Dieting discoveries

pygmalion

Well-Known Member
What worked best for me is controlling my access to food. That is problematic right now, with kids in the house.

One thing that worked for me was to make things that I could customize, for example stir fry. I could serve myself a small amount of pasta (or whatever) with a plateful of vegs and a morsel or two of meat. DS could have lots of whatever he wanted. We'd both be eating the same thing, but I'd have a fraction of the calories that he did.
 

wonderwoman

Well-Known Member
That's one of the difficult things about diets, imo. I think it's technically possible to put together a vegetarian Paleo diet, but it would be pretty non-conventional. As most people mean them, those're very different diets.

And yet I know very healthy, happy people on both. I think people have to experiement to find out what works for them.
I did say OR, as I can plainly see those two don't agree with eachother. Like I said, I will want my cheese.
 

wonderwoman

Well-Known Member
Again, my personal go-to is moderation and portion control. Granted, as a have *cough* lbs to lose, I'm not exactly the authority on this...I realize that. However, when I've felt the best and lost/maintained, I was really watching portion sizes and really paying attention to getting a little bit of everything. Oatmeal and a serving of fruit for breakfast; a small yogurt and/or some veggies for a snack; a couple of servings of veggies, some crackers and cheese, and some sort of protein (lentils, beans, chicken) for lunch (or one veggie, crackers and cheese, protein, and a fruit for dessert); some more veggies and some protein for dinner. Shrug.

I dunno, I guess I'm kind of a believer in the idea that, despite all of the different fads that come and go, we have known how to eat healthily for ages. It gets dressed up different ways, and some ideas come and go, but a lot stays the same. Lots of veggies, some lean protein, some dairy, some whole grains, some fruit; half the plate of veggies, quarter whole grains, quarter protein sort of thing. Variety and dark colors. Some fat is OK, but not in crazy-go-nuts quantities. If putting a small pat of butter on a bowl full of veggies for the whole family makes them infinitely more palatable to eat then, by all means, add the stupid pat of butter; despite the high amount of fat, avocados and nuts and seeds are good for you, in moderation. Nothing wrong with red meat, in moderation. Reminder that a filet of salmon (usually 6-8 oz) is NOT a serving--it's two. An entire grapefruit is not a serving--it's two.

Then again, I have Luddite tendencies.
It's times like these I miss when I had a REAL (career) job, a decent income, and could go out on Saturday mornings and slowly peruse the aisles of my local supermarket, just picking up whatever struck my fancy. Because 80% of what struck my fancy, truly, was healthy, albeit expensive, but at that time, well within my budget. Now I eat cheap garbage. And I eat it all week long. That's not moderation.

I'm a PCA, personal care aide. One of my clients is a registered dietician, 90 years old. She has never smoked a cigarette, never drank an alcoholic drink, everything she takes in to her body has to have some health benefit. Even the Entenmann's donuts have a reason, because you can't deprive yourself of treats. But she keeps a strict regimen of fresh produce, lean meats, etc.. She is SO anal about her groceries, which I buy for her, and I think that's why she's lived so long. I want to be just like her when I grow up.

It was really funny, the last time I saw her she asked me if I went to a gym to exercise. I said no, but I used to walk (before it got cold). She said, used to? honey you aren't getting any younger! I said yes, I know I should go out and walk a couple miles even on cold days. I said I don't know if you've noticed but I've gained weight since I've started working for you. She said yes, she'd noticed. I said, I think it shows in my face and my neck. She said, haha, child, it doesn't show in your face and neck, it shows in your bottom! How refreshing. Seriously.
 

pygmalion

Well-Known Member
One of my clients is a registered dietician, 90 years old. She has never smoked a cigarette, never drank an alcoholic drink, everything she takes in to her body has to have some health benefit. Even the Entenmann's donuts have a reason, because you can't deprive yourself of treats. But she keeps a strict regimen of fresh produce, lean meats, etc.. She is SO anal about her groceries, which I buy for her, and I think that's why she's lived so long. I want to be just like her when I grow up.

It was really funny, the last time I saw her she asked me if I went to a gym to exercise. I said no, but I used to walk (before it got cold). She said, used to? honey you aren't getting any younger! I said yes, I know I should go out and walk a couple miles even on cold days. I said I don't know if you've noticed but I've gained weight since I've started working for you. She said yes, she'd noticed. I said, I think it shows in my face and my neck. She said, haha, child, it doesn't show in your face and neck, it shows in your bottom! How refreshing. Seriously.




Your dietician client sounds precious. Wise lady. I hope you enjoy her. ;) Have you considered asking her about ways that you can improve your eating habits without breaking the bank?
 

Joe

Well-Known Member
Sort of. The point of Taubes' books, that have been mentioned in this thread, is that not all calories are created equal. The balance sheet is a lot more complicated than just "calories in/calories burned".
Right. His basic premise is that carbs elevate insulin levels, which drives fat deposition.

The ghrelin/leptin business only tells your body whether or not to be hungry, not whether or not to burn fat.
 

pygmalion

Well-Known Member
Right. His basic premise is that carbs elevate insulin levels, which drives fat deposition.

The ghrelin/leptin business only tells your body whether or not to be hungry, not whether or not to burn fat.

True. That was just one illustration of the idea that it's not quite as simple as calories in/calories out. :cool: Kinda like, when my kind was in fourth? fifth? grade, he was introduced to pi. the "on-level" math kids substituted the number 3 for Pi. (*shudder*) The pre-AP kids used 3.14 for pi. Now that he's in ninth grade and has a graphing calculator, he uses *wait for it* pi for pi. Was 3 a good approximation? Sorta. At least it introduced them to the concept and got them in the same city with the right answer. 3.14 was a better approximation and got them in the neighborhood. But actually using pi gets them to the best answer (until they round the result incorrectly, but that's a different subject. lol)

Same deal with weight loss/gain, etc, IMV. I think that, looking at things as a simple in plus out equation DOES get you in the city, for sure, but it's like using 3 for pi. There are a lot more digits of accuracy we could go after and, IMHO, probably more to come as people learn more about how appetite/metabolism, etc actually work.
 

Dance Ads