Yael452's Accountability Journal
Replies
-
wsandy8512 wrote: »What a lovely day you had and your meal is looks fabulous! What's the dressing on top of your sweet potato fries? I bought sweet taters yesterday to make some, but wasn't sure what to put on or dip them into because ketchup just doesn't seem right. Lol
@wsandy8512 I just used straight-up mayo, which I like eating with sweet potato fries. I find ketchup too strong for sweet potato fries usually. I'd use ranch dressing, but they don't sell it at most UK grocery stores (that I know of).
Last night at Nandos, I had a side salad called "Supergrain Salad" which had this buttermilk dressing on it, I really need to try and find the recipe online because it tasted lovely!
I wonder if you could make your own ranch at home! I do and the recipe is super simple... Just Mayo buttermilk and ranch dressing seasoning which they have at most major stores here, not sure if they have it where you are but you can order it online2 -
They do, I've just never made it before. Lol talk about a duh moment!1
-
wsandy8512 wrote: »They do, I've just never made it before. Lol talk about a duh moment!
It's SO SO SO much better than any bottled ranch - we go through probably a pint a week at my house lol (there are 4 of us though to be fair LOL).1 -
I very much doubt you can get that ranch dressing seasoning in UK supermarkets or here in Australia for that matter. The ranch dressing here (and in the UK) is TERRIBLE... I actually buy a fair amount of that type of stuff (not ranch dressing as it's not something I crave) from Canadian/USA online stores that sell stuff here (at a very large markup, mind you!). I travel to the US at least 3 times a year for work though and I tend to fill up my suitcase with stuff. Like Crystal Lite...
0 -
I very much doubt you can get that ranch dressing seasoning in UK supermarkets or here in Australia for that matter. The ranch dressing here (and in the UK) is TERRIBLE... I actually buy a fair amount of that type of stuff (not ranch dressing as it's not something I crave) from Canadian/USA online stores that sell stuff here (at a very large markup, mind you!). I travel to the US at least 3 times a year for work though and I tend to fill up my suitcase with stuff. Like Crystal Lite...
OMG NO CRYSTAL LIGHT?!?!??!?!? WHAAAAAAAAT?!?!?!
As for the ranch, is there no way you order it on, say, Amazon or something of the like? Pardon any ignorance, I'm just not sure how that works when it comes to international availability.0 -
I KNOW RIGHT!!! I sometimes wonder what customs sees when they scan my bags...
For a long time you couldn't buy Frank's Hot Sauce here - that was a horrible dark time in my life... :
Luckily they now stock it in the supermarket.
You can order some stuff on Amazon and get it shipped here - but a lot of the food-type stuff the seller won't ship here and you have to get it through a third-party shipper and the shipping costs are INSANE.
You can definitely get a bigger variety of things in the UK than you can here though - it was a bit of a shock to the system moving here! And I already thought it was bad when I moved from Canada to the UK... It's just such a small population here (and not close to a giant population like Canada is to the US).
0 -
I KNOW RIGHT!!! I sometimes wonder what customs sees when they scan my bags...
For a long time you couldn't buy Frank's Hot Sauce here - that was a horrible dark time in my life... : Luckily they now stock it in the supermarket.
You can order some stuff on Amazon and get it shipped here - but a lot of the food-type stuff the seller won't ship here and you have to get it through a third-party shipper and the shipping costs are INSANE.
You can definitely get a bigger variety of things in the UK than you can here though - it was a bit of a shock to the system moving here! And I already thought it was bad when I moved from Canada to the UK... It's just such a small population here (and not close to a giant population like Canada is to the US).
NO FRANKS EITHER?!?!?! THE HORROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!0 -
mistymeadows2005 wrote: »NO FRANKS EITHER?!?!?! THE HORROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Indeed, and it's good that you can see and appreciate the hardships we poor deprived folk in these foreign lands face on a daily basis...0 -
Haha, @mistymeadows2005 that was such an American response! I almost felt the horror pop out of my laptop screen
Happy 4th of July by the way. I've spent the last two summers in the US, so it actually feels kind of strange to miss out on the festivities this year.
Today my brother went to his girlfriend's house, so I was *completely* alone. I decided to prep my OMAD this afternoon, so that I can just pull it out of the fridge tonight and it's all ready and pre-calorie-counted.
This may be something I do more of in future since lack of planning often leads to me eating more calories than I need.
I prepped a "pasta medley"; pasta noodles with chopped ham, peas, chicken and a mushroom soup-sauce. This is the first time in ages I'll be having pasta. I made a mixed a big pot of plain yoghurt mixed with PB2 (which I lovvvee) for "dessert".
My weight has been stable the last week at about 162lbs, but I've been lax with calorie counting, and only tracking the main meal items and not little extras - which I think must be my downfall. I would eat intuitively but I don't trust my sense of hunger enough to be able to tell when I've had too much.
Does anyone find themselves confused by how one should be eating (low-carb, high-carb, eat anything but in a deficit..etc.) to find consistent weight loss? While I value my health and would like to prevent future disease etc. I currently have no real health issues besides being overweight, and I imagine if I don't lose it I could struggle with my health in the future. That said, I feel a lot of pressure to eat a specific way, like high-carb plant based or low carb paleo(ish) because somehow it has got into my head that I need to do one or the other to sustain any weight loss.
For now I feel I should focus on managing my appetite and eating in a caloric deficit, and focus on the macros (and food groups) once I've actually hacked the weight loss. I know @arguablysamson has discussed this topic probably more than once, but even so it's amazing how all the conflicting dietary voices and information we have at our disposal about diet, weight loss and health can end up making the whole weight loss process harder and not easier.
Anyway, that was a tangent...haha, these things seem to be consuming my thoughts lately.
0 -
You are young and have so much going, so let me prevent you from a lot of heartache and pain in hopes you won't find yourself 47yo and wishing like hell you'd learned the following when you were young: Do NOT go on restrictive food diets, period, exclamation point, or you will yo-yo for the rest of your life. If I could go back in time, I would do what I'm doing now... try to eat more Whole Foods that are filling and healthier. Don't axe any food groups. Eat less junk. Have junk sometimes, and when you do, be done and continue on the path to losing more weight... even if you go overboard for a week. Don't over exercise.
The best advice I can give you is eat now like you're going to eat in maintenance. Choose activities that you enjoy for exercise and change up if you get bored. If you get hurt, or suffer some emotional hardship in your life, don't allow your better eating habits to fall to the wayside because you can still lose with just a caloric deficit alone. Ignore the noise and do what makes you happy. You don't want to be miserable your whole life trying to find what works. If you ever get married and/or have children, your loved can take pictures of you to have for memories because you won't deny them by saying, "Don't take my picture, I look fat!"
Hugs sweet lady and thanks for the 4th of July wishes 2 -
Very much like the previous advice! I concur with that. Just try to eat healthy, but allow some celebrations sometimes also. I think that is the most sustainable path for sure. My idea of eating healthy is eat out of the basic food groups: fruits/vegetables, dairy (fermented is better IMO), whole grains, some kind of protein (I do think less meat is better but I think it is perfectly fine to eat some meat). My idea of celebrations is anything goes! Good luck!2
-
It isn't just pure CICO though. I think the more accurate formula is:
CI*digestive efficiency - (BMR + Other Energy Demands + fat excreted not due to energy demands)
You want CI low - how much you put in your mouth
You want digestive efficiency low - fasting and having to burn fat for gluconeogenesis has to be less efficient than getting the same calories in with a constant glucose drip. I think fasting helps here and what type of foods you eat matter here
You want BMR high - exercise will raise this
You want other energy demands high - this is the amount of exercise / steps etc your doing
You want fat excretion not due to energy demands high - ACV helps here I think.
The real equation would be a time-derivative of the above equation with many feedback loops and also rate and saturation constraints in those loops. A person can only process a surplus into fat at a limted rate. I guarantee that a competative eater doesn't convert all eaten to fat. They excrete it and a lot of it isn't used.
The way I think of it is:
You can't gain faster than a surplus cause the energy isn't there to go faster than a surplus
You must lose as fast as a deficit cause the energy has to come from somewhere, I think you can lose faster due to excretion of unused food and also due to other terms mentioned above. The equation above shows that it is even possible to lose fat withe CI slightly greater than CO. I think I'm correct. I've done a lot of physical system dynamics modeling and what I've said is all consistent with principles used there. What do you think?1 -
I definitely think there are other variables in play. But I do think that they probably don't make enough difference to worry about too much - especially under normal circumstances (like a competitive eater isn't how most people eat, so any food that doesn't get converted is kind of a moot point. Plus if you ate that way every day, you'd most likely gain weight, so again, the food that doesn't get converted is a moot point).
I think you can probably tweak the speed at which you lose, but is that tweak going to be measurable (or even worth worrying about)?
I think in theory you might be able to lose fat with CI>CO, but if true, it would be a very slow loss, no?
Anyway, I think that CICO is close enough and I've never NOT lost weight when I lower calories ingested to below output. I also (and here I might get flack!) tend not to believe people when they say that they can't lose weight ingesting less calories. I reckon they are lying to themselves...1 -
I definitely think there are other variables in play. But I do think that they probably don't make enough difference to worry about too much - especially under normal circumstances (like a competitive eater isn't how most people eat, so any food that doesn't get converted is kind of a moot point. Plus if you ate that way every day, you'd most likely gain weight, so again, the food that doesn't get converted is a moot point).
I think you can probably tweak the speed at which you lose, but is that tweak going to be measurable (or even worth worrying about)?
I think in theory you might be able to lose fat with CI>CO, but if true, it would be a very slow loss, no?
Anyway, I think that CICO is close enough and I've never NOT lost weight when I lower calories ingested to below output. I also (and here I might get flack!) tend not to believe people when they say that they can't lose weight ingesting less calories. I reckon they are lying to themselves...
Yes, you are guaranteed to loose when CI < CO (sufficient condition) but you will probably lose more than what is predicted due to the terms I mentioned. You are guaranteed to loose at least the amount of the deficit. I think some of the terms are significant though. I've read that gluconeogenesis is only 57% efficient so that would indicate to me that fasting would result in significantly more losses than eating the same cals spread out through the day.
Bottom line though is you are guaranteed to lose at least what a deficit dictates. Nothing can stop that unless you are able to create energy out of nothing. One problem with always going for deficits though is that if we constantly are in a state of underfeeding, then I think our metabolism will slow down making having a deficit harder. With OMAD, for the period we are eating, we are in a surplus for a short time and I think that helps to not make the metabolism slow down as much as constantly being in a deficit. Would be interesting to see some good studies on that.0 -
You guys are all right; I'm not being exacting enough and for whatever reason I keep sabotaging myself.
Bearing in mind, I'm definitely not binging or stuffing my face with whole packs of food items..nothing like that.
Failure for me looks like, not getting over 10K steps a day; eating 1,800 calories instead of 1,300, not drinking enough water over a day; fasting for 19 hours instead of 23 hours, not doing enough runs over 5 miles in a given week. Things like that over a period of say, three days, or a bad week, can push me into a really negative mental place. I'm realising this about myself.
I'm still continuing OMAD, but I'm struggling with it lately. For one, OMAD makes me feel a lot of pressure for my meal to be satisfying, both in quantity and in terms of taste. Also, when I eat and finish in a very small window (30 mins for example) I end my meal generally feeling very dissatisfied...like, "That's it? That's what I waited my whole day for? 30 minutes of food?".
I'm not saying eating three separate meals over the day would necessarily fix this...I'm just saying that there's an element of OMAD that (psychologically) leaves me wanting. So it's not necessarily that my stomach isn't satisfied, it's that psychologically I don't feel satisfied. I'm completely fine with enduring a little food deprivation, I haven't had a single failed day since I started OMAD - the fasting part is the easy part because it's so absolutely simple - just don't eat. Whereas, the eating window is where I find all the hurdles.
I need some kind of way of either muting or ignoring the psychological ties, or finding a way of enjoying that lone meal.
Recently it's gotten to the point where I get to 22/23/24 hours of not eating and I feel so little joy over my meal that it almost feels like it'll be easier to not eat anything than to eat my OMAD.
I'm not looking to blame any one particular thing, that's just been my mental space recently and I'm not really sure what is triggering it. There's some internalised stress going on in my head, I can feel it, but I need to spend some time trying to figure out what the source of that stress is.
I've been toying with the idea of changing my eating window, but I am undecided.
Anyway,
thank you for all your comments and input. It reiterates what I already know, but seem to be failing to put into practice.0 -
Very interesting discussion going on here. I'd also add that for long term reductions you have to be able to sustain these conditions, and this is what I think OMAD is perfect for. Many ways of achieving a deficit are unsatisfying. You never reach that wonderful feeling of fullness that you get after your OMAD meal. Since you always know that you've got this nice meal on the horizon you never feel deprived and this is key for overcoming the cravings, binge tendencies, etc. I think the OMAD approach results in much less overall hunger than other methods. As Bob mentioned I think having that good sized meal all at once, and going into a surplus for a brief time and then going into a clean fast until the next day is better than having an even deficit throughout. When I'm eating it's like a party, I'm feasting and having a blast, but when the party's over it's a clean fast for 23 hours at least. I just feel there is more benefit to cycling between these extremes than there is maintaining an even keel throughout the day.0
-
I don't think I've experienced what you are experiencing so not sure what to say. I've mostly really enjoyed my one meal. I do try to make that one meal nutritious and eat from all the food groups (whole grains, protein, fruits and veg, etc) and that seems to make it more satisfying also. When I lost all my weight, I also had a sugary desert most every night.1
-
I may not be able to relate to how you feel about OMAD, but I will tell you this... you may actually not be eating enough calories for your TDEE and that's why you're feeling such anguish. I believe I've read from @blambo61, that he had a longer eating window, up to four hours? Is that right, Bob? Eat the majority of calories in one sitting and then have healthy snacks the rest of the window if still feeling hungry.
The reason I say you may not be eating enough is this... your BMR is how many calories you need if comatose. Your TDEE is BMR plus your activity level--you are very, very active! If you have your MFP calculator set to sedentary, or lightly active, running as much as you do--you are not fueling yourself properly. MFP already sets you up for a deficit, but if you have your activity setup under your actual activity, you are creating a bigger deficit because 1) you are set up for too few calories and (2) you aren't eating back your exercise calories or your diary would never read "under their caloric goal". That's actually not a good thing. I've realized it's not good for myself either which is why I am going to up my caloric intake and that means I will have to expand my window. At this time, what you're doing is waiting for your car to get to E, then filling up to 1/4 of a tank. Yeah, it'll go for awhile, but if you filled it to full, you could travel a lot longer and more consistently and get to where you're going without so many stops. Kwim?
Whether you do OMAD or not, I strongly encourage you to set your activity right. You want to be happy and healthy, not miserable and feeling deprived--those combos set you up for failure before you even get a few months in.1 -
You're young, fit and not significantly overweight. Why OMAD in the first place? Joe designed it for severely overweight binge eaters who were resistant to more moderate weight loss approaches. It's great for extremists or for people who are trying to break extreme habits which have resulted in extreme consequences.
Personally, I love it. But I fit the bill. If I didn't, I'd just graze on less food during the day and lose a few pounds. There are much easier ways.
I've always loved the simplicity of OMAD, and the feeling you get when you've been fasting 12+hours. I do enjoy OMAD *almost* all the time, but then I get these days where I feel like I'm not getting anything positive out of it. Most of it is psychological.
I do see your point though, and certainly have considered the prospect of an alternative, modified version of fasting that would better fit my lifestyle. I have certainly reached a point where I believe fasting is something we should all incorporate into our lives, whatever form of fasting regimen that takes.
I guess that's part of the journey, finding a particular way of reducing calories and increasing bodily health in a manner that works for your lifestyle.
OMAD helps me a lot when I find myself falling into excessive snacking patterns, because to say "Eat nothing" is easier (for me) than saying "Eat less".
It's been good to hear everybody's perspectives because it really helps me question myself (in a good way) and helps me form conclusions about how to move forward.1
