If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ?
A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Gonna try the paleolithic diet. Raw fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds I hope i don't get the opportunity to shoot me a moose whilst i hunt and gather Ok, ok, will just eat my weight in caramel and lie back on the couch for a year I never said I was self disciplined |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On Oct 9, 2:28*am, PB wrote:
Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ? A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Calories are the ONLY fundamental contributor. You can't build body weight without excess energy; you can't maintain it with deficit energy. Low-carb and low-fat diets target particular foods, because of their caloric properties, and are not any more or less effective than just eating the same proportion of foods you eat now, but less. You could go on a twinkie diet and lose weight, as long as you are eating X number of twinkies daily that brings you short of your daily calorie need. Obviously, however, a twinkie has a LOT of calories/volume, because of what it's made of. You could eat a HUGE bowl of salad and get the same calories from it (sans dressing, that is). Salad is very leafy and fibrous, so it contains less calories for the same volume. Your hunger and your digestive system (a particular concern if you're not crazy about developing diverticulitis) are driven by VOLUME, not calories. You feel more full and take a better deuce after eating a salad than you do a twinkie, but both contribute the same caloric value. Aside from that, it's all just preference and "success" ratings. I'm more of an advocate of reading LOTS of diets and extracting the REASONS for their peculiar strategies, rather than the strategies themselves. Experiment! Try lots of different foods, expand your horizons, but don't make it a huge change. I've lost 23 lbs since February 08, and for 5 months of that time, Hot Pockets and Cup O' Noodles (salt aside, this is an amazing diet tool. 300 calories, lots of bulk, and it's hot, so it's filling!) composed roughly a third of my diet. It's a ****ty way to eat, nutritionally (read: salty), but even though they're "bad" foods, I still lost weight by only concerning myself with the calorie count. So, don't make a diet an exclusive change in what you eat. You want to change a few habits, as well. Plan meals ahead of time, read nutritional information, even for products you have no intention of buying (sometimes, you get surprised and find a new food for your diet toolbox). Get INTERESTED in what you're putting in your body. Gonna try the paleolithic diet. Raw fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds I hope i don't get the opportunity to shoot me a moose whilst i hunt and gather I don't personally think that's a healthy way to think about a diet. We're built to eat a lot of stuff. When you limit that, the body gets 'bored' with your intake, and you feel like crap. Not to mention, it's BORING. Ok, ok, will just eat my weight in caramel and lie back on the couch for a year I never said I was self disciplined You have to want it. Weight loss doesn't happen to you. It's the other way around. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On 9 oct, 02:28, PB wrote:
Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ? A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Gonna try the paleolithic diet. Raw fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds I hope i don't get the opportunity to shoot me a moose whilst i hunt and gather Ok, ok, will just eat my weight in caramel and lie back on the couch for a year I never said I was self disciplined I've started the raw diet today. I'll have my first meeting with other rawers in my area on Saturday night. Everyone brings his recipe. I'm eating exclusively non-cooked veggies, fruits and nuts. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On Oct 9, 1:43*pm, James G wrote:
On Oct 9, 2:28*am, PB wrote: Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ? A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Calories are the ONLY fundamental contributor. *You can't build body weight without excess energy; you can't maintain it with deficit energy. Low-carb and low-fat diets target particular foods, because of their caloric properties, and are not any more or less effective than just eating the same proportion of foods you eat now, but less. *You could go on a twinkie diet and lose weight, as long as you are eating X number of twinkies daily that brings you short of your daily calorie need. Obviously, however, a twinkie has a LOT of calories/volume, because of what it's made of. *You could eat a HUGE bowl of salad and get the same calories from it (sans dressing, that is). *Salad is very leafy and fibrous, so it contains less calories for the same volume. *Your hunger and your digestive system (a particular concern if you're not crazy about developing diverticulitis) are driven by VOLUME, not calories. *You feel more full and take a better deuce after eating a salad than you do a twinkie, but both contribute the same caloric value. Aside from that, it's all just preference and "success" ratings. *I'm more of an advocate of reading LOTS of diets and extracting the REASONS for their peculiar strategies, rather than the strategies themselves. *Experiment! *Try lots of different foods, expand your horizons, but don't make it a huge change. *I've lost 23 lbs since February 08, and for 5 months of that time, Hot Pockets and Cup O' Noodles (salt aside, this is an amazing diet tool. *300 calories, lots of bulk, and it's hot, so it's filling!) composed roughly a third of my diet. *It's a ****ty way to eat, nutritionally (read: salty), but even though they're "bad" foods, I still lost weight by only concerning myself with the calorie count. So, don't make a diet an exclusive change in what you eat. *You want to change a few habits, as well. *Plan meals ahead of time, read nutritional information, even for products you have no intention of buying (sometimes, you get surprised and find a new food for your diet toolbox). *Get INTERESTED in what you're putting in your body. Gonna try the paleolithic diet. Raw fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds I hope i don't get the opportunity to shoot me a moose whilst i hunt and gather I don't personally think that's a healthy way to think about a diet. We're built to eat a lot of stuff. *When you limit that, the body gets 'bored' with your intake, and you feel like crap. *Not to mention, it's BORING. Ok, ok, will just eat my weight in caramel and lie back on the couch for a year I never said I was self disciplined You have to want it. *Weight loss doesn't happen to you. *It's the other way around. Kidding. Exercise is gonna make or break me anyways. I'll vary my eating and stop eating at night. Drinks lots of water. Now, eating fruits, veggies, chicken, some eggs, whole wheat toast, diet protein shakes, and granola bars. Thanks for advice anyways though, makes sense. Don't know why low carb diet is so popular. Calories are calories as you say, but healthy carbs are needed so.... wtf ? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On 9 oct, 21:47, "
wrote: On 9 oct, 02:28, PB wrote: Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ? A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Gonna try the paleolithic diet. Raw fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds I hope i don't get the opportunity to shoot me a moose whilst i hunt and gather Ok, ok, will just eat my weight in caramel and lie back on the couch for a year I never said I was self disciplined I've started the raw diet today. I'll have my first meeting with other rawers in my area on Saturday night. Everyone brings his recipe. I'm eating exclusively non-cooked veggies, fruits and nuts. Went to Harvey's today with a group. What a screw-up in my diet! I'm back right now on tracks! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On Oct 10, 2:00*am, PB wrote:
Kidding. Exercise is gonna make or break me anyways. I'll vary my eating and stop eating at night. Drinks lots of water. Now, eating fruits, veggies, chicken, some eggs, whole wheat toast, diet protein shakes, and granola bars. My brother, who used to be a pretty decent wrestler, once told me "water will make you hard." And he was right. Water, or more loosely, any hydrating fluids (diet soda does count here, I've found; the diuretic effect of the caffeine seems less prevalent) are GREAT for you, especially if you're dieting. The body needs water to break fat down, and it costs nothing in terms of nutrition, so why not? Thanks for advice anyways though, makes sense. Don't know why low carb diet is so popular. Calories are calories as you say, but healthy carbs are needed so.... wtf ? I believe they're popular because they're popular. Like any fad, some underinformed person gets ahold of information that seems reliable to them, and without doing a lot of fact-finding, they just accept it and promote it themselves. Then, through positive feedback, everybody's onboard, until somebody starts knocking it, or another fad takes over. It's not that they don't work, it just seems completely counter- intuitive to opt for a radical change in dietary makeup, when the effects are no different than simply balancing out portions in a balanced diet. It doesn't hurt to bump up your portions of "good" carbs (ie. starches and long-energy foods) and protein, because there IS a benefit in calories. With carbs/protein, you're getting 4 kilocal/g, versus 7 kilocal/g for fat. They're less efficient at packing energy, so your body gets less net energy, and you're more likely to fall into deficit. All that said, though, it just seems like a lot of people pick a diet and THEN learn what it's about. Which is silly. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
So.....which diet ?
On Oct 9, 1:43*pm, James G wrote:
On Oct 9, 2:28*am, PB wrote: Low-carb, low-fat, low-cal ? A) All of the above ? B) None of the above ? Nutrionists are like economists. I'm confused. Calories are the ONLY fundamental contributor. *You can't build body weight without excess energy; you can't maintain it with deficit energy. Hummm! You gotta learn about lifetime Calorie Restriction. Serious stuff with a lot of extents. Here are videos that explain it, by people with sound credentials. http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=mOmnSEKIrag See at 17th minutes or so the resultats from people in Biosphere 2 in Arizona 1991-1993 http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=rai6u__Ouac 7 parts - long but worthwhile. As per recent studies, low proteins is what make experimental animals live longer. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Daily Diet Talk - Great Diet Support site - We need yourparticipation | [email protected] | General Discussion | 1 | February 23rd, 2008 04:37 PM |
Daily Diet Talk - Great Diet Support site - We need yourparticipation | [email protected] | General Discussion | 0 | February 23rd, 2008 04:51 AM |
Dr. Andrew B. Chung is deluded WAS: Moderate-fat Diet Is Kinder To Heart Than Low-fat Diet | Last Shot At The Mu_n | General Discussion | 0 | February 6th, 2004 03:11 PM |
Moderate-Fat Diet is Kinder to Heart than Low-Fat Diet, Study by UB Researcher Shows | Ken Kubos | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 7 | February 5th, 2004 12:17 PM |
diet: Negative behavior changes in recently dxed male senior with dr's orders to change diet | New | General Discussion | 4 | November 7th, 2003 06:48 PM |