Stupid question ...

Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting the
same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the egg with a
the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and "boiled".

BR Harry

"Hairy Lethal" (spellin mistaik) wrote in message
...
Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is
always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I
have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting the
same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the egg with a
the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask
the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and "boiled".

BR Harry



Who said it was healthier?

On Feb 17, 4:32 pm, "Hairy Lethal" (spellin
mistaik) wrote:
Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting the
same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the egg with a
the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and "boiled".

BR Harry

It sounds the same to me nutritionally. You are right. People really
get into dieting and form strong opinions. A lot of things work. About
the only hard and fast rule is that calories do count. dkw

Hairy Lethal wrote:
Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is
always surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which
are themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for
years. I have just has an argument with one of these, and this
question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting
the same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the
egg with a the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to
ask the question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried"
and "boiled".

BR Harry

How about ditch the egg, corn bread, margarine and eat instead:

lean turkey, veggies and hummus

"Hairy Lethal" (spellin mistaik) wrote in message
...
Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is
always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I
have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting
the
same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the egg with
a
the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask
the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and
"boiled".

BR Harry

No difference, really. But conventional wisdom is to limit egg
consumption to a few per week.
Is "whole corn" a UK term?

And watch the transfat in the margarine.

del

On Feb 17, 2:32 pm, "Hairy Lethal" (spellin
mistaik) wrote:
Hi all,

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

If I take an egg, boil it, slice it and lay it on a slice of full-corn
bread, with a little margarine, why is that more healthy than putting the
same margarine in a frying pan, frying the egg, and eating the egg with a
the slice of bread?

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and "boiled".

BR Harry

Hey, Harry!

Gotta agree that there are tons of experts, etc.

I certainly have to agree with DKW here -- calories do matter.
Everything else -- not as much (unless you're garbling poison).
However, techniques vary, and you have to adopt a life style that
allows you to restrict what you eat, that doesn't lead you off the
path, etc.

If you want to get rid of that 45 pounds, your duty is to get your
calories low enough, day after day, week after week, month after
month, to reach your goal. You have to maintain "task focus."

You have to be "good enough for long enough." It's both that difficult
and that simple. Not easy but also not all that complicated.

In 48 days I've lost 23 pounds and I'm going to lose another 45 or so
to get bellow 200. (Today I'm 242.) I've had about 1400 calories today
and, according to that rate, in about 100 days, I will have lost about
42 more pounds.

Losing weight will never be as much fun as chowing down on great-
tasting calories (Ive had some vegetables, beer, some pasta, etc.),
but again, to repeat, DKW is absolutely Keerect! Calories do count.
(In the movie, "Heart and Souls" is the song: "Walk like a man.."
Time to start that trek.)

Yours,

Caleb

No difference, really. But conventional wisdom is to limit egg
consumption to a few per week.
Is "whole corn" a UK term?

And watch the transfat in the margarine.

UK? Dunno. I never heard of full-corn, whole-corn when I lived in the UK. I
now live in Sweden and have had little contact with native Englishmen, even
though I am one.

I married a Swedish girl when working abroad, but when we tosed the coin it
landed on Sweden instead of the UK.

But the full-korn (SwE) stuff seems to be the "in thing" these days. If it
doesn't have the words "full korn" written on the packet then it 'aint
healthy. That leaves eggs out anyway.

I am quite overweight and need to make some serious changes in my life
(food-wise). My new goal is to loose 45lbs. But it seems that one is
always
surrounded by loads of "experts" on weight loss, most of which are
themselves fat, and have been just "watching their weight" for years. I
have
just has an argument with one of these, and this question came up:

Ok, I am going to get shot out of the water here, but I just had to ask
the
question. I see no difference, other than the words "fried" and
"boiled".

BR Harry


Hey, Harry!

Gotta agree that there are tons of experts, etc.

I certainly have to agree with DKW here -- calories do matter.
Everything else -- not as much (unless you're garbling poison).
However, techniques vary, and you have to adopt a life style that
allows you to restrict what you eat, that doesn't lead you off the
path, etc.

If you want to get rid of that 45 pounds, your duty is to get your
calories low enough, day after day, week after week, month after
month, to reach your goal. You have to maintain "task focus."

You have to be "good enough for long enough." It's both that difficult
and that simple. Not easy but also not all that complicated.

In 48 days I've lost 23 pounds and I'm going to lose another 45 or so
to get bellow 200. (Today I'm 242.) I've had about 1400 calories today
and, according to that rate, in about 100 days, I will have lost about
42 more pounds.

Losing weight will never be as much fun as chowing down on great-
tasting calories (Ive had some vegetables, beer, some pasta, etc.),
but again, to repeat, DKW is absolutely Keerect! Calories do count.
(In the movie, "Heart and Souls" is the song: "Walk like a man.."
Time to start that trek.)


Hi Caleb,
To me it is a simple matter of input versus output. I am documentary
evidence that when input exceeds output the bag in the middle (me) gets
bigger. I just wish the "simple" was a bit easier to do!

BR Harry

On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:07:26 GMT, "Hairy Lethal"
(spellin mistaik) wrote:

No difference, really. But conventional wisdom is to limit egg
consumption to a few per week.
Is "whole corn" a UK term?

And watch the transfat in the margarine.

UK? Dunno. I never heard of full-corn, whole-corn when I lived in the UK. I
now live in Sweden and have had little contact with native Englishmen, even
though I am one.

I married a Swedish girl when working abroad, but when we tosed the coin it
landed on Sweden instead of the UK.

But the full-korn (SwE) stuff seems to be the "in thing" these days. If it
doesn't have the words "full korn" written on the packet then it 'aint
healthy. That leaves eggs out anyway.


Is it possible that "full korn" means whole grain, rather than
something with corn in it? Here in the US we have something called
cornbread, but it's really more like a muffin, not a type of bread
you'd use for toast or use to make sandwiches or anything like that.

Anyway, I wouldn't put eggs in the unhealthy category, myself. They
are somewhat high in fat, but these days I think most people don't
feel that the cholesterol content of eggs is a major issue. And
they're a good source of protein and many other nutrients. Anyway, I
eat lots of them :-).


Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

"Chris Braun" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:07:26 GMT, "Hairy Lethal"
(spellin mistaik) wrote:

No difference, really. But conventional wisdom is to limit egg
consumption to a few per week.
Is "whole corn" a UK term?

And watch the transfat in the margarine.

UK? Dunno. I never heard of full-corn, whole-corn when I lived in the
UK. I
now live in Sweden and have had little contact with native Englishmen,
even
though I am one.

I married a Swedish girl when working abroad, but when we tosed the
coin it
landed on Sweden instead of the UK.

But the full-korn (SwE) stuff seems to be the "in thing" these days. If
it
doesn't have the words "full korn" written on the packet then it 'aint
healthy. That leaves eggs out anyway.


Is it possible that "full korn" means whole grain, rather than
something with corn in it? Here in the US we have something called
cornbread, but it's really more like a muffin, not a type of bread
you'd use for toast or use to make sandwiches or anything like that.

Anyway, I wouldn't put eggs in the unhealthy category, myself. They
are somewhat high in fat, but these days I think most people don't
feel that the cholesterol content of eggs is a major issue. And
they're a good source of protein and many other nutrients. Anyway, I
eat lots of them :-).


Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

I knew that in Europe, Maize is the name for what we call corn here in
USA. And corn is the name for wheat. Or maybe for any small grain. I
had just never heard anyone refer to "full corn" bread, like we would say
"whole wheat" or "whole grain". It was interesting. I don't know why
the health care establishment (US Government, Heart Association, Mayo
Clinic etc) recommend limiting eggs to a couple a week.

del