're covering nutrition and diet already in the existing food and drink fora - we're just possibly (between deep frying and mixing cocktails and indulging in red meat on a near-daily basis) not covering it in the "health and well-being" fashion that a new forum so specifically titled would imply.

There are some "Good low-calorie meals?" type threads already on food and drink that might be of use to the nutrition and diet forum if the mods could shunt the threads across. As it stands, Food and Drink is about the creation of and indulgence in what is, for many people, more of an art form than a simple fulfilment of the requirement for a daily need for calories.

Nutrition and diet (while I appreciate NP's logic that a packet of crisps and a chocolate bar can be a part of a well balanced diet and we can't all eat steamed vegetables seven days a week) to me is likely to be more about counting of calories and identification of easier ways to consume what are generally considered to be 'healthy' foods.

I'd rather see it under the fitness branch, on the basis that it's a lifestyle change forum of a very particular kind.

neuro-praxis

Vegeta wrote:

You see this is my problem with the forum under the current charter rules. Of course having any food once in a while is fine (it will hinder your progress though) but I couldn't even point out that having chocolate and crisps is a terrible idea while on a diet as it is against the forum charter

the tags for that thread are healthy snacks or something like that, cruly wurly as a healthy snack??

I take your point Vegeta.

However there needs to be a middle ground. I did say the "odd chocolate hit". In fact I think I've had that odd hit only once in the last six weeks myself...pretty good going for a chocoholic. I am working on the principle of "a little of what you fancy is good for you". I would argue that it actually helps your process, not hinders it.

If you give me some suggestions for changes to the charter on this point we can work out a better way of expressing both views. How about that?

Dragan

neuro-praxis wrote:

You know what - it is you that is in the minority. This holier-than-thou attitude is one of the reasons I requested a diet forum because unless you are frightened at the prospect of your two hour workout four times a week and subsist on protein shakes and steamed chicken breasts, the implication is that you're a fat failure.

I don't remember reading Low say anywhere that they go to the gym for hours a week and eat chicken breasts and protein shakes?

I think that assumption is a more telling factor than anything, that anyone who might find fault with what we are doing is someone how looking down on our choices.

When it comes to offering advice about food, I tend not to **** around.

I love food. I love chips, and chocolate, and those puddings from tesco's with the chocolate sauce that melts vanilla icecream and tastes unbelieveable. When I'm not eating food, I'm thinking about food. I once stopped having sex with the intention of eating, but was persuaded at the time to continue my pursuits.

Are you understanding how much I like food?

Do I eat whatever I want whenever I want to? Nope. Because sometimes that’s a stupid thing to do. Sometimes I have been sitting somewhere and someone will tell me "D, that second pizza is maybe not such a good idea…. It's not even a training day" and I will realise , DAMN, I'm lucky to have someone tell me that would be stupid.

Now then, where am I going with this?

Stop assuming that everyone who can offer an option is somehow looking down on you, allow people to point out possible flaws in eating habits and then the forum has massive potential. Until then, it's not really doing anything but allowing people to have a place to feel better about themselves without actually giving them a reason to.

As for people's concerns about fitness, I think the best thing to do is just to take anything posted in fitness at face value until it becomes obvious the person is not looking to take on any kind of activity level outside of a brisk walk and then move it over to Neuro!

Neuro, mayhaps you would be willing to move any threads about actual physical activity over to us if they end up on your forum? I imagine between all of us we can have things on both fora running very smoothly.

Vegeta

neuro-praxis wrote:

I take your point Vegeta.

However there needs to be a middle ground. I did say the "odd chocolate hit". In fact I think I've had that odd hit only once in the last six weeks myself...pretty good going for a chocoholic.

If you give me some suggestions for changes to the charter on this point we can work out a better way of expressing both views. How about that?

Hey I am by no means perfect when it comes to diet but I think the charter should be changed to allow people to point out that a persons food choice may go against their goals. if only for the sake of constructive criticism

example: Someone posts saying that they are going to try the special K diet, posters should be allowed to tell them that there are better ways to lose weight and that eating a carb heavy bowl of special k in the evening as dinner is actually against conventional wisdom.

you could re-word the charter that any negative comments posted in relation to a certain type of food or diet will get the user a warning/ban. On the other hand the forum welcomes helpful advice on all topics.

I am working on the principle of "a little of what you fancy is good for you". I would argue that it actually helps your process, not hinders it.

I think this is what people are afraid of. Yes eating a bit of chocolate or a take away once a month may be good for you mentally so you can keep focused on the diet but purely from a nutrirtion and diet point of view they will not help.

This line has to be clearly set down. It is perfectly fine to tell people that chocolate is ok every now and then (which it is, they wont drop dead) but just simply add to that, its full of sugar and fat and to avoid it if they can. Tell them if they must have chocolate go for a high cocoa with low sugar option to minimise the damage.

We need to educate, we cannot tell people that some junk foods are fine every now and then if we don't also try and highlight why they are bad and suggest a better alternative.

The forum can be a comforting place for shy people struggling with their current eating habbits. A poster creates a thread describing their addiction to chocolate. Lots of people here love chocolate but have found healthier ways to avoid it.

I'm rambling now but I hope you see what I mean neuro. I think this should happen pretty naturally anyway. If I don't get banned for pointing out what I think to be a poor diet or food choice, then I will give what very limited advice I have picked up and so will others. The charter just has to change slightly to allow constructive criticism

low

I think Fitness and sub-fora should be moved to Sports to move inline with its athletic perspective. Having said that, I don't it's all that important what category threads are in, but for the sake of having the correct labels on boxes, this is what I feel is more appropriate. I think it's safe to say the the Fitness forum is populated by two distinct groups, the elitists (or those thriving to be elite) and "newbs" (those new to the whole "what is good eating and living" idea). There are a couple of people that fall in between and I think those are the people that would be happier in the environment N and D presents. These are people that have done a little/a lot of research on their eating and are committed to improving but want to do so by baby steps and with gentle proding. The general attitude on the fitness forum is this

1. Well done for making the effort but
2. You're wrong in your approach.
3. Change completely.
4. Good luck.

This to me is the perfect attitude, but I can see why someone (and we all know the type) won't be happy being told that their bowl of branflakes and a chopped banana for breakfast along with stroll around the block won't lead them to their desired weight.

I can see both communities thriving because they'll both be catering for people with common goals and similar perspectives. I can read Dragan's,Jon's,G'ems,Hanley's et al. posts and say "yes, I understand what they're saying, I can relate to this". But when I look at what Little Miss Overweight says I have to say "no, I don't agree with that, your advice sucks"). And it works both ways. As I've said before, two different types of people with two compeltely different perspectives and they're not compatable. Leave D and N where it is and chuck fitness in sport and let's end this pretending.

I don't/won't contribute to either forum anyway so I'll not continue contributing to this thread.

(I don't know NP so I'm certainly not having a go at her if that's something people erroneusly picked up from my above post)

neuro-praxis

I appreciate your post Dragan. But it is not my automatic assumption that any counter-opinion offered is someone looking down on me. I think you'll find I've been pretty even in my responses and open to compromise. However user "low" DOES look down on anyone who would find, for example, Weight Watchers, a useful resource for getting weight under control. I was responding directly to that.

I would be really happy to move fitness-related threads over to you - that is no problem whatever. By the way...I *like* the fitness forum. I have been reading it for years. I also like fitness - I'm just not a gym freak. I enjoy basketball, walking and swimming. But I'm no expert on either nutrition or fitness, neither have I ever claimed to be (although I have taken a course in nutrition so I feel I have the basics down).

My fear in allowing the endless pointing-out of flaws in eating habits is that ordinary folks like myself won't want to come in or state their opinions for fear of being shouted down.

These issues of diet are not black and white, no matter what anyone says. There are thousands of contradictory studies on how best to eat, and they all have merits. Even doctors and nutritionists vary widely. How could we present the charter so that people are free to speak their minds correcting the diets of others meanwhile allowing and encouraging differences? Honest question there.

neuro-praxis

Vegeta wrote:

you could re-word the charter that any negative comments posted in relation to a certain type of food or diet will get the user a warning/ban. On the other hand the forum welcomes helpful advice on all topics.

Point understood and taken: I will go work on this now.