No wonder why....

Holly_Roman_Empire

You must be new here, OP. I suggest taking a look at some others' diaries on MFP. JonnyThan's is my favorite, although there are plenty of others that give him a run for his money.

You can eat whatever food you want, including two double bacon cheeseburgers from McD's, and still lose weight. It's all about calorie deficit, not food types. And before someone brings it up, it's possible to meet your macros eating fast food too.

I like to say pizza is a complete meal, if you have meat and vegetable toppings. Protein, fat, and carbs. What more could you ask for?

A bit of an exaggeration lol

If I were to eat 2 double bacon cheeseburgers from Mickey D's it would be nearly all of my total calories for the day which is 1600 on off days (The bacon clubhouse burger with reg bacon is 720 cal), add fries and a soda and I would be WAY over and not even be close to my macros. Same for the pizza. (For some that have reached their goals or who are bulking this may work though.)

True though...you can meet your caloric/macro needs while eating fast food. You just have to make better choices.



I think the point the OP was making (and I think she was just posting it as conversation not really to educate....bored maybe?) was just how TV ads are geared toward mindless eating and quick fixes (all unhealthy and glamorized.) (Most of the population isn't educated in caloric intake vs needs...although with the foods we have out there they should be IMO).

Good planning is key for a lot of people. I have friends(aiming to lose weight) that eat 1400 calories in one meal, and their calorie goal is 1800. Intermitent fasting allows for huge meals like half a supreme pizza or 3 double bacon cheeseburgers. So no, I don't think it's an exaggeration on my part.

MstngSammy

You must be new here, OP. I suggest taking a look at some others' diaries on MFP. JonnyThan's is my favorite, although there are plenty of others that give him a run for his money.

You can eat whatever food you want, including two double bacon cheeseburgers from McD's, and still lose weight. It's all about calorie deficit, not food types. And before someone brings it up, it's possible to meet your macros eating fast food too.

I like to say pizza is a complete meal, if you have meat and vegetable toppings. Protein, fat, and carbs. What more could you ask for?

A bit of an exaggeration lol

If I were to eat 2 double bacon cheeseburgers from Mickey D's it would be nearly all of my total calories for the day which is 1600 on off days (The bacon clubhouse burger with reg bacon is 720 cal), add fries and a soda and I would be WAY over and not even be close to my macros. Same for the pizza. (For some that have reached their goals or who are bulking this may work though.)

True though...you can meet your caloric/macro needs while eating fast food. You just have to make better choices.



I think the point the OP was making (and I think she was just posting it as conversation not really to educate....bored maybe?) was just how TV ads are geared toward mindless eating and quick fixes (all unhealthy and glamorized.) (Most of the population isn't educated in caloric intake vs needs...although with the foods we have out there they should be IMO).

Good planning is key for a lot of people. I have friends(aiming to lose weight) that eat 1400 calories in one meal, and their calorie goal is 1800. Intermitent fasting allows for huge meals like half a supreme pizza or 3 double bacon cheeseburgers. So no, I don't think it's an exaggeration on my part.

You can eat whatever food you want, including two double bacon cheeseburgers from McD's, and still lose weight. It's all about calorie deficit, not food types. And before someone brings it up, it's possible to meet your macros eating fast food too.

You were generalizing. So as a generalization...it would be an exaggeration.

I'm not disagreeing with the entire thought though. It just needs more 'splainin' ......and I seriously doubt they met their macros for that day without planning that 1400 calorie meal extensively. Half a pizza or 3 double bacons ain't gonna do it.

lindsey1979

OP -- if you want to follow the original thought, you might really like a book called "Mindless Eating". It's really fascinating on how it gets to so many psychological underpinnings of how many people end up eating more than they intend. And how to trigger that -- which is certainly capitalized on by both the fast food and weight loss industries.

It talks about how some of the food studies started out by the armed forces as a way to "trick" soldiers into eating when in stressful situations (like combat). And, now how some of that research has been re-purposed or furthered by fast food and weight loss industries. For example, the colors red and yellow trigger a hunger response whereas blue and green suppress that response. And, guess what? Almost all of the fast food companies' logos and places of business are in red and/or yellow (never blue or green). Coincidence? Unlikely.

They have a bunch more experiments and whatnot that delve into all sorts of other areas. It's really quite fascinating.

BoxerBrawler

OP -- if you want to follow the original thought, you might really like a book called "Mindless Eating". It's really fascinating on how it gets to so many psychological underpinnings of how many people end up eating more than they intend. And how to trigger that -- which is certainly capitalized on by both the fast food and weight loss industries.

It talks about how some of the food studies started out by the armed forces as a way to "trick" soldiers into eating when in stressful situations (like combat). And, now how some of that research has been re-purposed or furthered by fast food and weight loss industries. For example, the colors red and yellow trigger a hunger response whereas blue and green suppress that response. And, guess what? Almost all of the fast food companies' logos and places of business are in red and/or yellow (never blue or green). Coincidence? Unlikely.

Thanks! I'll def pick that up. I have read some information about how colors effect appetite also and you're right... almost all of the fast food chains use these colors that make people hungry!

I've always thought about mechanical eating, and how folks don't even know they are doing it... An example for me is when I've eaten all day long and am full but still have calories to go. I'm not going to mechanically eat just to hit a number ya know?

They have a bunch more experiments and whatnot that delve into all sorts of other areas. It's really quite fascinating.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

lindsey1979

OP -- if you want to follow the original thought, you might really like a book called "Mindless Eating". It's really fascinating on how it gets to so many psychological underpinnings of how many people end up eating more than they intend. And how to trigger that -- which is certainly capitalized on by both the fast food and weight loss industries.

It talks about how some of the food studies started out by the armed forces as a way to "trick" soldiers into eating when in stressful situations (like combat). And, now how some of that research has been re-purposed or furthered by fast food and weight loss industries. For example, the colors red and yellow trigger a hunger response whereas blue and green suppress that response. And, guess what? Almost all of the fast food companies' logos and places of business are in red and/or yellow (never blue or green). Coincidence? Unlikely.

They have a bunch more experiments and whatnot that delve into all sorts of other areas. It's really quite fascinating.

Thanks! I'll def pick that up. I have read some information about how colors effect appetite also and you're right... almost all of the fast food chains use these colors that make people hungry!

I've always thought about mechanical eating, and how folks don't even know they are doing it... An example for me is when I've eaten all day long and am full but still have calories to go. I'm not going to mechanically eat just to hit a number ya know?

Or two more I remember were super fascinating.

(1) This was done to see how people's expectations can affect how/what they eat. It was done in this restaurant where everyone was served the EXACT same thing -- same food, same description, etc. except for one thing. Everyone was offered a complimentary glass of red wine. It was the exact same wine (two buck chuck) that was served to everyone that accepted the offer, but the difference was in the labels --- the labels were the exact same except one said it was from North Dakota and one said the wine was from California (and this was pointed out by all the servers). I don't remember the exact numbers, but something like the tables that had the "California" wine at something like 28% more of their food and spent 18 mins longer at their tables on average. All just from the suggestion of wine being from California as opposed to North Dakota.

(2) This was one of my favorites -- they called it something like the never ending soup bowl. I believe they were trying to look at how people's perception of what they ate as opposed to other signals from the body (like their belly being full) told them that they should stop eating. I think it was done at a college somewhere where the people were allowed to eat as much tomato soup as they liked until they were "full" -- they just had to ask for seconds when their bowls got empty and couldn't touch the bowls. But the trick was that half of the bowls were normal and you had to ask for seconds when you were done and half of the soup bowls were attached to the tables where there was a tube at the bottom of the soup bowl constantly refilling it (but these soup eaters didn't know this -- as far as they knew it was a normal soup bowl and they could ask for seconds if they wanted more) -- so they could eat and eat, but the level of the soup in the bowl only lowered very, very slowly because it was always being replenished. They were shocked by how much more soup people with the never ending soup bowls ate -- one guy ate something like a gallon of tomato soup! Needless to say, the never ending soup eaters ate a LOT more until they were "full" and it showed how the visual cue of a soup bowl emptying was a bigger cue than internal feelings of satiation and being "full".

I think this played into the chapter where they were talking about how much bigger serving sizes are today and how that may be a much bigger cue to for what people eat more than anything. Like a cup of coffee 2-3 generations ago was 6 oz, and the smallest you can get at Starbucks now is double that and they also have 16 and 20 oz versions. Or how today's salad plates used to be the size of the 1920's dinner plates. Or Cokes used to be 8 oz, but now the cans are 12 oz -- not to mention that most "smalls" at fast food places are 16-22 oz and you can go all the way up to big Gulps of 44+ oz. And, so many Americans are eating so much more not because their hungry, but because the serving size has shifted so dramatically. And, part of the belief for that is so restaurants/fast food places can make more profit. As increasing the size 50% doesn't cost them that much and can justify them charging a lot more for it. Think about the size of desserts at most chain restaurants -- they're HUGE!