Can you really eat a burger?
Replies
-
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit
I’d add that
6. Bacon burgers > burgers.
7. 2 patties > 1 patty
But that could be just me. I wholly approve of ceoverturf’s post.0 -
Also, this is a fantastic burger:
And while I was there, I had half a apple pie shake (half was still a full glass). Next time, it will be a kitchen sink:
Damn, that does look good - though I'm not a fan of chili. And I know there is a Grub nearby ... off to Google locations. Maybe I can swing a burger from there in the next couple of days.
My gripe with Grub is they have a rule about doing the patties medium well. You can't order them any other way. I'm more of a medium rare girl, so I don't go there for the hamburgers. The milkshakes and the fantastic happy hour are an entirely different story...
ETA: You're from Dallas! Skip Grub and go around the corner to Twisted Root. Much better burgers, almost as awesome milkshakes (Grub has milkshakes with gummi worms, so they rank higher on my scale). I live within walking distance of both of those places and choose Twisted Root nearly every time...0 -
maillemaker wrote: »Even if that were true, why even depress yourself thinking about that? If I were you I would set reasonable goal calories and enjoy the ride. As you get closer you'll make the necessary adjustments to fit fewer calories here and there, and hopefully ultimately realize that your estimated maintenance calories are way low
Because to me it is critically important to understand the problem being tackled, and to be realistic about the possibility of success for any particular course of action. It is important to understand what is happening so that you can take steps to mitigate problems that lead to failure.
For many people, it seems the body has a built-in fat stores defense mechanism triggered, at least in part, by falling Leptin levels. This triggers a probably permanent decline in metabolism, and increases preoccupational thoughts of food, and increases hunger. These things in total end up being too uncomfortable for most people to bear which is why most people end up failing to maintain weight loss long term.
But knowing this, there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the problem. As it turns out, Leptin replacement therapy seems to mitigate all the symptoms of fat loss but only once the fat loss has occurred (there seems to be little effect before and not much during). Also, appetite suppressants can mitigate hunger.
Bariatric surgery is currently the only known procedure that seems to reset the horomonal and neural responsivity, and, as expected, trumps pharmacological and lifestyle changes both in effectiveness of weight lost and duration it is kept off.Why do you not exercise?
I hate sweating and exertion.
Dude, you are full of excuses all the time. Every time you post, it's about how obese people are doomed. You'll never succeed with that attitude.
0 -
jennifershoo wrote: »maillemaker wrote: »...Why do you not exercise?
I hate sweating and exertion.
Dude, you are full of excuses all the time. Every time you post, it's about how obese people are doomed. You'll never succeed with that attitude.
@maillemaker, did you actually say you “hate sweating and exertion”? Errr…
I can appreciate actual medical conditions that make it more difficult to lose weight, but… weight loss (and maybe life in general) is about finding the discipline to do things that don’t come easy.
I love food, but I limit my portions and exercise to make it work. Something’s gotta give - otherwise you’re just making excuses for yourself.0 -
@maillemaker, you have kids I think, judging by your profile picture. Do they do sports? Do they aspire for greatness in those sports, Olympics for swimming or MLB for little league or whatever their sport or choosing is? Do you tell them they are destined to fail, since 99% of children don't go on to become elite athletes? Do you tell them there is no point in trying? Do you tell them they are going to be miserable with early morning practices and running laps and potential injuries?
Or do you encourage them to do their best but have realistic expectations and that improving their abilities is worth the effort even if they don't achieve their dream?
Just curious if the attitude you have about weight loss pervades other parts of your life.0 -
I must have missed the part where nobody is supposed to ever experience hunger.0
-
LiftAllThePizzas wrote: »I must have missed the part where nobody is supposed to ever experience hunger.
Preach.
0 -
Do you dispute that your defeated attitude will guarantee your failure? Because it has and will continue to.
I do not have a defeated attitude. I acknowlege that hunger, among other things, derails most weight loss attempts and I have taken steps to mitigate hunger, thus mitigating failure.
Now, are you going to answer my question?
Also, I spent 30 minutes on my exercise bike. Are you now going to watch the video?New people that come here are much better off listening to us telling them what they can do to succeed instead of listening to you that only preaches about why you and others fail.
The only thing "preach" is science and fact. If you want to congratulate yourself for blowing sunshine up people's butts, knock yourself out.Do you plan on trying to get exercise into your life?
Maybe. It's possible if I lose weight that maybe I will have more energy or feel more motivated to exercise. But right now I don't and am not. At the end of the day all I want to do is relax. But I can't say how I might feel 50 or 100 pounds lighter. During the summer I do swim a fair bit in the neighborhood pool.Dreams are realized by setting a plan that has a realistic change of success, and then executing on that plan. Sometimes the distance is long and sometimes short, but you don't cover that distance without a plan that you can execute. Good luck!
I agree. My plan is to eliminate hunger through medication so that I can stick to a caloric deficit enabling ~2 pounds per week weight loss until a goal weight of approximately 200 pounds. This is a loss of 69 pounds from my current weight. I will re-assess at that point. I think, with hunger out of the way, that this is a realistic plan.I'm pretty sure that obesity, within reasonable limits, is less dangerous than long term use of appetite suppressants.
I agree. I am anticipating a 8-12 month duration to achieve 200 pounds, under 30-day doctor supervision. The doctor may take me off the medication at that point, at which point I will have to fend for myself. Then we will see if 8-12 months of new eating habits took hold or if in fact the studies are right and the symptoms of reduced body fat stores come roaring back into play to be fought in earnest. What I'm anticipating is a 6-months-on, 2-months-off regimen of appetite suppresant on maintenance, or something similar. Or maybe I will end up doing like my mother-in-law did and only take them every other day, or something similar.And there's your problem. Set a reasonable goal, cease being miserable. When you adjust to a moderate deficit, then maybe decrease it further. Drugs are not going to get you where you want to go, which is sustainable weight loss. When you come off of them, back comes the appetite, and back comes the weight.
Yup, that's what the bulk of the debate has been here in this thread (besides hamburgers). When you lose body fat stores, your body increases hunger to try and restore them. The effect may indeed be permanent as you note. It may have nothing to do with your deficit, but rather the fact that you have depleted fat stores. In which case it doesn't matter what you set your deficit to (or even if you have no deficit at all) - your body will still be kicking in hunger to try and get your fat stores back to their old levels.Oh, and do make sure you read up on the potential side effects of phentermine and topomax. Not nice.
Yup, I have. I'm willing to take the risk.
0 -
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit
I’d add that
6. Bacon burgers > burgers.
7. 2 patties > 1 patty
But that could be just me. I wholly approve of ceoverturf’s post.
8. Obese people can't lose weight because science and a one hour video0 -
This content has been removed.
-
You know, I don't see why using 44% of your calories for dinner is all that unreasonable once in a while anyway. I was eating at (and losing at) 1750 for a while--went from 130 to 125 at that level at nearly a lb/week until I decided to try and lower the loss rate. It was not at all uncommon for me to have about 770 calories left for dinner, as that meant 980 for breakfast, lunch, and even a snack, which isn't difficult at all.
Of course, it makes sense that someone who weights a lot more than me and is a guy might want to eat more than that, but then he and I in theory should not have the same calorie allotment. (But I also do exercise a lot.)0 -
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit
I’d add that
6. Bacon burgers > burgers.
7. 2 patties > 1 patty
But that could be just me. I wholly approve of ceoverturf’s post.
8. Obese people can't lose weight because science and a one hour video
Basically. I’m sure everyone on MFP would love to avoid exerting themselves/sweating, never feel hunger, and just relax. Alas, the old fashioned calories-in/calories-out mantra appears to work for the rest of us.
Apologies if I seem brusque, but I simply cannot understand not wanting to put in any effort to achieve one’s goals.0 -
Are those appetite suppressants doctor prescribed? Do you really expect a doctor to prescribe them when you reach maintenance?0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »You know, I don't see why using 44% of your calories for dinner is all that unreasonable once in a while anyway. I was eating at (and losing at) 1750 for a while--went from 130 to 125 at that level at nearly a lb/week until I decided to try and lower the loss rate. It was not at all uncommon for me to have about 770 calories left for dinner, as that meant 980 for breakfast, lunch, and even a snack, which isn't difficult at all.
Of course, it makes sense that someone who weights a lot more than me and is a guy might want to eat more than that, but then he and I in theory should not have the same calorie allotment. (But I also do exercise a lot.)
I used just over half my calories today for dinner and coffee post-dinner (to drink at my kid's hockey game). No big deal.
I also ate a full on Baconator Monday for lunch (no bun, tons of meat, cheese and bacon).
0 -
Aw man, I really want to read this thread, but 17 fecking pages??
Did we agree yet that burgers can be enjoyed as part of a healthy weight loss plan? Or is that just too Pollyanna of me?0 -
I do!! I've lost 61lbs. Just make sure you stay within your macros MOST of the time. Small differences here and there won't make a huge difference, but if you're constantly eating over then it will start to show. Enjoy a cheeseburger!0
-
I'm usually very sympathetic to human weakness, and really don't go for the drill seargent approach at all.maillemaker wrote: »(...)
I agree. (that using appetites suppressants long-term is worse than being fat) I am anticipating a 8-12 month duration to achieve 200 pounds, under 30-day doctor supervision. The doctor may take me off the medication at that point, at which point I will have to fend for myself. Then we will see if 8-12 months of new eating habits took hold or if in fact the studies are right and the symptoms of reduced body fat stores come roaring back into play to be fought in earnest. What I'm anticipating is a 6-months-on, 2-months-off regimen of appetite suppresant on maintenance, or something similar. Or maybe I will end up doing like my mother-in-law did and only take them every other day, or something similar.
(...)
But once is not a habit. Did you seriously just agree that taking speed to lose weight is worse for you than being fat... and then stated you plan on doing it long-term anyway?
Dude, get it together.
And, btw, while I do some light strength training and walk because I enjoy it, I make it a point not to run, bike or play sports - and do not intend to ever do so - because those things suck. I also frequently eat too much, because that doesn't suck.
It's what I love most about flexible dieting:
It tells me exactly how self-indulgent and shiftless I can be and still get away with it
0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Aw man, I really want to read this thread, but 17 fecking pages??
Did we agree yet that burgers can be enjoyed as part of a healthy weight loss plan? Or is that just too Pollyanna of me?
OP opted to have a burger. Whatever else happened here, there was a small victory.
0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Aw man, I really want to read this thread, but 17 fecking pages??
Did we agree yet that burgers can be enjoyed as part of a healthy weight loss plan? Or is that just too Pollyanna of me?
depends on what page you read….
this thread is all over the place0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Aw man, I really want to read this thread, but 17 fecking pages??
Did we agree yet that burgers can be enjoyed as part of a healthy weight loss plan? Or is that just too Pollyanna of me?
OP opted to have a burger. Whatever else happened here, there was a small victory.
Precisely.
It's time to turn this into cat gifs (or burger gifs) until it gets locked. It would be a better use of time than people continuing to advise OP to eat a burger, when he already did last night and/or trying to help someone who clearly doesn't want it.
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Aw man, I really want to read this thread, but 17 fecking pages??
Did we agree yet that burgers can be enjoyed as part of a healthy weight loss plan? Or is that just too Pollyanna of me?
OP opted to have a burger. Whatever else happened here, there was a small victory.
Yay!!!!! Good for you OP
This all reminds me of a long time ago (in a galaxy far, far away) when I was a tubby teen (having quit ballet and just kept eating like I was doing classes 3 times a week). My mum was a WW leader, and our city had just started up a class just for teens. Now, this is way back when the system worked on set numbers of breads, protein, fats, fruit and vege a day (omg, macros, what a concept!!), with a small amount of spare kilojoules to 'spend' each week on whatever you liked. Our class was on a Friday evening. Soon as we had finished a few of us would head straight along the road to McDonalds
(to be fair, this was a major novelty for us, it had only just opened). Of course it didn't fit in the then rigidity of our plan, but we were all angelic for the rest of the week and dutifully lost weight. Thinking back, that little bit of 'naughtiness' (quote marks to show I don't actually think it was bad at all) is probably what kept us on the straight and narrow the rest of the time. 0 -
Why is it always cats? Why not dogs?
0 -
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit
I’d add that
6. Bacon burgers > burgers.
7. 2 patties > 1 patty
But that could be just me. I wholly approve of ceoverturf’s post.
Is that bacon on the burger or bacon in the burger?0 -
It's basically two threads as far as I can see.
About a guy who made a decision that makes me happy for him and, unexpectedly, another guy who made some decisions that make me very sad for him.
Wish the two would balance each other out but they don't.
Hey, we're all grown people, and as they say even the devil can't do to you as you can full well do to yourself. But I'm still sad...0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit
I’d add that
6. Bacon burgers > burgers.
7. 2 patties > 1 patty
But that could be just me. I wholly approve of ceoverturf’s post.
Is that bacon on the burger or bacon in the burger?
Why not both?
0 -
-
-
momspective wrote: »Are those appetite suppressants doctor prescribed? Do you really expect a doctor to prescribe them when you reach maintenance?
By then he will somehow have magically developed the ability to deal with hunger signals without having gone through any sort of effort or learning process.0 -
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions