DeguelloTex Member

Keep in mind that while 12+ months might seem like a long time, that time is going to pass whether you're meeting you your goals or not. You might as well meet them.

Yes, that's a taco. I like the yellow corn and cilantro, but it's otherwise sadly lacking. ETA: It needs some queso fresco and pico de gallo, imo. I wouldn't turn it down, though.

Flautas are round and closed. And smaller. Hard shell tacos are, indeed, tacos, even if inferior.

All this time, I never knew tacos had to be high in calories. Easy on the cheese, easy on the sour cream. Lettuce, tomato, jalapeños, salsa, etc. have almost no calories. If you're really hungry, maybe consider one large one rather than two smaller ones if that saves calories on the tortillas.

Doesn't matter, as long as you use the correct raw or cooked entry.

120 grams of oats, 30 grams of dark brown sugar, and however much ground cinnamon looks good. Simmer in two cups of water for five minutes while I feed and water the dogs. It keeps me full for a couple of hours.

Not just a positive reason to change, but one that's sufficiently positive and sufficiently so in the relatively short term. You're probably talking about money. And a non-trivial amount of it.

Make donuts taste bad?

Kosher salt. Coarse black pepper.

That sounds awesome. The soup has caramelized shallots, so there's that.

It tastes like a completely different dish. Kind of how canned asparagus tastes nothing like fresh asparagus. And it is literally award-winning. Twenty more days...

Your husband told you that, didn't he?

Little Caesar's:

As someone who's third standard deviation in all sorts of ways, I get that there are outliers. That said, the metabolic range for the overwhelming majority of the population is fairly narrow for those of similar size.

And, to the extent that it is physiological, it's a much, much smaller difference than people tend to assign to it. It's pretty trivially easy to overcome, not some great millstone around their neck.

IIFYM is completely separate from lifting. It can be applied to any scenario. If you want to eat less protein than you see recommended in association with lifting, just target less protein. I mean, are you just looking for a macro allocation or something different?

I eagerly await your self-amputation threads, then. That's some rapid weight loss, too. No, it doesn't. But there aren't enough words in the language to get you to understand the context, that CICO isn't about water weight, isn't about short snapshots of time, and isn't about creating or destroying energy, so good luck…

A fair chunk of the phentermine posts that aren't specifically about OTC "equivalents" mention doctors and prescriptions. If someone were interested in reading as many posts as possible, that person would have had to make a concerted effort not to see the distinctions being made between prescription and OTC pills. There's…

My advice would be to steer clear of OTC diet pills.

One of the biggest problems is people wanting to go faster than they can realistically manage. It sounds like you have a good handle on that part.

A forum search using "phentermine prescription" tells a pretty different story.

There are a lot of warm foods that can fit in a caloric deficit and a lot of salads that might not. It's not hard to see how that could be seen as just a long list of excuses more than anything else.

Here's how I asked: "Do you have links to the posts you read?" How would you have asked, instead?

So if someone says, "I read some posts that say X" then I say, "I haven't seen that, do you have links?" I'm being condescending for not accepting someone's bald assertion about something? Yeah, I was asking her to post proof of what she said so I could read it, too. If you believe that asking someone to support what…

Which statements, exactly, seemed condescending you? Your use of "they" at least implies that I made multiple condescending statements. If you could point out precisely which ones, that would help. ETA: And I don't mean to derail, but in light of a now-deleted thread from last night, this could be useful. PM if that would…

That's fair. I don't agree that it was aggressive or condescending, though. It was more an expression of surprise that the near constant refrain against OTC suppressants was apparently being applied to prescriptions.

Seriously, what tone? OTC suppressants are constantly, and rightly, looked down upon here. Prescription ones, under a doctor's supervision, aren't. I was pointing out that those are two separate issues and that I don't recall ever seeing anyone credible on these boards tell someone not to work with her doctor or not to…

Perhaps you can point to as much as a syllable in any of my posts to you that could be even remotely construed by a reasonable person as trying to apply board posting rules to you. I haven't said thing one about your feelings. You said you read some posts that said a certain thing. I asked which posts those were. Quelle…

What part was rabid, exactly? The asking what you read or the saying that that's not what I've seen? "Work with your doctor" is pretty standard advice here. I still think you're taking comments about OTC suppressants out of context and applying them globally.

Frankly, that's hard to believe. Do you have links to the posts you read? Almost every post on that topic that I've read points out that if it's OTC it's probably not effective and, if it is, it will be taken off the OTC market as dangerous. And that prescription meds can work but they require, well, prescriptions. I've…