I've put on 5 pounds in the past 2 weeks....

Your body should only be burning one fuel at a time.

When you don't eat properly first up, in the morning, you'll be sluggish and moody until you do.

This is complete nonsense. I either run 10km or cycle 25-30km virtually every morning before ingesting a single calorie of food, and many others also do their morning workouts in a fasted state.

The morning meal is a modern invention, and the human body absolutely does not need it - the OP's problems have nothing at all to do with this.

Do you go to work like that? What do you do for a job? Working out isn't something I find particularly mentally taxing and requiring all my faculties.

OP, I think the main issue is you are probably miscounting calories, which is very easy when you do not prepare foods. It's not uncommon for pizza restaurants to not follow the recipe and easily put on extra cheese or sauce for good flavor. I would recommend starting to eat more at home.

I don't blame sodium often because I eat 5000mg a day and still lose 1 lb per week. So i wouldn't stress that. Accuracy of logging is truly the key as you can easily miscalculate and lose your deficit.

I would suggest the processed food, even if being counted correctly, means a higher calorie count for less volume and long term energy for Ken. 100 grams of macaroni pasta is 371 calories according to Google, while 100 grams of white sugar is 387. So as posters in this thread have said, it's just calories in vs calories out, right? I could just eat 50 grams of sugar with sauce rather than pasta.. it's the same right?

It's not the same. The energy you'll get from the pasta will last a lot longer, which means your next meal can be lighter and you'll be more effective throughout the gap in-between. My suggestion to Ken (and anyone else) is that cake and pizza and whatever else is fine in moderation, but the vast majority of the calories you're consuming daily should be from long-term energy foods and vegetables. You get to eat more of them too, so you get to tuck into a huge plate of veg, tossed in a little olive oil and seasoned (tastes really good) rather than a small portion of something more calorie dense.

You basically suggest the same thing at the end of your post.

Euroboss, I would highly suggest you do some research on interim fasting. It's well known that timing of nutrition and meal frequency have nothing to do with weight loss (such results in the below NIH study). I understand from a psychological perspective that some people require increase meal frequency, but there have been thousand of MFP members that practice IF with great success. Additionally, the hormone Ghrelin can be suppressed when going longer periods without food. This is why the first week of IF is very difficult because you still are used to the timing of meals. But after the first week, you are used to it and can go long periods without food.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985

One more note. I will say the OP can make better food choices for satiety reason and increase protein to improve muscle retention (especially if he is strength training) but poor food choices do not prevent weight loss, mismeasuring does. I end each night with a Klondike bar and I hit all my macro and micronutrient goals

I read that abstract and I've heard of the concept a few times. As I asserted before, I'm not suggesting a correlation physiologically between regular meals and weight loss. No-one that I've been reading tries to do that anymore, it's about developing healthy habits.

Eating regularly means you maintain a blood sugar level that enables you to be more.. relaxed. If you work in a profession where your intellect is required, it's simply not an option to have your brain not working optimally during business hours, which I know for me requires sustenance.

In the study you linked to IF, the subjects are eating:

A period of at least 4 h but not more than 6 h between main meals during the day, i.e. breakfast, lunch and supper, was imposed for both low- and high-MF groups. Supper had to be consumed at least 3 h before bedtime (2 h for snacks in the high-MF group)

So the IF study people are eating breakfast!

However, whatever is happening in a controlled study is not real life. Weight loss and health is a long distance race, not a sprint. We need habits and methods that enable us to lead the lives we want, perform mentally and physically at the levels we can be the best we can be. From my experience, which is supported by many others, regular healthy eating (which means starting the day with food) is the best way to do this. If your calorie intake starts off in the morning, peaks with a big lunch to power you through your day and tapers off with a small dinner.. once you've gotten used to this over some time you'll start waking up hungry! It's a great day when you do, believe me.

Maybe you really don't need to do this, but I would suggest you're an outlier then. It's a bit like saying 'some people never had to attend University and went to get PhDs, so not going to Uni is a valid path'. Well I guess it is then, but for the VAST majority of people you just have do it like everyone else does.. entertaining you're an outlier without spending considerable effort confirming it (i.e. eating regularly for a few months or acing Uni exams without every going to class) is just using the alternate method as an excuse not to do the work down the beaten track.

I've only really learned this about my eating having the long vacation I'm currently on to actually focus on this. While I was working full-time no-one could convince me that I needed to eat in the mornings. The difference in my energy and mental clarity now is astonishing - a real 'why didn't I do this before' moment.

Anyways, sorry for the 'diary shaming' or whatever before, everyone. I'm new here and didn't understand that's something we don't do.

*shrug* ok then non-breakfast people, I guess if you're happy and healthy and feel great then do what works for you.

Do you eat large dinners? How do you wake up not hungry? Are you overweight?

This article compares the findings of three studies that explored the role of increased blood glucose in improving memory function for subjects who ate breakfast. An initial improvement in memory function for these subjects was found to correlate with blood glucose concentrations. In subsequent studies, morning fasting was found to adversely affect the ability to recall a word list and a story read aloud, as well as recall items while counting backwards. Failure to eat breakfast did not affect performance on an intelligence test. It was concluded that breakfast consumption preferentially influences tasks requiring aspects of memory. In the case of both word list recall and memory while counting backwards, the decline in performance associated with not eating breakfast was reversed by the consumption of a glucose-supplemented drink. Although a morning fast also affected the ability to recall a story read aloud, the glucose drink did not reverse this decline. It appears that breakfast consumption influences cognition via several mechanisms, including an increase in blood glucose.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/67/4/772S.short

Other similar studies exploring other effects
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002822305001513
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nsinf/fnb/2005/00000026/a00202s2/art00004

That's just scratching the surface of the research that has been done on this..

*shrug* ok then non-breakfast people, I guess if you're happy and healthy and feel great then do what works for you.

Do you eat large dinners? How do you wake up not hungry? Are you overweight?

Generally, or "larger" lunches/dinners then if I split calories among "3 squares" or "5-7."
I don't wake up hungry.
No.

Also, marry me psulemon.

:flowerforyou: