Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, There's Nothing Magical About Breakfast (nytimes.com)
Is breakfast the most important meal of the day? Plenty of people certainly believe that, but according to a new report, that notion is based on "misinterpreted research and biased studies." The New York Times has run a piece authored by Aaron E. Carroll, a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine, who looked into numerous studies -- and found flaws in them -- to conclude that breakfast isn't as important after all. (Could be paywalled; alternate source) He writes: The [reports] improperly used causal language to describe their results. They misleadingly cited others' results. And they also improperly used causal language in citing others' results. People believe, and want you to believe, that skipping breakfast is bad. Carroll also points out a conflict in many of such studies: most of them have been funded by the food industry. He concludes: The bottom line is that the evidence for the importance of breakfast is something of a mess. If you're hungry, eat it. But don't feel bad if you'd rather skip it, and don't listen to those who lecture you. Breakfast has no mystical powers.
I wonder if the debunkers have provided evidence that supports their position that breakfast is unimportant and can be skipped? Just because the "proof" for a hypothesis is debunked, does not automatically mean the opposite of the hypothesis is true.
I typically don't have breakfast until 2.5 hours after I wake at 4:30AM and ride the express bus for 25 miles to work, getting my large skinny vanilla latte and breakfast sandwich at the cafeteria. Better to have breakfast after I'm done traveling in the morning. No risk of getting motion sickness and hurling on someone.
Yes it does. It led Kellogg and General Mills to a bottomless pot of gold.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Big Breakfast has been trying to get people to eat a big breakfast for years!
I've been working out on an empty stomach in the mornings for years, only to be criticized by armchair specialists about how bad or impossible this is... There's plenty of reserve energy floating around the human body and there's nothing miraculous about physical activity on an empty stomach.
You think our ancestors woke up to a fully stocked refrigerator every morning?
Mostly random stuff.
I personally never eat breakfast -- during the work week.
I'll eat a minimal lunch (always left overs = free mortgage payment per year :). Oh, wait, I don't have a mortgage anymore because I did that...
On the rare weekend days that I do eat breakfast I'll skip lunch altogether. I'm not hungry.
Dinner, for me, IS the most important meal -- and in many cases the ONLY meal I'll eat for the day.
No, I don't snack either. The funny thing is per US BMI fatso rules I am considered over-weight too boot. Of course they have always said that about me since grade school. I've always ignored it all. Even my doctor looked me up and down and said, "No -- you're just fine. Keep doing what you're doing."
Any magic things you hear about food are usually false:
- Sodium isn't bad for you (unless you have a special condition).
- High fructose corn syrup isn't significantly different than regular sugar.
- Aspertame has no significant health effects.
- Fat isn't bad for you.
- You don't have old undigested meat in your gut.
- You don't need 8 glasses of water per day.
- [Food item XYZ] isn't "brain food"
- Caffeine doesn't cause heart problems
- You don't need X servings of Y food per day
- Health food isn't much better for you than regular food
- Eggs don't give you a heart attack
- Organic doesn't mean healthy. Neither does natural.
- Chemicals are not bad for you.
The key for most people is not to eat after 8PM and get enough sleep each night.
If you are going to work your balls off, you'd better eat breakfast. If you are going to sit on ass all day, you can probably skip it, unless you're hungry. You can now skip this article, and every other article like it. Tada!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
...but my personal experience speaks elsewise.
If I sleep in I feel fine. If I force myself to get up early for work (which I do most days) then I feel groggy and not-hungry for 2-3 hours, if I force myself to eat something shortly after waking (usually a banana or prawn sandwich) I feel better for those 2-3 hours and gain an appetite for a full meal quicker.
I find it ironic that in an article about how imprecise and loose language led to the notion that breakfast is somehow special compared to other meals, the summary uses the term magical and the article uses the term mystical.
My own observation is that obese people tend to skip or have a very light breakfast. They then make up for it by having a big lunch, dinner and then snacks right up until bedtime. I've always felt that you should be a little hungry when you go to bed, then have a good size breakfast in the morning. Improves sleep, and sets you up for the day, with only a light lunch and dinner required. I also find that it prevents you from feeling tired in the afternoon.
My observation is that obese people eat snacks. Blaming it on breakfast or no breakfast is a diversion.
I agree; if you aren't hungry, don't eat (breakfast or any other meal). On the other hand I love something in the morning and my preference is Bulletproof Coffee. It is nice because it only contains fat and therefore doesn't get your insulin going right when you wake up.
There's nothing magical. It's not when you eat. It's calories in versus calories out.
.
Want to lose weight?
Find out your BSR (what you need just to survive)
Count calories.
Try to eat well (within the range of calories)
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
My own observation is that obese people tend to skip or have a very light breakfast. They then make up for it by having a big lunch, dinner and then snacks right up until bedtime.
My observation too. I have always been slim and fit, and I eat little and often :- Breakfast, mid-morning snack, lunch, mid-afternoon tea, evening dinner, and supper.
OTOH my brother-in-law only eats once a day (around 6pm) and has a massive blow-out at that time. He is shaped like a barrel I believe because that huge meal over the years has stretched his stomach muscles and gut to collapse point. He makes his kids eat like that too - the poor sods are in tears with hunger by mid-afternoon.
Anyway, if I did not eat breakfast my stomach would be rumbling noisily all morning. It depends on your personal metabolism.
As for people "lecturing" you to have a big breakfast, what rock have the authors been under for the last few years? All the lectures I now hear are telling us to eat less, like this one is.
My reasonable dinner may be unreasonable, of course, but at the end of the day, it's less calories than eating three meals a day like a chump.
It depends on the sum of the calories of the three meals, doesn't it?
Yes, I ask the question about sleep mainly because I know of exactly zero humans who have ever managed to achieve that whole 8-hours-of-sleep shit on any regular basis, and yet we seem to survive and thrive.
I think the whole point of driving the importance of breakfast has less to do with forcing people to eat at a certain hour, and has more to do with the fact that your body hasn't consumed any fuel at that point in roughly 10 - 12 hours, and things start to go downhill for most humans with regards to energy levels and overall alertness after a certain point of no food or drink. This tolerance to avoiding varies from individual to individual, thus no "studies" are necessary, only personal experience.
Bacon is served at breakfast more so than other meals. Magic.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
Find out your BSR (what you need just to survive) .
My BMR score is 2,476 calories per day.
Count calories.
My diet is 1,500 calories/150 grams of carbs per day.
Try to eat well (within the range of calories)
I have my last meal before 6PM and get eight hours of sleep.
Some do, others eat healthy foods, but their bodies have betrayed them. For some of us it's easy to stay fit, so we can easily make the mistake of thinking obese people are gluttons. Some are, and alcohol abuse often plays a role in this, but others exercise and eat healthy food, but can't lose weight. There are even obese vegetarians.
It's calories in versus calories out.
It's not quite as simple as that - not all calories are the same.
That said, number of calories is a pretty big part of it.
But there is! Feed a lot of it to your grandpa who has arteriosclerosis and an unexpected windfall will be coming your way!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He also did a youtube version of this on his Healthcare Triage channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
My wife, who had a long career in medicine, often says about changing ideas on what's good and bad for you, "That's what they say today."
When you eat and what you eat should depend on when you are active and how you are active so that your blood is rich leading up to periods of increased activity. This situation molds an overall conditioned response to your daily routine in terms of hormone production, which, among just about everything else you feel, is what causes you to be hungry, meaning you're anticipating a workload and feel that you ought to fuel up.
But you don't have to eat for energy to be mobilized to the blood due to the fact that you have body fat. But it's not possible for some people to utilize this faculty due to their poor diet.
The root of the problem is that people jam up their hormones, especially insulin, by eating grain and sugar which makes the body produce hormones out of proportion to what is preferable.
Hormones have multiple functions and triggering too much production of a hormone for one task will disrupt all of its other tasks. Simply put humans are not genetically suited to diets based on carbohydrates.
Losing weight and keeping the weight off is simple. Ignore everything but calorie in and calorie out.
At 5'10" and 200 pounds your BSR is in the 1900 calorie / day range. (Look it up).
Figure out how much you exercise (walk, stairs, gym, bike, etc..) and work with that.
Keep you calories under that amount and you will lose weight. Above you gain.
Eating one meal or 10; after 8PM or not; it's the calories that count.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
There's nothing magical. It's not when you eat. It's calories in versus calories out.
I understand the point you're making. Calories in vs. calories out is certainly right. But "calories out" is affected by a lot of things, including when you eat.
Ultimately for weight loss it really is in the long run. Now eating healthy is best.
But if you eat under your required daily maintenance level you will lose weight. Even if your diet is twinkies and rum.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Thank god, I'm usually still asleep during breakfast time, so I'll move to lunch instead.
Many of the above postings are indirectly saying that metabolism is individual, and while some "collective" rules may make sense (get some exercise, don't overeat), not everything generalizes. I suspect breakfast is one of those non-generalizable things.
We all have to find out what works best for us. I find that a small breakfast prevents me from being overly hungry at lunch and then eating more than I should. A large breakfast might have me skipping lunch and being overly hungry at dinner. I'm in the multiple small meals category, but I don't pretend this applies to everyone.
The magic of bacon is how often the nutritionists are magically transformed over whether it's bad for you or not (while some vegans try to sell us all on the magic of some nasty soy bacon).
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
to know if I don't eat something in the morning, I will be very distracted until later for lunch time.
One thing to note is ***never*** eat melons along with other foods. If you do eat melons, have them alone then wait for at least 30 minutes before something else. A chart showing food combinations pointed this out, before I saw that my stomach never felt that great after eating melons along with other stuff especially at hotel breakfast buffets.
mfwright@batnet.com
At 5'10" and 200 pounds your BSR is in the 1900 calorie / day range. (Look it up).
I'm 5'10" and 350 pounds. You figure it out. I don't know what BSR means and Google isn't being too helpful.
Figure out how much you exercise (walk, stairs, gym, bike, etc..) and work with that.
I walk 20 minutes per day during the week and work out at the gym on the weekend.
Keep you calories under that amount and you will lose weight. Above you gain.
My daily diet is 1,500 calories / 150 grams of carbs per day, less than what I need.
Eating one meal or 10; after 8PM or not; it's the calories that count.
Breakfast is "breaking fast." Between my last meal of the day and the first meal of the day should be at least a 12-hour fast.
Yes. However I find too many people make excuses based on trivial things. I happen to eat 75% of my calories within an hour or two before going to bed. I'm no longer in my 20s or 30s but I carefully watch my calories. I don't have a six pack but I'm in good shape. I always hear "why are you watching what you're eating - you're not fat."
I'm in good shape because I count calories. (And go to they gym.)
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
I am obese by all measurements. I weigh about 250lbs but I am not super fat. I do not eat breakfast, I don't snack while I am at work and I eat 2 very sensible meals a day. There are people I know that are much skinnier than I am, that eat 2-3x as much as I do. I also exercise a fair amount by necessity since I don't own a car and use my bicycle for everything. I can sprint for a few city blocks without too much trouble and I am never winded after climbing stairs 6 flights of stairs (which I do several times a day).
So, yeah, I suppose I fall into the "obese-non-breakfast-eating" crowd but I don't think that cramming more food into my body first thing in the morning (when I am not hungry) is going to help slim me down.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Some do, others eat healthy foods, but their bodies have betrayed them.
The New York Times had an article on a scientific study of the 2009 Biggest Loser contestants who regain their weight because their metabolism slowed down while dieting (expected) but their metabolism never recovered (unexpected). If they ate the normal calories for their height and weight, they would be eating an extra 400 to 800 calories that their body wants to regain the lost weight.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/health/biggest-loser-weight-loss.html
Empirical studies have shown conclusively that Lucky Charms are magically delicious.
4chan containment failure detected.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
My bad. BMR. No wonder google didn't help. Basal metabolic rate is the amount of calories you would consume if you were bedridden. We need a huge amount of calories simply for brain and organ function. Basic BMR calculators are a good way to start.
After a lot of effort I found that my BMR was within 10% of these basic calculators.
see: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/to...
see: http://www.calculator.net/bmr-...
Pick a weight you want to be at (say 225). Find the BMR for that weight and that's what you should eat for the day. Make sure you get enough protein so you may have cut your carbs.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
I has been from the word go. None of Gore's nonsense stood up to congressional scrutiny.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Feed a lot of it to your grandpa who has arteriosclerosis and an unexpected windfall will be coming your way!
That's also been debunked. Meat and fat don't cause problems; a high carb diet is far worse. So to carry out your plan, feed him pancakes with plenty of syrup.
Anyone else here old enough to remember the Four basic food groups, one of which was entirely taken up by Dairy, which a lot of humans flat out can't digest properly at all? After a while (and a lot of embarrassing gastrointestinal distress), they decided that was BS and created the Food Pyramid. The basic idea of that one was that you should be eating a metric shitload of breads. Today we call those "carbs", and these same types of people will tell you to avoid them like the plague.
Point being that nutrition "experts" have a long proud history of being completely full of shit. They'll even admit it. But that was before. They're right this time.
Breakfast thing being case in point. Young people should probably be fed if they are hungry, but if they aren't its usually downright stupid to force food on them. For older people this goes triple. I found with advancing age that my metabolism has slowed down to the point where if I try to force even 2 meals a day on myself, I gain weight. That's bad. Much, much worse than just eating only the 1 or 2 times a day I'm actually hungry.
I'd thought that till recently. I was getting extremely exhausted late aftenoon. I moved breakfast into late morning, lunch to early afternoon, and kept my afternoon snack. It has improved my energy issues and I get away with a lighter lunch since it is closer to my previous afternoon snack. I've discovered that I'm not usually hungry when I wake up.
Well I haven't eaten what is normally known as "breakfast" for about 7 years. (Of course, as it is technically defined as when you "break your fast", your first meal of the day is breakfast even if eaten at 10 pm). For what it's worth, I have noticed absolutely no ill effects of any kind.
Instead, following the recommendation of a growing number of nutritionists and doctors, I eat two meals a day at approximately noon and 6 pm. That's ample for someone of my age (late 60s) and conveniently allows for an 18-hour semi-fast between dinner and the following day's lunch. (I don't count coffee with lashings of double cream, although strictly it has quite a few calories).
The idea that you have to eat every few hours or you run out of blood sugar and faint has certainly been debunked. And anyway, it makes no sense. After a decent meal, it takes the food over an hour even to be liquidized in your stomach - before it can move on to digestion proper - and then your guts take 12-24 hours to extract most of the nutrients. So it's fairly obvious that you are getting nutrients drip-fed into your blood all that time. And indeed, it's very easy and painless to fast for 24-72 hours, because by the time the food in your intestines has been thoroughly absorbed, your body has automatically and transparently shifted to burning body fat. When I fast, I sometimes feel mild hunger pangs a couple of times the first day, but from the second morning a different (and very enjoyable) state sets in: no hunger, no indigestion, no feeling of fulness at all. It's almost as if you were without a digestive system for the time being, which gives it and you a rest. Incidentally, this is an ideal state to be in if you want to get a lot of work done without interruptions. If you can get into flow, you can work steadily for hour after hour without getting any hassle from your body.
What most of us mistake for hunger is a conditioned reflex, which we have set up to hit us at "mealtimes". Real hunger manifests as tiredness, and may be hard to recognize at first if you are not used to it.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Depending on your metabolism, bla bla bla...
The essence is: If you have a normal life cycle, breakfast means you haven't eaten anything for the past 10 hours, and probably it's not a bad idea to give your body some energy.
Of course, if you're eating for three already, like most overweight people, you can just as well skip three days to burn some fat.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
There are almost equal numbers (of studies and people) on each side. Anyone who claims one or the other is in a religion, not thinking rationally. The only logical conclusion is "it's complicated".
Learn to love Alaska
Ignore everything but calorie in and calorie out.
At 5'10" and 200 pounds your BSR is in the 1900 calorie / day range. (Look it up).
Figure out how much you exercise (walk, stairs, gym, bike, etc..) and work with that.
