Always hungry

kanebrewer88 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

kanebrewer88 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

kanebrewer88 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

kanebrewer88 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

If you're avoiding potatoes in your soup due to the carbohydrate content, I've got some bad news for you about lentils . . .

Indeed lentils contain carbs, which is why I say, take out the potatoes as your already getting enough. That said, a full bowl of soup has the same carbs as two slices of bread, no where near the same fat (infact none), and its three times more filling. Lesser of evils eh

I don't think it is possible to say that it's three times more filling -- some people (including myself) do find bread to be filling. I love lentils, I love bread, they both can fit into a healthy and filling diet plan. I don't think either one is evil.

Each to their own matey, all I know I look at quantity per calorie. Two ladles of soup is by mass, MORE then two slices of bread. And has less fat & calories BEFORE even adding a sandwhich filling. OP is talking about being hungry, providing solutions here pal. Somehow I dont think "go eat a sandwhich" is a solution.

One cup of lentils (what you called for in your recipe) is about 660 calories. Two slices of the bread I typically eat is about 160 calories. I am not arguing against lentils -- I eat them regularly. I don't know what size your ladle is, but two ladles of soup (at least by my ladle) seems somewhat equivalent to two slices of bread. As far as fat goes, bread typically isn't a high fat food (and our bodies require fat anyway).

A sandwich *is* a potential solution to hunger. I think the lentil soup is a great suggestion, I just don't understand the demonization of other foods. I can create a sandwich that is filling, helps meet my nutrient needs, and in the calorie range of a bowl of lentil soup. Both foods can be appropriate for hunger control and weight loss.

660 calories??? Where are you getting your info from?

230 calories.

Bread around 90 calories. so 180 total. Then add your 2 grams of FAT. Then you've got butter? I mean everyone adds butter right? 1 TBLSP butter 90 odd calories.

your over.

Whats your filling? becuase unless its just lettuce, tomatoes and onion, your going to go over.

Well i guess were both going to disagree on this.

That's cooked. When you said to add a cup of lentils, I presumed that you were adding uncooked lentils.

Even then, that's still more calories than two slices of the bread I eat. Butter isn't required for bread. I never eat butter. And even if one does add something like butter or hummus or peanut butter, many people find fat to be filling. A slice or two of bread with some fat may be just right for some people.

I get it. You have something against bread. I don't think it is justified, but you've made your position very clear.

erm no, I said "boil the lentils, then in a seperate pan boil the veg". I kinda thought this was self explanitory. I mean who eats raw lentils O_o

Okay, for the sake of arguement, its more calories then two slices of bread, it but damn well aint less then a sandwhich with a filling, and 2+ grams of fat is worse then a bowl with 0 fat.

PEANUT BUTTER!!!! WHAT!!!! THATS THE MOST FATENING THING YOU CAN EAT, PEANUTS ARE 161 calories per OZ and BUTTER, 90grams per tablespoon!! They put themtogether and liquidize, and your saying eat that!!!! WTF????

Hummous is OK

Fine you eat your hummous sandwhiches and get over your flame war, thanks.

I wasn't under the impression that you were saying to eat them raw. I'm saying that one cup of raw lentils has over 600 calories. The calories don't vanish when you cook them. If you are basing your calorie estimate on one cup of cooked lentils but using one cup raw in your recipe, you will be eating much more than you think you are.

Peanut butter is only going to be fattening if it causes you to eat more calories than you burn. Many people successfully maintain a calorie deficit while eating peanut butter, including myself. The goal for most of us isn't to have zero fat in the diet. We need some fat to live and if that fat comes from peanut butter, that's okay. A meal with zero grams of fat isn't automatically better than a meal with two. In fact, if OP is one of the many people who find fat to help promote a feeling of fullness and satisfaction, it may be easier to maintain a deficit when including foods like peanut butter (or hummus or butter or whatever) in the diet.

Someone disagreeing with your posts isn't a flame war. I haven't said anything about you personally and I haven't attacked you.

If peanut butter is fattening...I'm screwed.

OP, how many calories are you eating & how big a deficit? How long have you been eating the way you are?
Without that info, any answers are just noise.

If you just started, it takes some people a few weeks to get used to their new eating plan. You may simply not be eating enough. Different macros/foods being satiating is a personal thing, so you can always play with your percentages if your calories are in line.

I don't see any comments on how to stay full during shift work/long day so I'll comment on that. I worked briefly at an industrial site with a long commute both ways. Lunch was broken up in to two half hour shifts.

To adapt, I left for work on an empty stomach, packing my breakfast with me. I would eat my breakfast when I arrived on site. I carried about a half dozen snacks with me which might include half size protein bars, edamame pods, nuts, crackers, cheese, veggies and dip, fruit, and single serving yogurt. A sandwich, wrap, or salad would be in there too. I had a slow cooker going at home to be ready when I got home. And I reserved one snack for the long commute home.

My meals were much smaller being so many little ones, but I never allowed myself to get too hungry. For me, raging hunger is just asking for trouble.

I eat like a diabetic so I never go any more than a few hours between meals/snacks (excepting sleep). As long as I control portions, I still lose weight.