Plexus?

Hornsby wrote: »

If you had no metabolism you'd be dead. Plexus is garbage. Breakfast has nothing to do with metabolism.

This

Plexus is a money-grubbing scam. It does not work.

Whoever told you that you have "no metabolism" is wrong.

Figure out your maintenance calories and eat below that number to lose weight. It is that simple.

Oh goodness. I don't have a Facebook anymore for many reasons- including these ridiculous diet fads. I have multiple family members selling that Plexus stuff and could not stand seeing it anymore.

If you look at their website, they make so many crazy claims like "proven ingredients that help weight loss." There's always a little star next to those claims. That is because the FDA has not evaluated it! If they did... They wouldn't be able to make those claims.

If it works, or any of these fads for that matter, wouldn't everyone be slim now? Would America still be fighting obesity?

There are no short cut magical pills. You must eat fewer calories than you burn.

Kmace123 wrote: »

Anyone use this? If so -side effects? Lose weight? I had my metabolic weight done today and was told I have no metabolism and that I need to eat breakfast....I do eat breakfast....I think I need something to get me started.

Who on earth told you this???

As for plexus.... I used all their products religiously for 5 solid months, and lost a grand total of ZERO lbs!!

It is yet another mlm scam preying on the overweight, desperate and gullible, save your money.
Plug your stats into mfp, eat the calories it gives you. Weigh and log your food honestly and accurately and you will lose weight, for FREE. It really does work

Christine_72 wrote: »

Oh, and I never eat breakfast and I've lost weight just fine.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/health-wellbeing/uk-study-raises-doubt-about-breakfast-being-most-important-meal/news-story/46934c3023a9fab68caaddd6341b2e4f
I'm not a breakfast fan. I usually just have coffee because I'm not hungry.

PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »

jandsstevenson887 wrote: »

Christine_72 wrote: »

Oh, and I never eat breakfast and I've lost weight just fine.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/health-wellbeing/uk-study-raises-doubt-about-breakfast-being-most-important-meal/news-story/46934c3023a9fab68caaddd6341b2e4f
I'm not a breakfast fan. I usually just have coffee because I'm not hungry.

"Subscriber-only article." I was hoping for some ammo to launch at my friends who insist I'm putting myself into starvation mode by not eating unnecessary morning calories when I'm not hungry.

People wanting to shed a few kilos should ignore the oldest dieting rule and skip breakfast, as there is no proof that scoffing eggs, toast, porridge and fruit first thing will prevent overeating later in the day.

Doctors have long ­encouraged people to consume roughly a third of their daily calories in the morning to keep their weight down, but experts claim that there is little clinical evidence to justify breakfast’s reputation as the most important meal of the day.

James Betts, a senior lecturer in nutrition at the University of Bath, has dismissed the claim that “eating breakfast like a king” will kickstart the metabolism to burn more energy and prevent unhealthy food choices later on.

“The problem is that these benefits, although logical sounding, are largely ­assumptions based on observational studies and had never actually been tested,” Betts tells New Scientist magazine. “I was amazed when I started looking for evidence; I thought there would be a lot.”

The concept of a healthy breakfast was introduced about the turn of the past century by John Harvey Kellogg to sell more of his cereal, but since then hundreds of papers have been written claiming that skipping breakfast encourages ­unhealthy eating later in the day.

However, these studies are largely observational, Betts says, meaning it is hard to ­determine whether people who are healthy tend to have breakfast or if they are healthy because they have breakfast.

To test the theories, Betts asked one group of subjects to eat a breakfast of 700 calories or more while the others had to drink only water until lunch.

The no-­breakfast group ate more at lunch, but not enough to make up the 700 calories consumed by the breakfast-eaters. Similarly, skipping breakfast did not increase hunger later in the day. Hormone tests showed the ­levels of hunger were similar in both groups until lunchtime, whereas by mid-afternoon the people who had eaten breakfast were hungrier.
By the end of the day the extra calories consumed by the breakfast-eaters tended to have been burned off because this group had higher levels of physical ­activity, largely through fidgeting and light exercise.

“As soon as a doctor finds out that an overweight patient skips breakfast they’ll often tell them to make sure they eat it every day,” Betts says. “But should we not know more about the health ­effects? We try not to give other health advice without evidence, so why are we more lax with breakfast?”

Previous research has shown that children who skip breakfast tend to perform worse at school than children who eat it, but other factors such as lack of sleep and higher levels of poverty or neglect may also contribute.

Peter Rogers, a psychology professor specialising in nutrition and behaviour at the University of Bristol, says: “Most of us could do with eating less. Given that it’s probably the easiest meal to skip, maybe skipping breakfast ­occasionally could be that ­opportunity.”