total calories

Chris Braun wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:18:42 GMT, (The Queen of
Cans and Jars) wrote:

Karine Frigon wrote:

Hi everyone!

I have very big temptation to keep this "gimmicks" for myself, since
you are supposed to pay some bucks to know these tricks but I do
believe in information sharing.

Bat**** crazy *and* a spammer? It must be our lucky day.

That's pretty much my take on it too.

Great minds think alike, and fools seldom differ.

Rachael Reynolds wrote:
"Karine Frigon" wrote in message
.. .
Almost every traditional diet program ever conceived has one thing in
common: Extremely low calories. Nearly all of these low calorie diets
produce weight loss in the beginning. The problem is, none of them work
for long - it's physiologically impossible to lose fat permanently by
starving yourself. The human body is simply too "smart" for this to ever
work.

This is the second time you have posted this. Many more experienced people
than I pointed out it was nonsense with no scientific basis at all. Suggest
you go away and find something better than a reference to a vague
Scandanavian journal to back this up before posting again.


--
Rachael
176/116/119

http://www.justgiving.com/rachaelreynolds

The approach to weight loss and weight maintenance outlined in Karine
Frigon's post is almost exactly what I have been doing for the last
eighteen weeks. It has worked very well for me. I'm happy with my
weight and the energy I have and I just plain feel good. At five a.m.
every morning I climb out of bed, turn on some loud rock 'n' roll music
and get on the Nordic Track for twenty minutes in front of a fan. The
rest of the day sparkles. The flab around my waist is gone, I feel good
and I enjoy the regimen and plan on staying with it. I'm sixty years
old, five foot nine and weigh 168 lbs. When I started I had just turned
sixty, and weighed 187.

Doug Lerner wrote:


On 4/20/06 10:03 AM, in article ,
"Karine Frigon" wrote:

Than get stuck on low calorie diet and don't improve anything.

It's day 321 for me on my low-calorie diet and I've lost 74 pounds so far.
Here is my weekly weight graph through Friday:

http://lerner.net/diet/weight20060414.jpg

I'm definitely not starving myself. I'm learning to eat normal human
portions!

doug


I was stuck on a low calorie diet almost all my life. I lost track of
it for about 5 years and tried a higher calorie diet. Those were the
fattest 5 years of my life. Now I'm back to my low calorie way of
eating and have been there for over 10 years.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

Karine Frigon wrote:

Almost every traditional diet program ever conceived has one thing in
common: Extremely low calories.

Cool. Someone who has never even read the popular books on
weight loss but who claims to be an expert. So have you failed
to read the books because you can't or because doing so would
blow your cover?

Nearly all of these low calorie diets produce weight loss in the beginning.

Nearly all?

The problem is, none of them work for
long - it's physiologically impossible to lose fat permanently by starving
yourself. The human body is simply too "smart" for this to ever work.

Which is why most of the popular books on the topic don't
do extremely low calories. If you're going to depict yourself
as an expert it does make sense that you should attempt to
become qualified as one.

"Cheese" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Hi, does it really matter total calories per meal as long as I stay
lower than my total intake.
I.E. To loose approx 2 lbs per week I should be eating a maximum of
1800 calories per day.

I will have a light breakfast or a banana in the morning, lets say
approx 400 cal. For lunch I will grab a yogurt with some fruit, lets
say 200 calories. That means I could eat 1200 calories at night and
still loose weight right? I don't usually eat much in the morning, and
could deprive myself for lunch if I can enjoy my favorite meals at
night and pig out. This can't be right???

Mentally, you're a long way from understanding how a body works and why we
eat. We don't eat for enjoyment, we eat for energy to keep our body
functioning. That means supplying the body with energy when it wakes,
trickling a bit more in throughout the day and finally topping it off with
enough to repair overnight. If there is a particularly part of the day
that demands extra energy it's good to give the body a little food head
start and then a little more when the activity is complete. That's why we
eat.

"Enjoyment" is ... I don't know what to say here. It's just not as
important as we make it out to be.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

That is such a depressing approach to food!


--
Rachael
176/116/119

http://www.justgiving.com/rachaelreynolds

"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in
:


"Cheese" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Hi, does it really matter total calories per meal as long as I stay
lower than my total intake.
I.E. To loose approx 2 lbs per week I should be eating a maximum of
1800 calories per day.

I will have a light breakfast or a banana in the morning, lets say
approx 400 cal. For lunch I will grab a yogurt with some fruit,
lets say 200 calories. That means I could eat 1200 calories at
night and still loose weight right? I don't usually eat much in the
morning, and could deprive myself for lunch if I can enjoy my
favorite meals at night and pig out. This can't be right???

Mentally, you're a long way from understanding how a body works and
why we eat. We don't eat for enjoyment, we eat for energy to keep
our body functioning. That means supplying the body with energy when
it wakes, trickling a bit more in throughout the day and finally
topping it off with enough to repair overnight. If there is a
particularly part of the day that demands extra energy it's good to
give the body a little food head start and then a little more when
the activity is complete. That's why we eat.

"Enjoyment" is ... I don't know what to say here. It's just not as
important as we make it out to be.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

That is such a depressing approach to food!


"Breakfast is gold, lunch is silver and dinner is lead."
--Unknown

Andy

"Andy" q wrote in message ...
"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in
:


"Cheese" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Hi, does it really matter total calories per meal as long as I stay
lower than my total intake.
I.E. To loose approx 2 lbs per week I should be eating a maximum of
1800 calories per day.

I will have a light breakfast or a banana in the morning, lets say
approx 400 cal. For lunch I will grab a yogurt with some fruit,
lets say 200 calories. That means I could eat 1200 calories at
night and still loose weight right? I don't usually eat much in the
morning, and could deprive myself for lunch if I can enjoy my
favorite meals at night and pig out. This can't be right???

Mentally, you're a long way from understanding how a body works and
why we eat. We don't eat for enjoyment, we eat for energy to keep
our body functioning. That means supplying the body with energy when
it wakes, trickling a bit more in throughout the day and finally
topping it off with enough to repair overnight. If there is a
particularly part of the day that demands extra energy it's good to
give the body a little food head start and then a little more when
the activity is complete. That's why we eat.

"Enjoyment" is ... I don't know what to say here. It's just not as
important as we make it out to be.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

That is such a depressing approach to food!


"Breakfast is gold, lunch is silver and dinner is lead."
--Unknown

Andy

It was the enjoyment thing not being important rather than the ordering of
the cals that depressed me!


--
Rachael
176/116/119

http://www.justgiving.com/rachaelreynolds

Rachael Reynolds wrote:
"Cheese" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Hi, does it really matter total calories per meal as long as I stay
lower than my total intake.
I.E. To loose approx 2 lbs per week I should be eating a maximum of
1800 calories per day.
I will have a light breakfast or a banana in the morning, lets say
approx 400 cal. For lunch I will grab a yogurt with some fruit, lets
say 200 calories. That means I could eat 1200 calories at night and
still loose weight right? I don't usually eat much in the morning, and
could deprive myself for lunch if I can enjoy my favorite meals at
night and pig out. This can't be right???
Mentally, you're a long way from understanding how a body works and why we
eat. We don't eat for enjoyment, we eat for energy to keep our body
functioning. That means supplying the body with energy when it wakes,
trickling a bit more in throughout the day and finally topping it off with
enough to repair overnight. If there is a particularly part of the day
that demands extra energy it's good to give the body a little food head
start and then a little more when the activity is complete. That's why we
eat.

"Enjoyment" is ... I don't know what to say here. It's just not as
important as we make it out to be.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

That is such a depressing approach to food!



Whatever keeps us on track. I try to eat to live since living to eat
got me a bit chubby at one point in my life.
--

Cheese

http://cheesensweets.com/contact/cheese

In article , Andy wrote:

"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in
:


"Cheese" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Hi, does it really matter total calories per meal as long as I stay
lower than my total intake.
I.E. To loose approx 2 lbs per week I should be eating a maximum of
1800 calories per day.

I will have a light breakfast or a banana in the morning, lets say
approx 400 cal. For lunch I will grab a yogurt with some fruit,
lets say 200 calories. That means I could eat 1200 calories at
night and still loose weight right? I don't usually eat much in the
morning, and could deprive myself for lunch if I can enjoy my
favorite meals at night and pig out. This can't be right???

Mentally, you're a long way from understanding how a body works and
why we eat. We don't eat for enjoyment, we eat for energy to keep
our body functioning. That means supplying the body with energy when
it wakes, trickling a bit more in throughout the day and finally
topping it off with enough to repair overnight. If there is a
particularly part of the day that demands extra energy it's good to
give the body a little food head start and then a little more when
the activity is complete. That's why we eat.

"Enjoyment" is ... I don't know what to say here. It's just not as
important as we make it out to be.
--

So you are prepared to give up enjoyment for the rest of your life? If
it were not important you never would have needed to diet.

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman