EvanKeel Member

Usually I'll save about half my calories for the evening meal, and break up the the rest day based on how hungry I am at the time.

Not it's not bad for me. I don't have a problem processing sugar. I can't speak for other people. My preferred brand has more than that, depending on flavor: https://www.tillamook.com/products/yogurt.html It's dang tasty and I can fit into my day. That's about all I can tell you.

My dad has a saying: "Getting old sucks, son, but I guess it's better than some of the alternatives."

So, you might find the graph on the phone app useful. On the android app, you'd go to Nutrition in the hamburger menu>> Calories >> Week view...from there you'd probably like the Net option

Of course if it works for you and you find it sustainable, then great. But terms like "empty calories" always make me cringe, along with saying that they don't have nutritional value. Your mileage varies, it seems, but if it provides me with energy, it has value. And I don't think anyone with cholesterol levels that test…

I prefer to weigh myself daily just to keep the data set going. It does take some discipline to make sure I'm valuing the 'larger picture' instead of individual weigh-ins, though.

Poor innocent calories in the wrong place at the wrong time. if they had just gotten there 12 hours later...

To me, good and bad are meaningless qualifiers. Not to restate the obvious, but they're just ways of saying that "I should eat this, or not that." But without knowing why I shouldn't eat something, it doesn't really help me to know that "shouldn't eat it." And the "why" of that is where anyone with a search engine can…

Yeah, that. For whatever it's worth, I actually think recomps happen in the guise of extended weight loss stalling more often than they're given credit for. It's why people should probably take more measurements than just their weight. It just takes a long time. On the other hand, if someone isn't losing weight *and* also…

There is a certain logic to it. Most of the people I encounter who have those notions also think they can lose 60lbs in month. So I guess if one's expectations are that out of whack, subsisting on lettuce makes sense.

Precisely, While I can see a snotty tone making any advice sound annoying, I think it's more likely that personal baggage is to blame for it coming off as annoying here. As for myself, I'm pretty pretty darn introverted when it comes to strangers. I will wait until there is no more foot traffic to enter a building simply…

The entire premise that you one can come up with hard and fast general rules centered around something as personal and subjective as hunger (and what affects it) is silly. If it works for some people, good for them. Finding crap science to rationalize it out to everyone is dumb. At best, you can come up with a framework…

Assuming we're not talking about any extra calories earned through logging exercise, it would just depend on how fast you told MFP you want to lose weight. 2lbs per week = 1000 cal per day deficit 1lb per week= 500 cal per day deficit 0.5 lb per week =250 cal per day deficit.

Presentation can have a pretty big impact on the meaning that's communicated. I can see a similar conversation sounding fairly pushy even if this one wasn't. On the other hand, sometimes our reception of information is affected by other encounters we've had. Just as an example, in the parking structure I use, it's usually…

I will also say, however, that the fact that you're asking this question now is telling. You may wish that you had been more proactive once you gain another 50 or 100 lbs. It's easier to refocus in your mid 20s than it is in your mid 30s and 40s. Like retirement investments, it's better to start early.

If you're really worried about your health, see a doctor for a routine check up that will probably include some lab work. Waist size by itself isn't an indicator of much. I'm your height and 20 lbs heavier (203 lbs at the moment) with a 38" waist. By most medical standards, I'm pretty healthy; in fact my blood pressure…

I imagine it's because different people have different tastes. I think most varieties of mushrooms are repellent in almost any context, but many people love them.

I don't care for the absolutism of the statement regardless of word choice (skinny). It's just not very thoughtful and overly simplified. For that matter, I'd have a problem if it were reversed as well: Nothing feels as good as [random food] tastes. Neither is true nor balanced. There are situations where either might be…

Context matters. For example, if we look up the definition of the word, "slag" we could get a fairly tame statement of: "stony waste matter separated from metals during the smelting or refining of ore." On other hand, if you look up "slag" at Urban Dictionary, you'll get a very different definition. As a term, "healthy"…

Even if we substitute skinny for another word (e.g. "fit"), it still implies a false dichotomy. One can be fit and still eat awesome food.

It seems important to note here that we have no way of determining TDEE without accurately logging food and then seeing the resulting weight loss/gain/maintenance over time; doing this with a low margin for error is actually quite challenging. We can *estimate* TDEE based on a this formula or that formula, but that's just…

For entertainment purposes, you could make use of Search function to see some of the spectacular crapstorms that this subject has prompted in the past in the forums. As for myself, I haven't really noticed adverse effects of drinking diet soda.

That. And as I am not a pro bodybuilder and I have my own specific goals, I'm not sure why I'd care regardless.

Veggies fruits beans nuts whole grains Non-starchy vegetables are likely going to be the least calorie-dense option for increasing fiber intake.

I'd also suggest that one is highly unlikely to reach a consensus on what's healthy, optimal, necessary, and/or important. Though, perhaps a consensus is overrated.

Yeah, and I get it. Words matter. I have debates over semantics a lot. A shared vocabulary, especially over a vague term, is necessary. And yet. If someone starts off by talking about how they're eating clean....everyone knows how discussion is going to go down. Generally I find those types of discussions useful, but not…

90% of the comments on these boards would be unnecessary if users started using "nutrient-dense, mostly whole-foods" instead of some variant of "clean foods." And I'm guessing the majority of people on either side of the discussion would be more or less ok with the resulting list of foods.