A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Weightwatchers
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

calories?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old September 5th, 2006, 05:04 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default calories?

"Eddie-Type2" wrote:
But I think you missed my original posting where I clearly said to LW ....

......"The indigenous people of the artic part of Canada are properly
referred to
as Inuit, not Eskimos........"


That is an inaccurate statement. It is perhaps best, when
discussing *only* the Inuit of Canada to call them Inuit, it is
never improper to call them Eskimos.

Then you popped in and went nutso on Nunya's posting...........


Only if "nutso" means that I use words precisely.

In fact Nunya made several slightly inflammatory and very
inaccurate statements. I did object to those, and did make an
attempt at being relatively brief in commenting. I do expect
readers to be observant and notice that my signature does
indicate where I live, which _should_ cause people to assume it
best to ask for details rather than argue from ignorance and
assumptions about anything I say that they question.

But yes, obviously if anyone wants to argue the point I can and
will come up with a great deal of documentation as well as point
out that I do have sufficient personal expertise to make the
statements that I do.

You are obviously well educated on the subject, but you really should read
and understand what you are responding to before you go off the deep-end
with your replies....


Apparently *you* didn't read it well. Trust me, I did. That
was why I chose that article to respond to.

*Your* reply was the one that went off the deep end... and left
you somewhat in water over your head.

That being said, I am truly impressed with your response and no offense was
ever intended.


I didn't assume an offense was ever meant. I don't see this as
a topic that drives people to being offensive as such. However,
Usenet is filled with offensive people. Not so oddly they
usually are everywhere, and do comment of this type of thread.
Very oddly though, there haven't been any here! We may well be
adamantly disagreeing, but I don't see anyone being offensive.

Are us "fat folks" easier to get along with, or what??? :-)

Now, what do you have to say about weight-loss and WW ? LOL!!!


Oh, my... NO!

I just went to the doc last week, and I've gained 10 pounds and
my sugar levels were up to "borderline diabetic" again. I am in
no mood to discuss *this* topic! I _love_ to eat, and had just
decided that one particular meal (halibut with salad and rice)
that I eat often would be better with double the amount of rice
in it. Booom! That idea gets blown away...

Grrrrrr... please, just now I really don't want to talk about
WW. ;-)

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #82  
Old September 5th, 2006, 05:32 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Eddie-Type2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default calories?

Sorry to hear that your sugar levels are high. You had better take care of
it and watch your carb intake.
Discussing WW is what this group is all about so I'm a little surprised that
you don't want to discuss this topic?
I did say, "indigenous people of artic part of CANADA are referred to
Inuit"......we are either not communicating properly or you keep missing
that point? So where is my inaccurate statement?

Take Care Floyd......it's really not worth arguing about.......

Let's get back to discussing WW and weightloss - ok?

Eddie
Weight June05-359.0lbs
Current Weight-286.8lbs
Loss to date=72.2lbs
Goal Weight-180.0lbs

"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote in message
...
"Eddie-Type2" wrote:
But I think you missed my original posting where I clearly said to LW ....

......"The indigenous people of the artic part of Canada are properly
referred to
as Inuit, not Eskimos........"


That is an inaccurate statement. It is perhaps best, when
discussing *only* the Inuit of Canada to call them Inuit, it is
never improper to call them Eskimos.

Then you popped in and went nutso on Nunya's posting...........


Only if "nutso" means that I use words precisely.

In fact Nunya made several slightly inflammatory and very
inaccurate statements. I did object to those, and did make an
attempt at being relatively brief in commenting. I do expect
readers to be observant and notice that my signature does
indicate where I live, which _should_ cause people to assume it
best to ask for details rather than argue from ignorance and
assumptions about anything I say that they question.

But yes, obviously if anyone wants to argue the point I can and
will come up with a great deal of documentation as well as point
out that I do have sufficient personal expertise to make the
statements that I do.

You are obviously well educated on the subject, but you really should read
and understand what you are responding to before you go off the deep-end
with your replies....


Apparently *you* didn't read it well. Trust me, I did. That
was why I chose that article to respond to.

*Your* reply was the one that went off the deep end... and left
you somewhat in water over your head.

That being said, I am truly impressed with your response and no offense was
ever intended.


I didn't assume an offense was ever meant. I don't see this as
a topic that drives people to being offensive as such. However,
Usenet is filled with offensive people. Not so oddly they
usually are everywhere, and do comment of this type of thread.
Very oddly though, there haven't been any here! We may well be
adamantly disagreeing, but I don't see anyone being offensive.

Are us "fat folks" easier to get along with, or what??? :-)

Now, what do you have to say about weight-loss and WW ? LOL!!!


Oh, my... NO!

I just went to the doc last week, and I've gained 10 pounds and
my sugar levels were up to "borderline diabetic" again. I am in
no mood to discuss *this* topic! I _love_ to eat, and had just
decided that one particular meal (halibut with salad and rice)
that I eat often would be better with double the amount of rice
in it. Booom! That idea gets blown away...

Grrrrrr... please, just now I really don't want to talk about
WW. ;-)

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)



  #83  
Old September 5th, 2006, 05:44 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
nanner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default calories?


snip

The etymology of the term "Eskimo" is plagued with a myth that
it is an Indian word for "eaters of raw meat",
as if that would
be an insult.


I don't see the insult either LOL

Of course nobody but a Westerner with a very
hypocritical Eurocentric view would consider that insulting.


steak tartare anyone? very popular in Belgium from what I understand LOL

alot more snipped

thanks for all the interesting info


  #84  
Old September 5th, 2006, 08:31 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default calories?

"Eddie-Type2" wrote:
I did say, "indigenous people of artic part of CANADA are referred to
Inuit"......we are either not communicating properly or you keep missing
that point? So where is my inaccurate statement?


You are a bit casual about quoting. I havee no problem with the
statement you quote above.

But that was *not* what you said that I objected to, as should have
been *very* clear from what I've been saying.

But I think you missed my original posting where I clearly said to LW ....

......"The indigenous people of the artic part of Canada are properly
referred to as Inuit, not Eskimos........"

^^^^^^^^^^^

That is an inaccurate statement. It is perhaps best, when
discussing *only* the Inuit of Canada to call them Inuit, it is
never improper to call them Eskimos.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

See the difference? It *is* significant.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #85  
Old September 5th, 2006, 11:18 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Eddie-Type2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default calories?

ok , you win......I'm tired....I need to lose weight and get
healthy..........back to WW........
Take care Floyd.........it was fun

Eddie
Weight June05-359.0lbs
Current Weight-286.8lbs
Loss to date=72.2lbs
Goal Weight-180.0lbs

"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote in message
...
"Eddie-Type2" wrote:
I did say, "indigenous people of artic part of CANADA are referred to
Inuit"......we are either not communicating properly or you keep missing
that point? So where is my inaccurate statement?


You are a bit casual about quoting. I havee no problem with the
statement you quote above.

But that was *not* what you said that I objected to, as should have
been *very* clear from what I've been saying.

But I think you missed my original posting where I clearly said to LW ....

......"The indigenous people of the artic part of Canada are properly
referred to as Inuit, not Eskimos........"

^^^^^^^^^^^

That is an inaccurate statement. It is perhaps best, when
discussing *only* the Inuit of Canada to call them Inuit, it is
never improper to call them Eskimos.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

See the difference? It *is* significant.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)


  #86  
Old September 6th, 2006, 03:48 AM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Nunya B.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 615
Default calories?

Good choice Eddie.

It's like pig wrestling - you both get dirty but the pig enjoys it. Back to
weight loss with WEIGHT WATCHERS.

--
the volleyballchick

"Eddie-Type2" wrote in message
...
ok , you win......I'm tired....I need to lose weight and get
healthy..........back to WW........
Take care Floyd.........it was fun

Eddie
Weight June05-359.0lbs
Current Weight-286.8lbs
Loss to date=72.2lbs
Goal Weight-180.0lbs




  #87  
Old September 6th, 2006, 01:04 PM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Eddie-Type2
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default calories?

LOL!!!............

Eddie
Weight June05-359.0lbs
Current Weight-286.8lbs
Loss to date=72.2lbs
Goal Weight-180.0lbs

"Nunya B." wrote in message
...
Good choice Eddie.

It's like pig wrestling - you both get dirty but the pig enjoys it. Back to
weight loss with WEIGHT WATCHERS.

--
the volleyballchick

"Eddie-Type2" wrote in message
...
ok , you win......I'm tired....I need to lose weight and get
healthy..........back to WW........
Take care Floyd.........it was fun

Eddie
Weight June05-359.0lbs
Current Weight-286.8lbs
Loss to date=72.2lbs
Goal Weight-180.0lbs





  #88  
Old September 26th, 2006, 01:32 AM posted to alt.support.diet.weightwatchers
Saul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default calories?

You need to get away from WW and start on your own to see what to eat and
make you own decisions. There are hundreds of books out there to read, or
even the internet.
You should be able to look on a package of food is with a quick glance, see
its its going to load you up with fat and calories.

Very easy to lose weight.

Intake calories - (+) burning = losing (gaining) weight

Thats all you need to know. How much you take in, how much you burn
normally, then add some walking to burn more.

Good luck


"nanner" wrote in message
...
Hi - i am totally lost when it comes to calories. Should i just google it
and see what the "average woman" should intake or is there a formula for
how many calories a day to eat?

I am using Fitday to track what i eat but then i see all these numbers and
it means nothing to me!! What should the Fat/Protien/Carbs ratio be? I
need to lose weight, not maintain where I am.

Thanks!!



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
total calories [email protected] General Discussion 48 April 20th, 2006 11:05 PM
Three reasons why calories probably don't count TC Low Carbohydrate Diets 120 February 27th, 2006 07:57 PM
Week 17 report - a "so so" week. Down 1.3 lb, but still higher thanI was on 9/9 Doug Lerner General Discussion 9 October 1st, 2005 01:20 AM
Here are some WW's Dessert Recipes SPOONS Weightwatchers 3 August 24th, 2004 01:06 AM
Uncovering the Atkins diet secret Diarmid Logan Low Carbohydrate Diets 142 February 14th, 2004 03:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.