Viewing the message boards in:

eat right and no need to count calories

167891012»

Replies

  • Posts: 4,298 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »

    where did i claim these meals have no sauce? it's the entire meal that requires a lot of calories to be filling to me.

    Copied from an earlier post of yours so people don't have to scan the whole series of quotes:

    "if you're adding meat or vegetables, it's no longer just pasta and it's those foods that are considered as to whether or not it's filling. doesn't take away from the original premise."

    If adding meat or veg changes the 'just pasta' into something more filling, surely dairy, seafood, nuts, extra oils, etc do the same. Since I can't think of a pasta sauce that doesn't contain one or more of the above, only other option is plain noodles with just enough olive oil or butter or similar to keep the noodles from sticking.

    Otherwise, your whole 'adding meat or veg changes the pasta' argument is meaningless, because vegetables or meat added to pasta are just a chunky sauce.

    In fact, since sauces are apparently acceptable, I will wager you're going to find a whole lot more people who find 1/2 cup of noodles in a lovely creamy cheesy sauce, or a nice bolognese far more satiating than the fish and broccoli meal.
  • Posts: 2,333 Member
    edited January 2015
    stealthq wrote: »

    Copied from an earlier post of yours so people don't have to scan the whole series of quotes:

    "if you're adding meat or vegetables, it's no longer just pasta and it's those foods that are considered as to whether or not it's filling. doesn't take away from the original premise."

    If adding meat or veg changes the 'just pasta' into something more filling, surely dairy, seafood, nuts, extra oils, etc do the same. Since I can't think of a pasta sauce that doesn't contain one or more of the above, only other option is plain noodles with just enough olive oil or butter or similar to keep the noodles from sticking.

    Otherwise, your whole 'adding meat or veg changes the pasta' argument is meaningless, because vegetables or meat added to pasta are just a chunky sauce.

    In fact, since sauces are apparently acceptable, I will wager you're going to find a whole lot more people who find 1/2 cup of noodles in a lovely creamy cheesy sauce, or a nice bolognese far more satiating than the fish and broccoli meal.

    find whatever you want satiating. do not care. no clue what your point is though.
  • Posts: 24,208 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »

    Of course, and I totally agree with this.

    However, I have thought about it a lot, because I'd like to prevent it this time (of course). I don't have any answers, but I do know it wasn't due to not knowing my calories.

    What happened was that I maintained for 5 years while being very active, lots of stuff happened in my life (which are not worth getting into, but were relevant), I stopped being active and did not adjust my calories down, and -- the big one -- I stopped caring enough for several years for one reason or another.

    What I see as the question to answer is why didn't I care enough and what would prevent that from happening again? My current thought is that if I didn't care enough to eat well or weigh myself or take action when my clothes were getting tighter (yet I knew what to do and did briefly get back on the wagon successfully for a period of time), I also wouldn't care enough to log, so the logging can't be the issue.

    I do plan to force myself to weigh in regularly, no matter what, as I think this will help, and right now logging and playing with my diet helps, and always I find that thinking of it as about eating healthy helps (for me, but is not enough on its own without the other rules I used or some similar thing).

    I say all this not because I perceived you as being critical or am defensive about it (although I might be, I suppose), but because it fleshes out my position on this.

    I don't think my participation in this thread is anti-calorie-counting, though. My feeling is that it's a great tool, one that fits my personality and which I'm using now, but one which is not necessary if you are someone who dislikes doing it or finds it burdensome. (Back in the day it would have been more burdensome to me as I wasn't aware of anything like MFP if it even existed. Even now I wouldn't count if it meant looking stuff up and keeping a written log.)

    Thank you. Trying to always flesh out my own thinking.

    I think that the "didn't care enough" is insightful (at least to a first level) and I'm more interested in that aspect of failure mode than does this tool or that tool works or doesn't. Weight loss is relatively easy, maintenance is harder.

    It's ALL about adherence.
  • Posts: 257 Member
    Not counting leads me to "one more spoonful won't hurt" (and then the spoonful becomes ten spoonfuls). When I do count, I realize that most of the times, when it doesn't fit my calorie allowance anymore, I'm usually already satisfied and I would just be eating for the sake of it

    /\ This if you are aware of what you are putting in your mouth, no matter what it is, clean, healthy, not healthy etc. ---- it doesn't matter if you aren't aware and over eat, don't expend the excess calories someway -- by working out --- you will gain... Simple as that...
    It's the same with fat free a few years ago ... yes they may be lower in "FAT" or have no fat.. but if you eat the whole box and don't expend the calories... it does not matter.
  • Posts: 4,298 Member
    edited January 2015
    Aviva92 wrote: »

    find whatever you want satiating. do not care. no clue what your point is though.

    It's much nicer having a discussion with someone that at least tries to keep up with their own statements. Just saying. From you, a couple of posts back:

    "so, you're saying that eating plain pasta is just as filling as more nutritionally dense foods?"

    Yes. For some, including me, that is what I'm saying.

    Since plain pasta was revised to include pasta with sauce, I'm also saying the number of people who find that this is the case for them has undoubtedly increased.

    Therefore, the notion that pasta is inherently less satiating shouldn't be generalized.
  • Posts: 2,333 Member
    stealthq wrote: »

    It's much nicer having a discussion with someone that at least tries to keep up with their own statements. Just saying. From you, a couple of posts back:

    "so, you're saying that eating plain pasta is just as filling as more nutritionally dense foods?"

    Yes. For some, including me, that is what I'm saying.

    Since plain pasta was revised to include pasta with sauce, I'm also saying the number of people who find that this is the case for them has undoubtedly increased.

    Therefore, the notion that pasta is inherently less satiating shouldn't be generalized.

    keeping up with my posts just fine.

    if you find a low calorie version of pasta to be filling, then go for it. do not care. not everyone does though and many people don't.
  • Posts: 24,208 Member
    A fine example of moving the goal posts.
  • Posts: 34,415 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »

    I kind of backed way from Tilapia after seeing they way they are raised. Pretty gross.

    Also very true, but decided not to open that particular can in this thread.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Posts: 30,886 Member
    tomatoey wrote: »

    Why is everyone bullying this person? I don't get it. Seriously. People have different preferences and different definitions of what 'healthy' means. Some people do well on high-fibre/low-fat diets. Some do well on gluten-free. Some do well on lower-carb. More people than just Aviva, I mean it's ridiculous to say otherwise, we're ten years into low-carbism and many people have found it to work for them. I don't understand the bullying.

    There has been no bullying, and no one has said low carb does not work for some people.
  • Posts: 2,333 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »

    There has been no bullying, and no one has said low carb does not work for some people.

    uh, well all i said was that it does work for some people.
  • Posts: 2,333 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »

    There has been no bullying, and no one has said low carb does not work for some people.

    incorrect. there have been quite a few insults thrown around. is this just allowed on here now?
  • This content has been removed.
  • Posts: 22,505 Member
    687474703a2f2f7777772e676966736f75702e636f6d2f776562726f6f742f616e696d61746564676966732f36363235305f6f2e676966

    Thread closed. Too lazy to copy pasta guidelines 1 and 2.
This discussion has been closed.