One meal a day.

Options
1235

Replies

  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    stevencloser wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

    you know for most people less than 1000 calories is not healthy right?

    That's a "fact" made up by the American food industry. Around the world people eat differently and are fine. The US food industry is a consolidation of seed companies/chemical companies/packaged food companies focused on profit not health. Very powerful lobbiests pushing their agenda.


    There is science to support caloric requirements. So do you believe that you need less calories than a toddler?

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/downloads/calreqtips.pdf

    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/

    You're using government websites to try to show me the food industry lobbyists aren't dictating what the government guidelines for nutritional needs are. I think you made my point.
    There's science to support climate change is real, but the US government websites don't say that.

    Let me re-ask lemon's question. Do you think eating less than a toddler is totally fine for a grown person?

    First
    Yes. A toddler is growing a body at a rapid speed. An extremely overweight/obese person - at whom the One Meal a Day plan is aimed - is trying to shrink his/her body, and it has plenty of stored fuel in it already. I personally have a toddler's worth of excess fat on my body. Fasting for 20-23 hours or a few days won't harm me.

    Second thing someone mentioned:
    I would have thought Big Ag dictating nutritional guidelines was a conspiracy, too, if I weren't a farmer in Iowa.
    That Nat Geo display is great - you can see the slow down/reverse during the farming crisis of the '80s followed by the steady increase once the large consolidated farms were subsidized by the federal government. Maybe you hear about The Farm Bill coming up in Congress ... it includes things like your taxes covering about 80% of a large farms crop insurance premiums. Not a small, diverse, sustainable family farm. A multi-thousand acre corn/soybean rotation farm.

    Right this moment we have EPA reversing its own decision on the endocrine disrupting chlorpyrifos. Europe bans glyphosate, but we still use it. Monsanto is trying to merge with Bayer. Please go research the consolidation of Ag, Chemical, Pharmaceutical companies happening. It's all available information in media as boring and non-conspiratorial as Fortune and Bloomberg and The Farm Journal.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,389 MFP Moderator
    edited May 2017
    Options
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

    you know for most people less than 1000 calories is not healthy right?

    That's a "fact" made up by the American food industry. Around the world people eat differently and are fine. The US food industry is a consolidation of seed companies/chemical companies/packaged food companies focused on profit not health. Very powerful lobbiests pushing their agenda.


    There is science to support caloric requirements. So do you believe that you need less calories than a toddler?

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/downloads/calreqtips.pdf

    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/

    You're using government websites to try to show me the food industry lobbyists aren't dictating what the government guidelines for nutritional needs are. I think you made my point.
    There's science to support climate change is real, but the US government websites don't say that.

    Let me re-ask lemon's question. Do you think eating less than a toddler is totally fine for a grown person?

    First
    Yes.     A toddler is growing a body at a rapid speed. An extremely overweight/obese person - at whom the One Meal a Day plan is aimed - is trying to shrink his/her body, and it has plenty of stored fuel in it already. I personally have a toddler's worth of excess fat on my body. Fasting for 20-23 hours or a few days won't harm me.

    Second thing someone mentioned:
    I would have thought Big Ag dictating nutritional guidelines was a conspiracy, too, if I weren't a farmer in Iowa.
    That Nat Geo display is great - you can see the slow down/reverse during the farming crisis of the '80s followed by the steady increase once the large consolidated farms were subsidized by the federal government. Maybe you hear about The Farm Bill coming up in Congress ... it includes things like your taxes covering about 80% of a large farms crop insurance premiums. Not a small, diverse, sustainable family farm. A multi-thousand acre corn/soybean rotation farm.

    Right this moment we have EPA reversing its own decision on the endocrine disrupting chlorpyrifos. Europe bans glyphosate, but we still use it. Monsanto is trying to merge with Bayer. Please go research the consolidation of Ag, Chemical, Pharmaceutical companies happening. It's all available information in media as boring and non-conspiratorial as Fortune and Bloomberg and The Farm Journal.

    Fine to have an opinion, but do you have support data/science to counter the argument I previously provided? Short term, it's ok for obese individuals to utilize LCD if they are under care as they can run frequent blood test to validate/address any deficiencies. And I am not saying that OMAD is necessarily a VLCD, but it would be interesting to see what people actually eat. I suspect the majority don't hit protein needs in isocaloric conditions.

    Also, it seems you have a very myopic view of the government based on their actions rather than insights into how those decisions are actually made. It might be worthwhile to understand the reasoning behind their decisions. It should also be noted that various governments will make decisions based on their on values. Often those decisions don't have to be based on pure science, but rather a result of their public interest. It's similar to why companies will remove ingredients from their products or provide alternatives even if there isn't science to back it (i.e. Pepsi with cane sugar instead of HFCS).
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited May 2017
    Options
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

    you know for most people less than 1000 calories is not healthy right?

    That's a "fact" made up by the American food industry. Around the world people eat differently and are fine. The US food industry is a consolidation of seed companies/chemical companies/packaged food companies focused on profit not health. Very powerful lobbiests pushing their agenda.


    There is science to support caloric requirements. So do you believe that you need less calories than a toddler?

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/downloads/calreqtips.pdf

    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/

    You're using government websites to try to show me the food industry lobbyists aren't dictating what the government guidelines for nutritional needs are. I think you made my point.
    There's science to support climate change is real, but the US government websites don't say that.

    Let me re-ask lemon's question. Do you think eating less than a toddler is totally fine for a grown person?

    First
    Yes. A toddler is growing a body at a rapid speed. An extremely overweight/obese person - at whom the One Meal a Day plan is aimed - is trying to shrink his/her body, and it has plenty of stored fuel in it already. I personally have a toddler's worth of excess fat on my body. Fasting for 20-23 hours or a few days won't harm me.

    I happen to agree that fasting for 20-23 hours or a few days (well, depending on what you mean by a few, certainly one or two) won't hurt you.

    That wasn't actually the point being debated, though. What was being discussed was consistently eating below 1000. (I will stipulate that it depends on size and activity level.)
    I would have thought Big Ag dictating nutritional guidelines was a conspiracy, too, if I weren't a farmer in Iowa.

    What does this have to do with 1000 calories? In what way has Big Ag been involved in calorie determinations?
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    Also, it seems you have a very myopic view of the government based on their actions rather than insights into how those decisions are actually made

    I am a farmer. I have actual insights. Believe what you want. And don't insult me. It's in the directions for participation in this forum.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    What does this have to do with 1000 calories? In what way has Big Ag been involved in calorie determinations

    If you'd like to believe that powerful, wealthy corporations don't influence the government, that is your right. If you aren't curious about the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto, that is your right.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    What does this have to do with 1000 calories? In what way has Big Ag been involved in calorie determinations

    If you'd like to believe that powerful, wealthy corporations don't influence the government, that is your right. If you aren't curious about the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto, that is your right.

    Again, what does this have to do with calories?

    What do you think would happen to me--I'm 5'3, 125 and quite active--if I ate 900 calories per day over time? I think that I would lose weight rapidly and not be able to keep up the activity, and that it would be unhealthy. You seem to be claiming that that's misinformation fed to me by the government, so what is the correct information and what is the gov't allegedly telling me that is incorrect?

    I'm sorry you so widely misunderstood what I am saying.
    Here: You don't need the government to tell you what you need to eat. Eat what you need to live.

    Ok? That's it.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    Also, it was not "consistently" eating below 1000 calories. That was not the comment.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    When I eat below 1200 MFP won't even let me get that little reward of the (grossly optimistic) estimate of what I'd weigh in 5 weeks. As if 1200 is automatically perfect for every single woman. That's my point. These nutritional guidelines are pushed by an agenda. Look at it this way: How did humans survive for so long before the government told us exactly how much of what we needed to eat everyday?
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    What does this have to do with 1000 calories? In what way has Big Ag been involved in calorie determinations

    If you'd like to believe that powerful, wealthy corporations don't influence the government, that is your right. If you aren't curious about the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto, that is your right.

    Again, what does this have to do with calories?

    What do you think would happen to me--I'm 5'3, 125 and quite active--if I ate 900 calories per day over time? I think that I would lose weight rapidly and not be able to keep up the activity, and that it would be unhealthy. You seem to be claiming that that's misinformation fed to me by the government, so what is the correct information and what is the gov't allegedly telling me that is incorrect?

    I'm sorry you so widely misunderstood what I am saying.

    Hmm, maybe you could help me. Seems like this digression started with the following exchange:
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

    you know for most people less than 1000 calories is not healthy right?

    That's a "fact" made up by the American food industry. Around the world people eat differently and are fine.

    Then psulemon jumped in
    psuLemon wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

    you know for most people less than 1000 calories is not healthy right?

    That's a "fact" made up by the American food industry. Around the world people eat differently and are fine. The US food industry is a consolidation of seed companies/chemical companies/packaged food companies focused on profit not health. Very powerful lobbiests pushing their agenda.

    There is science to support caloric requirements. So do you believe that you need less calories than a toddler?

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/downloads/calreqtips.pdf

    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/

    You responded, off topic:
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    You're using government websites to try to show me the food industry lobbyists aren't dictating what the government guidelines for nutritional needs are.

    Note: no one had said anything about nutritional needs, although if you want to attack the current Dietary Guidelines I'm up for a discussion (I eat somewhat differently from them but think they are reasonable enough in current form). (Also, not sure why BigPoultry and BigBeef and BigPork don't get to be part of BigAg.)

    Anyway, back to the discussion, after you were prompted to answer lemon's actual question, you wrote:
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    An extremely overweight/obese person - at whom the One Meal a Day plan is aimed - is trying to shrink his/her body, and it has plenty of stored fuel in it already. I personally have a toddler's worth of excess fat on my body. Fasting for 20-23 hours or a few days won't harm me.

    Obviously no one was talking about fasting or saying anything bad about OMAD. The issue was about eating below 1000 routinely being fine and anything to the contrary being just made up by BigAg and totally fine for people around the world.

    Also, I don't believe OMAD is aimed at an extremely overweight/obese person only. It's a perfectly fine way to eat in maintenance too, if you eat maintenance calories, of course. And a fine way for someone like me to lose weight too, if I wanted to.

    You then went on about BigAg and the Farm Bill, which I don't think has anything to do with the question you were asked.

    So to get back to that, since you are the one claiming that eating less than 1000 regularly is nothing to be concerned about and normal and totally healthy outside of the US (where things are dictated by BigAg), what's the basis to say that?

    (I am not claiming that eating 1000 can never be a reasonable choice.)
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    When I eat below 1200 MFP won't even let me get that little reward of the (grossly optimistic) estimate of what I'd weigh in 5 weeks.

    Isn't it under 1000 where it cuts that off?

    I rarely close my diary, but I support MFP on this. I noticed it as an issue when I closed my diary after eating only a few vegetables for dinner on Good Friday my first year and getting a crazy loss prediction. At first I found it amusing, and then it struck me that it could really encourage undereating/ED behavior. I think not allowing that is a good idea. I do sometimes eat below 1200 (even 1000 -- I fast on certain religious holidays, and sometimes stuff happens so I eat low and make it up some other day), but I know why, so even if I closed who would care that I get a warning from MFP.
    the government told us exactly how much of what we needed to eat everyday?

    The gov't doesn't tell us how much we need to eat every day. It has recommendations based on estimated calories that an average person of average activity needs to eat to maintain. Everyone varies, but claiming that it's just a gov't conspiracy to claim that 1000 is WAY below maintenance for the vast majority of people or a plot by Big Ag just doesn't square with biology.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    As I posted already, in case you don't read deeply, regularly eating 1000 was not the comment.
    You seem very dedicated to your view and uninterested in informing yourself.
    I am secure in my confidence at least one person has questioned the complicity between Big Ag, Big Pork, Big Beef, Big Pharma, and the EPA and FDA.

    Peace.
  • HestiaMoon1
    HestiaMoon1 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    HestiaMoon1 wrote: »
    As I posted already, in case you don't read deeply, regularly eating 1000 was not the comment.

    But of course it was:



    I've started an "Eat less than 1000Kcal per day at Breakfast and fast through the Day" diet and in a week I've reduced my Blood Sugar from avg 12 to 6.3 tonight. Lost over 2 Kilos as well. I've cut out carbs as much as I can too, so my one meal a day misses out pasta, potatoes, bread and rice.

    You keep trying to change the topic to something vague about BigAg, but that was never the issue.

    Why aren't you happy? You know all the answers. That's why you're skinny and we're fat. Enjoy your superior position. Relish it. You cannot change us plebes. So pedestrian in our misguided beliefs.
  • yoherbs421
    yoherbs421 Posts: 160 Member
    Options
    I know someone who complains they arent losing weight even though they eat one meal a day. Then he tells me he ate a whole tub of ice cream for dinner lmao. I tried explaining insulin spikes and weight gain. He didnt believe me. Now the physician tells him hes pre-diabetic. One meal a day would be okay if it was a regular sized meal, small enough to not cause a large spike. I would take cinnamon with the one meal, cinnamon delays gastric emptying therefore making you feel satiated longer, while keeping your insulin down. Yep, cinnamon.
  • yoherbs421
    yoherbs421 Posts: 160 Member
    Options
    psuLemon wrote: »
    yoherbs421 wrote: »
    I know someone who complains they arent losing weight even though they eat one meal a day. Then he tells me he ate a whole tub of ice cream for dinner lmao. I tried explaining insulin spikes and weight gain. He didnt believe me. Now the physician tells him hes pre-diabetic. One meal a day would be okay if it was a regular sized meal, small enough to not cause a large spike. I would take cinnamon with the one meal, cinnamon delays gastric emptying therefore making you feel satiated longer, while keeping your insulin down. Yep, cinnamon.

    The whole insulin hypothesis is not really panning out. There are already several studies to support that insulin doesn't cause weight gain.. In the end, energy balance (CICO) determines your weight. The whole purpose of insulin is to activate cells to take in nutrients.. so pretty important role. The problem comes in when your cells become resistance to insulin, so your pancreas over produces it.

    Sounded like your friend use the OMAD as a binging mechanism which is unfortunately.

    Ruiner! Lol. Jk. This is good. I was not aware of energy balance, CICO, and OMAD ... more reading for me!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,389 MFP Moderator
    Options
    yoherbs421 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    yoherbs421 wrote: »
    I know someone who complains they arent losing weight even though they eat one meal a day. Then he tells me he ate a whole tub of ice cream for dinner lmao. I tried explaining insulin spikes and weight gain. He didnt believe me. Now the physician tells him hes pre-diabetic. One meal a day would be okay if it was a regular sized meal, small enough to not cause a large spike. I would take cinnamon with the one meal, cinnamon delays gastric emptying therefore making you feel satiated longer, while keeping your insulin down. Yep, cinnamon.

    The whole insulin hypothesis is not really panning out. There are already several studies to support that insulin doesn't cause weight gain.. In the end, energy balance (CICO) determines your weight. The whole purpose of insulin is to activate cells to take in nutrients.. so pretty important role. The problem comes in when your cells become resistance to insulin, so your pancreas over produces it.

    Sounded like your friend use the OMAD as a binging mechanism which is unfortunately.

    Ruiner! Lol. Jk. This is good. I was not aware of energy balance, CICO, and OMAD ... more reading for me!

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989

    Here is a pretty good start on EE (or CICO).

Categories