Eating more later in the day?

12346»

Replies

  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited August 2016
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I love how you keep avoiding the science articles I throw at you... really helps your credibility ;) Anyways, have fun eating!

    You mean the studies that don't support your claims?

    Again, do you know what high GI means? I'm assuming no cause you keep skirting the question...

    It's a measure of the total rise in glucose.

    It's also something that most people can disregard.

    Only way I can see it has any relevance is if he's using a hypothetical of somebody sitting down to a nice, satisfying dinner of 100% pure glucose while in a fasted state.

    Once a meal of mixed macronutrient composition comes into play (which encompasses, ohhhhh, about 99.99% of all meals), GI becomes irrelevant.
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I'm in the mood for dessert. Like breakfast for dinner, but only dessert. Lots and lots.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.

    Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.

    Sugar is not the devil. ;)

    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.


    As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.

    I can provide more citations if needed.

    Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....

    Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....

    My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....

    1. You are taking it out of context.
    2. The point of saying sugar has shown in studies to be addictive (whether or not more than drugs), is an important point.
    3. Mercola as an authority? Maybe not. But the study is real.
    4. There is another study I cited that showed that eating carbs made people want to eat more carbs. Sugar are carbs...

    The other study you posted matched calorie and macronutrient intake. They were comparing the GI of the entire meal, not the amount of carbohydrate.

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2013/06/26/ajcn.113.064113.abstract

    "Design: With the use of a randomized, blinded, crossover design, 12 overweight or obese men aged 18–35 y consumed high- and low-GI meals controlled for calories, macronutrients, and palatability on 2 occasions. The primary outcome was cerebral blood flow as a measure of resting brain activity, which was assessed by using arterial spin-labeling functional magnetic resonance imaging 4 h after test meals. We hypothesized that brain activity would be greater after the high-GI meal in prespecified regions involved in eating behavior, reward, and craving. "

    As shown in
    Table 1, both test meals were composed
    of similar ingredients and had the same macronutrient distri-
    bution (ProNutra Software, version 3.3.0.10; Viocare Technol-
    ogies Inc).



    You cannot claim that the differences in hunger were related to the number of carbohydrates as that wasn't what was tested.

    Yes, that's true. Do you know what contributes to high glycemic numbers? High blood sugar numbers. Do you know what increases blood sugar numbers? Carbohydrates.

    As the study itself says: Conclusions: Compared with an isocaloric low-GI meal, a high-GI meal decreased plasma glucose, increased hunger, and selectively stimulated brain regions associated with reward and craving in the late postprandial period, which is a time with special significance to eating behavior at the next meal.

    Hmmm....

    The study you linked does not support your claim, period.

    It is NOT a measure of carbohydrate content, it's a comparison of the GI of an entire meal of mixed macronutrients.

    Additionally, how do you explain these findings where the highest satiety food item is a high GI carbohydrate?


    https://www.ucsyd.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/om_uc_syddanmark/dokumenter/marianne_markers_kursus_NRO/110228_Holt et al Satiety index.pdf

    Yes, as you've said before and I addressed recently. Do you know what high GI means?

    I went back a few pages and you still have not addressed the satiety Index study where the white potato which is a high G.I. carbohydrate showed the greatest satiation.


    How does this factor into your claims?

    If carbohydrates make people hungry, and if meals with higher glycemic indicies cause hunger, why is the highest satiety food item a high glycemic carbohydrate?
  • TravisGM92
    TravisGM92 Posts: 143 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.

    Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.

    Sugar is not the devil. ;)

    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.


    As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.

    I can provide more citations if needed.

    Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....

    Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....

    My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....

    1. You are taking it out of context.
    2. The point of saying sugar has shown in studies to be addictive (whether or not more than drugs), is an important point.
    3. Mercola as an authority? Maybe not. But the study is real.
    4. There is another study I cited that showed that eating carbs made people want to eat more carbs. Sugar are carbs...

    The other study you posted matched calorie and macronutrient intake. They were comparing the GI of the entire meal, not the amount of carbohydrate.

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2013/06/26/ajcn.113.064113.abstract

    "Design: With the use of a randomized, blinded, crossover design, 12 overweight or obese men aged 18–35 y consumed high- and low-GI meals controlled for calories, macronutrients, and palatability on 2 occasions. The primary outcome was cerebral blood flow as a measure of resting brain activity, which was assessed by using arterial spin-labeling functional magnetic resonance imaging 4 h after test meals. We hypothesized that brain activity would be greater after the high-GI meal in prespecified regions involved in eating behavior, reward, and craving. "

    As shown in
    Table 1, both test meals were composed
    of similar ingredients and had the same macronutrient distri-
    bution (ProNutra Software, version 3.3.0.10; Viocare Technol-
    ogies Inc).



