How bad is bread, wraps etc for you when trying to lose fat

Penny Tration · 03-09-2015 10:38am

_davidsmith_ wrote: »

The op lost 7kgs in 12 weeks and does cardio 4 times a week, that is fairly drastic weight loss providing the op wasnt morbidly obese to begin with

I lost 23lbs in 9 weeks. It's not that difficult to do without starving yourself. Big changes to your diet and lifestyle will incur big losses at the start, which will slow down soon enough.

_davidsmith_ · 03-09-2015 10:38am

im not a doctor or a personal trainer and fair play to you for your achievment but youre not changing my opinion that get up early eat breakfast exercise have a balanced lunch exercise again and then have a nice dinner lots of veg small carbs and meat, will provide sustainable results and better health than randomly skipping meals throughout the day, or eating random small amounts of food

molly09 · 03-09-2015 10:43am

Three cream crackers for lunch ...... Will that actually keep you satisfied until dinner

Alf Veedersane · 03-09-2015 10:45am

_davidsmith_ wrote: »

She was originally referring to someone who was having a 100-200kcal lunch, and i dont think that 3 plain cream crackers is a lunch, this is only my opinion, and i know everyone is entitles to theirs. Iv done all the fad diets keto, shakes, carb cycling and the only thing thats sustainable is eating things that were grown in the ground or was alive at one point, not processed junk and diet fizzy chemical drinks and no fast food, no matter how healthy the option, things in a packet are designed not to go off therefore are filled with sugar or salt. And certainly not starving myself to see the scales plumet.

It's not a fad diet. Eating 100-200 kcals at lunch is neither good nor bad without context. What's the caloric intake over the ocurse of the day? You can't say anything about someone's diet based solely on the snippet of information that is that they have 100-200 kcals at lunchtime.

Dard23 · 03-09-2015 10:46am

I'm reading a lot here about calorie deficit and one balancing out the other. The reason you don't swap 200 calories of lean meat, veg, fruit for 200 calories of chocolate, sweets is also the fact that the latter are empty carbs. If you want to be healthy it's about more than just weight loss!! If you're swapping good meals for equivalent intakes of crap than you are not getting any proper fats, nutrients, protein or other things essential for your body to function correctly. You may be the same weight but with poor muscle mass, bad skin, hair and a low immune system getting sick all the time! Quality not quantity is more important in your diet!

Alf Veedersane · 03-09-2015 10:47am

molly09 wrote: »

Three cream crackers for lunch ...... Will that actually keep you satisfied until dinner

Depends what you've eaten before the 'lunch' and what you wat betwene then and 'dinner' and what time your 'dinner is at.

People don't necessarily stick to the breakfast before work, lunch at 1 and dinner at 6-7 model.

_davidsmith_ · 03-09-2015 10:49am

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

It's not a fad diet. Eating 100-200 kcals at lunch is neither good nor bad without context. What's the caloric intake over the ocurse of the day? You can't say anything about someone's diet based solely on the snippet of information that is that they have 100-200 kcals at lunchtime.

Read my posts before jumping on me, j*sus youd swear i was telling her she was a moron, Im saying its my OPINION that i THINK its healthier to eat 3 square meals a day. Would you put 3 cream crackers in your childs lunch box and tell them that they can have the rest of their calories at another point in the day? if so than grand because thats your decision, and i wont judge you on it. I still dont THINK it constitutes a meal, but again its my OPINION

Tar.Aldarion · 03-09-2015 10:52am

PinkLemonade wrote: »

What % of your daily calorie intake is that? Seems extremely low to call a meal

I probably eat 2000 calories+ per day. Meals are different sizes, most my calories are not had at lunch, tend to be in the evening.

_davidsmith_ wrote: »

3 cream crackers for a meal when your exercising seems like an incredibly small amount, if you starve yourself you will pile weight back on once you inevitably fall off the diet wagon. Everything should be in moderation and 70% of each plate should be vegtables, 100kcal meals are not sustainable long term.

I don't eat crackers and am not on a diet, I don't think that would be a good meal. I have had my lunch for over a year, an example of my lunch is vegetable and bean soup, which I have a lot. Some other soups would be more but less than 200cals. It doesn't have dairy in it which would add calories.

I don't starve myself at all, I'm pretty much never hungry with what I eat, most my calories come from the evening I guess. I start off with a protein smoothie in the morning usually which keeps me full until 2-3pm, have soup, have other meals after work.

Alf Veedersane · 03-09-2015 10:55am

_davidsmith_ wrote: »

Read my posts before jumping on me, j*sus youd swear i was telling her she was a moron, Im saying its my OPINION that i THINK its healthier to eat 3 square meals a day. Would you put 3 cream crackers in your childs lunch box and tell them that they can have the rest of their calories at another point in the day? if so than grand because thats your decision, and i wont judge you on it. I still dont THINK it constitutes a meal, but again its my OPINION

I'm not jumping on you or having a go. Apologies if it comes across like that.

I'm just pointing out that outside of 100-200 kcals at lunchtime we know no more. We don't know what quantity of food is had before or after.

An adult has more scope to eat during the day so it's not comparable with a child's lunch. That's the only time they really have to eat during school hours.

I have a small lunch but I'll have eaten twice before that, I'll have something mid-afternoon and then a nice big meal involving meat and veg in the evening. I also train 4 times a week and I'm not looking to lose weight.

I'm just making the point that we can't say it's too little without the full picture. If it was all that was eaten between a couple of Weetabix in the morning and then a standard dinner in theevening, I would completely agree with you. But we don't know so we can't say it's not a suitable lunch. because it might not be considered time for a meal but rather time for a snack.

starlit · 03-09-2015 1:05pm

I'd suggest to not necessarily cut out bread, pasta and rice. You could just opt for gluten free, or low protein ones. Drain the pasta and rice with water to get rid of the starch which should help reduce the likelihood of developing into fat/sugar.

Darkslide · 03-09-2015 2:37pm

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I probably eat 2000 calories+ per day. Meals are different sizes, most my calories are not had at lunch, tend to be in the evening.

Out of interest, what's a typical dinner then?

Tar.Aldarion · 03-09-2015 3:40pm

Darkslide wrote: »

Out of interest, what's a typical dinner then?

Hi Darkslide, i don't really have a typical dinner as it varies every day. The last two were massaman curry with mixed veg, roast cashews, tofu and noodles. The one before was a red wine chickpea and mushroom/veg dish.

A personal favourite is peanut butter stew and brown rice.

fussyonion · 03-09-2015 3:55pm

I'm the one who lost 12kg in 7 weeks.

I was obese to begin with, in answer to someone's query.

I do cardio 4 times a week (changing things up this week though to include weights/classes) and I eat three meals a day.

I do not starve myself; I'm so against people who go on crash diets to lose weight quickly and I believe losing weight sensibly is the best way.
I don't have a massive appetite and get full very quickly.

My typical day's food would be either a boiled egg with wholegrain toast and tea for breakfast, a large mixed salad with protein for lunch (OR I might have three or four cream crackers with LowLow cheese spread if I fancy that...that's what I enjoy eating and it does fill me up until dinner).

Dinner will be home-made Bolognese, curry, Shepherd's Pie etc, all served with vegetables instead of rice/spuds/pasta.

Cutting carbs out in the evening has been hugely beneficial for me.
I used to feel bloated and as if I had over-eaten, plus my portion sizes for spuds/pasta/rice were too big.
Eating meat/fish with veg in the evening is good for me because I feel satisfied but not bloated.

I am never starving; I snack on fruit or almonds/cashews/walnuts, Greek yogurt with berries and I drink lots of water.

I drink alcohol one night a week and I have whatever I fancy to eat one day a week.

I'm happy with how I'm doing this; I don't think 12kg in 7 weeks is drastic. As I said, I'm not starving myself and I'm not obsessing.
I actually thought I had a good attitude towards what I was doing.

I cut out almost all carbs at the very start of my weightloss journey but for me it wasn't sustainable and I have re-introduced them at breakfast/lunch.

Darkslide · 03-09-2015 6:55pm

Wow! Looks great. Cheers. I'll try it sometime.

_davidsmith_ · 07-09-2015 8:30am

fussyonion wrote: »

I'm the one who lost 12kg in 7 weeks.

I was obese to begin with, in answer to someone's query.

I do cardio 4 times a week (changing things up this week though to include weights/classes) and I eat three meals a day.

I do not starve myself; I'm so against people who go on crash diets to lose weight quickly and I believe losing weight sensibly is the best way.
I don't have a massive appetite and get full very quickly.

My typical day's food would be either a boiled egg with wholegrain toast and tea for breakfast, a large mixed salad with protein for lunch (OR I might have three or four cream crackers with LowLow cheese spread if I fancy that...that's what I enjoy eating and it does fill me up until dinner).

Dinner will be home-made Bolognese, curry, Shepherd's Pie etc, all served with vegetables instead of rice/spuds/pasta.

Cutting carbs out in the evening has been hugely beneficial for me.
I used to feel bloated and as if I had over-eaten, plus my portion sizes for spuds/pasta/rice were too big.
Eating meat/fish with veg in the evening is good for me because I feel satisfied but not bloated.

I am never starving; I snack on fruit or almonds/cashews/walnuts, Greek yogurt with berries and I drink lots of water.

I drink alcohol one night a week and I have whatever I fancy to eat one day a week.

I'm happy with how I'm doing this; I don't think 12kg in 7 weeks is drastic. As I said, I'm not starving myself and I'm not obsessing.
I actually thought I had a good attitude towards what I was doing.

I cut out almost all carbs at the very start of my weightloss journey but for me it wasn't sustainable and I have re-introduced them at breakfast/lunch.

Excellent! much like myself so, best thing that you found something that worked and stick to it, thats harder than the excersise.

ISOP · 12-09-2015 11:09am

I lost 16 kilo's in twelve weeks by almost cutting out all sugar out of my diet, I went from 92 to 76. I cut out bread, alcohol and all processed food, i was amazed by the results, now I drink once or twice a week and eat what I want at the weekends and am well able to maintain the weight

Teflon Ron · 12-09-2015 3:16pm

ISOP wrote: »

I lost 16 kilo's in twelve weeks by almost cutting out all sugar out of my diet, I went from 92 to 76. I cut out bread, alcohol and all processed food, i was amazed by the results, now I drink once or twice a week and eat what I want at the weekends and am well able to maintain the weight

Nice one.

What was a typical days food when you were doing that? Looking for ideas myself. Need to lose some weight!

Backstreet Moyes · 22-09-2015 10:03am

I have started preparing my own lunch when bringing it to work to try have chicken most days which i love.

Could anyone give me an idea of which option they think is better, and maybe an estimate of the calories for each.

I cook either two chicken fillers in coconut oil and a drop of soya sauce and eat them.

Or else i cook one of them and put it in one of those round crusty rolls with no butter and ketchup.

ejabrod · 23-10-2015 12:41am

Just to state first - I am a coeliac so my experience/opinion may be completely different from that of a non-coeliac.

The one thing I have removed from my diet is - Yeast.

Spoke to a professor a year or so ago about gastric issues I was having with being bloated and he advised that I try remove yeast from my diet. He stated to me (very strongly) the yeast was (and I quote) "Poison".

I have removed yeast and dairy from my diet and (for me) no more bloating and upper/lower abdominal bloating.

My diet has changed a lot also. I boil 5 chicken breasts for the week, some mixed leaves, tomatoes, (feta) cheese (I know it's 'dairy') green beans, olives and sweet chili dressing EVERY day for lunch.

to answer your question " How bad is bread, wraps etc for you when trying to lose fat" (for me) it is toxic stuff - even the gluten free equivalent. (other people will feel differently) but I feel that bread and wraps should have no place in a persons daily diet.

Tyrell Wellick · 23-10-2015 6:04am

So what is the 'healthiest' bread?

ejabrod · 23-10-2015 11:55am

Tyrell Wellick wrote: »

So what is the 'healthiest' bread?

IMO, if you have to have bread, brown soda bread.

Zillah · 23-10-2015 12:19pm

doovdela wrote: »

I'd suggest to not necessarily cut out bread, pasta and rice. You could just opt for gluten free, or low protein ones. Drain the pasta and rice with water to get rid of the starch which should help reduce the likelihood of developing into fat/sugar.

This is going back a bit but:

Gluten free is pointless unless you're gluten intolerant.
Low protein bread would just mean you're getting less protein which is a bad thing for most people.
Draining pasta and rice doesn't get rid of starch, they're made of starch.
All carbs turn into blood sugar.

Literally everything you said in this post is wrong.

PGE2 · 23-10-2015 3:35pm

Zillah wrote: »

This is going back a bit but:

Gluten free is pointless unless you're gluten intolerant.
Low protein bread would just mean you're getting less protein which is a bad thing for most people.
Draining pasta and rice doesn't get rid of starch, they're made of starch.
All carbs turn into blood sugar.

Literally everything you said in this post is wrong.

Gluten free is most definitely not pointless, studies have shown that wheat and gluten have harmful effects, and may cause and may in fact cause cancer and autoimmune diseases.

keane2097 · 23-10-2015 3:37pm

PGE2 wrote: »

Gluten free is most definitely not pointless, studies have shown that wheat and gluten have harmful effects, and may cause and may in fact cause cancer and autoimmune diseases.

Link?

PGE2 · 23-10-2015 4:37pm

keane2097 wrote: »

Link?

ww.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/wheat

It's not just gluten that is harmful, grains in general are toxic to the human body.

Tar.Aldarion · 23-10-2015 4:46pm

PGE2 wrote: »

ww.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/wheat

It's not just gluten that is harmful, grains in general are toxic to the human body.

That seems lieke a reliable source, at first I was going to take olive oil to prevent cancer, but then i saw tumeric prevents cancer and also is for weightloss, bargain.

Alf Veedersane · 23-10-2015 5:30pm

PGE2 wrote: »

ww.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/wheat

It's not just gluten that is harmful, grains in general are toxic to the human body.

You should send that link onto bodies conducting cancer research because they don't think there's are any meaningful studies that demonstrate that gluten causes cancer.

PGE2 · 23-10-2015 5:42pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You should send that link onto bodies conducting cancer research because they don't think there's are any meaningful studies that demonstrate that gluten causes cancer.

The studies have shown that wheat and other grains are toxic to the human body. They strip the body of nutritional value with anti nutrients, they cause leaky gut and contain lectins which can essentially train the human body to attack itself.

Celly Smunt · 23-10-2015 5:49pm

PGE2 wrote: »

The studies have shown that wheat and other grains are toxic to the human body. They strip the body of nutritional value with anti nutrients, they cause leaky gut and contain lectins which can essentially train the human body to attack itself.

Cancer is cell division gone mad, not the human body attacking itself.

PGE2 · 23-10-2015 6:01pm

Celly Smunt wrote: »

Cancer is cell division gone mad, not the human body attacking itself.

I never said cancer is the body attacking itself. The body attacking itself refers to autoimmune diseases.

Alf Veedersane · 23-10-2015 6:06pm

PGE2 wrote: »

The studies have shown that wheat and other grains are toxic to the human body. They strip the body of nutritional value with anti nutrients, they cause leaky gut and contain lectins which can essentially train the human body to attack itself.

So which part is the cancer causing part?

Celly Smunt · 23-10-2015 6:07pm

PGE2 wrote: »

I never said cancer is the body attacking itself. The body attacking itself refers to autoimmune diseases.

And those autoimmune diseases refer to gluten intolerance, which like hayfever is the body reacting badly to an external stimulus.

Those without gluten intolerance don't need to avoid wheat etc just like those without hayfever don't need to avoid pollen.

Nonoperational · 23-10-2015 6:07pm

PGE2 wrote: »

ww.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/wheat

It's not just gluten that is harmful, grains in general are toxic to the human body.

Sigh.

PGE2 · 23-10-2015 6:15pm

Celly Smunt wrote: »

And those autoimmune diseases refer to gluten intolerance, which like hayfever is the body reacting badly to an external stimulus.

Those without gluten intolerance don't need to avoid wheat etc just like those without hayfever don't need to avoid pollen.

Even if one is not "gluten intolerant", eating foods containing gluten such as wheat is bad for your body, the anti nutrients render other nutrients on the body bio unavailable.

Dial Hard · 24-10-2015 10:38am

Anti-nutrients.

Right so.

Zillah · 24-10-2015 6:31pm

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

That seems lieke a reliable source, at first I was going to take olive oil to prevent cancer, but then i saw tumeric prevents cancer and also is for weightloss, bargain.

I liked the article that explained that cancer is caused by animal protein and not genetic mutation.

Tyrell Wellick · 25-10-2015 4:20am

I'm going to forego bread for cream crackers

Dan Carter · 25-10-2015 8:42am

Dial Hard wrote: »

Anti-nutrients.

Right so.

Do you have a question about anti nutrients?

longshanks · 25-10-2015 4:20pm

Dan Carter wrote: »

Do you have a question about anti nutrients?

I have an auntie Noreen, a lovely lady.

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 3:08pm

Hi All, coming in at the end of all this and see a few educated answers and then others that were filtered from doctors, pharma companies or food companies in general. (no difference really). Doctors run on what they are told. No disrespect to any Doctor by the way - just a truth based on the fact that the world is now obese, really obese. Doctors have been telling us, and the pharma have been telling doctors; that cholesterol from animals, dairy etc is the big evil. BUT - pharma sell statins and insulin... doctors prescribe - yes you guessed it, statins and insulin. neither hypothesis is based on reality but rather on marketing! Why not google to find out how much real research and NOT corporate funded or lobbied research is out there.
So... cholesterol has been blamed for heart disease for a long time and yet more than 50% of people who die from "heart disease" are on statins and have normal cholesterol. see here hmmm... that cant be right! Can it? It's a bit like the Guarda been blamed for the murder because he was found at the scene!
The truth which is freely available if you choose to remove the big business filter is this;
Inflammation of everything from brain to organs to aww... you guessed again; arteries, which is cause by sugar and carbs (no difference between the 2 as they both get turned straight to fat and are toxic!) is what causes heart disease. Cholesterol is sent to the area of inflammation to fix you and is then blamed for the heart disease, stroke etc. obviously diabetes is in the mix due to the body having to deal with yep... you smarty pants, sugar/carbs as it creates insulin to deal with all the toxic sugar.
Here's the low down; the body gets inflamed so it manufacturers more cholesterol in the liver. (dietary cholesterol has very little to do with actual cholesterol made by the body). The "bad" cholesterol, LDL, actually has 2 parts or particles- 1 large and 1 small. it is only the small particle that is the problem as it sticks in the damaged arteries or plaque caused by the INFLAMMATION which is caused by the carbs and sugar. The truth is that if you tackle the INFLAMMATION caused by sugar and carbs then cholesterol is totally benign and meaningless. If you ask your doctor for the this I can almost guarentee you that he/she will not know what you are talking about because their sponsors, I mean drug suppliers, do not want them to know the truth either.
Ask yourself and your doctor the following: Who the heck decided that your cholesterol (which if you bothered reading the link) should be X or Y??? the only answer you can and will come back with is the name of a drug company who couldn't give a $£"& about you me or the doctor.

So YES - bread, wraps etc for you when trying to lose fat is bad and toxic for you! These lists are what you should be eating to get your life back. Start thinking for yourself and listen to your body.

Tyrell Wellick · 26-10-2015 3:09pm

Cream crackers and low fat butter ok?

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 4:06pm

Nope, low fat anything is bad for you - don't fear the fat. Think; fat is insulin neutral!!! and therefore has no impact on your insulin levels. Fat doesn't make you fat. Get your head around that!
Crackers are carbs - stay away from wheat, grain and especially corn which is basically toxic.
Real butter especially kerrygold is the best thing to stick in ye as it is from pasture fed and not grain fed. You are better off make cauli wraps or cauli crackers - you can google it.

fussyonion · 26-10-2015 5:38pm

sHnaCk wrote: »

Nope, low fat anything is bad for you - don't fear the fat. Think; fat is insulin neutral!!! and therefore has no impact on your insulin levels. Fat doesn't make you fat. Get your head around that!
Crackers are carbs - stay away from wheat, grain and especially corn which is basically toxic.
Real butter especially kerrygold is the best thing to stick in ye as it is from pasture fed and not grain fed. You are better off make cauli wraps or cauli crackers - you can google it.

While I tend to agree regarding butter, there are some people who aren't supposed to have it.
People with high cholesterol or heart problems should really be seeking lower-saturate foods.

Alf Veedersane · 26-10-2015 6:36pm

So, doctors prescribe insulin because pharma companies sell it?

I'll tell my brothers to extricate themselves from the scam and stop injecting insulin so.

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 7:26pm

fussyonion wrote: »

While I tend to agree regarding butter, there are some people who aren't supposed to have it.
People with high cholesterol or heart problems should really be seeking lower-saturate foods.

The only thing that's agreeable is that people with heart problems or who have had heart attacks should watch their cholesterol.
People with high cholesterol would do better to stop sugar and carbs and stop the inflammation rather than watch cholesterol levels. read here as an example.

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 7:45pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

So, doctors prescribe insulin because pharma companies sell it?

I'll tell my brothers to extricate themselves from the scam and stop injecting insulin so.

You are right. I apologise for such a generalisation.
While some people have type 1 diabetes due to many reasons and may never have a choice in whether they can or can't take insulin - many of them can still make dietary choices that can lower their dependence on insulin read here
Type 2 diabetes is however mostly caused by diet and as such can often be reversed through a LCHF diet. yes reversed.
I don't know what form of diabetes your brother has but either way he does have some choices. Once again I did not mean to offend anyone who has or knows someone with diabetes. I just wanted to provide an alternative to the sentence of diabetes.

Insulin obviously helps and saves people with diabetes; however, pharma companies do not want you to know the truth about the foods we eat and prefer to perpetuate the lie. They could easily explain to us what is causing it but that isn't good for the share price now is it.

I really feel for people with these diseases and hope that they do find the way out. As mentioned, low carb/high fat has proven to be a strong choice.

Alf Veedersane · 26-10-2015 7:53pm

Both have Type 1. Both have always had good diets.

The generalisation extends to pharma companies. Who else develops the drugs that prolong lives, saves lives and improves the quality of lives?

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 8:26pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Both have Type 1. Both have always had good diets.

The generalisation extends to pharma companies. Who else develops the drugs that prolong lives, saves lives and improves the quality of lives?

Bully for your brothers. Delighted.
The generalisation for pharma stands.
In most cases, their focus is on developing the best medications they can, to treat the patients with the highest medical need, getting those drugs to market as quickly as possible, and used as much as possible.

Pharma companies subsidise the largest part of drug development today. In so doing, they contribute to the alleviation of suffering of millions of people (because without those drugs, lots of people would die a theoretically preventable death). I understand this - I am not ignorant

I do not have a utopian idea of how things work in the world. If I have a cold I don't think I should get free paracetamol no more than if I'm hungry I'm entitled to free bread. Is anyone calling bakeries evil for asking money for decreasing hunger, which is a basic human need?

Unfortunately there are products that capitalise on human misery and the drug companies feed much of the disinformation. Cholesterol and Diabetes are case in point.

Oasis1974 · 26-10-2015 8:36pm

Why is oats legumes and quinoa in the red list and peanuts that's crazy.

sHnaCk · 26-10-2015 8:58pm

Oasis1974 wrote: »

Why is oats legumes and quinoa in the red list and peanuts that's crazy.

You would want to put it in context I reckon. If you are obese and want to lose wait and change from carb/sugar energy to fat energy then anything that is going to spike your insulin production should be avoided. These grains cause inflammation which is the cause of many aches, pains and diseases.
If you don't have weight issues etc. and are maintaining then follow what your body says

How bad is bread, wraps etc for you when trying to lose fat

Comments