But none of that works. Calorie out is a guess that's immeasurable. Calories in is also not measurable (unless you make 10 of every meal, and measure the calories in 9, eat 1, and measure the calories in your poop). So the theory is correct, but the measures are useless.
Learn to love Alaska
My grandfather told me to watch out for those so called, "free cholesterol test". He said, "That test cost me my bacon!"
Side note, he lived to be 91 years old. ~ 30 years after the test.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
I very rarely eat breakfast. In fact, I rarely have an appetite until I've been up for at least an hour or two.
When people say that breakfast is the most important meal of the day, I generally reply that Lunch is the least important meal of the day - except when it's first. And for me, Lunch is almost always first ;-)
I only eat discarded tennis shoes. High fiber and good for the environment. Plus it is the most naturally probiotic thing you can eat.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
What are human energy reserves called?
Seems like exercising without food intake would prompt the body to "fork over" them reserves.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
"...to conclude that breakfast isn't as important after all."
Breakfast isn't as important as what? Lunch? Dinner? Oxygen? Jack Daniels?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
It's been working for me for years. I track what I eat and go on a weekly basis. Example if you need 2000 calories a day you should eat 14,000 a week. If saturday you have 4000 and sunday you have 3000 then you need to eat 3000 less then following 5 days.
It's works. Is calorie counting exact? No. Not at all.
I happen to think that calorie out is fairly straight forward and is probably the easier of the two. My BMR is 1800 calories. Walk briskly for 20 minutes and I use up 140 calories. The calorie in and calorie out estimates are close enough for me to regulate my weight.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
It's been working for me for years.
Thus, it's 100% perfect.
My BMR is 1800 calories.
So you spend a week living in a controlled environment where it was measured?
No, you are making up numbers that fit your personal experience, and asserting they apply to everyone, when they apply to nobody, including you. Your delusion doesn't become reality, even if you really really believe it.
Learn to love Alaska
The only solution is to say "sod it" and eat a bit of everything. Or say "sod it completely" and eat a lot of everything.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
As usual, Monty Python has the answer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
Now that's what I call breakfast!
"I only eat discarded tennis shoes. High fiber and good for the environment."
And because they taste better than kale.
I've always heard that you should eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a queen, and dinner like a pauper.
You should be able to eat most anything you want for breakfast because you'll work off those Calories during the day while you work, IF you actually work. A lot of people nowadays do little if any physical work. Those are the ones who are either overweight or working out to stay slim.
Scientific evidence seems to indicate that you've already been cut out of the will.
The low fat part being debunked is also BS, or at least highly misinterpreted data. People read what they want to read from scientific studies.
http://www.bbc.com/news/health...
Ah yes, congress, the wise men and women of the scientific world.
http://www.generalmills.com/en...
Doubleplus unslim!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You suggested in another post you were doing low-carb. 150 g/day isn't low-carb except by comparison to a standard American diet. Try 20. Maybe it works for you, maybe it doesn't. But it's worth trying for a month or so.
It certainly did the trick for me. I lost about eighty pounds and I've kept it off for four years. Typical day for me in maintenance mode is under 50 g, with lots of days down in the 20 g range. After this long, I find I prefer ketosis - in addition to killing hunger, it's solved a lifelong problem with afternoon sleepiness. It's also made me a much better cook.
Some do, others eat healthy foods, but their bodies have betrayed them. For some of us it's easy to stay fit, so we can easily make the mistake of thinking obese people are gluttons. Some are, and alcohol abuse often plays a role in this, but others exercise and eat healthy food, but can't lose weight. There are even obese vegetarians.
That's because the simplified "calories in - calories out" mantra that some people like to repeat doesn't take efficiency into account. Some obese people have very efficient bodies that break down food easily and horde calories while some skinny people are so because their bodies are actually quite inefficient so many of those calories they eat just go out the other end and never get stored or burned in the first place. The findings regarding the role of gut bacteria in recent years highly support this.
Breakfast is a culture thing.
Even in my country they once spread the mantra "Breakfast is the most important meal" ... I doubt the majourity is following it.
I stopped eating breakfast around my 5th grade. It was simply impossible. There was no time for it and frankly I was not hungry, but around 9:00 we had our first 15 minutes break in school, so then I ate "breakfast".
In our days my first meal is lunch, depending when it is. And in rare cases, e.g. on vacations or when I do Aikido seminars (5h to 6h training per day) I have a small breakfast before the first training.
Depending on how much sports I do and how much work I have I eat only once a day anyway ...
Contradicting the idea of what to eat as they spread it in magazines or "new science of the day", I eat a huge meal in the late evening.
Culture, wow. In Mediterranean countries you have an espresso and a small sip of olive oil in the morning. Breakfast is when work/school long has started. Somewhere between 9:00 and 11:00. And it is a very small one as you have your first real meal somewhere around 13:00/14:00 ... and afterwards you have siesta till 16:00. Then your work continues till probably 20:00.
Sure, having enough nutrition to be able to perform, e.g. brain work, as in school, is important. But there are plenty of ways how to achieve this. E.g. not having school started at an absurd early time in the morning for little kids just because the teachers want to go home at 14:00.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
...can science prove that there's no magic?
They're all highly biased towards supporting big oil, highly biased towards laughing at anything anyone says that may involve spending government money, and so forth. This makes them mistakenly agree with the idea that there's no such thing as manking causing climate change. It's all natural to them, part of God's plan, so no need for a single dime in mitigation (besides, it's a liberal plot!). Morons.
I never had the custom of eating breakfast. I wake up and work till noon and have lunch. I never ate before school as a child. I haven't experienced any negative side effects from this, I'm not overweight, I don't have digestive issues and I don't run out of energy in the morning. I doubt people from one of the many countries/cultures around the world that don't have a "breakfast" meal have any major issues either.
The amount of Calories consumed by exercise for most people is easy to calculate; the energy that goes into lifting weight, walking, running, swimming is all fairly straightforward. Body efficiency food-to-mechanical-energy runs about 25%.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Easy to estimate, impossible to calculate.
Learn to love Alaska
http://m.imgur.com/gallery/LhN...
If they're systematic, then it doesn't matter that they're guesses. Anyone can keep track and see how it goes. Getting fatter? Cut down on calories eaten using whatever system you're using. Continue for a month. Still getting fatter? Cut down again. Getting thinner? Then it works.
Inexact measurements are useful for weight loss. It's not a scientific study.
Are you implying humans presence on earth is not natural?
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
No, it's natural. Doesn't mean stand by and wait for the end either. Floods are natural, earthquakes are natural, it makes sense to try and mitigate those as well if possible.
Then there's no reason to "measure" anything. Do more of what's good for you, and less of what's bad. Calorie counting, and shaming others based on what you see them eat, or exercise is silly. But that's what you get here on Slashdot. "Just eat less" said to someone who already eats half of what others do, but still gains weight just means you don't know what you are talking about.
Learn to love Alaska
You suggested in another post you were doing low-carb. 150 g/day isn't low-carb except by comparison to a standard American diet.
A low-carb diet is 150 grams or less of carbs per day. The typical American eats 225 grams to 325 grams of carbs per day on a 2,000-calorie diet.
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/150-carbs-per-day-still-considered-low-carb-7754.html
Yeah, except as the other poster had said, meat and fat don't cause problems, so you'd need to fill him with pancakes. There's nothing wrong with a diet full of bacon, except maybe the salt.
Honestly, sometimes I wish Ancel Keys had never been born. It's really hard to find whole fat yogurt these days because everyone thinks fat-free is better, and they're just lying to themselves when they say it tastes better without the fat, because it doesn't.
Kale. Hipster spinach, right?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Let's be clear. Breakfast is quite literally the first meal you eat after you have gone without food for a length of time. You "break" your "fast"
That's about the only reason to consider breakfast as more important than any other meal. One would hope that the first thing you eat after a fast, no matter how long it is, is something reasonably good for you. In that sense, Breakfast *is* the most important meal.
