Cooking and diet don't mix.

Well, of course they CAN mix, yet one difficulty in diet control is
having a good cook around. It can be even a problem for the cook,
since they are often overweight. Other cooks obviously like to cook,
but not to eat, but they are the exception. I have to laugh at the
cooking shows, where they scoup out mounds of butter, oils, sugar, and
other high calorie ingredients. Yet, it is unlikely you will see a
cooking show on how to prepare oatmeal, or how to toss a garden salad,
or steam broccoli. Most cooks are insulted if you don't eat their
food. If it is a spouse, you might really be in trouble. The fact is,
IMO, the less cooking and preparing you do, the healthier. Most food
is best in its natural state and requires no cooking or just simple
boiling or steaming. The potato is the obvious example. By itself, or
baked or boiled it is low calorie and nutritious, but as soon as you
start doing things to it like fry it or add this and that to it, the
calories skyrocket and the dish is no longer low calorie and probably
not as healthy.

I was just curious how people handle that potential problem where they
want to eat healthy but not too much, and not high calorie foods, but
have a "good" cook in the household? dkw

I have two words....PORTION CONTROL.

Ever eaten dinner with a skinny person (i.e. someone who just IS and
always has been slim)? Different set of habits i.e. what I used to
think of as "normal" meal does for two people, no pigging out between
meals or at night etc.

M.

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:01:01 -0700, wrote:

Well, of course they CAN mix, yet one difficulty in diet control is
having a good cook around. It can be even a problem for the cook,
since they are often overweight. Other cooks obviously like to cook,
but not to eat, but they are the exception. I have to laugh at the
cooking shows, where they scoup out mounds of butter, oils, sugar, and
other high calorie ingredients. Yet, it is unlikely you will see a
cooking show on how to prepare oatmeal, or how to toss a garden salad,
or steam broccoli. Most cooks are insulted if you don't eat their
food. If it is a spouse, you might really be in trouble. The fact is,
IMO, the less cooking and preparing you do, the healthier. Most food
is best in its natural state and requires no cooking or just simple
boiling or steaming. The potato is the obvious example. By itself, or
baked or boiled it is low calorie and nutritious, but as soon as you
start doing things to it like fry it or add this and that to it, the
calories skyrocket and the dish is no longer low calorie and probably
not as healthy.


I suppose it depends on the cook. My husband considers me a good cook,
which I think is exaggerating a bit, but other times, I think I do
pretty darn well. And I fix pretty healthy stuff!

I disagree about less cooking and preparing being healthier. For me,
if I cook less, prepare less, then I'm FAR more likely to go out to
eat or eat fast food. Hardly as healthy as what I can fix at home.


I do agree that food is often best prepared simply. My luncheon and
snack salads are simple grilled or roasted chicken, fresh veggies and
spinach, usually either with a bottled dressing containing healthy fat
and minimal sugar, or a plain olive oil and balsamic vinegar dressing.
(OK, sometimes I add garlic/herbs, sometimes I do lemon or lime juice
instead of vinegar, but you get the drift. Simple, yet tasty!)

Breakfast... tasty fruit/protein smoothies with green tea or, simple
egg white omelets with various fillings. Spinach, red pepper, reduced
fat mozarrella and a tablespoon of walnuts is a favorite. Low in
carbs... and if I want a yolk, I use one omega-3 egg.

Dinner tends to be simple grills or stir fries (non-stick wok) or
soups or stews, with veggies, lean protein and healthy fats. Carbs
primarily from vegetables, but occasionally from whole grains.

Sometimes I'll use a frozen entree... we get some that have half
decent nutrition profiles, like sesame crusted salmon that I can bake,
in fact, I served that the other night with some roasted acorn squash,
steamed asparagus and a half cup of red grapes for dessert.


I was just curious how people handle that potential problem where they
want to eat healthy but not too much, and not high calorie foods, but
have a "good" cook in the household? dkw

I don't bother much with unhealthy recipes... I stick with those that
I feel have good ingredients and are relatively simple to prepare.
There's tons out there on the internet! And I fiddle recipes that look
promising too.

It's really not that hard. But if you have someone cooking for you who
prefers the high calorie kinds of recipes, maybe you can challenge
them to find substitutions?


--
Cynthia
262/241/152

In article om,
" wrote:

Well, of course they CAN mix, yet one difficulty in diet control is
having a good cook around.
snip
I was just curious how people handle that potential problem where they
want to eat healthy but not too much, and not high calorie foods, but
have a "good" cook in the household? dkw

You offered a lot of generalizations that--I have to say *my* case--just
aren't true.

I am a very good cook, and cook for my family every night of the week. I
choose foods that are healthy, like lean meats and vegies, and offer
other items that I know my family enjoys but I choose not to eat because
of *my* way of eating.

I try to keep in mind that my food issues aren't everyone's food issues.
I don't expect everyone to eat what I eat, or even what I make. To each
his own. If you want pork chops, mashed taters, and broccoli, have at
it. If you want your pork chop sliced up on a bed of greens, go for it.
If you want your broccoli covered in cheese and butter, fine, it's your
heart attack.

And, I have found over the years, that most meals take 30 minutes or
less to prepare. If you can't give up 30 minutes to prepare a quality
meal for yourself or your family, you have issues that can't be
addressed here.

Amy
168/115/...

--
Check it out!
http://www.tcfitnesschallenge.com/index.html

This is similar to the dining out problem, when it comes to calories and
portion control.

I find the hour+ of smelling a cook prepare a meal to lead to hunger, and
ultimately large portions on my plate.



wrote in message
ps.com...
Well, of course they CAN mix, yet one difficulty in diet control is
having a good cook around. It can be even a problem for the cook,
since they are often overweight. Other cooks obviously like to cook,
but not to eat, but they are the exception. I have to laugh at the
cooking shows, where they scoup out mounds of butter, oils, sugar, and
other high calorie ingredients. Yet, it is unlikely you will see a
cooking show on how to prepare oatmeal, or how to toss a garden salad,
or steam broccoli. Most cooks are insulted if you don't eat their
food. If it is a spouse, you might really be in trouble. The fact is,
IMO, the less cooking and preparing you do, the healthier. Most food
is best in its natural state and requires no cooking or just simple
boiling or steaming. The potato is the obvious example. By itself, or
baked or boiled it is low calorie and nutritious, but as soon as you
start doing things to it like fry it or add this and that to it, the
calories skyrocket and the dish is no longer low calorie and probably
not as healthy.

I was just curious how people handle that potential problem where they
want to eat healthy but not too much, and not high calorie foods, but
have a "good" cook in the household? dkw

I love to cook and I love to eat. The key is meal planning and not
having any last minute "What should we eat" days.

I don't exercise portion control either, I just cook healthy food and
eat til I'm full.

On Jun 8, 11:07 am, Mitch Mitch@... wrote:
I love to cook and I love to eat. The key is meal planning and not
having any last minute "What should we eat" days.

I don't exercise portion control either, I just cook healthy food and
eat til I'm full.

Thanks for all the ideas, folks. Where I was coming from is the
realization that I was never able to diet successfully while I was
married. I'm sure it works for many people, but I have also heard
other people say "I wish my wife weren't such a good cook". Obviously
there are lots of ways to work out the situation....portion control of
course, preparing healthier meals, as was suggested, secretly feed the
dog under the table.

Ever notice the sign on some popcorn machines in malls? I have. One
read, "Place machine in mall area to increase sales" or something like
that. It works. If you smell and see good food, you want some. That
was a problem for me. What worked for me was to give away all the high
cal. foods and not stock anything that was fattening in the house, and
that was only possible without a (good) cook in the house. Different
strokes for different folks. dkw

On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:27:38 GMT, Cubit wrote:

This is similar to the dining out problem, when it comes to calories and
portion control.

I find the hour+ of smelling a cook prepare a meal to lead to hunger, and
ultimately large portions on my plate.


With the exceptions of some big stews, chilis, lentil dishes, etc...
where I fix a big batch and we eat off of it for several days or I
freeze some, mostly I fix a single meal.

There's a portion of lean meat, large portion of veggies, usually a
bit of fruit for dessert, sometimes a carb... and that's it. There's
enough for two, all portioned out, so even if hubby wanted to indulge
in more, he couldn't. I rarely want to, my dinners are pretty filling.

(If hubby was really hungry, I have plenty of stuff in the fridge he
could go for at need... but I don't leave him hungry usually.)

Tonight, we are having a chicken stir fry, with asparagus, yellow
squash, onion and red pepper. And curried red beans on the side for
our carb. Dessert will be a slice of cantaloupe. I was going to have a
small dish of lime jello going as well, but I kind of goofed and it
won't be set in time.

--
Cynthia
262/241/152

I try to cook some meat, and then the rest is good fresh veggies
chopped up in a salad, or like a"salsa" i put on top of my meat. I
like ot keep things simple.