You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
You can have as many sweet treats as you want, but you have to make them yourself. No bought treats. I haven't had a bought biscuit in two weeks. It results in a lot less snacking when you can't be bothered to make stuff, but I have also noticed that the homemade stuff is much more satisfying and less addictive than the bought stuff as well as being more delicious. I can eat a modest serving of homemade ice cream and not want more, but I could eat a whole pot of Ben and Jerry's.
It might lead to fewer calories (although looking at these flapjacks I doubt it) but the aim is to cut out ultra processed food. There is a suggestion that the emulsifiers in UPFs cause problems and can lead to weight gain either intrinsically or as a result of increased appetite/compulsion. Plus it's well known that bought stuff is engineered to be as moreish as possible. Like my homemade version, supermarket ice cream contains lots of sugar and fat, but it contains added lecithin; whereas mine still has lecithin but it's from four egg yolks with the associated protein, nutrients and deliciousness.
I can also control the yumminess by making things slightly plainer if I want, to make them last longer. I'm going to make some bread tonight too in the machine.
I've removed most upfs over the last year or so. Don't eat a lot of sweet things anyway but in summer I do enjoy a sort of homemade ice-cream. I just get whatever frozen berries and sometimes banana slices that I've frozen when we've had bananas going over ripe. Put a couple handfuls of frozen fruit in a bowl pour over a big glug of double cream which promptly freezes and then sit and mash it all up with a dessert spoon in the bowl until it reaches a nice consistency. I find it sweet enough from the fruit and no need for egg or anything else. I also do a frozen banana and cacao powder blend which is a yummy version of chocolate ice-cream.
Certainly feeling better for the improved diet and have lost a few kgs.
The cream/fruit idea sounds pretty good.
You can have as many sweet treats as you want, but you have to make them yourself. No bought treats. I haven't had a bought biscuit in two weeks. It results in a lot less snacking when you can't be bothered to make stuff, but I have also noticed that the homemade stuff is much more satisfying and less addictive than the bought stuff as well as being more delicious. I can eat a modest serving of homemade ice cream and not want more, but I could eat a whole pot of Ben and Jerry's.
It might lead to fewer calories (although looking at these flapjacks I doubt it) but the aim is to cut out ultra processed food. There is a suggestion that the emulsifiers in UPFs cause problems and can lead to weight gain either intrinsically or as a result of increased appetite/compulsion. Plus it's well known that bought stuff is engineered to be as moreish as possible. Like my homemade version, supermarket ice cream contains lots of sugar and fat, but it contains added lecithin; whereas mine still has lecithin but it's from four egg yolks with the associated protein, nutrients and deliciousness.
I can also control the yumminess by making things slightly plainer if I want, to make them last longer. I'm going to make some bread tonight too in the machine.
I'm not entirely convinced it's the lecithin in ice cream that's the probem, I suspect the problem is that it's mostly fat and sugar!
We all should know that’s UPFs are very bad however so is mixing sugar and fat; that’s any fat (especially seed oils) and any sugar (all carbs are sugar). Google the Randall Cycle.
The human body only requires protein and fat to thrive. Carbohydrates cause insulin spikes (insulin is a fat storing hormone) the more carbs you eat and the more often you eat them the more fat you will store.
I got into baking a few years ago and I found I put on loads of weight because I was baking such lovely stuff. I was baking as a distraction from studying however 🙂
Thinking that i could lose a bit of weight (good for knees, and improve my watt/kg) but don't want to go keto cos that sabotages cycling training, so thinking i'll go 5:2 this autumn on rest days and see how that goes. Likely doing more endurance work rather than VO2/SS so that might work to shed the weight over a few months and adapt once i am working on higher outputs in the spring
Of course i can just keep eating dried figs once the harvest is over (see Alpin's thread) and that should lose me 2 kg a day
and TJ, I knew it was Lambchop reading his message before i saw who wrote it......
Eat less, move more. HTH.
No need to diet here, there again I don't eat any of the cold desert type gunge in the opening post whether home made or not. 🙂
What flour and other ingredients are you using for the homemade bread, Molgrips? That's one way you can improve on industrial stuff if you don't have much choice commercially.
Mrs dB makes delicious ice cream, latest was green gage & even recently dandelion flavours - consequently I'm on constant 5-2 diet
Unfettered homemade flapjack and bread to lose weight?
All I can say is, good luck with that!
Google 3 ingredient peanut butter cookies, make some and tell me you can stop at one. Added chocolate chips/chunks and some caramel flavouring for additional goodness.
Am GF, so have to make my own biscuits 😭
Unfettered homemade flapjack and bread to lose weight?
It is incredibly delicious but I don't want to stuff my face with it because I'd have to make more. I've only had one bit.
Eat less, move more. HTH.
No it doesn't help, shut up.
What flour and other ingredients are you using for the homemade bread, Molgrips?
Wholemeal flour, yeast, milk.. what else goes in bread? Oh, I do put vitamin C in it.
The human body only requires protein and fat to thrive.
Nah, not true. There's a LOT more to it than that.
Surely like any diet, its a mental thing. Hope it works for you though @molgrips.
There are no biscuits in our house (poor visitors), due to us devouring a packet once opened. Yes I do make my own cakes, biscuits and puddings, but we only have a piece, slab, serving each and send the rest to the family with four children across the road. Sometimes I freeze certain baked goods.
I prefer Gelato it ice cream.
what else goes in bread?
Salt, oh and no milk(IMO)! Not that I can eat it any more anyway.
due to us devouring a packet once opened.
Apparently known as a "snackcident" according to Sarah off sewing bee
To be fair to the eat less move more crew, the OP is doing 50% of that.
The human body only requires protein and fat to thrive.
I mean other than preventing scurvy ............. rickets ............. osteoporosis ............ improving cognitive function and regulation ...... transported oxygen around the body ........ enabled metabolism .............. what have micronutrients ever done for us?
yes it does.
you're just not moving enough and eating too much. HTH.
sure. wanna buy some magic beans? 😉
It doesn't help.
Mostly it ignores that "move more" is actually a very small part of the "calories in = calories out" equation. It's a heck of a lot easier to not eat three chocolate chip cookies than it is to swim a mile at 2:20/100yds pace (although my dopamine addicted brain quite likes both).
the balance between the two will be a very individual thing.
but you can't escape thermodynamics.
but you can't escape thermodynamics.
You cannot deny that people who exercise more tend to be less overweight.
I've adjusted my diet to reduce processed food because it all contains significant amounts of salt. My blood pressure was a bit high and when I added it up I was way over the 6mg per day recommendation. To get below 6mg I've had to make about half my diet from things with no salt at all, to keep the total down when I can't reduce it in the other half. But it has fixed my blood pressure.
6mg per day recommendation
I thought it was 6g which I am way under, who says 6mg? I've tried to add a little to my diet as MyFitnessPal suggested I wasn't getting enough but I'm certainly over 6mg
Yes NHS recommendation is 6g per day but certainly reducing UPF in the diet will massively reduce salt intake. Having said that home cooked food made from raw ingredients is more enjoyable than any UPF and cooking is a lovely way to wind down and to increase your appreciation of the food you eat. Home cooking can however play havoc with wine consumption. As it has this evening.
Well done, greybeard. It's 6g (or 5g according to WHO) but obviously just a typo.
Now we just have to convince someone to adopt sensible eating habits that are more mediterranean diet than home made ice cream and flapjack..
This takes me back to the iDave fad diet rip off saga. 🙂 Anyone care to hunt down the threads? The point in STW history at which Molgrips terminally fell out with me. 😉
Yes, 6g, not 6mg. Sorry.
Not an excuse, but it also gets complicated because some recommendations are grammes of salt, some grammes of sodium, and some moles of sodium.
No white carbs, no dairy, no fruit, no cereal, no drinks with calories, glass of red wine with meals - 6 days a week. Cheat day, have what you want.
Courtesy of iDave.
New diet
Why not? I don't know if I'll do much baking, but I'm going to make an effort to cut out the junk. I do like a good ANZAC cookie though.
Sigh. This was not meant to be a weight loss thread, but for the benefit of the smug gits:
but you can't escape thermodynamics.
Thermodynamics is about things like heat engines and carnot cycles and such. That's a million miles from how human bodies work. When you eat something with calorific value, what actually happens to it? How does it get turned into kinetic energy? Or fat? It doesn't get burned, like petrol in a car. You can verify this by drinking a cup of diesel each morning and seeing if you gain weight. Cows get a large number of calories from eating grass, you could try eating grass all day and seeing if you become as big as a cow. Obviously silly examples, but it highlights that this is not about thermodynamics. When you eat food, it gets broken down into component parts by gut bacteria and acid, and there are many species of these bacteria and they produce all sorts of metabolic products of their own. Your guts are also full of brain cells, which interact with those chemicals. When glucose from the food enters your blood stream, or when there isn't enough glucose, what happens depends on the hormones that are produced in response to that. There are also processes that affect your brain on a basic level and also more indirectly. This can then change what your brain does next. Human brains are not at all rational - that's why so many people eat too much junk food, or they smoke, or they are alcoholics, or they're addicted to gambling or porn. This is all critically important in how people get fat.
You cannot deny that people who exercise more tend to be less overweight.
Yes, but is that because they enjoy it more because they aren't especially fat to begin with? How many people have taken up exercising, lost a load of weight, then given up and got fat? The answer is most of them - research shows that most people who diet and exercise to lose weight end up putting it back on. Why? Because they are morally inferior and degenerate? Don't be tempted to think that, it's a pretty toxic viewpoint. You have to admit that if you are already fat, trying to go for a run or a bike ride can be an absolutely ****ing miserable experience with no reward. So it's really hard to keep doing it. But if you're young and/or thin and fit-ish, like I was when I started, it's a lot more enjoyable.
If you're skinny, ask yourself how hard it was to become skinny? How much self denial do you go through every day? Usually when this comes up people say 'oh it's easy, just don't eat junk food' but what if it's not easy for you? I mean, I find it really easy not to smoke, or drink a bottle of whiskey. It's the easiest thing in the world for me to do, because I've never drank or smoked. But I absolutely would not log onto an Alcoholics Anonymous forum and say 'just don't drink, HTH'. Of course, over-eating does not (usually) have such grave consequences as alcoholism or other substance abuse, but it has similar roots and is easier to do because it's very normal and we're surrounded by yummy food everywhere we go and it's even more a part of culture than alcohol is. And of course, you need to eat. I have a mate who is extremely skinny, about 6% body fat or something. He rides probably 4-6hrs a week, runs a bit, swims and does yoga. But here's the thing - he has always been that skinny, before he took up exercise. And he also eats whatever he wants. I'm not riding that much currently, but I have done for plenty of my life. When we go out for coffee, he orders a cake. But I have to agonise over it and feel like a **** if I do. Why? His body is completely different to mine. He's got a 350W FTP but a 5s sprint of about 450W. He can also only ride for about 5hrs before giving up completely. I doubt he can deadlift much. We're all comfortable with people having different body types based on these kind of performance numbers - everyone knows that - but we also have different characteristics on the inside, and a lot of people don't really understand that.
So why I am I fat? What do I blame? I seem to have moderate ADHD which screws up my life in a lot of ways. People with ADHD have low levels of dopamine in their brain (amongst other things), and since dopamine is a neurotransmitter and one of the chemicals that our brain operates on, it has a big impact on their personality and functioning. I have to sit at home on my own and work all day, and often that work is dull and not challenging. This means I have low dopamine most of the day which is really hard to deal with. But there is a cupboard full of dopamine downstairs! If that's empty, I can walk up the road to a shop full of dopamine. I don't meet people often, but if I do, they are all eating and drinking dopamine.
When I was a student, I had lots of friends and I went from group to group socialising all the time (and not doing uni work). Instead of drinking alcohol I drank coke which was a terrible idea although I didn't realise it at the time. I also ate whatever I fancied because I was exercising a fair amount. I was fairly skinny although I was slowly gaining weight. I didn't even weigh myself at the time as I took it for granted that biking would keep me thin. When I did go biking, I went all out because I am a sprinter, so I sprinted everywhere, this is probably related to dopamine as well. That meant I trashed my glycogen stores and came home and ate every simple carb I could find. I suspect this altered my gut biome to make me really good at digesting sugar (and I still am - I can fuel myself entirely on gels all day and not get any bad guts). When I try to 'move more' I naturally end up riding too hard, which depletes glycogen stores, and when this happens I crave simple carbs in a way that some of you congenitally skinny people have probably never experienced - but here's the thing: Simple carbs are actually great for recovery after hard exercise. So then do I recover faster and do more exercise the next day? Or do I not recover as well, try to exercise, and end up riding slower and moving less after my bike ride?. There have been studies that show that our bodies self regulate to a large extent - if we cut calories we end up cutting expenditure throughout the day as a result. I know that if I cut calories too much, I not only get tired but I start to get cold as well - I need more clothes and I sleep a lot colder. And I get really bloody miserable, which makes daily life and work a lot harder.
So I think that my struggle to lose weight is related to my brain, my physiology, and the things I did when I was younger, in complex ways. The thing you have to remember is that we all know you're supposed to eat less and move more. And yet, a relatively small proportion of us have actually succeeded long term in changing our bodies for the better. Why is this? I think of it like like a roleplaying game. We're all born with a set of stats related to how we find dopamine, our capacity for self denial, our urges to seek pleasure, our physical response to exercise, and the exercise we like to do. All these things play a part in how we play the game, and how we end up after 40 years of it.
So no, 'eat less move more' does NOT help but thanks. Actually no, no thanks, because you know damn well we know this, you're saying it to denigrate us fatties, because you think we're either stupid or morally feeble. Don't you? Be honest. How many people have gone from being fat buggers to properly skinny athletes and stayed that way? I'm sure you'll find some, but NOT MANY and that is the point. It takes a very specific set of stats to be able to do that and it's quite rare - but not non-existent. What's much more common is a set of stats that let you easily enjoy exercise, and be good at it. And another stat that means you enjoy doing things that are healthy and make you thin. We could all eat less and move more, but a lot of people would find that very hard and be very miserable. And are you really expecting people to make themselves miserable all their lives? Would that be more healthy, do you think?
Anyway this was meant to be a tongue in cheek thread about treats, and some thoughts on UPFs. I was hoping maybe for a few recipes and other views on going UPF free. But predicably we've had toxic judgements dressed up as weight loss 'advice' yet again we're still only on page 1. Ho hum.
You cannot deny that people who exercise more tend to be less overweight.
I vaguely remember someone saying something about correlation and causation ...
And back on track - here's a lemon drizzle that doesn't have any butter. MrsP had to change her diet a while back and found this recipe which she's now adapted to do coffee and walnut cake, ginger cake and a chocolate cake.
https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/lighter-lemon-drizzle-cake
How moreish is it though? I suspect butter helps with the satisfyingness of cake?
My flapjacks were mostly butter/sugar, I think there was way too much. I could probably use double the oats next time.
Moreish? It's cake therefore by definition one slice is never enough. It's probably lighter than a normal lemon drizzle though. Also on flapjacks she uses rape seed oil instead of butter which world's fine (and chucks in pumpkin seeds, chopped dates, macadamias, cranberries, sunflower seeds, small bits of 100% chocolate etc)
Great post molgrips
but you can't escape thermodynamics.
Always enjoy a STW diet thread. Countless studies have shown that humans need about 2000-2500 calories a day, and it regulates itself quite directly, so a Miner or a bushman in the Amazon and a office worker and the man that tests mattresses for a living, all need just the same intake to maintain their weight. Put in less than that over time,you'll loose weight, put in more, over time you'll gain weight. What those 2000-2500 calories are is mostly less important, but a balanced diet that includes meat, veg and fruit - what we're 'designed to eat' seems like a sensible choice. Do whatever you need to do to make the changes you want (within reason). If that's home baking your flapjack, then crack on.
I cut out all sugar and carbs (where possible) and massively increased my exercise levels. You feel tired for the 1st while but it goes - lost loads of weight (about 40kg)
Feel much better and have loads more energy. There isn't much secret to loosing weight - what you eat has to be less than you burn. And keeping 1000 calories a day deficit should see a 1.2 kg a week loss (well it did with me). Consistency is the key and there is no such thing as a cheat day.
I now eat what I need as to be honest 1000 cal a day deficiency sucks even if it's only for 6months
There isn't much secret to loosing weight - what you eat has to be less than you burn
There isn't much secret to being rich. Just earn more than you spend.
There isn't much secret to loosing weight - what you eat has to be less than you burn
There isn't much secret to being rich. Just earn more than you spend.
Absolutely true - the difference is, that it is a lot easier to eat less than it is to earn more. After losing huge amounts of weight whilst I appreciate that the calorie deficit sucks it is within everyone's power to do it. The key in my opinion, is consistency. There are too many people who I speak to, who claim that they just can't lose weight. When you actually look into what they eat on a day-to-day basis you quickly see the extra calories going in. And my last top tip, you will never do the calorie deficit unless you also incorporate exercise. When I first started I was aiming to run about 5K three times a week. Now I run 10 to 12 kilometers a day plus some longer runs. It took me about 18 months to ramp up to running every day and to be able to do some serious distance. And as this is a cycling forum, yes my cycling improved dramatically especially my hill climbing.. at one point I was doing four watts per kilo although as I've been using cycling as a recovery method from running Garmin now seems to believe I'm back down to 3.2 watts per kilo
I cut out all sugar and carbs (where possible) and massively increased my exercise levels. You feel tired for the 1st while but it goes - lost loads of weight (about 40kg)
Feel much better and have loads more energy. There isn't much secret to loosing weight - what you eat has to be less than you burn. And keeping 1000 calories a day deficit should see a 1.2 kg a week loss (well it did with me). Consistency is the key and there is no such thing as a cheat day.
I now eat what I need as to be honest 1000 cal a day deficiency sucks even if it's only for 6months
I know everyone is different but interested to know how long it was before you actually felt better (or at least less tired!). This week I've just started increasing my exercise levels again and I'm knackered! and almost reaching for the **** it button and stopping again (not helped by poor sleep at the moment).
PS as already said great post @molgrips
it is a lot easier to eat less than it is to earn more.
It isn't necessarily, that's what I've been trying to say this whole time. Just because YOU find it easy, doesn't mean everyone does and I outlined just some of the reasons for that earlier. I earn quite a bit, but I don't really work hard for it; however I don't go around telling people how easy it is or how rubbish they are for not earning much. It's pure luck on my part - and I'm grateful for it.
I've been trying for 20 years or more to lose weight. I've succeeded at times, but then failed again. I find it very hard - but the question is, why do I find it hard? Why did you succeed and I failed? The lazy answer is to just assume that you're better than me. But what would that even mean?
it is a lot easier to eat less than it is to earn more.
It isn't necessarily, that's what I've been trying to say this whole time. Just because YOU find it easy, doesn't mean everyone does and I outlined just some of the reasons for that earlier. I earn quite a bit, but I don't really work hard for it; however I don't go around telling people how easy it is or how rubbish they are for not earning much. It's pure luck on my part - and I'm grateful for it.
I've been trying for 20 years or more to lose weight. I've succeeded at times, but then failed again. I find it very hard - but the question is, why do I find it hard? Why did you succeed and I failed? The lazy answer is to just assume that you're better than me. But what would that even mean?
I have never denigrated anyone for over eating - but it's a lot easier to go to bed hungry etc than magically earn more.
I cut out all sugar and carbs (where possible) and massively increased my exercise levels. You feel tired for the 1st while but it goes - lost loads of weight (about 40kg)
Feel much better and have loads more energy. There isn't much secret to loosing weight - what you eat has to be less than you burn. And keeping 1000 calories a day deficit should see a 1.2 kg a week loss (well it did with me). Consistency is the key and there is no such thing as a cheat day.
I now eat what I need as to be honest 1000 cal a day deficiency sucks even if it's only for 6months
I know everyone is different but interested to know how long it was before you actually felt better (or at least less tired!). This week I've just started increasing my exercise levels again and I'm knackered! and almost reaching for the **** it button and stopping again (not helped by poor sleep at the moment).
PS as already said great post @molgrips
It was a few months. I think it took me 3 months to be able to run five kilometers without stopping. I used to have a little mantra that I couldn't eat until I've exercised.
There are no biscuits in our house (poor visitors), due to us devouring a packet once opened. Yes I do make my own cakes, biscuits and puddings, but we only have a piece, slab, serving each and send the rest to the family with four children across the road. Sometimes I freeze certain baked goods.
I prefer Gelato it ice cream.
This is absolutely key - no snacks in the house. No temptation (helps if family are also supporting - I told them to hide anything from me)
If more energy goes out than goes in you will loose weight it's physics..I do concede that the urge to eat is strong and it takes real effort and is mentally torturous but it's worth it. You have to make a dramatic change to who you are and what you do to make it work long term though
why do I find it hard?
Are you still using large quantities of maltodextrin and sugar?
One interesting thing I have seen is the increasing emphasis on fructose as the real enemy of thinness and its astonishing how much fructose / high fructose corn syrup is in stuff. maltodextrin is made from high fructose corn syrup
I am around a stone overweight. I find it hard to shift because I so dislike feeling hungry and use sweet stuff to satisfy - I am effectively addicted to sugar. ON my big bike ride despite attempting to eat 4000 calories a day I lost a stone and a half and came home lighter than I have been since my 20s. a bit extreme tho 🙂
Food and exercise are only part of the equation, emotions, psychology, hormones, circumstance and even gut biome are all also big parts and frankly massively outweigh "food and exercise"
For me I know it is the psychological and emotional part that are the big barriers and the ones I don't know how to crack.
How moreish is it though? I suspect butter helps with the satisfyingness of cake?
My flapjacks were mostly butter/sugar, I think there was way too much. I could probably use double the oats next time.
I used to make flap jacks a lot, but that's a lot of sugar and golden syrup and I did tend to hoover them up quicker than I'd like.
I make a peanut butter variant now
2 cups of oats
3/4 cup of peanut butter (i use crunchy)
1/3 cup of honey
Dark chocolate chips
Mix the honey and peanut butter together, then add the oats an mix. Spread into a flat flat dish and put it in the fridge for a couple of hours. Remove and cut up into squares, Done.
Back onto the original topic if you want low carb low sugar cookies these are delicious
100g almond flour
130g peanut butter smooth, MUST be soft and runny
1 egg large
50g granulated sweetener (Stevia in the green bag from Sainsbury's is perfect)
1 teaspoon baking powder
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1 teaspoon of almond extract
Top with unsalted peanuts and a sprinkle of Stevia
Multiply to make larger mixes – I normally make 3 egg mixes and just put all wet ingredients into the mixer, mix and then dump the almond flour in and mix again)
Roll into a sausage and cut into cookie shapes
Bake for 8-10 minutes at 180 ( watch them like a hawk at 8 mins)
If more energy goes out than goes in you will loose weight it's physics
No! It's biology, which is a lot more complicated. I'm sure everyone knows someone who eats what they like, doesn't exercise and is thin. I certainly do. It's blatantly not just physics.
its astonishing how much fructose / high fructose corn syrup is in stuff.
In America, yes. Because they grow a lot of corn. It's pretty rare in UK foods, at least as far as I know. I have looked for it and not found it.
Re the cookies - thanks for the recipe but I remain unsure if it's worth making facsimiles of sweet things that still taste sweet, or training myself to enjoy things that are inherently low sugar like nuts or meaty snacks etc or cheese. When I successfully did the iDiet I actually went off sweet things.
Interesting re that diet - it worked really well for me once, but not subsequently. Some sort of adaptation? Or I just didn't have the mental energy a second time? Hard to know. It did take me years to put the weight back on.
If more energy goes out than goes in you will loose weight it's physics
No! It's biology, which is a lot more complicated. I'm sure everyone knows someone who eats what they like, doesn't exercise and is thin. I certainly do. It's blatantly not just physics.
And I bet when you actually measure what that that thin person eats when you aren't with them it's a lot less than you think. Conversely when you speak to people who struggle to loose weight they often don't see the snacking as counting when in reality everything that you swallow counts
I appreciate (from reading the thread) that you are struggling and I really agree loosing weight is tough. Going to sleep hungry is horrible, constantly feeling hungry is torture. But.... Perhaps read this thread more positively? You seem to be taking negative consultations from posts where I don't think that there are any.
Loose lose
Or it ends up in the disproportionately cross thread.
research shows that most people who diet and exercise to lose weight end up putting it back on. Why? Because they are morally inferior and degenerate?
Because most people desire simple answers to complex questions (see also: religion). People see a diet as something to complete, then they go back to their old ways. This is why crash/fad diets don't work, people yo-yo and the net result is little more than an increased appetite. If you want to lose weight or 'get in shape' then that requires a lifestyle change, not a quick fix of attending Slimming World weigh-ins for three months on your way to the pub.
Comparing food with alcohol is kinda bogus in so far as problem drinking can lead to a physical dependency. Suddenly deciding "enough is enough" as an alcoholic can literally kill you. As far as I'm aware, no-one ever died from abruptly quitting fags or cake despite what "Death By Chocolate" might have us believe.
It's pretty rare in UK foods, at least as far as I know. I have looked for it and not found it.
Its actually pretty common. found all over the place and in unlikely places
And I bet when you actually measure what that that thin person eats when you aren't with them it's a lot less than you think.
Based on what evidence? Your unshakeable believe in simple physical models applied inappropriately to very complex systems?
Its actually pretty common. found all over the place and in unlikely places
Example?
Comparing food with alcohol is kinda bogus in so far as problem drinking can lead to a physical dependency.
It can, but you get there by being unable to stop drinking too much anyway. Just talk to an alcoholic. Or a smoker. And there's plenty of arguments saying that sugar is also addictive. People can be addicted to gambling for goodness' sake and you don't even eat or drink that. Also eating too much sugar can give you type 2 diabetes which is treated differently but it's not that different in principle.
You seem to be taking negative consultations from posts where I don't think that there are any.
Or to put it another way, "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come across negatively". Point is that saying 'eat less move more' is totally useless as we've all heard it a million times. It's not in the least bit useful. And when people argue that it is, that's dismissing the struggle we face. If we fail to do something hard, that's understandable. If we fail to do something easy, the implication is that we're shit. And that is a negative sentiment.
People see a diet as something to complete, then they go back to their old ways.
No, I don't think so - the 'crash diet' thing is not common these days. People 'sort their lives out' and 'do better' and 'make lifestyle changes' sometimes for long periods of time, but it usually comes back eventually. Because guess what - we know. We're told how to do it endlessly, and yet somehow it's still difficult for many - no, MOST - people. So don't tell me to eat less move more. I'm trying to work out what my problem is and how to actually solve it, and I'm learning about myself all the time. So please don't tell me again what I have been hearing since I was a kid.
I was never a fat kid by the way - I did loads of exercise all through my growing years and I have not really stopped for more than about 6 months a few times. I've been cycling for nearly 40 years. I was told 'eat less move more' and I thought I moved enough. And yet, somehow, the weight slowly went on. Because I didn't realise that WHAT I ate was really important, because it's NOT just a case of calories in vs calories out. What those calories are is important.
No! It's biology, which is a lot more complicated. I'm sure everyone knows someone who eats what they like, doesn't exercise and is thin. I certainly do. It's blatantly not just physics.
Biology is complicated but the principle of losing weight is very, very simple and well attested to by thousands of years of evidence - don't eat as much food as your body needs and you will lose weight. You can see the evidence of this on the news tonight, from Gaza. From historical evidence, in famines, hunger strikes and concentration camps. As mentioned above, from athletes restricting their diets. This happens to every single person or animal on the planet - there are no exceptions.
What you seem to be talking about is maintaining a lower weight and that's a completely different thing. It's probably best if you didn't confuse the two things and then you wouldn't have to argue your point so often.
I vaguely remember someone saying something about correlation and causation ...
True, but when there's direct science showing how the correlation can be causative it's worth considering.
When you eat food, it gets broken down into component parts by gut bacteria and acid, and there are many species of these bacteria and they produce all sorts of metabolic products of their own. Your guts are also full of brain cells, which interact with those chemicals.
Sorry, what?
No! It's biology, which is a lot more complicated. I'm sure everyone knows someone who eats what they like, doesn't exercise and is thin. I certainly do. It's blatantly not just physics.
It is just physics in the link between energy in and energy out. The differences are what happens in between. The factors involved in that in between are so numerous to be impossible to measure but at the end of the day energy goes in and energy goes out. No doubt some are more efficient at burning the energy, some more efficient at storing it as fat and all those factors will lead to a normal distribution of those who find it easy to lose weight/hard to gain weight at one end and those who find it hard to lose/ easy to gain at the other. But simply eating less/more of the right things and exercising more will shift the curve for people.
You cannot deny that people who exercise more tend to be less overweight.
And cars that aren't moving are also more likely to have broken down, correlation/causation.
There's anecdotes that work either way.
Some former pro cyclists stay skinny, some are Eddy Merkx.
Eddie Hall (former Strongman) trains less (and eats less) than in his half ton deadlifting prime and is now leaner than ever.
As much as I can't stand James Smith (the PT guy that writes self help books) he makes a good point around this. Something like 10% of the population either exercise enough, or would like to exercise enough (the criteria was having a gym membership IIRC). That leaves 90% of the population who, however much you prescribe them exercise, probably won't do it. For the proportion of those that are unhealthy it's far better to separate out the advice on moving more from the advice on heating healthy because both are good for you regardless of whether you do either or both.
Analogous to the helmet debate, cycling is good, wearing a helmet is good, both is better, but either will still make you live longer than neither.
TINAS : ridden ~5000km so far this year and swimming 3x per week, still 15st because I enjoy moving as much as I enjoy a good crumble and custard.
Just rabbiting correlation doesn't mean causation as evidence that a correlation isn't causative just shows how little you know
True, but when there's direct science showing how the correlation can be causative it's worth considering.
Worth considering also that people who are overweight will choose not to exercise as much as those who are skinny.
There's all sorts of things worth considering but it doesn't mean exercise more and eat less isn't a very valid starting point
There's all sorts of things worth considering but it doesn't mean exercise more and eat less isn't a very valid starting point
I think we all know this, which is why it's immensely boring to trot it out in response to molgrips' amusing and honest account of his experiments with diet.
I think your idea of trying to mainly eat homemade stuff sounds interesting. Making small changes can make a difference.
After the working at home times and a couple of years of long covid tiredness, boredom and biscuit eating I put on a few kg (this is a lot for me as I have been naturally slimish most of my life).
I've lost most of that over about 2 years by the tiny change of swapping some of my regular lunchtime sandwiches for salad and trying to eat overnight oats with fruit rather than museli for breakfast (was doing so half the time but have regressed this summer). Museli is about 25% sugar due to all the dried fruit!
Definitely worth trying your experiment as sticking a small change long term is great and homemade food is usually more satisfying.
I've also read that sourdough bread is more filling and less morish. I think this is true but availability for us depends on getting to the bakers which isn't always possible.
Enjoy the cooking and eating.
Worth considering also that people who are overweight will choose not to exercise as much as those who are skinny.
Also, for those already overweight it's harder to exercise.
I've always been skinny, I struggle to put weight on. Even so, a few years of a sedentary WFH lifestyle - back in the office I'd hit 10,000 steps by lunchtime, today it's closer to 10 - has left me a bit soft around the middle. I could do to lose a couple of pounds (really, I could probably do just to tone up a bit) but that shouldn't be a big ask.
For some though, it's gone beyond "just..." It's quite easy to glibly go "exercise more" but if you're 20 stone with both knees shot then you're not about to be running a marathon tomorrow. Whilst it might be poor life choices which got them to this point in the first place, it's not necessarily a "choice" not to exercise now.
There's all sorts of things worth considering but it doesn't mean exercise more and eat less isn't a very valid starting point
Here's the thing though:
WE KNOW. Everyone knows this by now. So the real question is, why are we still fat? Or at least fatter than we want to be. Seriously - tell me.
Most people eat too much.
me included.
Most people eat too much.
me included.
Indeed - I suspect it's also the snacking between meals. And if you think about some of the calorie values of some of the food that we eat. Perfect if you're working a manual job and you need to be eating 3000 plus calories per day. Less so if you're working in office and struggling to even get to 5,000 steps a day
WE KNOW. Everyone knows this by now. So the real question is, why are we still fat? Or at least fatter than we want to be. Seriously - tell me
Because they eat too much or don't exercise enough or are at the extremes of the distribution