Only in the USA. In most of Europe, kale has been a staple crop for around a thousand years. It became more popular in the UK in the second world war, when it was one of the easiest vegetables to cultivate at home and food imports were very expensive. It's one of the cheapest leaf vegetables to buy here.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Indeed, and that's why the notion of Breakfast being the most important meal is senseless - in fact it's almost a tautology.
Every meal is the most important.
Come on. Are all 8.5" x 11" pieces of paper EXACTLY the same? No. There is tolerance.
Is the speedometer on your car 100% accurate? No. But it gives you a fairly good idea of how fast you're going. Better than looking out the window and guessing.
Are the BMR estimates based on weight, age and height EXACT. No of course not. But they give a very good approximation of where to be and how to modulate your caloric intake.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
The saddest five words ever:
Breakfast has no mystical powers.
--- Void where prohibited. Your mileage may vary. ---
Please don't propagate this myth. It is simply not based on anything.
It isn't calories, it's what you eat and comes down to HOW your body works. It's about hormones, largely insulin and how your body handles it.
You cut calories without fixing how your body works because you've been abusing it, and you will simply be starving yourself. And that simply doesn't work and is unhealthy.
Cut out sugars and carbs. Eat natural (unprocessed) fats. (two other myths - fat doesn't make you fat, and don't cause heart disease)
It is THAT simple. But people refuse to believe it. Don't just trust a Slashdot post. Read the research papers - and read the criticisms about them, researcher bias, etc. Learn what we have been 'fed' about diet. Educate yourself. Look at the data around obesity, heart disease, diabetes. It is amazing to me how much info is available to us, yet people just want a quick fix. Take some time and read.
Good Calories Bad Calories
The Primal Blueprint
Grain Brain
Many others.
I have been doing this for almost 4 years now, and in my mid-40s I am healthier than I have ever been. We have been an agriculture society for 10k years, but humans have been around and evolving for 2.5 million years. Do a visual comparison of those two numbers. Look at how little time we have been farming, then look at the Standard American Diet. Look at the sheer percentage of your diet that is grain and sugar based. Cut those things out. You will be much much healthier and that is what got us to where we are today.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Rubbish of course it is the most important meal of the day, you try having a meal without having breakfast.
Also it is the only meal of the day when you are likely to eat
Never eat baked beans with breakfast, that it is a sin. Now that is how empires are created.
The most dangerous drug
Then there's no reason to "measure" anything. Do more of what's good for you, and less of what's bad.
Measure because inexact measurements are a lot more informative over time than no measurements at all. They provide a system for making better decisions. A system doesn't have to be perfect to be useful.
Calorie counting, and shaming others based on what you see them eat, or exercise is silly. But that's what you get here on Slashdot.
Yeah, shaming is assholish, but that's the internet and the culture for you. You have my full support in telling people not to be assholes.
"Just eat less" said to someone who already eats half of what others do, but still gains weight just means you don't know what you are talking about.
I'm not sure what's wrong with "just eat less". It's almost always a right answer. It works for many people. What are people supposed to say: "here's a 47-point plan to micromanage your health"? If "just eat less" doesn't work, then maybe consult some physicians or other professionals.
Feed a lot of it to your grandpa who has arteriosclerosis and an unexpected windfall will be coming your way!
That's also been debunked. Meat and fat don't cause problems; a high carb diet is far worse. So to carry out your plan, feed him pancakes with plenty of syrup.
Everything has been debunked. Eat whatever the hell you want.
Hey Aaron Carroll is the guy from the Healthcare Triage Youtube channel. Great channel.
Good grief dude, listen to yourself... "Moderating calorie intake is useless because you can't be 100% accurate".
Ever heard the phrase "don't let perfect be the enemy of good"?.
Estimation and trial & error (eg tracking your actual weight over time and adjusting as needed) works just fine. You don't need exact numbers.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Except that all the studies which claim fat is bad for you were funded by people trying to push margarine and other plant oil based products. Some of the studies on the other side were actually not funded by the meat industry.
We're on the same page. I have always ate well but I slowly started putting on weight in my late 30s and I realized that the issue was portion control. I simply ate too much food. Even if the quality of one's food is excellent if you eat too much you will gain weight.
I lost weight and have kept myself at a good weight for years by simply paying attention to calories consumed. Of course this is above and beyond paying attention to what I'm putting into my body and generally eating very well.
And, as you mentioned, I quickly realized that the way to get the protein I wanted in the allowable calories I had to reduce my carb intake. Lucky for me sugars have never been my poison of choice. (Unless you consider potatoes, pasta and bread to be sugar.)
Ultimately, as a point of logic, you will starve to death (lose weight first) if you eat too few calories even if the calories are rubbish (twinkies and rum).
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
I thought it was only used for animal feed. Never seen it, but then I never specifically went looking for it.
Not any more. http://www.realclear.com/busin...
OST, that link's a bit old, they've probably moved onto some other fad by now.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
"Moderating calorie intake is useless because you can't be 100% accurate".
When you have to lie to make up quotes to insult someone with, that just makes you a lying liar.
Learn to love Alaska
Not directly...
Learn to love Alaska
No, but I consider pasta and bread to be poison. Potatoes and sweet potatoes only in small amounts on occasion.
It has nothing to do with portion control. I know, because I used to think that. But nope, not at all.
Avoid grains or grain products
Avoid sugar
Eat as much healthy fat as you like (low-fat is bad for you). Animal fat, olive oil, butter, coconut oil, avocados, eggs
Eat meat - the best sources you can get
Those four things will slim you down and reduce inflammation greatly. It will also help you get off the insulin roller-coaster. Once you get there, you will realize how bad you felt before, and will wish you would have started sooner. I also avoid nuts/legumes as well. Some people say avoid dairy, but I still eat cheese and full-fat dairy products. (no milk though) My health is better, my bloodwork is better. I just am ready for the medical establishment to realize their advice has been wrong all these years, and based off of bad or biased reporting of scientific studies.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Interesting. I allow myself the "poison"(bread and pasta) on weekends only. Veggie, meat, dairy, eggs during the week.
Perhaps I'm healthy because I limit my intake of "poison." You added legumes to the mix of don't eat..
Why? What sources do you have that indicate that legumes are bad - as for instance a white bean and beef stew casserole.
As far as breads are concerned have you seen the Netflix documentary "Cooked" with Michael Pollan. There is a good one on bread focusing on the difference between traditional bread and mass produced bread.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
It gets worse. They expect you to cut the end of your dick off!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I can not accept that Colossus is wrong about this.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
I paraphrased.
Please explain how I mis-represented your position?
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Paraphrases shouldn't be in quotes. Quotes are reserved for quotes.
My position was unrelated to what you said. Correcting you would be as relevant to your comments as explaining what my favorite car is, and why. How about this:
"Everyone that says you can count calories is a liar"
"Everyone who says you can do what they did and you will lose weight is a liar."
Can you understand those? My comments weren't about what someone should do with regards to losing weight, but about what to listen to. Those topics are orthogonal.
Learn to love Alaska
OK whatever you say dude.
OP suggested you can lose weight by consuming less calories than you expend, you replied by saying "none of that works", because of the difficulty of measuring calories precisely.
My paraphrasing was accurate to the wording that you used (fine, I shouldn't have used quotation marks, but it was obvious from context that it was not a direct quotation, so I do not appreciate you calling it "lying").
If you meant something entirely different, I'm sorry but you did not communicate it clearly. Perhaps consider that instead of blaming the reader.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
"Don't blame the reader" is rich, coming from someone that doesn't even read what was written. You saw that I disagreed with some portion of some post you agreed with, and attacked me, based on who I disagreed with, not what I said.
When confronted, you take it all back and blame me for your inability to read any of the posts, and just responding to the emotions you felt glancing over them.
Learn to love Alaska
I didn't "attack" or "insult" anyone. I disagreed with that you said, based on the wording you used (and it had nothing to do with "who" you replied to, wtf???). I'm sorry that you evidently have the thinnest skin on the entire internet, and fly off the handle at someone simply trying to have a discussion with you.
Funny... that is not the wording I used. Someone once told me you should reserve quotation marks for actual quotes.
Have a nice day.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson