Tidbits - rats and eggs
deckerp
Posts: 4,519 Member
I read this in a local Tidbits paper.
In a test at the University of Texas, rats were fed one food only in an effort to find out which are the best foods, and which are the worst. Two-thirds of the rats who were fed only white bread died after 90 days. Rats fared little better when fed only peanuts, hot dogs, hamburger, shredded wheat, or macaroni. They lived somewhat longer on tuna or milk. The best single food was egg. Rats eating only eggs lived indefinitely.
0
Replies
-
A link to the actual study would be a nice touch. Cheers
1 -
So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.3 -
So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustainability, really groundbreaking lol.
Correction: The bread was commercially made white bread that was enriched with the standard niacin, iron, riboflavin and thiamin, or vitamin B‐1, in other words the standard enriched white bread that's been made over the previous few decades. The other control bread had addition enrichment of magnesium oxide, manganese sulphate, copper sulphate, calcium, phosphate, folic acid, vitamins A and E, cobalamine pantothenate, pyri doxine and the amino acid lysine, which is a vital link in the protein chain.1 -
I love that they lived longer on enriched/processed (muahahahaha) bread. 😁0
-
neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
If you're talking about my assertion that mono-diets are bad for humans, I think they are, generally. Could a mono-diet be formulated that would be life sustaining? Maybe. But it's not a thing that really makes sense, IMO, and it's probably not likely to be the best choice, even if not short-term deadly.
I understand the value of animal studies in the big picture, of course. They're often an important preliminary step to research in humans. (Basically, I was being sarcastic about the value of knowing - if it's even true - that rats/mice survive longer on some mono-diets vs. others, taken as an isolated data point on its own.)
I certainly wasn't asserting that white bread is "bad" . . . I don't believe that at all.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one.
Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??" 2 -
cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one. Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??"
Agreed. The basic study has no practical meaning whatsoever. It was to show that the standard white bread of that time was not as good as a white bread that included other nutrients, well no surprise there. There is no for or against here lol, it was just a study, but I do find it interesting that people like to make something more out of it than it actually is. Cheers.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one. Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??"
Agreed. The basic study has no practical meaning whatsoever. It was to show that the standard white bread of that time was not as good as a white bread that included other nutrients, well no surprise there. There is no for or against here lol, it was just a study, but I do find it interesting that people like to make something more out of it than it actually is. Cheers.
Right? I mean, there has to be some benefit to be drawn from a scammy "diet" like a mono-food diet. NO one is going to study that ethically.
I have to say, I do wonder about all the people on this site who post that they eat the exact same things every day because it's easier to log that way. Um. Okay, then. Good luck with that.1 -
cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one. Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??"
Agreed. The basic study has no practical meaning whatsoever. It was to show that the standard white bread of that time was not as good as a white bread that included other nutrients, well no surprise there. There is no for or against here lol, it was just a study, but I do find it interesting that people like to make something more out of it than it actually is. Cheers.
Right? I mean, there has to be some benefit to be drawn from a scammy "diet" like a mono-food diet. NO one is going to study that ethically.
I have to say, I do wonder about all the people on this site who post that they eat the exact same things every day because it's easier to log that way. Um. Okay, then. Good luck with that.cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one. Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??"
Agreed. The basic study has no practical meaning whatsoever. It was to show that the standard white bread of that time was not as good as a white bread that included other nutrients, well no surprise there. There is no for or against here lol, it was just a study, but I do find it interesting that people like to make something more out of it than it actually is. Cheers.
Right? I mean, there has to be some benefit to be drawn from a scammy "diet" like a mono-food diet. NO one is going to study that ethically.
I have to say, I do wonder about all the people on this site who post that they eat the exact same things every day because it's easier to log that way. Um. Okay, then. Good luck with that.
I'm not sure if the carnivore diet would qualify, but Harvard just did a study on them this year and the results are not what most people thought. The Inuit generally in its history, but not in the last 100 yrs or so ate mostly meat, is that a mono diet, not sure, they did consume plant material in the summer months which contributed about 2% of total calories in their diet over a 12 month cycle.
Is a balanced diet a guarantee of good health, not sure and you certainly couldn't come to that conclusion from the data of most western societies where disease and care is a huge part of the cost of health.
0 -
I have to say, I do wonder about all the people on this site who post that they eat the exact same things every day because it's easier to log that way. Um. Okay, then. Good luck with that.
It depends what they mean by 'the exact same things'
Sure, if they ate totally only bread (or eggs or tomatos or any one food) that is unlikely to be healthy or sustainble.
But I admit I, on weekdays at least, eat very very similar breakfasts and lunches - but that isn't mono food- it is weetbix, milk, coffee, yogurt, banana, berries, mandarine, small cookie - ie a mixture of foods but almost same ones every day
There is variety - as in more than one food - but same combination of several foods most days.
(I do usually eat meat as part of my dinner)2 -
cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »So mono-diets are mostly bad, if you're a rat. Good to know.
I'm not a rat.
What do you think is the take-home point from this . . . or do you just think it's amusing that someone did the experiment?
FWIW, I think mono-diets are bad for humans, too, not to mention boring. But I reached that conclusion by thinking about things like human history, the hints from nutritional research, etc. I can't prove it: I don't care.
If a single food has all the nutrition to sustain life then it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. Part of the nutritional puzzle could be which additional food have deleterious effects and could possibly shorten life. Enriched white bread, or maybe it wasn't enriched but I suspect it isn't going to be the healthiest single food for sustainability. These types of click bait are pretty entertaining, but that's about it. Cheers
Of course. Kinda common sense, innit?
Why would anyone (human) adopt a mono-diet, unless literally forced?EDIT: Ok, this was a study done 53 years ago and the mice that died in 90 days were from white bread that wasn't enriched. The other control were the mice ate the enriched bread were still alive and in good health at the 90 days. Basically, milled wheat with a few added ingredients to make it a bread is not a good to eat for sustaiability, really groundbreaking lol.
. . . if you're a rat (mouse?). I think you're not. 😉
Me, I don't even much like white bread, except the nice fresh focaccia and such from my local baker once in a rare while, so I'm not too worried. Probably not enriched flour, but I never asked. Don't care.
Yeah, I wasn't saying we should, I was only commenting on your assertion that it was bad. Nothing wrong with white bread and it all has been enriched to some degree. If something was in the environment where humans lived that was feasible on a caloric basis to procure, we would have found it and consumed it.
Also, yes we are not mice or rats but science uses surrogates to procure biological results can be used to better inform when eventual human trials begin.....not rocket science, and a common argument, which you can't really blame people because they are mice afterall. Cheers.
LOL, Good argument. I'll go down this rabbit hole too...since no one has studied it on humans in 53 years, it's not gonna happen. No one cares about a bread vs egg diet. No one. Plus, no self-respecting human is likely to be the test subject willingly, "Hey, you might die, but will you try this white-bread-only diet for 90 days so we can see??"
Agreed. The basic study has no practical meaning whatsoever. It was to show that the standard white bread of that time was not as good as a white bread that included other nutrients, well no surprise there. There is no for or against here lol, it was just a study, but I do find it interesting that people like to make something more out of it than it actually is. Cheers.
Right? I mean, there has to be some benefit to be drawn from a scammy "diet" like a mono-food diet. NO one is going to study that ethically.
I have to say, I do wonder about all the people on this site who post that they eat the exact same things every day because it's easier to log that way. Um. Okay, then. Good luck with that.
There was the guy over here in Australia who basically only ate potatoes for a year, but it wasn't part of a study, only a self guided thing. https://www.menshealth.com/weight-loss/a19536403/can-the-potato-diet-help-you-lose-weight-safely/
I love spuds, but I think I'd lose my mind.1 -
So, who exactly funded this study? 🤔
Why not compare to a vegetable, sea vegetable, etc?0 -
So, who exactly funded this study? 🤔
Why not compare to a vegetable, sea vegetable, etc?
The study was done in 1969 in the USA. The summary above actually misrepresents it, the point of the study was to show that enriching bread with various vitamins etc provided significant benefits. It wasn't about generally finding a single source food.0 -
Potato guy didnt quite eat only potatoes.........
"During his challenge, Taylor ate all kinds of potatoes, including sweet potatoes. To add flavor to his meals, he used a sprinkle of dried herbs or fat-free sweet chili or barbecue sauce. If he made mashed potatoes, he only added oil-free soy milk.
He drank mostly water, with the occasional beer thrown in ...."
It also says he took supplements - presumably B12 and iron or he would get very anaemic.
0 -
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions