Why you should cut out/lower sodium, sugar or carbs

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)

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)

LOVE IT! I'm saving that quote for later use!

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.

I am sorry but I completely disagree with OP.

Different food sources trigger different responses in the body. There is a wealth of information out there that will explain this much better that I am willing to try.

To say it doesn't matter whether you eat 500 calories of a Mars bars is the same as eating 500 cal of spinach is only correct in 500 cal are 500 cal, but it neglecting the fact that both food items trigger different responses in our bodies,

Stef.

I'm not seeing what your response has to do with what OP said. She wasn't suggesting that spinach = mars bars, she was merely stating that no one mineral/macro should be demonized....

That's BS. Everyone should know that Vitamin B7 is the reason there is evil in the world.

And here I thought it was b6....Must be why my weight has stalled.

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.

I'm coming in late with this, but I was always told that the same thing does not work for everyone. Everyone is different and you should not judge people for what they chose to do. If they want to cut out sugar, salt, or carbs, what business of it is yours? Just do your own thing and mind your business!

1. Public forum
2. Law of thermodynamics dictates that weight loss will happen with a calorie deficit (everyone's deficit is different)
3. Perhaps OP was encouraging people to not latch on to some diet fad and relapse, forever believing they are doomed because they love Twinkles and Big Macs

I'm coming in late with this, but I was always told that the same thing does not work for everyone. Everyone is different and you should not judge people for what they chose to do. If they want to cut out sugar, salt, or carbs, what business of it is yours? Just do your own thing and mind your business!

You must not have read my OP. I never said people can't do what they want.

As edited, the OP is solid advice (in my lowly opinion). There's no reason anyone should feel they have to limit a particular nutrient in order to lose weight. Where people tend to disagree is when you go from "you don't need to restrict" to "you shouldn't restrict," and I think originally it came across as more the latter than the former.

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.