Why you should cut out/lower sodium, sugar or carbs
Replies
-
Well, tried eating healthy and at a calorie deficit for a month. Didn't lose a pound. I eat low-carb high-fat and eat until I'm full, and whaddya know, I'm down 35 lbs. in 3 months.
That's because fat and protein are more filling and take more time to break down in the body. They sustain you longer. You may feel full, but you are eating at a deficit.
My biggest focus in terms of my diet is getting enough protein (about 40%). That's all I really focus on and the rest works itself out. If I have some sugar, it's not going to torpedo my progress. I have to keep it within my macros though, so I need to have the self control to only eat what fits comfortably into the plan.
0 -
Well, tried eating healthy and at a calorie deficit for a month. Didn't lose a pound. I eat low-carb high-fat and eat until I'm full, and whaddya know, I'm down 35 lbs. in 3 months.
That's because fat and protein are more filling and take more time to break down in the body. They sustain you longer. You may feel full, but you are eating at a deficit.
My biggest focus in terms of my diet is getting enough protein (about 40%). That's all I really focus on and the rest works itself out. If I have some sugar, it's not going to torpedo my progress. I have to keep it within my macros though, so I need to have the self control to only eat what fits comfortably into the plan.
0 -
self control > pretending sugars and carbs and sodiums are teh debil
I exercise self control every time I don't put something in my mouth that is going to make me crave more of it.
no that's denial not self control ....
Self control is being able to eat what you want/love/crave in moderation (moderation=self control)
By what twisted definition of self control is abstaining from something not control of one's self? If I were to fast for the next 7 days, would that require absolutely no self control simply because that involves the denial of food? No willpower whatsoever required simply because it involves abstaining? That simply makes no sense.
If you think self control means "moderation", you should consult a dictionary.
I did...
self denial per websters = a restraint or limitation of one's own desires or interests
self control = Satiation
The decrease in liking of and desire for a substance following repeated consumption is known as satiation. Satiation rates when eating depend on interactions of trait self-control and healthiness of the food. ... those with low self-control satiated at the same rate regardless of health condition. Perceived unhealthiness of the food alone, regardless of actual health level, relates to faster satiation, but only for people with high trait self-control.
Interesting. But to exercise that self control, according to your own quote in its application to this thread, you would have to perceive carbs and sugar as unhealthy.0 -
I did...
self denial per websters = a restraint or limitation of one's own desires or interests
self control = Satiation
The decrease in liking of and desire for a substance following repeated consumption is known as satiation. Satiation rates when eating depend on interactions of trait self-control and healthiness of the food. ... those with low self-control satiated at the same rate regardless of health condition. Perceived unhealthiness of the food alone, regardless of actual health level, relates to faster satiation, but only for people with high trait self-control
We're really in the weeds here, but:Self Control - restraint exercised over one's own impulses, emotions, or desires
If I desire to eat a twinkie (can't say that I do, but for the sake of example) but I exercise restraint by not eating a twinkie, that's self control. It's also a denial of my urge to eat a twinkie. Satiation is completely separate from self control and is used to describe when you've eaten to or beyond capacity. Whatever you're quoting from is suggesting a link between a measure of self control and satiety, but it says nothing about the meaning of the terms. I really am lost as to how you think the terms self control and satiation are synonymous.0 -
If your counting calories you're restricting and cutting back.
Every diet (or eating strategy, or whatever else people call it) requires a sacrifice. Different people find different sacrifices easier to handle.
And we're all here for the same reason, right?
We're all making sacrifices.0 -
self control > pretending sugars and carbs and sodiums are teh debil
I exercise self control every time I don't put something in my mouth that is going to make me crave more of it.
no that's denial not self control ....
Self control is being able to eat what you want/love/crave in moderation (moderation=self control)
By what twisted definition of self control is abstaining from something not control of one's self? If I were to fast for the next 7 days, would that require absolutely no self control simply because that involves the denial of food? No willpower whatsoever required simply because it involves abstaining? That simply makes no sense.
If you think self control means "moderation", you should consult a dictionary.
I did...
self denial per websters = a restraint or limitation of one's own desires or interests
self control = Satiation
The decrease in liking of and desire for a substance following repeated consumption is known as satiation. Satiation rates when eating depend on interactions of trait self-control and healthiness of the food. ... those with low self-control satiated at the same rate regardless of health condition. Perceived unhealthiness of the food alone, regardless of actual health level, relates to faster satiation, but only for people with high trait self-control.
Interesting. But to exercise that self control, according to your own quote in its application to this thread, you would have to perceive carbs and sugar as unhealthy.
and by your own admission you will have health issues if you eat the sugar/carbs/sodium you crave...but deny yourself to keep yourself healthy.
edited for spelling...I do have a medical condition. Roughly, it's called a tendency to get fat. Cutting sugar and when possible carbs actually helps me not get fat. So I'll keep right on with it.0 -
Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.0 -
as was your attempt to prove OP wrong. your arguments have little to do with her statement and more to do with you (not saying your weak willed, but plenty of others here have proven that you can eat sugar and still lose weight). this thread was about people freaking out about sugar and sodium content, when it is the calorie count itself that will have an effect on fat loss/gain, not about people who cant eat one chocolate and leave the rest of the box alone i.e. a lack of moderation, hence people saying you lack self control. if you expect weight loss to be sustainable then you should allow yourself these things in small amounts otherwise you will end up binging eventually. calorie counting is about being able to eat whatever you want within your macro limitations.Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.
as for going that long without food, i wouldnt do that. seems like your putting yourself through a great deal to lose weight when you could easily eat every single day and still experience fat loss.
the reason you cant eat one cupcake and leave the rest alone is due to a dopeamine release in your brain, which is the same thing that happens during sex, or basically anything that could make you happy. its essentially a drug addiction through food, which most people on this website have had or still have0 -
as was your attempt to prove OP wrong. your arguments have little to do with her statement and more to do with you (not saying your weak willed, but plenty of others here have proven that you can eat sugar and still lose weight). this thread was about people freaking out about sugar and sodium content, when it is the calorie count itself that will have an effect on fat loss/gain, not about people who cant eat one chocolate and leave the rest of the box alone i.e. a lack of moderation, hence people saying you lack self control. if you expect weight loss to be sustainable then you should allow yourself these things in small amounts otherwise you will end up binging eventually. calorie counting is about being able to eat whatever you want within your macro limitations.Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.
as for going that long without food, i wouldnt do that. seems like your putting yourself through a great deal to lose weight when you could easily eat every single day and still experience fat loss.
I'll tell you what. Find me a peer reviewed study that shows I will reach my goal weight and/or maintain it easier and/or faster by eating a single serving of chocolate cake for breakfast, then ignoring the all-day cravings this produces, and I will go buy a chocolate cake Friday and do it for a month to see what happens.
Just one good study. Otherwise, I have to assume this is merely your opinion on the matter and may work for you but may not for me.0 -
Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
:huh:
0 -
Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.
as was your attempt to prove OP wrong. your arguments have little to do with her statement and more to do with you (not saying your weak willed, but plenty of others here have proven that you can eat sugar and still lose weight). this thread was about people freaking out about sugar and sodium content, when it is the calorie count itself that will have an effect on fat loss/gain, not about people who cant eat one chocolate and leave the rest of the box alone i.e. a lack of moderation, hence people saying you lack self control. if you expect weight loss to be sustainable then you should allow yourself these things in small amounts otherwise you will end up binging eventually. calorie counting is about being able to eat whatever you want within your macro limitations.
as for going that long without food, i wouldnt do that. seems like your putting yourself through a great deal to lose weight when you could easily eat every single day and still experience fat loss.
I'll tell you what. Find me a peer reviewed study that shows I will reach my goal weight and/or maintain it easier and/or faster by eating a single serving of chocolate cake for breakfast, then ignoring the all-day cravings this produces, and I will go buy a chocolate cake Friday and do it for a month to see what happens.
Just one good study. Otherwise, I have to assume this is merely your opinion on the matter and may work for you but may not for me.
No one said that eating things in moderation makes weight loss easier or faster. You're putting things out of context. What we're saying is that weight loss is possible by eating a certain amount of calories and still eating things you enjoy.0 -
I'll tell you what. Find me a peer reviewed study that shows I will reach my goal weight and/or maintain it easier and/or faster by eating a single serving of chocolate cake for breakfast, then ignoring the all-day cravings this produces, and I will go buy a chocolate cake Friday and do it for a month to see what happens.
Just one good study. Otherwise, I have to assume this is merely your opinion on the matter and may work for you but may not for me.
:huh: :huh: :huh:
Go do a google search for "Twinkie Diet"
I will help you out
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/0 -
if it fits your calorie goals i can personally guarantee that it would still cause fat loss. the guys comment above about the twinkie diet
as was your attempt to prove OP wrong. your arguments have little to do with her statement and more to do with you (not saying your weak willed, but plenty of others here have proven that you can eat sugar and still lose weight). this thread was about people freaking out about sugar and sodium content, when it is the calorie count itself that will have an effect on fat loss/gain, not about people who cant eat one chocolate and leave the rest of the box alone i.e. a lack of moderation, hence people saying you lack self control. if you expect weight loss to be sustainable then you should allow yourself these things in small amounts otherwise you will end up binging eventually. calorie counting is about being able to eat whatever you want within your macro limitations.Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.
as for going that long without food, i wouldnt do that. seems like your putting yourself through a great deal to lose weight when you could easily eat every single day and still experience fat loss.
I'll tell you what. Find me a peer reviewed study that shows I will reach my goal weight and/or maintain it easier and/or faster by eating a single serving of chocolate cake for breakfast, then ignoring the all-day cravings this produces, and I will go buy a chocolate cake Friday and do it for a month to see what happens.
Just one good study. Otherwise, I have to assume this is merely your opinion on the matter and may work for you but may not for me.0 -
if it fits your calorie goals i can personally guarantee that it would still cause fat loss. the guys comment above about the twinkie diet
as was your attempt to prove OP wrong. your arguments have little to do with her statement and more to do with you (not saying your weak willed, but plenty of others here have proven that you can eat sugar and still lose weight). this thread was about people freaking out about sugar and sodium content, when it is the calorie count itself that will have an effect on fat loss/gain, not about people who cant eat one chocolate and leave the rest of the box alone i.e. a lack of moderation, hence people saying you lack self control. if you expect weight loss to be sustainable then you should allow yourself these things in small amounts otherwise you will end up binging eventually. calorie counting is about being able to eat whatever you want within your macro limitations.Considering that I often go three to four days out of every week eating zero food, I'm not too worried about what random internet people have to say about my capacity for self control.
What I would be interested in knowing is what biological and/or psychological traits make it easier for me to eat nothing than to eat one serving of cupcakes and leave the rest for another day?
If anyone wants to link appropriate abstracts and so forth, I will gladly read them. The attempt to paint me as weak willed however, has failed for lack of evidence.
as for going that long without food, i wouldnt do that. seems like your putting yourself through a great deal to lose weight when you could easily eat every single day and still experience fat loss.
I'll tell you what. Find me a peer reviewed study that shows I will reach my goal weight and/or maintain it easier and/or faster by eating a single serving of chocolate cake for breakfast, then ignoring the all-day cravings this produces, and I will go buy a chocolate cake Friday and do it for a month to see what happens.
Just one good study. Otherwise, I have to assume this is merely your opinion on the matter and may work for you but may not for me.
The twinkie diet says it was possible, not beneficial. In fact, the guy doing it didn't think it was beneficial at all, plus as I recall his breakfast was something veggie, then he ate snackfood the rest of the day. Nor is it peer reviewed research.
I do agree, if I eat below maintenance, no matter what I eat, I will lose weight. However, how does it benefit my plan to induce annoying cravings that make me grumpy and unhappy rather than (most of the time, because I do eat some carbs and sugar) resist entirely and have a more pleasant day?0 -
The twinkie diet says it was possible, not beneficial. In fact, the guy doing it didn't think it was beneficial at all, plus as I recall his breakfast was something veggie, then he ate snackfood the rest of the day. Nor is it peer reviewed research.
I do agree, if I eat below maintenance, no matter what I eat, I will lose weight. However, how does it benefit my plan to induce annoying cravings that make me grumpy and unhappy rather than (most of the time, because I do eat some carbs and sugar) resist entirely and have a more pleasant day?
I never said it was healthy or nutritious....
Only that it was possible to achieve what you said you wanted to achieve in a post earlier.
and the point remains he did lose weight.
His health markers DID improve
and he lost 27 pounds
edit
Do you need a peer review when the test subject actually performed the test on himself and then was able to present the results first hand?? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:0 -
The twinkie diet says it was possible, not beneficial. In fact, the guy doing it didn't think it was beneficial at all, plus as I recall his breakfast was something veggie, then he ate snackfood the rest of the day. Nor is it peer reviewed research.
I do agree, if I eat below maintenance, no matter what I eat, I will lose weight. However, how does it benefit my plan to induce annoying cravings that make me grumpy and unhappy rather than (most of the time, because I do eat some carbs and sugar) resist entirely and have a more pleasant day?
I never said it was healthy or nutritious....
Only that it was possible to achieve what you said you wanted to achieve in a post earlier.
and the point remains he did lose weight.
His health markers DID improve
and he lost 27 pounds
I said how will it help me, not prove it's possible. My health markers have improved steadily since I lost weight starting more than two years ago.
I'm really not trying to be obnoxious. I don't have to try, it comes naturally.
All I'm quibbling with OP about is that for some of us it is easier to resist certain things entirely or greatly reduce them in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.
As for exerting willpower, if I couldn't do that, I never would have reached my current weight to begin with. But I am a big believer in not doing something the hard way if there is an easy way.
If someone can show me how eating chocolate cake for breakfast, then craving all day but not giving into those cravings will help me lose a few more vanity pounds faster or easier and/or then maintain at my goal weight, I'm all for it. An excuse to eat chocolate cake every day for breakfast for a month? Okay. But I don't think any peer reviewed study exists showing that inducing a food craving, then resisting it all day, day in, day out, is beneficial to those of us struggling to lose or maintain.
Edit: It needs to be peer reviewed primarily to show quality of research, and it needs to be more than one person, because otherwise, that just shows results for one person. Not even a female at that.0 -
The twinkie diet says it was possible, not beneficial. In fact, the guy doing it didn't think it was beneficial at all, plus as I recall his breakfast was something veggie, then he ate snackfood the rest of the day. Nor is it peer reviewed research.
I do agree, if I eat below maintenance, no matter what I eat, I will lose weight. However, how does it benefit my plan to induce annoying cravings that make me grumpy and unhappy rather than (most of the time, because I do eat some carbs and sugar) resist entirely and have a more pleasant day?
I never said it was healthy or nutritious....
Only that it was possible to achieve what you said you wanted to achieve in a post earlier.
and the point remains he did lose weight.
His health markers DID improve
and he lost 27 pounds
I said how will it help me, not prove it's possible. My health markers have improved steadily since I lost weight starting more than two years ago.
I'm really not trying to be obnoxious. I don't have to try, it comes naturally.
All I'm quibbling with OP about is that for some of us it is easier to resist certain things entirely or greatly reduce them in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.
As for exerting willpower, if I couldn't do that, I never would have reached my current weight to begin with. But I am a big believer in not doing something the hard way if there is an easy way.
If someone can show me how eating chocolate cake for breakfast, then craving all day but not giving into those cravings will help me lose a few more vanity pounds faster or easier and/or then maintain at my goal weight, I'm all for it. An excuse to eat chocolate cake every day for breakfast for a month? Okay. But I don't think any peer reviewed study exists showing that inducing a food craving, then resisting it all day, day in, day out, is beneficial to those of us struggling to lose or maintain.
Edit: It needs to be peer reviewed primarily to show quality of research, and it needs to be more than one person, because otherwise, that just shows results for one person. Not even a female at that.
Ok mate...
But what if you just ate smaller pieces of chocolate cake throughout the day??
Say you allotted 500 calories of cake for the day....
So you break that slice of cake up into 5 servings to have 100 calories 5 times a day??
I mean I have only been following some of your posts on this thread....
But you are saying that you have to keep all these certain foods out of your diet for you to lose/maintain your desired weight....and that is not the case.
I mean for me, I have no problem turning away from cake or brownies or doughnuts....
But not all people are like me.
So for those people, it will be alright to indulge in their "cake".....
Just fit it in.0 -
side note too.
We all have to exert will power and discipline to achieve results we want.
I do....
I am not as lean as I am, because I indulge in all I want.0 -
side note too.
We all have to exert will power and discipline to achieve results we want.
I do....
I am not as lean as I am, because I indulge in all I want.
Amen. Sometimes, I pat my ice cream and whisper softly, "More tomorrow."0 -
Why are we even talking about cake here?
You are starving yourself for 3-4 days a week by your own admission. There is nothing you can say or do to convince me that this is healthy. This is disordered eating and, as someone who has suffered from and recovered from an ED, I urge you to seek counseling to find a better way.
I realize you are going to argue this point because you think you are doing right by yourself. That's how the disease works.0 -
I mean for me, I have no problem turning away from cake or brownies or doughnuts....
But not all people are like me.
So for those people, it will be alright to indulge in their "cake".....
Just fit it in.
I think that's what it comes down to. If you're the type of person who is miserable without cake, then you need to find a way to fit some cake into your diet. On the other hand, if you really don't care much about cake to begin with, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to budget a lot of calories for cake. And that doesn't mean that you'll somehow fail and binge on cake down the road - it just means you don't prioritize cake the way others do.
I think people start to get defensive when they're told they should be eating cake more often or they somehow lack self control because they don't eat cake on a regular basis. Whether you "should" eat something really comes down to whether it fits into your specific goals. Could you eat it? Sure, at least in some quantity. Should you? It really depends.0 -
I mean for me, I have no problem turning away from cake or brownies or doughnuts....
But not all people are like me.
So for those people, it will be alright to indulge in their "cake".....
Just fit it in.
I think that's what it comes down to. If you're the type of person who is miserable without cake, then you need to find a way to fit some cake into your diet. On the other hand, if you really don't care much about cake to begin with, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to budget a lot of calories for cake. And that doesn't mean that you'll somehow fail and binge on cake down the road - it just means you don't prioritize cake the way others do.
I think people start to get defensive when they're told they should be eating cake more often or they somehow lack self control because they don't eat cake on a regular basis. Whether you "should" eat something really comes down to whether it fits into your specific goals. Could you eat it? Sure, at least in some quantity. Should you? It really depends.
no one says they should...they are told they can....and they respond no I can't I will cave and eat it all....then they are told to practice moderation, they say I can't...just can't do it...in for a penny in for a pound then they are told they lack self control.
Which is by definition lacking self control...if you can't eat a portion of cake/chocolate whatever without eating too much you lack self control...do you lack it in all aspects of life...nope but you do when it comes to whatever it is that you can't say no to.
ETA: never mind...0 -
No medical condition here, but I do try and limit my sodium intake for the sole reason that I don't like being bloated all the time. I do agree that restricting all delicious carbs and sugars is a sin and people should realize that's not what's making them fat. :drinker:
Also, I see all the bickering and I'm sitting back and enjoying.....*munches on popcorn*:laugh:0 -
The twinkie diet says it was possible, not beneficial. In fact, the guy doing it didn't think it was beneficial at all, plus as I recall his breakfast was something veggie, then he ate snackfood the rest of the day. Nor is it peer reviewed research.
I do agree, if I eat below maintenance, no matter what I eat, I will lose weight. However, how does it benefit my plan to induce annoying cravings that make me grumpy and unhappy rather than (most of the time, because I do eat some carbs and sugar) resist entirely and have a more pleasant day?
I never said it was healthy or nutritious....
Only that it was possible to achieve what you said you wanted to achieve in a post earlier.
and the point remains he did lose weight.
His health markers DID improve
and he lost 27 pounds
I said how will it help me, not prove it's possible. My health markers have improved steadily since I lost weight starting more than two years ago.
I'm really not trying to be obnoxious. I don't have to try, it comes naturally.
All I'm quibbling with OP about is that for some of us it is easier to resist certain things entirely or greatly reduce them in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.
As for exerting willpower, if I couldn't do that, I never would have reached my current weight to begin with. But I am a big believer in not doing something the hard way if there is an easy way.
If someone can show me how eating chocolate cake for breakfast, then craving all day but not giving into those cravings will help me lose a few more vanity pounds faster or easier and/or then maintain at my goal weight, I'm all for it. An excuse to eat chocolate cake every day for breakfast for a month? Okay. But I don't think any peer reviewed study exists showing that inducing a food craving, then resisting it all day, day in, day out, is beneficial to those of us struggling to lose or maintain.
Edit: It needs to be peer reviewed primarily to show quality of research, and it needs to be more than one person, because otherwise, that just shows results for one person. Not even a female at that.
Ok mate...
But what if you just ate smaller pieces of chocolate cake throughout the day??
Say you allotted 500 calories of cake for the day....
So you break that slice of cake up into 5 servings to have 100 calories 5 times a day??
I mean I have only been following some of your posts on this thread....
But you are saying that you have to keep all these certain foods out of your diet for you to lose/maintain your desired weight....and that is not the case.
I mean for me, I have no problem turning away from cake or brownies or doughnuts....
But not all people are like me.
So for those people, it will be alright to indulge in their "cake".....
Just fit it in.
Actually if I were to eat small pieces of cake all day on 1200 calories a day (I'm old and sedentary and short, don't judge!) I would actually harm my health as it would be impossible, even taking a good multivitamin, to meet my nutritional needs.0 -
I mean for me, I have no problem turning away from cake or brownies or doughnuts....
But not all people are like me.
So for those people, it will be alright to indulge in their "cake".....
Just fit it in.
I think that's what it comes down to. If you're the type of person who is miserable without cake, then you need to find a way to fit some cake into your diet. On the other hand, if you really don't care much about cake to begin with, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to budget a lot of calories for cake. And that doesn't mean that you'll somehow fail and binge on cake down the road - it just means you don't prioritize cake the way others do.
I think people start to get defensive when they're told they should be eating cake more often or they somehow lack self control because they don't eat cake on a regular basis. Whether you "should" eat something really comes down to whether it fits into your specific goals. Could you eat it? Sure, at least in some quantity. Should you? It really depends.
no one says they should...they are told they can....and they respond no I can't I will cave and eat it all....then they are told to practice moderation, they say I can't...just can't do it...in for a penny in for a pound then they are told they lack self control.
Which is by definition lacking self control...if you can't eat a portion of cake/chocolate whatever without eating too much you lack self control...do you lack it in all aspects of life...nope but you do when it comes to whatever it is that you can't say no to.
ETA: never mind...
Ah, but here is the thing. I'd bet my last crumb of the chocolate cake I am indeed going to have this weekend (because I do sometimes intend to indulge, just not daily) that there are people in this thread who can walk away from a cake after just a serving easy as pie. But that can't do intermittent fasting without exerting a massive amount more willpower than I have to in order to do it. Therefore, it isn't really about willpower or self control or whatever you want to call it, it must be either physical or psychological differences.0 -
I do intermittent fasting0
-
Actually if I were to eat small pieces of cake all day on 1200 calories a day (I'm old and sedentary and short, don't judge!) I would actually harm my health as it would be impossible, even taking a good multivitamin, to meet my nutritional needs.
Hmmm....not so sure about that....
But whatever.0 -
Actually if I were to eat small pieces of cake all day on 1200 calories a day (I'm old and sedentary and short, don't judge!) I would actually harm my health as it would be impossible, even taking a good multivitamin, to meet my nutritional needs.
Hmmm....not so sure about that....
But whatever.
Well, if by small you mean 'forkful' maybe not. Either way, I see no reason to torture myself that way. As for intermittent fasting, ever notice how good you feel on day two if you wait a few extra hours to eat? Or is that just me? I actually wait until the evening of the second day sometimes just so I can walk around feeling all happy and stuff. Not sure what's up with that. Very light ketosis, maybe. Much better than cake!0 -
If you have a medical condition which requires you to do so. Otherwise, please stop obsessing over and wasting precious time worrying about things that won't harm you. As I always try to reiterate, life is too short.
ETA: I'm not saying that individuals shouldn't be able to reduce the amount of x they consume, if that's what is keeping them from achieving weight loss. The intention of this post was to point out that demonizing any particular food group is unnecessary. "I went over my sodium intake, that is horrible!" and "Added sugars are horrible" statements are far too frequent, and that way of thinking really isn't healthy or needed.0 -
Actually if I were to eat small pieces of cake all day on 1200 calories a day (I'm old and sedentary and short, don't judge!) I would actually harm my health as it would be impossible, even taking a good multivitamin, to meet my nutritional needs.
Hmmm....not so sure about that....
But whatever.
Well, if by small you mean 'forkful' maybe not. Either way, I see no reason to torture myself that way. As for intermittent fasting, ever notice how good you feel on day two if you wait a few extra hours to eat? Or is that just me? I actually wait until the evening of the second day sometimes just so I can walk around feeling all happy and stuff. Not sure what's up with that. Very light ketosis, maybe. Much better than cake!
You take that back. Nothing is better than cake. Unless you add ice cream0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions