 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / August 2004Help a couple of questions , advice welcomed.
Hi All , I've got a couple of questions , i've been reading a diet book called "You are what you eat" its a great book which even has a t.v show over in the U.K it really has shown me the errors of my ways and i'm enjoying a much healthy life style,one piece of advice pretty much says stay away from carbonated/fizzy drinks , but it seems to be talking more about Cola's etc , but where do things like sparkling spring water come into this situation ?????? Also is coconut the fruit in its original form , okay for diets? is the juice fine to drink ? of course i'm asking because i do like my sweet things and i guess a coconut as nature intended would hopefully be fine to indulge in through out the week , as i can pretty much make a coconut last from one weeks shopping to the next , nipping a piece here and there. TIA OH No My Tails Popped Out.... wrote in alt.support.diet on Sun, 22 Aug 2004: >Hi All , I've got a couple of questions , i've been reading a diet book >called "You are what you eat" its a great book which even has a t.v show [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >about Cola's etc , but where do things like sparkling spring water come into >this situation ?????? The thing about colas is that they have added sugar, or, in diet form, artificial sweetener. Fizzy water is fine, as long as it's plain water, not flavoured (you really, really don't want to put those artificial flavourings into your body, nor artificial sweetener, either). >Also is coconut the fruit in its original form , okay for diets? Not really, as it contains a huge amount of saturated fat. Alas.... >is the >juice fine to drink ? of course i'm asking because i do like my sweet things >and i guess a coconut as nature intended would hopefully be fine to indulge >in through out the week , as i can pretty much make a coconut last from one >weeks shopping to the next , nipping a piece here and there. You would be better with fruit like nectarines or oranges, which don't contain fat.  SignatureAnnabel - "Mrs Redboots" 90/88/80kg Annabel , thank you for your reply , i know feel i've learnt a little bit more. Best regards > OH No My Tails Popped Out.... wrote in alt.support.diet on Sun, 22 Aug > 2004: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > You would be better with fruit like nectarines or oranges, which don't > contain fat. >Subject: Help a couple of questions , advice welcomed. >From: "OH No My Tails Popped Out...." Nospam@nospamthansks.com [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >about Cola's etc , but where do things like sparkling spring water come into >this situation ?????? Normally, sparkling water is low calorie and carbohydrate free/low. Depending on which 'diet' you are actually following (a commercial one like Atkins or Weight Watchers or South Beach or whatever you and your dr came up with) these things sometimes matter. Personally, I am a diabetic and avoid all drinks (fizzy or otherwise) that have any carbs or many calories. I have pretty much taken to making water my main drink. >Also is coconut the fruit in its original form , okay for diets? is the >juice fine to drink ? of course i'm asking because i do like my sweet things >and i guess a coconut as nature intended would hopefully be fine to indulge >in through out the week , as i can pretty much make a coconut last from one >weeks shopping to the next , nipping a piece here and there. My experience, sadly, is that most fruits are way too high in sugar/carbs. Again, *I* am diabetic, and so that is the main reason why. If I had to, I'd pick out a veggie before a fruit, but mainly because of sugar/carbs. God, what I wouldn't do to eat an orange or a bananna! I think you need to decide what 'diet' you are trying to follow, and then decide accordingly what things are allowed, allowed in moderation, and 'banned'. Since I have no idea what you're trying to achieve or how you're trying to achieve it, I can't really say more than this. The USDA site has all the stuff you'd need to measure foods side-by-side to see their nutritional content. Also the ADA and other sites like Fitday.com. HTH. -- DJ >I think you need to decide what 'diet' you are trying to follow, and then >decide accordingly what things are allowed, allowed in moderation, and >'banned'. Since I have no idea what you're trying to achieve or how you're >trying to achieve it, I can't really say more than this. Of course, conditions like diabetes affect what one can eat. But, apart from this, I hate to think that one has to "ban" particular foods from one's menu entirely in order to lose weight -- particularly healthy things like fruit. It certainly worked for me to just limit my intake of the things that are high in calories relative to nutritional value. (I don't consider fruits in this category, but rather things like cookies and pastries.) I have eaten just about everything at some time or another in the course of losing over 120 lbs. I guess one thing I have pretty much "banned" is non-diet soda, though I've had it a couple of times. It just seems like something I can do without. But I will occasionally eat sweets and other treat foods -- just infrequently and in moderation. I know some people have foods that trigger eating binges, and perhaps it's better to avoid those entirely. One thing that works for me is to avoid bringing sweets and junk foods into my house, so that if I indulge I just do it when eating out and then only in moderation. There's no temptation to finish the whole package :-). Chris 262/141/ (145-150) > lbs. I guess one thing I have pretty much "banned" is non-diet soda, me2. One of those sacrifices to make the water taste better. I think if you start mixing it up the plain water won't taste as good. I've banned ice cream though, and anything else where 200 kcal is a ridiculously small amount; Heywood Mogroot wrote in alt.support.diet on Sun, 22 Aug 2004: >> lbs. I guess one thing I have pretty much "banned" is non-diet soda, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I've banned ice cream though, and anything else where 200 kcal is a >ridiculously small amount; I think it depends on what you like. My mother, for instance, would have no problems if she never ate ice-cream again, as she's not that fond of it. I like it, so do eat it in moderation. Usually, these days, I make my own so I can control what goes into it. SignatureAnnabel - "Mrs Redboots" 90/88/80kg >> lbs. I guess one thing I have pretty much "banned" is non-diet soda, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I've banned ice cream though, and anything else where 200 kcal is a >ridiculously small amount; I haven't banned ice cream, but when I bring it home I buy lower-calorie varieties, and I don't eat it that often. Generally I can take or leave ice cream. I actually prefer yogurt most of the time. I also haven't banned other calorie-dense dessert items, but don't have them at home and eat them only occasionally (like last night when DH and I shared two desserts at a restaurant :-) ). Chris >Of course, conditions like diabetes affect what one can eat. But, >apart from this, I hate to think that one has to "ban" particular [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >when eating out and then only in moderation. There's no temptation to >finish the whole package :-). Your approach is similar to mine, Chris. I can't think of a single food item that I would "ban" from my diet. What I try to avoid most of all is completely empty calories - like putting sugar in tea or coffee (I don't take it sweet anyway but if I did I would never use sugar), or on the very rare occasions when I drink a cola I would always choose the sugar free variety. After that come the foods I regard with caution, which I know to be calorie dense - usually meaning those high in refined carbs and fats together. Experience has taught me that it isn't eating particular foods that triggers my bingeing. The more I regard a food as forbidden, the more I crave it and it can then assume a "desirablity factor" out of all proportion, with the inevitable results. janice > Hi All , I've got a couple of questions , i've been reading a diet book > called "You are what you eat" its a great book which even has a t.v show [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > about Cola's etc , but where do things like sparkling spring water come into > this situation ?????? Sparkling water is okay. There was some issue about carbonation being bad for your bones a few years back, but I don't credit it with much of a threat. > Also is coconut the fruit in its original form, okay for diets? I saw Annibel answered this quite differently than Chris and I do. I agree with Chris. Chris has lost 100 and I've lost 70 pounds. I'm not sure about Annabel - my memory is that she lost a bunch low-fatting it ten years ago and regained it all plus some. Now she's attempting to do it again. Low-fat isn't a great plan. A better plan is to find a calorie budget that works for your life and eat a balanced diet, where "balanced" means [very] roughly equal macronutrient ratios. A decent guess for a starting place might be 45% carbs, 30% protein and 25% fat. You might be startled at how full you feel on small portions of a diet like this. But keeping control of your calories in the end means watching out for food that cost more calories than they're worth. Fats should be there but they have to displace other foods, typically carbs, and carbs should be there but the ones you pick ought to be high in fiber and high in phytonutrients and taste good and work in your recipes. Don't squander your calorie budget on things you don't need. So, to answer your question, there's a place for coconut in your diet, but it will have to be in lieue of something else because you just can't keep spending your calorie budget. Only you can decide if you prefer a little bit of coconut over a lot of orange, for example. Coconut is relatively high calorie: check www.fitday.com for an idea of calories per portion. > is the juice fine to drink ? I rarely drink juice anymore. Too many calories too quickly consumed. I eat fruit whole and drink water and coffee. > of course i'm asking because i do like my sweet things > and i guess a coconut as nature intended would hopefully be fine to indulge > in through out the week , as i can pretty much make a coconut last from one > weeks shopping to the next , nipping a piece here and there. Then go for it. I eat almonds this way, and for the sweet-tooth moments I have a variety of choices: cottage cheese mixed with sweetened yogurt, or a small square of really good dark chocoate, or a Balance bar. (I've gotten small enough so my calorie budget requires I only get HALF a Balance bar now, but time was I'd eat one of those for an evening snack.) > TIA Mistress Krista has a great website that explains the whole eating thing in laymen's language. I could send you to a half dozen other places that tells you the truth about food, but she's good and worth bookmarking: http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html and look for the Eating tab. Dally 244/175/168 > Low-fat isn't a great plan. A better plan is to find a calorie budget > that works for your life and eat a balanced diet, where "balanced" means > [very] roughly equal macronutrient ratios. A decent guess for a > starting place might be 45% carbs, 30% protein and 25% fat. You might > be startled at how full you feel on small portions of a diet like this. Dally, you say that low fat is a bad plan, and then in the next sentence suggest a diet with 25% of calories from fat, which is a low fat diet. It makes no sense. My recent realization on low fat is that it works better for younger people than for older people, since, as people age, their glycemic control turns for the worse and low fat diets are not working as well for people with poor glycemic control. This is not universal, as various people deteriorate at very different rates, but generally, I would expect it to be true. So, a lot of people report that a low fat diet worked great for them X years ago, and then they put on pounds and it does not work as well. Since Annabel is so adamant about continuing her diet of choice, I decided to stop harping on her, but my expectation is that it won't work in 4 or so months. She has a lot of willpower, so she might as well prove you or me wrong. Who knows, bodies work in mysterious ways and not every fat person is insulin resistant. There are studies to this effect and they mention cohorts of insulin sensitive obese subjects. i >>Low-fat isn't a great plan. A better plan is to find a calorie budget >>that works for your life and eat a balanced diet, where "balanced" means [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > It makes no sense. I defined my terms. It's not my fault if you have "low-fat" defined differently in your brain. 33% "/- 10% of each macronutrient is what I call "balanced". It's not the "as little fat as humanly possible" that typical idiot dieting includes. Ornish and MacDougal both aim for 10% fat. Body for Life suggests 20% fat and the Zone Diet (which I've been following more or less for two years) recommends 25% fat and is called "a low carb" plan in mainstream literature. In practice any specific day will range a bit around your goal percentages and I don't think it matters all that much. At that point it comes down to recipe preferences. Many of us have found the same thing with different terms: our portions sizes are controllable and our bodies work best when we get roughly balanced macronutrients. 33 +/-10=23-43% per macronutrient. Annabel appears to be doing roughly 80% carbs. I think it's worth mentioning to the OP that she's on the track that leads to low energy, deprivation, food cravings, hunger, poor skin, low metabolism, muscle loss and eventually giving all this up and regaining all the weight. Wouldn't it be nice to skip that step and learn how to feed your body right the first time? > My recent realization on low fat is that it works better for younger > people than for older people, since, as people age, their glycemic > control turns for the worse and low fat diets are not working as well > for people with poor glycemic control. This is not universal, as > various people deteriorate at very different rates, but generally, I > would expect it to be true. My recent realization is that nearly all the people who followed low-fat regained their weight. As far as I can tell NEITHER of us are involved in large clinical trials, so your realizations are worth exactly as much as my realizations, i.e., zilch. > Since Annabel is so adamant about continuing her diet of choice, I > decided to stop harping on her, but my expectation is that it won't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > this effect and they mention cohorts of insulin sensitive obese > subjects. I think she'll lose weight if she eats less calories than she burns. I just think she'll be miserable and inevitably regain it all if she does it by forcing her body to be tired, hungry and deprived of essential nutrients. I don't mean to harp at her, either, but I'll correct her when she sends newbies down the yo-yo dieting path. Dally Dally wrote in alt.support.diet on Sun, 22 Aug 2004: >I think she'll lose weight if she eats less calories than she burns. I >just think she'll be miserable and inevitably regain it all if she does >it by forcing her body to be tired, hungry and deprived of essential >nutrients. I don't mean to harp at her, either, but I'll correct her >when she sends newbies down the yo-yo dieting path. *DO* feel free to point out how two weight-loss plans in eleven years is "yo-yo" dieting? I was tired on the Friday because I had overdone it on the Thursday, not because of anything I had or had not eaten, but because my husband and I are preparing for a major competition in six weeks' time, and really, really need to practice, ideally 6 days/week, but that doesn't always happen. We had planned to skate for 45 minutes in the morning, and an hour of social dance (which also enables us to work on our compulsory dances) in the evening; there was no ice that morning, for reasons I needn't go into here, and we therefore had to skate for 45 minutes in the evening, plus social dance. We worked ourselves so hard that I was exhausted after about 35 minutes of the social dancing, and my thighs were sore. However, this would have happened whatever I had eaten; it does happen from time to time! SignatureAnnabel - "Mrs Redboots" 90/88/80kg >>> Low-fat isn't a great plan. A better plan is to find a calorie >>> budget that works for your life and eat a balanced diet, where [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > day will range a bit around your goal percentages and I don't think it > matters all that much. At that point it comes down to recipe preferences. > Many of us have found the same thing with different terms: our portions > sizes are controllable and our bodies work best when we get roughly [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Dally Well answered, Dally. Unfortunately some people that skim through this post won’t realize that you’re basing your meals on percentages and ratios (45% carbs, 30% protein and 25% fat) with only a quick but very important mention of calories at the beginning. That leaves a lot of room for error for those that overlooked that comment and don’t know their RMR. This plan could cause energy and muscle loss at 1500 calories or weight gain at 3500 calories. It’s this 2000 calorie range that causes more diet failure than the +/-10% nutrient differences, IMO. Portion control is the only way to stay thin for the duration of our increasing life spans. Tweaking the nutrient percentages helps keep the body healthier and feeling better while eating smaller portions, IMO. Rob 185/140/155/160 Dally wrote in alt.support.diet on Sun, 22 Aug 2004: >> Hi All , I've got a couple of questions , i've been reading a diet >>book called "You are what you eat" its a great book which even has a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >I saw Annibel answered this quite differently than Chris and I do. Only because coconut contains saturated fats, the bad kind. Had the OP said "olives", I would have answered differently. SignatureAnnabel - "Mrs Redboots" 90/88/80kg |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.