This is not an attack, more of a debate

estebancambias

Ok well my question is related to food. I notice in here every diet is thought to be wrong. Like 6 meals a day, is virtually impossible for me. I don't like eating, it's just something that I just don't do. I eat breakfast, perhaps sometimes lunch if I'm bored and dinner. The food I eat is whatever is given to me, generally noodles, chicken and potatoes. Credit to people in here who do have the time to eat ''right'' but in our age, isn't my dinner quite a healthy selection.

This is a bad topic, as I wrote it in a sort of rant so please exuse the lack of coherience.

PeakOutput

read the 6 meals a day thread and you will see peoples opinions on the "i havent got time argument".

i work ten hours a day and time has nothing to do with my diet being dodgy

estebancambias

But food is boring and does not interest me. I have time but I don't want to use the time to make food.

Dragan

estebancambias wrote:

generally noodles, chicken and potatoes. Credit to people in here who do have the time to eat ''right'' but in our age, isn't my dinner quite a healthy selection.

This is a bad topic, as I wrote it in a sort of rant so please exuse the lack of coherience.

Not really, you have a source of protein, some starchy carbs, no veg, no healthy fats..... not really all that healthy at all.

If you want to eat healthy you will find time. If you want excuses you will find those.

PeakOutput

estebancambias wrote:

But food is boring and does not interest me. I have time but I don't want to use the time to make food.

well if your not prepared to put in the effort do you expect to get results?

effort = results and it does not take long to lob a few ingredients into a frying pan and leave them simmer or to make a sandwich but if you simply cant do it then you simply cant do it, as long as you realise that there is nothing stopping you from doing it whats the problem?

Naikon

Learn how to cook your own meals, and then you can control what goes in.
Your diet sounds a bit crap tbh, I have been trying to lose some weight and I find cooking food such as lean chicken,steak, plenty of veg,some decent carbs(i.e no white bread) and little fruit works best.
Sauces can be made from basic foodstuffs and are alot better than any horror which comes from a packet.
Eat more to lose more(with some exercise of course)

ali.c

My diet is well off the wall, good days bad days (both under and over-eating). I know how hard it is to get a healthy balanced diet going but Honest to god though its not about time or about how easy it is, it all comes down to how badly you want it and taking responsibility for eating well.
This is also not an attack but eating well is essential to maintaining good health, how much of a chore are other life supporting functions like say breathing?

Naikon

estebancambias wrote:

But food is boring and does not interest me. I have time but I don't want to use the time to make food.

Make it interesting, if I followed your diet I would get a bit bored of it fast.
Experiment with cooking food which allows a good balence between time and quality.
Frankly, to live off noodles, chicken and spuds is not an excuse.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

PeakOutput

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

same here indeed that is my problem

Vegeta

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

If I was offered sex with a normal looking girl or a delicious 5 course meal. I would pick the delicious 5 course meal. Maybe sex with the girl as the 6th course but yeah I loves me food.

estebancambias

This is my diet from the last 3 days . Might as well show it.

Monday: Meusli with banana and super milk
Wholemeal bread with turkey and lettuce
Pasta with tuna
10 litres of water through the day

Tuesday: Same breakfast with some brownbread toast and normal milk
Tin of tuna
Salami with cheese in brown pitta bread

Yesterday: No Breakfast
Beans on toast
Broccoli, chicken, noodles and potatoes.

I drink about 10 litres of water a day.

Dragan

Vegeta wrote:

If I was offered sex with a normal looking girl or a delicious 5 course meal. I would pick the delicious 5 course meal. Maybe sex with the girl as the 6th course but yeah I loves me food.

Your not thinking like a fitness forum member. You divide the meal, slow digesting carbs and proteins before hand, quick digesting carbs and proteins for during and after.

Degsy

Dragan wrote:

Your not thinking like a fitness forum member. You divide the meal, slow digesting carbs and proteins before hand, quick digesting carbs and proteins for during and after.

**** that..grab it and eat your fill before it goes off:D

Vegeta

estebancambias wrote:

This is my diet from the last 3 days . Might as well show it.

Monday: Meusli with banana and super milk
Wholemeal bread with turkey and lettuce
Pasta with tuna
10 litres of water through the day

Tuesday: Same breakfast with some brownbread toast and normal milk
Tin of tuna
Salami with cheese in brown pitta bread

Yesterday: No Breakfast
Beans on toast
Broccoli, chicken, noodles and potatoes.

I drink about 10 litres of water a day.

are you trying to gain weight/ lose weight or just eat more healthy foods??

I don't really get why you posted here, are you annoyed that you cant eat 6 times a day. Does it frustrate you that you find it hard to eat?

I don't get it. Are you looking for people to comment on your current diet to see if its healthy or not??

g'em

Dragan wrote:

Your not thinking like a fitness forum member. You divide the meal, slow digesting carbs and proteins before hand, quick digesting carbs and proteins for during and after.

And you're not thinking like a TTer. Why separate the food and sex combo in the first place!??!!? She might be a normal looking girl, but there's no stipulation made about physique. Just make sure she has ripped abs - holds the food in place quite nicely

Vegeta

Dragan wrote:

Your not thinking like a fitness forum member. You divide the meal, slow digesting carbs and proteins before hand, quick digesting carbs and proteins for during and after.

Can you imagine it, lying in bed afterwards she lights up a cigarette and you are trying to gulp down a shake and a banana or just some good ol' RAM.

estebancambias

Well yes, because I here so many contradicting things in relation to food.
I always thought stuff like noodles and pasta were good for you, my grandmother is italian and she has always said, that pasta is good for you. Burgers, pizza, chips are meant to be bad foods, I never thought chicken, and pasta were bad foods.

Dragan

g'em wrote:

And you're not thinking like a TTer. Why separate the food and sex combo in the first place!??!!? She might be a normal looking girl, but there's no stipulation made about physique. Just make sure she has ripped abs - holds the food in place quite nicely

If i was thinking like a true TTer it would be five courses of dessert.....perfect.

Good sex should be like a good session......messy.

juanveron45

The thing is estebancambias what are your priorities in life? is looking fit and being healthy important to you and are you prepared to do what it takes to get what you want.

getting up for college or work in the morning is a chore for alot of people but we do it because having money and earning a living is a priority for most people

its the same as doing assignments or studying for exams, if something is worthwhile its a challenge


At the end of the day you can do what ever you want but dont try and think for a second you can have second or third class preparation and get first class results, life just doesnt work that way

rubadub

estebancambias wrote:

Ok well my question is related to food. I notice in here every diet is thought to be wrong. Like 6 meals a day, is virtually impossible for me. I don't like eating, it's just something that I just don't do.

The fitness fourm consists of a few main types of people. Athletes/Personal trainers/bodybuilders/power lifters- to these people diet is very important, they are eating before and after workouts to maximise the effect of the workout, e.g. having enough energy to train to their fullest, then taking in foods to get maximum recovery.

Others are here mainly to lose weight/fat, and hopefully get fitter in the process.

Eating 6 meals a day increases your metabolism, so for people who are overweight and overeating it is very beneficial. 6 small meals means you stomach is never too full, so gradually shrinks. Therefore you are satisfied easier. Also 6 evenly spaced meals means your next meal is never far away, you can resist snacking better. Unlike yourself most overweight people like eating.

Other people here are trying to put on weight, I doubt many are dangerously underweight or anything, rather just lanky looking lads, looking to put on muscle rather than extra fat.

How would you describe yourself? what are your goals?

cavanmaniac

It ain't easy, but if you want something bad enough, you'll do it.

I'm wiping the slate clean next week, I have been eating 6 a day and the better foods but results ain't really happening I'm really going gung ho at it after the bank holiday weekend and redoublke my efforts. It'll be time consuming and will take commitment in the kitchen and the gym, but I want it badly, so I'll do it.

Dragan

cavanmaniac wrote:

It'll be time consuming and will take commitment in the kitchen and the gym, but I want it badly, so I'll do it.

Thats what i like to see mate, reading stuff like that makes me work harder. Any help you need just shout on the board and you know we'll do what we can.

amazingemmet

Vegeta wrote:

Can you imagine it, lying in bed afterwards she lights up a cigarette and you are trying to gulp down a shake and a banana or just some good ol' RAM.

Been there done that. I like to treat getting some like an endurance event, you need to carb up before you start, a load of bcaa's to stop muscle break down and of course loads of fluids throughtout then a good post workout shake.

At the moment there's a lot of debate on slow and steady versus high intensity short work. My personal thoughts on this is once you take into account total volume you can fit both types in.

A motivated training partner also helps

cavanmaniac

Dragan wrote:

Thats what i like to see mate, reading stuff like that makes me work harder. Any help you need just shout on the board and you know we'll do what we can.

And likewise good sir. I've just bought Metabolism Advantage by Berardi so am doing a cupboard clearout and getting the chef's hat on after getting heartily sick of my restricted range of meals. From next week it's monastic lifestyle and lots of sweat for me and I'll see where I am after 4 weeks or so.

Hanley

estebancambias wrote:

But food is boring and does not interest me. I have time but I don't want to use the time to make food.

I honestly don't know how to respond...

I don't even know what you're asking.

If you're asking what's wrong with your diet, for a normal person, then not much. Obviously you could be doing alot better, but you'll survive.

If you're asking what's wrong with it from a lifting/training/appearance perspective then I don't know where to start. I'd feel a bit bad simply saying "everything".

Also, my grandmother once told me girls were the devil. I still throw holy water on them to keep them away. Maybe you could try that with your pasta..?

hunnymonster

estebancambias wrote:

I drink about 10 litres of water a day.

That's quite a lot of water.

6ix

I have to say, I was thinking that too. BTW, I like the Argentinian element to this thread - Juan Veron offering advice to Esteban Cambiasso!

Boston

Mate I was you eight weeks ago. I seriously mean that. I get very little enjoyment out of food, never cooked myself and eat whatever crap was served up to me. I turned that around in pretty much a week. Now I do all my cooking in the evening after work and gym and swimming. You'll make time in your life for the important things, its just has to register first that good health is important.

lizzyvera

I know where he's coming from, as a girl, I'm happy once I'm skinny so health does not come into it at all. I like nice food but if I'm short on money I just dont eat. To be thin, it doesn't REALLY matter what you eat, as long as it's not a lot.

So it's easy to not have "goals" or any motivation to be healthy except that it makes you feel better and more alert, and even that is only with some commitment to something you may not be interested in.

g'em

lizzyvera wrote:

So it's easy to not have "goals" or any motivation to be healthy except that it makes you feel better and more alert, and even that is only with some commitment to something you may not be interested in.

Really? well maybe it's just me, but I quite enjoy not suffering from high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, heart disease, increased stress, lethargy, skin problems, irregular menstrual cycles, breast canncer, colon cancer, strokes, unstable moods, a host of obesity-related disorders, and a multitude of other things that are closely associated with poor nutritional habits... but maybe I'm weird like that :rolleyes:

/sarcasm

Boston

lizzyvera: Are you saying its a good thing to be thin/underweight?

lizzyvera

No, underweight is bad, but when you're young and naturally slim, you don't have the same "need" to look after yourself. Let's be honest, vanity is much more pressing than the possibility of heart disease in 30 years.

I'm looking after myself now, just the last two months or so I've taken an interest in this forum really, and labels on food, but I can definitely see where OP is coming from. (Though I'm up to 8 stone now and feeling better generally.)

And actually, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that mammals live longer when slightly starved, once they eat low calorie- high nutrition meals, and lots of people follow this. Not me, I just took pep pills too much haha.

tribulus

I think often some girls, ones I know anyway just like being slim but not necessarily what you would call physically fit, either in terms of athletic ability or aesthetically speaking.

Where as a lot of guys would be happy(ier) with their bodies if they had some muscle and a lowish bodyfat. //sweeping generalisations

So for girls who fit into the above description (and I'm aware there are plenty who don't) it's not that hard to be slim(by the above definition), it just involves not eating much.

Where as for guys who fit into the above, attaining that would require some effort both in the gym and nutritionally.

AlphaMale 3OO

lizzyvera wrote:

I know where he's coming from, as a girl, I'm happy once I'm skinny so health does not come into it at all. I like nice food but if I'm short on money I just dont eat. To be thin, it doesn't REALLY matter what you eat, as long as it's not a lot.

So it's easy to not have "goals" or any motivation to be healthy except that it makes you feel better and more alert, and even that is only with some commitment to something you may not be interested in.

Remind me to never take dietary advice from you. Girls need to eat too.

Sonderval

Thats far too much water - 10 litres is risking washing whatever salt you have right out of your body along with sodium and other soluables. Water intoxication can kill:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=4EC337D6-E7F2-99DF-3549D1F6684BC11A

Hanley

Sonderval wrote:

Thats far too much water - 10 litres is risking washing whatever salt you have right out of your body along with sodium and other soluables. Water intoxication can kill:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=4EC337D6-E7F2-99DF-3549D1F6684BC11A

Considering some of the posts they've made I doubt they're actually drinking that much.

nesf

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

It could be a matter of how people give advice more than anything else. It's not a matter of sugar coating things, it's more a distinction between what is needed and what is the ideal. Unless someone is an athlete or looking to cut down to a very low bf% then it might be an idea to make it clear that they don't have to eat perfectly.

Criticising people whose goals don't require a perfect diet for not having a perfect diet is pointless and unhelpful imho.

Hanley

nesf wrote:

it's more a distinction between what is needed and what is the ideal.

I like this idea.

A lot of people seem to do a lot of mental masturbation on here over what's "ideal" and how if you're not eating loads of healthy fats and following an exact macro split and getting all you micro nutrients you're never gonna achieve anything. Which needless to say, just isn't true.

g'em

Hanley wrote:

A lot of people seem to do a lot of mental masturbation on here over what's "ideal" and how if you're not eating loads of healthy fats and following an exact macro split and getting all you micro nutrients you're never gonna achieve anything. Which needless to say, just isn't true.

This is quite true - not everyone does need to follow a diet as rigorously as others. But then again, a lot of people come here, post their diet and they simply get told what a good diet is. Unfortunately, for a lot of folks, a "good" diet seems completely alien - eating protein at every meal, lots of good fats, little refined carbs etc. We've become so accostomed to treating ourselves with junk and crap (because we've had a long day/ are under stress/ deserve it just coz'!!) that it's become totally allowable to eat sh!t more often than it's needed.

But if people post up their diets looking for constructive criticism and suggestions, irrespective of how clean it is to start with, then they'll get it!

Hanley

nesf wrote:

Criticising people whose goals don't require a perfect diet for not having a perfect diet is pointless and unhelpful imho.

Again, good point.

What goals are unobtainable without a perfect diet?

What is a perfect diet?

How do we know a perfect diet is in fact "perfect"? Perfectly healthy and perfectly performance related aren't neccessairly the same. So does this mean neither of them are perfect? Or both of them are perfect? Or perfect lies somewhere in the middle?? And if it's somewhere in the middle then it must not be perfect at all since it leads to a comprimiase on both sides.

By it's very nature whatever diet leads to the greatest success is "perfect" surely?

People with better than average genetics (vom) can usually get away with eating less than "perfectly". So the common perfect doesn't apply to this small sub set of gifted individuals? Does "perfect" mean something else for them?

If perfect does in fact mean something else for the gifted few, then what about those with a signifcant genetic (vom) disadvantage? If "perfect" changes for the gifted, then presumably it also is somthing different for those genetic duds (hardgainers? again, vom).

Perfect must be VERY situation depedant and I would imagaine what is "perfect" for each individual is unique. General guidelines are by their very nature general and apply to most I would agree, thus criticising every minor flaw in the diet is redundant once the person is making progress, since they've found what works "perfectly" for them. Changing things might in fact lead to lesser results, so the perfectly healthy diet suddenly becomes a handicap.

Or changing things might lead to no visable or performance difference. Does this make the new diet no better or worse than the old one? Even tho the new one is seemingly "perfect"? If no benefit is derived then was the previous diet also "perfect"? But if they're both "perfect", yet both different, how can this situation exist?

And the people who are screaming about perfection always seem to be the lower middle of the pack guys and girls. They're horrified to hear how pro bodybuilders eat in the off season and the blandness and unhealthyness of comp season, shocked to hear SHW lifters live off chocolate and fast food. Their diet's aren't "perfect" for the vast majority, but they help them to be the best at their chosen sport.

So WTF is going on??? Shouldn't "perfect" be universally true? How do these guys eat so sub-optimaly but still excel? (I'm expecting "genetics" to be the answer..... in case no=one's noticed ---> VOM)

nesf

I completely agree with you. Genetics plays an enormous role and most nutrition ideas are generalisations (that doesn't make them "wrong", they just shouldn't be taken to be gospel).

Where the problem in all this arises is when people approach it like a religion and not a science. Nutrition is a science. It's fallible, open to correction and inductive. That doesn't make it not useful or anything, you just need to keep an open mind when looking at the topic.

g'em

I'm sure there's quite a few of us who must look like regular fitness nazi's on the board, and I'm quite sure I've been accused of it more than once But this is the way I see it:

Just as you both (Hanley and nesf) say, everyone is different. I'm by no means genetically gifted and I'm a bit of a slave to the green-eyed monster where those lucky people are concerned too (baxstards the lot of 'em), but at the end of the day the basics of nutrition are the same - we all succumb to the same metabolic processes and we all need the same macronutrients (disorders and intolerances notwithstanding) to survive.

But how do you figure out what the little differences are? Well, personally I think one of the most effective ways is to wipe the slate clean - start off with a 'textbook' perfect diet and play with introducing various things until you can figure out what you can get away with and what you can't. Obviously not everyone is willing to do that, but most people I know who have the best understanding of their own nutrition needs are people who've done something along those lines.

*sigh* I think I was happier when I could stay in denial about being able to toelrate a carb-heavy diet...

nesf

I think it really depends on your goal. Some goals are more "tolerant" than others genetic wise (i.e. going from 30%bf to 25%bf is going to be fairly similar for most people). Some, like going to 8%bf or something are completely different. Some people will manage it relatively easily and others will have fight hard against their body for a very long time to get there and have to continue fighting very hard to stay there.

The whole ecto/meso/endomorph concept is useful for generalising this kind of thing simply because it reminds us how important genetics is in the individual. Some of us gain muscle and/or fat easily and some of us don’t. The whole tabla rasa approach with BMIs etc, while useful when talking about populations, aren’t very useful when talking about individuals. It’s a bit like IQ, it’s useless for comparing two individuals, yet very useful when talking about very large groups of people.

Diet advice needs to, some extent, be tailored. The more exacting the goal, the more tailored for the individual the advice needs to be. Again, the same could be said for exercise.

ali.c

nesf wrote:

The whole ecto/meso/endomorph concept is useful for generalising this kind of thing simply because it reminds us how important genetics is in the individual. Some of us gain muscle and/or fat easily and some of us don’t.

Tbh though i know genetics does have a role to play, but i wonder how much of being say carb intolerant comes from having a ****e diet for years. Just as with most intolerances a critical load is required before the body has an adverse reaction to it, prehaps it years of eating crap which makes the body not respond well to it?

equally i suppose i wonder how much the conditioning you undergo as a child affects your build later in life?

Obviously i am just speculating but just throwing it out there tbh.

Sangre

Hanley wrote:

I like this idea.

A lot of people seem to do a lot of mental masturbation on here over what's "ideal" and how if you're not eating loads of healthy fats and following an exact macro split and getting all you micro nutrients you're never gonna achieve anything. Which needless to say, just isn't true.

Exactly, I think we see this attitude surface everytime someone brings up the topic of drinking and getting fit/losing weight. Some people talk like one beer will set you back a month.

ali.c

Sangre wrote:

Exactly, I think we see this attitude surface everytime someone brings up the topic of drinking and getting fit/losing weight. Some people talk like one beer will set you back a month.

Yes and no, tbh i see people saying it doesnt matter what you eat if you train hard. See thats not true for most people, esp people who are overweight to begin with. I train hard and it shows in my lifting, i pretty much doubled my deadlift (55Kg-100Kg) bench (20kg-40kg) and squat (BW-45kg*5) numbers in 3 months but honestly my diet was passable but not close to perfect so i didnt lose a whole load of weight (actually its the exact same)

Of course 1 beer isnt going to set you back a month but if you are trying to lose weight 8/9 beers a week could almost cancel out your deficit for the week.

what people do get when the post here is a balance of views covering each view point.

of course you dont need a perfect diet to get anywhere but the closer to perfect it is the quicker you will reach the destination IMHO.

nesf

ali.c wrote:

Tbh though i know genetics does have a role to play, but i wonder how much of being say carb intolerant comes from having a ****e diet for years. Just as with most intolerances a critical load is required before the body has an adverse reaction to it, prehaps it years of eating crap which makes the body not respond well to it?

equally i suppose i wonder how much the conditioning you undergo as a child affects your build later in life?

Obviously i am just speculating but just throwing it out there tbh.

What exactly do you mean by build/conditioning? Environment will always play a huge role in someone's health etc but the point is that it's the combination of environment and genetics that shapes people.

Would you agree that some people can get away with crap eating habits more than others?

ali.c

nesf wrote:

What exactly do you mean by build/conditioning? Environment will always play a huge role in someone's health etc but the point is that it's the combination of environment and genetics that shapes people.

I guess i meant what type of activities they undergo, so does some do and stick with long distance running because they have a predisposed build to it or does exposure to it at a young age somewhat shape the build of the child to fit the sport? There was a program on discovery where some girl from an eastern european country started weight-lift really really young. It was saying that as a result her muscle was packed diagonially thus producing more muscle fibres per square inch. I dont remember all the details and i know its not the best reference but it got me thinking that most elite althetles begin training at such an early age that it could well alter their physical development. Pure speculation, and i was just putting it out there

nesf wrote:

Would you agree that some people can get away with crap eating habits more than others?

Yes i do, but i also think that crap is relative and its very difficult to break down someones lifestyle piece by piece and identify how come they get away with it. Genetics definately plays a role, but i was wondering as too how much of a role does nutrional history etc play. Day for bad references but i remember reading that between the ages of 0-2 most our fat cells develop, after which they shrink or expand but the number remains fairly constant. I have no idea how true this is but again i was wondering how much does childhood nutrion impact on how tolerant we are to crap diets as adults.

PeakOutput

ali.c wrote:

There was a program on discovery where some girl from an eastern european country started weight-lift really really young. It was saying that as a result her muscle was packed diagonially thus producing more muscle fibres per square inch. I

ye i saw that too her dad was ex russian military and was doing excersises with her when she was 2 and now she is seventeen and an amazing weight lifter apparently

nesf

ali.c wrote:

I guess i meant what type of activities they undergo, so does some do and stick with long distance running because they have a predisposed build to it or does exposure to it at a young age somewhat shape the build of the child to fit the sport? There was a program on discovery where some girl from an eastern european country started weight-lift really really young. It was saying that as a result her muscle was packed diagonially thus producing more muscle fibres per square inch. I dont remember all the details and i know its not the best reference but it got me thinking that most elite althetles begin training at such an early age that it could well alter their physical development. Pure speculation, and i was just putting it out there

Yes i do, but i also think that crap is relative and its very difficult to break down someones lifestyle piece by piece and identify how come they get away with it. Genetics definately plays a role, but i was wondering as too how much of a role does nutrional history etc play. Day for bad references but i remember reading that between the ages of 0-2 most our fat cells develop, after which they shrink or expand but the number remains fairly constant. I have no idea how true this is but again i was wondering how much does childhood nutrion impact on how tolerant we are to crap diets as adults.

I've always thought of long distance runners as being a case of self-selection. People who have "suitable" builds are more likely to take it up. Heavier people will drift towards rugby, shot putt or whatever. Even something as basic as someone's bone structure and height will push people a bit towards one "group" of sports more than another.


I did see a study discussing how habits built as children (lack of activity, being overweight) were a very good indicator for future condition. If you develop bad nutritional habits when you're young you're very likely to continue with these habits into adult life. It might be more of a case of habits being formed than actual physical changes (I could be wrong here, I haven't looked into it in any depth).