Horizon and losing weight

[RogerS]

Steve

The following,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/tools/hip_t ... aist.shtml

is probably a better indicator than BMI, for the layman.

I've just got down to 0.9 :mrgreen:

Keep it up mate!

Dibs

But it is only aimed at fatties as it doesn't go below 38cm waist size!

 

[Steve Maskery]

Any person with a waist below 38cm doesn't need to read this thread!

S

 

[doctor Bob]

I'm on a zero fat diet at present, its a killer.

Breakfast- oatmeal with water
Lunch- chicken breast of tin of tuna
Tea- Pasta with grilled chicken breast
plus apples, veggies, black coffee and vit suppliments

I want to compete in the indoor rowing championships in 3 years time (over 50's), I think I may be having a mid life crisis.

 

[defsdoor]

Fat is ok to eat - it's carbs that are the killer.

 

[Gill]

Here's one of my recipes for you. It's very mild so perhaps another teaspoon of curry powder wouldn't hurt. You might like to add another teaspoon of cornflour to thicken it more, but not too much - gotta watch those calories . Oh, and I know the portions are small but it is supposed to be served on a fast day.

Lo-Cal Chicken Curry

Serves 4. Total calories per portion: 116

Ingredients

5 sprays of oil (5 cal)
175g chopped onion (40 cal) (half a large onion)
140g chopped carrot (30 cal) (one medium/large carrot)
100g chopped yellow pepper (33 cal) (one pepper)
200g chopped chicken leg and thigh meat, trimmed and skin removed (240 cal)
1 chopped inch root ginger (20 cal)
5g curry powder (6 cal)
5g cornflour (15 cal)
1 tin chopped tomatoes (74 cal)
Salt to taste
Chopped coriander garnish

Spray oil into frying pan. Fry onions until lightly brown, then add chicken and brown. Add carrot, pepper and ginger. Stir for a minute to allow the ginger to infuse. Add the curry powder and fry for another minute, then stir in the cornflour. Once the cornflour is absorbed, add the tomatoes and bring to a simmer, stirring.

Cook until tender.

Garnish with chopped coriander and serve with 50g brown Basmati rice (177 cal).

This blog has some useful ideas. I'm currently trying to find the Konjac/Shirataki noodles she mentions and I may have found a retailer, but I'll have to wait until the store's next stock delivery arrives.

Oh, and the Telegraph had a feature on the 5:2 diet a little while ago.

HTH

 

[RogerS]

Fat is ok to eat - it's carbs that are the killer.

Your evidence is ?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Fat is ok to eat - it's carbs that are the killer.

Your evidence is ?

T'is true. The human species evolved for several hundred thousand years as hunter-gatherers, so we are digestively well able to cope natural fats such as that on meat. We're not adapted to deal with artificial fats such as hydrogenated fat, margarine and the like. It's only in the last few thousand years that we've taken up farming, and started to eat grains in quantity (and thus bread, pasta, rice etc), and we're not really adapted to cope with them fully. Similarly, potatoes are a very recent addition to our diet, and processed sugars. We don't really need any of them.

Source: "Waist Disposal" by Dr John Briffa.

 

[wobblycogs]

I feel that I need to point out that as long as you eat fewer calories that you expend you will always lose weight. Fair enough you might have to eat like a rabbit but it will work (if you don't believe me try not eating for a while). I have long suspected that a lot of these "carbs are bad", "fat is bad", xyz is bad" diets work mostly because they cut out a large portion of what you would normally eat and you inadvertently restrict your calorie intake.

I'm not saying there's absolutely nothing to these food restriction diets it just that for the most part your body is producing the same things from the food you eat whether you feed it fat, sugar or carbs. The thing that really set alarm bells ringing for me about carb restriction diets is that it seems to ignore the fact that carbohydrates are found in vegetables and fruits. I, personally, favour a health well balanced diet with lots of chocolate.

 

[Dibs-h]

the fact that carbohydrates are found in vegetables and fruits.

I think those are perfectly fine - its the refined carbs that are the issue. I see the surgeon who did my hernia repair on Thursday and hopefully will be told "do what you like", at the 6 week "sign-off".

Then it's on to some exercise (weights\gym) to loose the last 1st and gain some muscle mass. :mrgreen:

I've been reading up massively on the old tinernet about sensible ways to loose fat and the sites that can evidence their approaches - all of them talk about plenty of vegetables, especially the green ones.

As some have said - keeping the weight stable is the issue. For that it needs to be a lifestyle change as no one wants to stay on those "diets" forever or long term. :wink:

Dibs

 

[promhandicam]

Just remember per ML orange juice has a higher calorific value than beer.

Though apparently that`s no excuse for gettig caught having a beer with your cornflakes.


So remember...try not to get caught.


Cheers.

If you switched to orange juice Doug you'd end up looking like this

:lol:

 

[RogerS]

Fat is ok to eat - it's carbs that are the killer.

Your evidence is ?

T'is true. The human species evolved for several hundred thousand years as hunter-gatherers, so we are digestively well able to cope natural fats such as that on meat. We're not adapted to deal with artificial fats such as hydrogenated fat, margarine and the like. It's only in the last few thousand years that we've taken up farming, and started to eat grains in quantity (and thus bread, pasta, rice etc), and we're not really adapted to cope with them fully. Similarly, potatoes are a very recent addition to our diet, and processed sugars. We don't really need any of them.

Source: "Waist Disposal" by Dr John Briffa.

We've been here before discussing this and I'm not going to waste my time reading crank books that have not been peer reviewed. Read what StevieB has to say on the topic.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

We've been here before discussing this and I'm not going to waste my time reading crank books that have not been peer reviewed. Read what StevieB has to say on the topic.[/quote]


If you don't want to read the book, that's fine - it's your choice in a free country. I'd be a tad careful about dismissing books you haven't read as 'crank books' though. This particular one is scientifically based.

 

[RogerS]

We've been here before discussing this and I'm not going to waste my time reading crank books that have not been peer reviewed. Read what StevieB has to say on the topic.

If you don't want to read the book, that's fine - it's your choice in a free country. I'd be a tad careful about dismissing books you haven't read as 'crank books' though. This particular one is scientifically based.[/quote]

Where? No evidence whatsoever on his blog...promoting..surprise, surprise...his book. Where are the peer-reviewed scientific studies?

Oh, silly me, I missed it. Here it is....from his website..

Tatler magazine – listed as one of the UK’s top private doctors – 2006

As they say in Dragon's Den, as far as this thread goes, I'm out.

 

[chippymart]

Hi Steve
You should look at a company called Herbalife and the products that they sell. The wife and I own a gym and she has just started selling these products and they are great for weight loss.
I struggle to eat brekkie in the morning so she brought home some milkshake powder,which is full of nutrients and minerals and got me to drink for breakfast. In two weeks I lost 4 pounds. They also do protein bars for snacking and they taste great, they also do a tea.
It has proved very popular with our members and we often sell £300-400 worth of products daily.
Seems to have worked for both of us.
Martin

 

[Gill]

I'm currently trying to find the Konjac/Shirataki noodles she mentions...

I've found some . Holland & Barrett stock these practically calorie-free products under the name "Zero Noodles" but they're not cheap. Tomorrow's a fasting day so I'll learn what they taste like. I've heard the flavour is quite different from conventional noodles, which is hardly surprising.

 

[Steve Maskery]

I've just written, and lost, a long reply. I really should do a CtrlC before posting. however the gist was this.

Gill, thank you , but I need recipes for 1 not 4. It comes from a mid life discontinuity...

Martin, thank you, but I am low-budget. My bro went that route. He did lose weight, but he spent a lot of money. I personally have absolutely no difficulty eating breakfast, nor any other meal!

I've just cooked this:
http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/2916 ... ur-chicken

I did it without the batter, but even so, I suspect I've breached the 600Kcal mark. It was, however, absolutely delicious.

I did start to write a cookery book. The idea was that you used to have a big kitchen with an Aga and a kitchen garden, but are now living in a flat above a chip shop in Stapleford with nothing but a Baby Belling and a a kettle. OK, I never had the Aga, nor am I living in a flat above a chip chop, but you get the idea.

"How to survive divorce and still love your kitchen." The cover photo would be of a recipe book of intimate meals for two, with a kitchen knife stuck through it and a river of gravy (jus?) running from the wound. You get the gist. I think I might revisit the idea.

Bitter, moi?
S

 

[riclepp]

Errr, humans will get fatter and drop dead more quickly than before....why???

Food is in abundance, espically fat laddend stuff...(Greggs, Bakers oven, KFC, MacD's etc). For the most part we are also lazy, drive the five minute walk to get the paper...you know who you are. Too much alcohol available you know in garages, sweet shops and open all hours pubs.

We no longer as a speices eat only what we need to survive. As someone said earlier years ago we were hunter gatehers so you only had minimal food stuffs, so you proberly did'nt see too many fatties as we do in this day and age. Also we never had central heating, double or triple glazed windows or any of the other insulation we have now. So we would shiver to stay warm and thus burns off calories. Yes you will always have obese people who have medical conditions that cause weight gain, but you will also get the ones that are pigs, just look at the news you will see them. I watch what I eat and I exercise in order to stay trim. Why can't others do the same????? I understand fully as you get older you can't do the things you used to, but you can and should watch what you eat. I get fed up with obese people say it is not their fault for being large....well who's fault is it then....did I force you to eat a 14" pizza, or the large KFC meal...no I did not...you did. In order to stay trim or lose weight you cannot just do it by diet alone, you also need to exercise as well , and I believe if you want it that bad you will succed and acheive the results you want. All the ones that fall by the wayside are weak and wish to blame someone else for their problems. I make no apologies for the rant, but I really get fed up with wingers and people who blame everyone else for their weight or other issues. I am just like every one else I would love to just sit on my arse and stuff my face, but I could not do that..due to self respect, I run 3 - 5 mile every day, do weights in the winter and cycle every two or three days and swim at the weekends. If I can do this so can anybody else, I spend an hour and a half exercising every day and there is pleanty of time to do it. Ask yourself how many hours do you sit on the couch watching drival on telly 5 - 6 hour every evening?????

 

[JakeS]

T'is true. The human species evolved for several hundred thousand years as hunter-gatherers, so we are digestively well able to cope natural fats such as that on meat. We're not adapted to deal with artificial fats such as hydrogenated fat, margarine and the like. It's only in the last few thousand years that we've taken up farming, and started to eat grains in quantity (and thus bread, pasta, rice etc), and we're not really adapted to cope with them fully.

So what you're saying is that we should cut out these elements of our diets so that in a few more millennia, our descendants have the same problem? Seems remarkably self-centred and inconsiderate to me! ;-)

(Personally I'm very sceptical of any diet that has a name; names are for marketing, and if it's being marketed it's because someone's making money off of it, which means whatever they say they don't have my best interests at heart. And the above sounds... familiar.)


I'm going with "exercise more and eat less", which doesn't have a snazzy name and nobody's written a fancy book or run a series of seminars, but I seem to be losing weight, so I'm not unhappy with it yet. The best thing about eating less is that it's also reduced my appetite; my girlfriend suggested having a 'day off' every week and we had a Chinese takeaway for it a couple of weeks ago; I made it about a third of the way through what I used to eat before I felt completely stuffed.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

We've been here before discussing this and I'm not going to waste my time reading crank books that have not been peer reviewed. Read what StevieB has to say on the topic.

If you don't want to read the book, that's fine - it's your choice in a free country. I'd be a tad careful about dismissing books you haven't read as 'crank books' though. This particular one is scientifically based.

Where? No evidence whatsoever on his blog...promoting..surprise, surprise...his book. Where are the peer-reviewed scientific studies?

Oh, silly me, I missed it. Here it is....from his website..

Tatler magazine – listed as one of the UK’s top private doctors – 2006

As they say in Dragon's Den, as far as this thread goes, I'm out.[/quote]


Roger - I'm sorry if I've inadvertently provoked you or trod on a corn, or something. I've no wish to upset anyone over this (or any other) subject - but I don't really understand why your response to my post is so direct; intemperate, even. I wasn't part of the Stevieb thread, and haven't read it, so don't know what has upset you in it, but - as I said - I didn't take part in it. If you have an argument with him over something, that's between you and him, but please don't turn your fire on me.

I don't make a habit of reading diet books, but as my trouser waistband became a little tighter, I thought I'd better take some notice before it started costing me for a new wardrobe. I did suggest Dr Briffa's book because it is based on medical and scientific knowledge (true, it isn't a scientific treatise peer reviewed, but based on good science and medical research it is) and it's also practical and (fairly) down to earth. Now, you've made it clear that you don't want to read the book, and that's fine - free country - but don't just dismiss something you haven't read as unscientific. I hope I'm wrong, but I feel you're calling my judgement into question, and to be honest, I find that a wee bit hurtful. (By the way, I'm a professional mechanical engineer, so no stranger to scientific method and rigour.)

Roger - I'm not looking for an argument. I mentioned the book because I was impressed with it, with it's approach and conclusions, and I thought it might be of interest to others. That's all.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

T'is true. The human species evolved for several hundred thousand years as hunter-gatherers, so we are digestively well able to cope natural fats such as that on meat. We're not adapted to deal with artificial fats such as hydrogenated fat, margarine and the like. It's only in the last few thousand years that we've taken up farming, and started to eat grains in quantity (and thus bread, pasta, rice etc), and we're not really adapted to cope with them fully.

So what you're saying is that we should cut out these elements of our diets so that in a few more millennia, our descendants have the same problem? Seems remarkably self-centred and inconsiderate to me! ;-)

(Personally I'm very sceptical of any diet that has a name; names are for marketing, and if it's being marketed it's because someone's making money off of it, which means whatever they say they don't have my best interests at heart. And the above sounds... familiar.)


I'm going with "exercise more and eat less", which doesn't have a snazzy name and nobody's written a fancy book or run a series of seminars, but I seem to be losing weight, so I'm not unhappy with it yet. The best thing about eating less is that it's also reduced my appetite; my girlfriend suggested having a 'day off' every week and we had a Chinese takeaway for it a couple of weeks ago; I made it about a third of the way through what I used to eat before I felt completely stuffed.

Jake - that's not what I'm saying, and it's not what the book says either. Interestingly, what the book does say is that you should balance what you eat to the energy you use, which is pretty much what you said. The book also suggests that our digestive systems are evolved to the diet of hunter-gatherers, and a lot of the modern high-energy foods such as artificial sugars are nutrition we're not really adapted to cope with. Itdoesn't say that you shouldn't eat them, but it does explain how it's very easy to take on more energy than you use if you do eat them to excess. Hence the general concern with there being so many people about carrying more weight than they should.

By the way, it's not a 'named diet'. It's just an objective look at human nutrition from a medical and scientific viewpoint, and guidance on how to achieve a sensible balanced diet without being too prissy about it.