Ayurvedic nutrition for weight loss (and general sanity)
Replies
-
dashaclaire wrote: »My Mum used to brew a pitta tea in the summer (Virginia July=pantpantpantpant) that was supposed to be cooling, didn't taste like much but I was totally impressed by how much it cooled my whole body down... It was like A/C in a glass. She got into Ayruvedic stuff for a awhile. I think the is some value there, many herbs have some value. If it gets you doing yoga and eating healthy then wonderful. My personal opinion: Yoga is the fountain of youth.
Hey, that might be the thing to help my hot flashes!
0 -
Yeah my mom and my dad at 71 and 81 respectively both do yoga every day...I don't do it quite that much but I do think it's pretty incredible.0
-
dashaclaire wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Thank you MFP, for reminding me that people are self righteous and close-minded.
I told my fiance that I was surprised at how the tone here is often one of a political discussion board, rather than the positive tone I was expecting. He said people get attached to their beliefs about food just like they do their political beliefs.
However, on this discussion board, the rules are "Do not attack, mock, or otherwise insult others" so feel free to Flag > Report something you think a moderator should review for breaking those rules.
Love you and your bf analysis of why people are so nasty on MFP!
Nobody is being nasty in this thread.
Nobody's attacking anyone.
Challenging statements is not attacking people.
Debunking bunk is kind and nice, if anything.
0 -
dashaclaire wrote: »My Mum used to brew a pitta tea in the summer (Virginia July=pantpantpantpant) that was supposed to be cooling, didn't taste like much but I was totally impressed by how much it cooled my whole body down... It was like A/C in a glass. She got into Ayruvedic stuff for a awhile. I think the is some value there, many herbs have some value. If it gets you doing yoga and eating healthy then wonderful. My personal opinion: Yoga is the fountain of youth.
Recipe me, please!
0 -
I was pinching (pruning) my bee balm yesterday and was wondering if Ayurveda has any uses for that. It's in the mint family. I also have spearmint and peppermint.
It's been a while, but I believe I am mostly Pitta dosha.0 -
margaretlb4 wrote: »Yeah my mom and my dad at 71 and 81 respectively both do yoga every day...I don't do it quite that much but I do think it's pretty incredible.
My mom is 77 and regularly does a balancing pose I find challenging. To get myself through it, I use a "my 77 year old mother does this" mantra.
0 -
Make sure whatever your doing, you can maintain it for life. Otherwise, it just becomes another fad diet. The simplicity of CICO is a Godsend.0
-
It lost me when it said I could not have banana with my yogurt.
http://www.ayurvedicyogi.com/recipes/0 -
It lost me when it said I could not have banana with my yogurt.
http://www.ayurvedicyogi.com/recipes/
Noooooo.....no bananers. Nope.
P.S. I had one on my oatmeal this morning. I don't think this diet allows oatmeal either.0 -
Jackie9950 wrote: »Make sure whatever your doing, you can maintain it for life. Otherwise, it just becomes another fad diet. The simplicity of CICO is a Godsend.
Best post yet!
0 -
In because why not.
1). According to this I should stick to dry foods. Can I eat 4200 calories of rice, plain pasta, and chips a days, and lose weight and be "healthy" because the Egyptians or whoever said it was okay a million years ago?
2) I'll sign up for this plan, but only if I have the option where I can sign others up under me, and receive a potions of their hundred buck sign up fee gimmick. I might even throw in an ItWorks wrap and some garcinja Cambodia.
No, I didn't research this "diet", no I didn't read the entire thread. I ain't gotta. Know what it says and where it's going. Lol.0 -
margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That's an article which isn't a study AND it talks about eating foods in excess of energy demand. It's not talking about eating the same number of calories in an energy deficit.
There is a slight difference in the thermic effect of ice cream vs. kale, so your body might net slightly less calories from the kale than the ice cream (we're talking maybe 10 calories or so if that)... BUT... having said that, one needs to consider context and dosage. In the context of an overall nutrient dense diet, 100 calories of ice cream is not going to derail someone's weight loss efforts. Ice cream still supplies protein and fat. I often use a small serving of gelato to up my fat intake.
0 -
forwardmoving wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That article just said -exactly- what I said to you. Fruits and veggies help us feel full, eating only candy bars is a bad idea because of how it makes you feel. But it does not change the FACT that a measure of energy does NOT change.
The bold sentence above is a generalization and in no way applies to every person. A candy bar can make someone feels as full or more full than an apple or a bowl of spinach. Really, it depends on the person.
But, you are right, a unit of energy is just that and does not distinguish between food type.
I would pay to meet someone who could sustain themselves on candy bars and multivitamins without feeling like crap. Agreed about the generalization.
I once knew someone who would go on a short term diet (just to lose a couple of pounds) eating 4 chocolate bars a day. She seemed to do fine.
I think a person would live longer on a diet of chocolate bars than just kale if we are talking about extremes though.
Were they really young? I can't imagine being able to do that any other time in life!
0 -
Twinkie diet man0
-
It lost me when it said I could not have banana with my yogurt.
http://www.ayurvedicyogi.com/recipes/
Noooooo.....no bananers. Nope.
P.S. I had one on my oatmeal this morning. I don't think this diet allows oatmeal either.
No... oatmeal????? Oh... just no. How could oatmeal be bad? It's my favorite comfort food.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »forwardmoving wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That article just said -exactly- what I said to you. Fruits and veggies help us feel full, eating only candy bars is a bad idea because of how it makes you feel. But it does not change the FACT that a measure of energy does NOT change.
The bold sentence above is a generalization and in no way applies to every person. A candy bar can make someone feels as full or more full than an apple or a bowl of spinach. Really, it depends on the person.
But, you are right, a unit of energy is just that and does not distinguish between food type.
I would pay to meet someone who could sustain themselves on candy bars and multivitamins without feeling like crap. Agreed about the generalization.
I once knew someone who would go on a short term diet (just to lose a couple of pounds) eating 4 chocolate bars a day. She seemed to do fine.
I think a person would live longer on a diet of chocolate bars than just kale if we are talking about extremes though.
Were they really young? I can't imagine being able to do that any other time in life!
Lol, 4 chocolate bars? That was a nice SNACK back in the olden days.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »It lost me when it said I could not have banana with my yogurt.
http://www.ayurvedicyogi.com/recipes/
Noooooo.....no bananers. Nope.
P.S. I had one on my oatmeal this morning. I don't think this diet allows oatmeal either.
No... oatmeal????? Oh... just no. How could oatmeal be bad? It's my favorite comfort food.
No oatmeal? What will I mix in my yogurt?
Wait, don't tell me they "banned" that food too!0 -
hollyrayburn wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »forwardmoving wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That article just said -exactly- what I said to you. Fruits and veggies help us feel full, eating only candy bars is a bad idea because of how it makes you feel. But it does not change the FACT that a measure of energy does NOT change.
The bold sentence above is a generalization and in no way applies to every person. A candy bar can make someone feels as full or more full than an apple or a bowl of spinach. Really, it depends on the person.
But, you are right, a unit of energy is just that and does not distinguish between food type.
I would pay to meet someone who could sustain themselves on candy bars and multivitamins without feeling like crap. Agreed about the generalization.
I once knew someone who would go on a short term diet (just to lose a couple of pounds) eating 4 chocolate bars a day. She seemed to do fine.
I think a person would live longer on a diet of chocolate bars than just kale if we are talking about extremes though.
Were they really young? I can't imagine being able to do that any other time in life!
Lol, 4 chocolate bars? That was a nice SNACK back in the olden days.
Snickers bars baby. All the way. I used to get off the el and stop at the newsstand and get one every night for dinner before hopping on the bus. Then I'd go home and eat a bowl of cereal.
I think I've improved on nutrition since I was single.
0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »hollyrayburn wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »forwardmoving wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That article just said -exactly- what I said to you. Fruits and veggies help us feel full, eating only candy bars is a bad idea because of how it makes you feel. But it does not change the FACT that a measure of energy does NOT change.
The bold sentence above is a generalization and in no way applies to every person. A candy bar can make someone feels as full or more full than an apple or a bowl of spinach. Really, it depends on the person.
But, you are right, a unit of energy is just that and does not distinguish between food type.
I would pay to meet someone who could sustain themselves on candy bars and multivitamins without feeling like crap. Agreed about the generalization.
I once knew someone who would go on a short term diet (just to lose a couple of pounds) eating 4 chocolate bars a day. She seemed to do fine.
I think a person would live longer on a diet of chocolate bars than just kale if we are talking about extremes though.
Were they really young? I can't imagine being able to do that any other time in life!
Lol, 4 chocolate bars? That was a nice SNACK back in the olden days.
Snickers bars baby. All the way. I used to get off the el and stop at the newsstand and get one every night for dinner before hopping on the bus. Then I'd go home and eat a bowl of cereal.
I think I've improved on nutrition since I was single.
I remember those days too. Nutrition is a whole lot important to me now.0 -
Yes it isthankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
What it isn't is not the be all and end all of good nutrition and optimal health / performance
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »forwardmoving wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »Actually here's one that came up on a google search. Check out the source:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/emptycalorie-foods-vs-nutrientdense-foods-1350.html
that's great about your weight loss. Believe me I eat my fair share of ice cream. I just don't feel as good when I eat alot of it.
That article just said -exactly- what I said to you. Fruits and veggies help us feel full, eating only candy bars is a bad idea because of how it makes you feel. But it does not change the FACT that a measure of energy does NOT change.
The bold sentence above is a generalization and in no way applies to every person. A candy bar can make someone feels as full or more full than an apple or a bowl of spinach. Really, it depends on the person.
But, you are right, a unit of energy is just that and does not distinguish between food type.
I would pay to meet someone who could sustain themselves on candy bars and multivitamins without feeling like crap. Agreed about the generalization.
I once knew someone who would go on a short term diet (just to lose a couple of pounds) eating 4 chocolate bars a day. She seemed to do fine.
I think a person would live longer on a diet of chocolate bars than just kale if we are talking about extremes though.
Were they really young? I can't imagine being able to do that any other time in life!
She was in her mid twenties.
0 -
Yes it isthankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
What it isn't is not the be all and end all of good nutrition and optimal health / performance
Okay the human body is just a jug of water. No other chemical processes going on there. Good to know.0 -
thankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
You're right. The amount of calories absorbed by the body can differ depending on the food.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/on-food-labels-calorie-miscounts/?ref=health&_r=1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/227605580 -
thankyou4thevenom wrote: »
Yes it isthankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
What it isn't is not the be all and end all of good nutrition and optimal health / performance
Okay the human body is just a jug of water. No other chemical processes going on there. Good to know.
The differences are marginal and not worth noting when the objective is scale weight movement0 -
thankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
You're right. The amount of calories absorbed by the body can differ depending on the food.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/on-food-labels-calorie-miscounts/?ref=health&_r=1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22760558
The fact that our current method of assessing the caloric content of food needs an update (maybe... findings are preliminary at this point) does not mitigate the fact that the calories are still there. Whether a certain amount of almonds has 100 calories vs. 65 calories, if you compare them to something with a similar NET caloric value, the energy the human body gets from the food is the same.
She's not right.
0 -
margaretlb4 wrote: »Has anyone else worked with ayurvedic principles for weightloss? I am beginning to work with an ayurvedic nutritionist through an app called "Vida" - so far I'm really enjoying it. The main simple instruction she has given me is to think about ways to slow down in my life and also to sip lemon water throughout the day. She also has given me a digestive lassi recipe that i'm keen to try. And - and this is startling - she has looked at my diary for my last 8 or so pounds of weight loss and said that I might not be one of these people who DOESN'T need high protein for weight loss.
It also may depend on the week of my period. So this is interesting and without going nuts about it, I'm going to try and see what I should eat for the 1st through 4th weeks of my period (more or less protein that my body may crave...etc) and see what happens. Very curious to see if this helps. It sure makes sense when she talks about it, just paying attention intuitively to what your body wants....we'll see if it wants french fries.
I haven't seen an aryuvedic practitioner, but one of my professors was an aryuvedic doctor, so I've had some formal education in it. It is a 5000 year old system that is still widely used today. It is a simple, elegant, and logical system for looking at the body and getting it into homeostasis. Your practitioner most likely assessed your dosha, Kapha, Pitta, or Vata (we can be a combination of the three) and she is giving you nutrition and maybe also herbs based on your constitutional imbalances. It's a holistic approach and part of getting into balance is shedding unnecessary weight.
My dosha is predominantly Kapha. Kapha tends to be slow, calm, heavy, runs cold, tongue is pale and damp (did your practitioner look at your tongue?). Warming and moving herbs and foods help Kapha get into balance, such as cinnamon and ginger.0 -
What we are interested in is scientific support for what has been acknowledged widely as pseudo-science ...got any actual scientifically sound studies on any of the nutritional precepts and herbs and their efficacy
0 -
I'd also like scientific support for the body types... and what I see as an assertion that the body was out of homeostasis in the first place since it seems to be claiming to put it back into it.0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »thankyou4thevenom wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »margaretlb4 wrote: »I'm talking about tone. It's not how I like to treat people, even when i don't agree with them. There's a nicer way to say things.
I also think that all calories are not created equal. 500 calories of kool aid do not make your stomach feel the same as 500 calories of healthier things.
Agreed and agreed. But there are quite a few people here who think all calories are created equal, so expect a lot of push back.
A calorie is a unit of energy. Of course all calories are created equal. Nutrition and satiation differ. People seem to confuse them with what a calorie is.
Thing is no they're not. A calorie is how much energy is it takes it raise the temperature of 1 kg of water by 1 degrees. It's seriously obvious to me that that's not how the human works. So while it's a great guide it's not the be all and end all of weight loss/gain.
You're right. The amount of calories absorbed by the body can differ depending on the food.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/on-food-labels-calorie-miscounts/?ref=health&_r=1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22760558
The fact that our current method of assessing the caloric content of food needs an update (maybe... findings are preliminary at this point) does not mitigate the fact that the calories are still there. Whether a certain amount of almonds has 100 calories vs. 65 calories, if you compare them to something with a similar NET caloric value, the energy the human body gets from the food is the same.
She's not right.
We don't currently have a definite way of determining the net caloric value, we simply count them using the Atwater system (1 unit of energy=1 calorie). Basically, "a calorie is a calorie" is how they're determined now. And while a calorie is of course a calorie, how much is absorbed is what really counts.
Look, I'm counting calories right now, I eat varied things, it's working fine. But I absolutely I agree with her that it's not that simple (in response to a simplistic and incorrect assertion that basically a calorie is a calorie, they're all equal (for weight loss, period). It's just not true. How much it matters is a separate discussion.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions