Love for Oxygen & Misleading Info

Here's a fun fact: I love to ride my bike to the library to read my favorite books and magazines. In fact, I went there two days ago and yesterday to read my favorite magazine: Oxygen.

I loooove Oxygen. It's cut-to-the-chase, real information (in my opinion) about what it means to be healthy and fit.

As much as I love this magazine, it can get a little pricey. Until I get a subscription (which I probably will be getting hopefully soon), I figure I could save many by reading it at the library in the big fluffy chairs. (Bonus points for the chair.)

I was dying to read the July 2012 issue because of the tribute to Robert Kennedy. This man will forever live in the hearts of money because of his persistance in getting people healthy and the vitality he presented the world with.

Source

It took me around two hours to completely digest this whole issue. I read it from top to bottom. I have to say, the way they honored Mr. Kennedy was amazing, and I cried. Yes, I got looks but I didn't care! It was so touching and so very heartfelt. My favorite part? The love letters he wrote to Tosca Reno. I hope I have a man like that some day.

After I finished that, I went on to read a women's health magazine. No, not the ones like Oxygen, Muscle & Fitness Hers, or FitnessRx that support heavy weight training, but the ones that support the lifting of 4 lb. dumbbells and eating processed foods simply because there is 'less fat.' Hmm.

Here's what I saw:

Now not trying to be overly critical or anything, I just DON'T think this is sending out the right message. If you can read that, it's basically telling women that they can eat whatever macronutrient they want, even if it exceeds the others, as long as they are in a caloric deficit and losing weight.

Don't get me wrong. They are right in the fact that as long as you are in a deficit, you will lose weight. But there is a significant difference between weight loss and fat loss. The latter is obviously the better choice. It shouldn't be about the number on the scale. If you have more muscle, you will weigh more but you will be lean and a calorie burning machine.

Would you rather have a skinny body with a high body fat percentage and a low number on the scale or a tall, muscular, LEAN figure that looks good naked, has a low body fat percentage and a slightly higher number on the scale? I would rather the latter, please. 

FAT LOSS > weight loss. It took me some time to understand this, believe me.

This magazine (not going to name any names; if you know the magazine that's great but I'm not trying to completely dismiss them) in my personal opinion should be promoting a diet full of a good mix of ALL the macronutrients, for each and every one of them presents a need to our bodies. I don't think I would eat pasta all day just as long as I was in a 'deficit.' Where's the protein? Where's the fat? Where's the healthy, balanced attitude towards food?

I'm sorry, these things just tend to get to me, especially knowing that a gullible teenage girl could read this and think they're healthy not getting a good balance of essential macronutrients. I was this last year. Imagine if I had read this last year.

Rant over. Happy Thursday!

Pin It