Graces7 wrote: » learn_more wrote: » Tactic 10People don't want to learn the hard truth.Food was never that cheap. Junk food came in and made food cheaper than it ever was. Largely due to freezers and food scientists who figured out a way to transport food over vast distances and keep it edible. By injecting hydrogenated fats and sugar to preserve them as well. If people were educated about bad food, and they should be, then they would know that junk food is xtra cheap. I think that some ppl spend about 5% of their income on rotten food, when they know full well if they wanted to enjoy good food the spend would come to more like 20%. And it doesn't even have to be the much.So, I think you know exactly what I'm getting at. Really? I do not think so! :rolleyes: Where do you shop? Simple good food IS cheap. ALDI have the super6 offers every week .. so please do not accuse me of ignorance! I cannot eat junk food because of a medical issue but eat simply and well and inexpensively. As do many I know. Ah well!
learn_more wrote: » Tactic 10People don't want to learn the hard truth.Food was never that cheap. Junk food came in and made food cheaper than it ever was. Largely due to freezers and food scientists who figured out a way to transport food over vast distances and keep it edible. By injecting hydrogenated fats and sugar to preserve them as well. If people were educated about bad food, and they should be, then they would know that junk food is xtra cheap. I think that some ppl spend about 5% of their income on rotten food, when they know full well if they wanted to enjoy good food the spend would come to more like 20%. And it doesn't even have to be the much.So, I think you know exactly what I'm getting at.
RobertKK wrote: » Porridge in the morning takes only a few minutes in the microwave, add fruit and some whole milk and you have a delicious and healthy breakfast, which is cheaper than cereals.
Graces7 wrote: » lovely idea and a man after my own heart but try offering that to kids these days.. or grown up kids ..
Mr. FoggPatches wrote: » Fortunately, my gattaca like genes mean that none of this will ever bother me or my descendants.
darkpagandeath wrote: » Fat people and type 2 diabetes are going to destroy the health system. size 16 here should not be an average size for a woman. Ireland will be the fastest country in the EU in a few more years. I mean Jesus look at the amount of chocolate consumed here.
learn_more wrote: » Your misunderstanding of anything I have said is quite embarrassing ( for you ) . Guess I have to explain that as well.
Giblet wrote: » You know why I always finished the Pizza, I never saved anything for the next day.
Flint Fredstone wrote: » I'm just under 6ft tall and 13 stone and I love bacon and cheese fries. I eat far worse than some people I know that are in very bad shape. It would be very easy to hold your views if you are not prone to putting on weight...
Flint Fredstone wrote: » Sorry. That's my fault but it was Christmas.
Shenshen wrote: » So, essentially the same truth we've been told for the last 2 decades? Yes, that certainly was worth a new thread...
the beer revolu wrote: » Ah but this is coated in a whole level of patronising and superiority.
dub_skav wrote: » Also, the term macros is used, so you know it's an expert speaking.
Flint Fredstone wrote: » He's probably a PT, did a course like...
pumpkin4life wrote: » Trumpett: I went from being overweight to normal weight by: 1: Eating and drinking low carb. Ketogenic/paleo/atkins, all be grand. I eat meat, green veg, eggs, cheese and low carb peanut butter. 2: Lift weights a few times a week. Stick with compounds, so deadlift, squat and bench. I don't count calories, I eat as much food as I want and I'm around 10-12% bodyfat as of now. This seems to be controversial advice because a lot of people want to look like they're helping, rather than actually helping. I've been really heavy, I've been there and yeah, it's fùcking shìte out and you'll get some passive aggressive lads along the way, but don't give up and stick with it. Best of luck.
pumpkin4life wrote: » So whats worked for me very well: 1: Psychology and mindset. I hate the idea of counting calories because that means restriction. Restriction means using up valuable willpower and using up willpower means you have a bad day and then you binge on junk food and you don't hold to the diet. So, instead of saying "I'm not allowed to eat high carb foods" you say to yourself "I'm allowed to eat as much delicious steak, cheese, whiskey, tomatoes, eggs etc as I want". * 2: Lunch and business travel. Stick with salads, salad bar and cheese if your place has a canteen. If not, lunchbox with food the day before. If you're at a restaurant, order the biggest steak you can get. If you're going drinking, order whiskey straight. No one's ever batted an eyelid with myself tbh. The few who do = "yeah I'm involved in a lot of sports and this is my diet for it". Problem solved if you're worrying about it. And you don't have to go nuts with zero carbs. If someone offers you a bit of office birthday cake, no problem at all like. If you're genetically blessed you can probably afford to go with around 100 carbs a day. A genetically predisposed towards obesity lad like myself should probably stick with 50 carbs or less a day.*I've found this a really good way to give up addictive stuff in general. If you can substitute one addiction for another much smaller one or fool your brain so there is no willpower involved and youre in self indulgence do what you want mode, its far easier to give things up.
Wibbs wrote: » Yep, the true evangelists. And by christ they'd bore the skin of you in the majority of cases. Do NOT get me started on those cretins peddling the "paleo" diet and other such quackery. Misinformed mountebanks the lot of them.
rustynutz wrote: » The conspiracy theorist in me thinks a lot of the obesity problems in developed countries is driven by big business and the pharma sector. If governments wanted to they could tackle the amount of calorie dense and processed food that's available on the market, but that wouldn't be good for the big food giants, it also wouldn't be good for the pharma companies who get paid billions to treat type 2 diabetes and all the other ailments associated with obesity. Now where's my tinfoil hat? 😊 I would be strongly in favour of a sugar and processed food tax, but ONLY if the tax on fresh meat, fruit, vegetables etc. was reduced considerably as an incentive. Again if the political will was there it shouldn't be that complicated, I'm sure it would take a considerable burden off the health service inside 10 years
rustynutz wrote: » The conspiracy theorist in me thinks a lot of the obesity problems in developed countries is driven by big business and the pharma sector. If governments wanted to they could tackle the amount of calorie dense and processed food that's available on the market, but that wouldn't be good for the big food giants, it also wouldn't be good for the pharma companies who get paid billions to treat type 2 diabetes and all the other ailments associated with obesity. Now where's my tinfoil hat? 😊
pumpkin4life wrote: » Posted this in another thread: That's it, and it works. Don't be one of the aggressive health bores. Get a system in place and stick to it. Then have fun outside of that without being hung up and you're laughing.
Smoked Tuna wrote: » Think your mixing your BMI and body fat percentage up. Typo I assume.
pumpkin4life wrote: » Disagree with this. That kind of diet (I don't eat paleo ftr) saved my ass and it worked far better than any counting calories/macro bullshìt did before.
Smoked Tuna wrote: » That's not bull****, it's science. Counting calories works. For the majority of people it's energy in vs energy out. The food you've been eating however makes it less likely to over eat.
pumpkin4life wrote: » It's far more complicated than that. If you eat less (calorie counting) what happens is that the metabolic rate, the amount of calories you burn at rest, slows the fùck right down. A lower metabolic rate, besides making you feel fatigued and cold, also means that weight loss stalls, since your has adjusted its burn rate lower to match the number of calories taken in. Easier to become more depressed, less energy for this reason. That's the first problem. The second problem is willpower. Denying yourself food means that you will one day give up and indulge. Hunger and bad thinking is a great way for you to cave in. I guess having done both myself and seen great results in this and in othesr, I'm increasingly skeptical about calories in/out, especially because your body is a non linear system which doesn't seem to obey the laws of thermodynamics. But hey, thats my opinion and thats what worked for me. Might not work for others, but considering obesity rates are going up like mad, there's something big to this imo.
Wibbs wrote: » Like I noted on another thread where a few crawthumpers were peddling their virtue and polishing their halos it's easy to see where the church got its foot soldiers and zealots in times past.