    You cannot claim that the differences in hunger were related to the number of carbohydrates as that wasn't what was tested.

    Yes, that's true. Do you know what contributes to high glycemic numbers? High blood sugar numbers. Do you know what increases blood sugar numbers? Carbohydrates.

    As the study itself says: Conclusions: Compared with an isocaloric low-GI meal, a high-GI meal decreased plasma glucose, increased hunger, and selectively stimulated brain regions associated with reward and craving in the late postprandial period, which is a time with special significance to eating behavior at the next meal.

    Hmmm....

    The study you linked does not support your claim, period.

    It is NOT a measure of carbohydrate content, it's a comparison of the GI of an entire meal of mixed macronutrients.

    Additionally, how do you explain these findings where the highest satiety food item is a high GI carbohydrate?


    https://www.ucsyd.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/om_uc_syddanmark/dokumenter/marianne_markers_kursus_NRO/110228_Holt et al Satiety index.pdf

    Yes, as you've said before and I addressed recently. Do you know what high GI means?

    I went back a few pages and you still have not addressed the satiety Index study where the white potato which is a high G.I. carbohydrate showed the greatest satiation.


    How does this factor into your claims?

    If carbohydrates make people hungry, and if meals with higher glycemic indicies cause hunger, why is the highest satiety food item a high glycemic carbohydrate?

    I'm not sure to be honest. I don't do much research on high satiety foods, so I can't answer that.

    But are you to tell me that Lyle then doesn't know what he's talking about? Cause if so I think I can finally understand why I'm getting such resistance.
  • TravisGM92
    TravisGM92 Posts: 143 Member
    Prepare your jokes and what not now, I'll leave this thread as of now. If anyone wants to discuss this in more depth, message me.
  • AnabolicMind2011
    AnabolicMind2011 Posts: 211 Member
    Here's the thing Travis- you are 100% entitled to your own opinion. You are entitled to interpret studies any way you wish. Just because you believe something fact, doesn't make it a fact though. You'll need to show evidence to support your claims if your going to make irresponsible statements like this. People will obviously challenge your theories because they differ greatly from facts. The problem is, there's newcomers who come on this site not knowing anything yet. When people spread misinformation, it does a disservice to the newcomers that are trying to learn.
  • elphie754
    elphie754 Posts: 7,574 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Prepare your jokes and what not now, I'll leave this thread as of now. If anyone wants to discuss this in more depth, message me.

    Kind of hard to discuss anything in depth with someone who doesn't understand certain words have certain meanings and refers to non-scientific, peer reviewed journals as a source for their claims.
  • msalicia116
    msalicia116 Posts: 233 Member
    edited August 2016
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I'm in the mood for dessert. Like breakfast for dinner, but only dessert. Lots and lots.

    After this thread, who isn't? I can't wait until you come back after having dessert for dinner, in your calorie range, and bragging about your 1 lb loss this week.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<

    You said, I quoted you not someone else, you said
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar.

    I'm pretty certain anyone who reads the English language is going to read that exactly as being an "advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever" to not eat sugar. Maybe you weren't aware that's how the English language works.

    Yes, I did say that. I didn't deny saying that, I said I said it in response to someone else. Learn to read that.

    Secondly, what I meant by that (which I explained later) was that it's not required in any diet to be healthy. That doesn't mean DON'T eat sugar.

    But there is no normal interpretation where "sugar is the devil"="sugar is not required in the diet." Especially since cutting out all sugar would mean cutting out lots of foods that probably SHOULD be in your diet, and which have positive correlations with good health, like vegetables.

    Here's an example in case you are having trouble grasping this.

    Poster: I hate fish, so how can I eat it.

    Me: I love fish, but the fact is it's not necessary, don't eat it if you don't like it. (Pretty much what I actually said.)

    Your version of what I said: Fish is the devil!

    Now, do you really think those are the same thing?

    How about this? Poster: I hate kale, how can I eat it. You: Kale is the devil! (Now, granted, that does get said probably, but it does not mean "kale is not necessary in your diet" (which is of course true), but "kale tastes bad.") Maybe you should have gone with that; it might have been a more believable way to backpedal.

    And no, it's not true that carbs, in general, cause more hunger. Carbs vary greatly in how satiating they are ON AVERAGE, carbs on average are more satiating than fat to the average person (see all the qualifications), and --most importantly -- people vary as to what works for them and also as to whether hunger is even a problem. OP said NOTHING to suggest that hunger is a problem unless you are trying to suggest that she shouldn't have been eating all of her calories.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I have lots of corn from a local farm that I need to eat up, so definitely some corn on the cob!
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    edited August 2016
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Prepare your jokes and what not now, I'll leave this thread as of now.

    You said you were doing that back on page one:
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    I'll leave this discussion cause obviously I'm being attacked... not sure why.



  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    edited August 2016
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I'm in the mood for dessert. Like breakfast for dinner, but only dessert. Lots and lots.

    After this thread, who isn't? I can't wait until you come back after having dessert for dinner, in your calorie range, and bragging about your 1 lb loss this week.

    It'll be more like 1.5, but who's counting?

    Oh, that would be me. ;)
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    In fact I'd love it if people would link Lyle's material more often, but I'd wager he would rip you a new one if he were in this thread.
    I'll eagerly double down on that wager. Too bad Lyle doesn't post here, lol.
  • msalicia116
    msalicia116 Posts: 233 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<


    Sooo... saying it's the devil and just as addictive as cocaine is not to tell them not to eat it?
    How much cocaine should I take per day?

    I wouldn't advise taking any cocaine. Or sugar. Or MSG. All of which are edible, none of which are required for a healthy diet.

    Remember when you asked us where you advised anyone not to eat sugar? You know that thing you swear you aren't doing? THAT, just then, was you advising people not to eat sugar. I'm done, because if you claim those words don't mean to not eat sugar you don't understand the English language.

    It's like clockwork. I couldn't blink before he back peddled.

    So what is everyone making for dinner tonight? I was thinking pasta with that really good ciabatta bread. Nmnmnm

    I have lots of corn from a local farm that I need to eat up, so definitely some corn on the cob!

    I haven't eaten enough corn this summer. Time to play catch up I think!
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<

    You said, I quoted you not someone else, you said
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar.

    I'm pretty certain anyone who reads the English language is going to read that exactly as being an "advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever" to not eat sugar. Maybe you weren't aware that's how the English language works.

    Yes, I did say that. I didn't deny saying that, I said I said it in response to someone else. Learn to read that.

    Secondly, what I meant by that (which I explained later) was that it's not required in any diet to be healthy. That doesn't mean DON'T eat sugar.

    Lastly, you're just jumping to conclusions that I haven't said. I've clarified all of my intentions on here multiple times yet people such as yourself think I said "don't eat sugar" or "it's not true that carbs cause more hunger"-- yet I've provided both clarification AND sources to back each. Back peddling? I'M back peddling? HA! Do you know what that means?

    I've been clarifying other peoples issues again and again because apparently people like yourself can't/don't read the previous posts that I've already explained. I'M simply responding to people's accusations. Everyone keeps back peddling MY claims.

    Are you trying to say that I made you say that sugar is the devil?

    <baffling thread is baffling>

    The sugar made you do it.
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<

    You said, I quoted you not someone else, you said
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar.

    I'm pretty certain anyone who reads the English language is going to read that exactly as being an "advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever" to not eat sugar. Maybe you weren't aware that's how the English language works.

    Yes, I did say that. I didn't deny saying that, I said I said it in response to someone else. Learn to read that.

    Secondly, what I meant by that (which I explained later) was that it's not required in any diet to be healthy. That doesn't mean DON'T eat sugar.

    Lastly, you're just jumping to conclusions that I haven't said. I've clarified all of my intentions on here multiple times yet people such as yourself think I said "don't eat sugar" or "it's not true that carbs cause more hunger"-- yet I've provided both clarification AND sources to back each. Back peddling? I'M back peddling? HA! Do you know what that means?

    I've been clarifying other peoples issues again and again because apparently people like yourself can't/don't read the previous posts that I've already explained. I'M simply responding to people's accusations. Everyone keeps back peddling MY claims.

    Are you trying to say that I made you say that sugar is the devil?

    <baffling thread is baffling>

    The sugar made you do it.

    She does get all insanely hopped up on it. :laugh:
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    edited August 2016



    0111_dodc.gif


  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
    Oh really?
    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)

    TravisGM92 wrote: »
    Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:

    Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?

    Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!

    And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<

    Hey, this is interesting. Can you please post some peer reviewed studies on this?
This discussion has been closed.