Why does everyone think it's WHAT they eat that matters?

kickers19

I don't give up what I love...I just find the healthier alternative. If that's not possible..then I just walk away. Giving something up to become healthier is a lot cheaper than eating smaller amounts, and being sick. Doctors are expensive!

In Canada they are not!
Drink on Canadians, drink on...

Shr3dded

For me, it is what I eat.
If I eat a massive 2-lb salad with cucumber, tomato, avocado, and tuna which only comes to 300 calories, I will feel invigorated, full, and satisfied.
If I eat a 2.5oz bar of chocolate which comes to 300 calories, it will taste good while I'm eating it, but I'll still be hungry and I will feel unsatisfied and have heartburn.

That's the point that I made, though. Your calorie-dense chocolate bar isn't satisfying whereas your big salad is. You decide what to eat for your calories. For example, as a test, if you only ate 1,200 calories of chocolate bars each day you'd still lose weight. I see so many people on this site only wanting to lose weight (and fast!). So cut down what you eat. Period. Of course it matters what we put in our bodies but from a pure calories in/out perspective just eat less. You're going to fail if you cut out pizza, beer, a candy bar, etc. That's why when I lost my weight I focused on the calories only.

I can't tell if you're serious or trolling. But as for choosing what you eat vs eating a bunch of over processed junk, it isn't only a lifestyle choice. Micronutrient intake is one of the most important parts of maintaining a healthy eating regimen. You can consume 1200 calories of chocolate bars (1200 is unhealthy and stupid imo) and be short of several vitamin and mineral intake needs for the day. OR you could eat several natural whole foods, lean meats, veggies, fruits, whole wheat , hitting all your intake needs and feeling satiated.
Losing weight fast might be your ideal goal, but in the long run it isn't worth it to do it in that manner.

IIISpartacusIII

I read so many threads on here about giving up this or that, limiting this or that, etc. It's not what you eat, it's how much you eat that matters. You just need to chose if you want calorie-dense food or more of a less-dense food.

If you have to lose a lot of weight and restrict what tastes good you're going to fail. So instead of giving up pizza why not just eat one less slice per meal? Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite. I really don't understand why people are so dang hard on themselves. Good luck!

Matter for what purpose? To drop some weight... generally a caloric deficit over time will do it but for performance, maintaining or increasing lean body mass, for endurance and optimal weight loss and overall health, of course it's WHAT you eat that matters. Try staying healthy eating Krispy Kremes for all your calories. Try feeding a diet of M & M's and nothing more to olympic athletes and see how well they do in competition. Oh... it matters, it matters more than you could even dare to imagine.

jorge_007

It does matter. I run every single day. I've tried different combinations of food. If I eat trashy food it negatively affects my running performance. Also, I find that going on a temporary restrictive diet can be beneficial. I took out bread out of my diet this month and found other food sources to supply my carbohydrate needs. I learned that I don't need to have bread/flour in my diet every single day.

darwinwoodka

Miller Light is not beer. If I want beer, I'm drinking GOOD beer. Eat better, drink better. You'll be more satisfied and need less.

mmddwechanged

I have to be careful when potato chips are in my house, but you just can't replace Guiness !

ggxx100

For the record, Miller light is not beer...it's a bastardization and an ill-conceived attempt at beer.


Guinness is king.

Confuzzled4ever

Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite.

^ This is not an option! Otherwise, I agree.

Believe it or not despite it's thickness guiness is one of the lower calorie beers out there at 120 per 12 ounces (compared to 150 for the average lager, 160-210 for ale and 200-220 for a porter). The malt is toasted which burns off some of the sugars

http://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/guinness/draught-(can)
http://www.thatsfit.com/2010/03/17/guinness-a-dieters-beer-choice/

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size 1 can (14.9oz)

Amount Per Serving
Calories from Fat 0Calories 155

% Daily Values*
Total Fat 0g 0%
Saturated Fat 0g 0%
Cholesterol 0mg 0%
Sodium 0mg 0%
Potassium 0mg
Total Carbohydrate 9.9g 3%
Dietary Fiber 0g 0%
Sugars 0g
Protein 0.3g

Vitamin A 0% Vitamin C 0%
Calcium 0% Iron 0%
* Percent Daily Values are based on a 2000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs.

totally getting guinness more often!!

meeper123

Instead of Guinness drink a Miller Lite.

^ This is not an option! Otherwise, I agree.

Believe it or not despite it's thickness guiness is one of the lower calorie beers out there at 120 per 12 ounces (compared to 150 for the average lager, 160-210 for ale and 200-220 for a porter). The malt is toasted which burns off some of the sugars

http://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/guinness/draught-(can)
http://www.thatsfit.com/2010/03/17/guinness-a-dieters-beer-choice/

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size 1 can (14.9oz)

Amount Per Serving
Calories from Fat 0Calories 155

% Daily Values*
Total Fat 0g 0%
Saturated Fat 0g 0%
Cholesterol 0mg 0%
Sodium 0mg 0%
Potassium 0mg
Total Carbohydrate 9.9g 3%
Dietary Fiber 0g 0%
Sugars 0g
Protein 0.3g

Vitamin A 0% Vitamin C 0%
Calcium 0% Iron 0%
* Percent Daily Values are based on a 2000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs.

totally getting guinness more often!!

....hmm goes to google rolling rock

meeper123

Beer (Rolling Rock)

Serving Size: 1 Bottle, Calories: 120, Fat: 0g, Carbs: 10g, Protein: 1g

Wait checked more it goes from 120-150 is confused lol ( same oz.)

jpiti

best post i've read in a while lol! so true