PDA

View Full Version : Healthy vs. Junk food



DivingCRNA
04-01-2010, 06:38
Sweet! I want obesity to be next!!





I tan just fine, but would rather wear serious sun screen....I like to look young and being healthy...If the girls my own age want a tan person, the younger ones don't seem to mind:smiley2:

I don't know what your age is BR, but I'm pretty sure that it IS the younger ones tanning with no thought of what it is doing to their skin. There is some talk of the FDA regulating tanning beds as there is new evidence that they are even more harmful than previously thought.

and Obamacare taxing tanning will likely destroy that industry anyway.

Good. It's like smoking. You choose the behavior which leads to cancer, you should pay up front for the self induced health issues you will have.

rayaa3
04-01-2010, 08:34
Wow, this thread has really gone on a ride.

In seriousness - on the obesity issue, I like a tax break that you can get in Canada: if your child participates in sports, your cost, to a degree is deductible. I don't know much about it, I found out about it when researching for any similar tax deductions for my family. I like the idea.

Lulubelle
04-03-2010, 01:04
Sweet! I want obesity to be next!!



This thread is about pale men CRNA. You want to tax people who are overweight? Good luck with that idea. As many as 30% of people are overweight for issues having nothing to do with lifestyle. Then there are those with poor resting metabolic rates for whom it is just tough unless they are capable of eating like a bird and exercising a ton. Not saying that lifestyle isn't the major factor in most cases, but good luck trying to take a physical characteristic like obesity, as opposed to a clear lifestyle choice like smoking, and making it stick.

OK thread derailers, pale men are alive and well on the beach this weekend, and they look good to me. Especially the shirtless jogging Marines.

Largo
04-03-2010, 09:57
You can actually buy a lot of high-quality food cheaper than the junk food. The problem is that people choose stuff that has had cost added through shelf-stable packaging and freezing. They also choose high-sugar items.

You can fill up a fridge with family-size packages of meat, and whole chickens, and fresh produce, for a surprisingly small amount of money.

Unfortunately, people don't want to do the additional work required to prepare healthy food.

Lulubelle
04-03-2010, 10:07
You can actually buy a lot of high-quality food cheaper than the junk food. The problem is that people choose stuff that has had cost added through shelf-stable packaging and freezing. They also choose high-sugar items.

You can fill up a fridge with family-size packages of meat, and whole chickens, and fresh produce, for a surprisingly small amount of money.

Unfortunately, people don't want to do the additional work required to prepare healthy food.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one Largo. I used to run a pediatric diabetes clinic, at a time when it was becoming recognized that many kids were getting Type 2 diabetes. It is well known that fresh healthy food costs more and that is one of the barriers to getting people with limited means to eat healthy. When a mom whose spouse just walked out on her is trying to feed 3 kids on food stamps, that 99 cent cheeseburger costs a lot less than a lean meat with a couple of fresh vegetables. The technique you describe is what most MIDDLE class people CAN do to eat better and don't choose to.

I buy organic and local when possible, and it has to be a conscious choice, because it is prohibitively expensive. But not everyone has that choice. You won't find anything in a box in my house for the most part. You will find frozen vegetables as it is hard to keep a lot of fresh vegetables in a house that feeds one. Plus, frozen vegetables actually have more nutrients than vegetables that have traveled from far far away.

Back to Pale Men. I'm going to go survey the beach. I hope that old skinny man tanned to leather who wears thong banana hammocks is not around today.

DevilDiver
04-03-2010, 11:37
Sweet! I want obesity to be next!!



Not saying that lifestyle isn't the major factor in most cases, but good luck trying to take a physical characteristic like obesity, as opposed to a clear lifestyle choice like smoking, and making it stick.


Is Food The Next Tobacco?
Forbes.com - Magazine Article (http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/05/blutt-food-regulation-intelligent-investing-tobacco_print.html)


You want to tax people who are overweight? Good luck with that idea.

Really? What makes you think this is not already happening?

DevilDiver
04-03-2010, 11:52
It is well known that fresh healthy food costs more and that is one of the barriers to getting people with limited means to eat healthy. When a mom whose spouse just walked out on her is trying to feed 3 kids on food stamps, that 99 cent cheeseburger costs a lot less than a lean meat with a couple of fresh vegetables.


This is just not true........ Average "Value Menu" food cost for a national fast food chain runs 50% of sale price. This design is based on the customer purchasing a higher profit add-on like french fries or soft drink to increase the over all ticket price, volume and return visits to achieve a sustainable profit for the business.

Q: Why does the statement have to include the "single mom with 3 kids"? This has nothing to do with the cost of the food.

McDonald's does not take "Food Stamps" so it would cost the individual more for the cheeseburger because they have to purchase it.

DevilDiver
04-04-2010, 00:53
Some light reading on the other non thread related topic.

Healthy, Low-Calorie Foods Cost More on Average (http://www.csrees.usda.gov/newsroom/impact/2008/nri/03191_food_prices.html)

I apprieciate the point that your are trying to make and I know your heart is in the right place but the information is skewed. Plus this study is based on super market items not fast food.

Believe me, I am not trying to say poeple should eat unhealthy food, just that you can eat healthy on a budget, it just takes more effort than the drive through window.

Did you notice what foods they compare in the study? :smiley36:

Low calorie Foods:
Oysters
Red Peppers
Blue Berries
Lobster
Cod
Olive Oil

High Calorie Foods:
Sugar
Cookies
Butter
Margerine
Peanut Butter
Lard

:smiley36: You really have to be joking, $36.32 a day?

Based on a standard 2000-calorie diet, the researchers found a diet consisting primarily of calorie-dense foods costs $3.52 a day, but a diet consisting primarily of low-calorie food costs $36.32 a day. The average American eats a variety of foods throughout the day, spending $7 a day.

:smiley5: Sooo, for $36.32 a day per person for the single mom and three kids we would be looking at $145.28 a day for 365 days a year at $53,027.20 food cost to feed the family this proposed low calorie food diet.

I know that I can feed a family of four very heathy food for a whole week for under the $145.28 a day that is claimed in that report. :smiley2:

Largo
04-04-2010, 10:43
Agree. There is a term in agribusiness called 'Value-added products.'
If you put a piece of meat under plastic, then consumers will pay more for it. If you stick it in a cardboard box, and ship it to Japan, they will pay even more.

You can buy a whole turkey for $8 or less. Compare that to $8 at McDonalds.

Put in a garden, and it's amazing how cheaply one can eat well.

It's the preservatives and the packaging that costs money. Healthy food can be purchased unprepared more readily than unhealthy food.

Lulubelle
04-04-2010, 15:59
Some light reading on the other non thread related topic.

Healthy, Low-Calorie Foods Cost More on Average (http://www.csrees.usda.gov/newsroom/impact/2008/nri/03191_food_prices.html)

I apprieciate the point that your are trying to make and I know your heart is in the right place but the information is skewed. Plus this study is based on super market items not fast food.

Believe me, I am not trying to say poeple should eat unhealthy food, just that you can eat healthy on a budget, it just takes more effort than the drive through window.

Did you notice what foods they compare in the study? :smiley36:

Low calorie Foods:
Oysters
Red Peppers
Blue Berries
Lobster
Cod
Olive Oil

High Calorie Foods:
Sugar
Cookies
Butter
Margerine
Peanut Butter
Lard

:smiley36: You really have to be joking, $36.32 a day?

Based on a standard 2000-calorie diet, the researchers found a diet consisting primarily of calorie-dense foods costs $3.52 a day, but a diet consisting primarily of low-calorie food costs $36.32 a day. The average American eats a variety of foods throughout the day, spending $7 a day.

:smiley5: Sooo, for $36.32 a day per person for the single mom and three kids we would be looking at $145.28 a day for 365 days a year at $53,027.20 food cost to feed the family this proposed low calorie food diet.

I know that I can feed a family of four very heathy food for a whole week for under the $145.28 a day that is claimed in that report. :smiley2:

Food is a very difficult thing to study. That's why I picked a USDA study that at least tried to look at very specific detail. No need to dive down into their math, because Americans don't eat that way anyway.

The important thing is the concept. There are a million studies proving the same concept that this one did, which is that crappy food is more calorically dense, and cheaper per calorie, and that you can therefore fill yourself/your kid up more cheaply with crappy food. Go price the cost of a lean meat, a fresh vegetable, and a starch for 4. Then price 4 regular McDonald's hamburgers or a Domino's nasty pizza. Comes in around 5 dollars, for everyone. Why do you think that the poor eat more junk food than those who are not?

We can just agree to disagree on this one. Trust me, I want healthy food to have a cost advantage. But I don't believe that it does. Show me a study that even hints at healthy food being cheaper. I worked many struggling families who were really trying, but they simply couldn't afford to put good fresh low calorie food in front of their families every meal, and their kids were obese and had Type 2 diabetes as a result. They had dieticians at their disposal, so they knew HOW, but didn't have the means.

How did we get from pasty men to this anyway?

BRsnow
04-04-2010, 16:02
Some light reading on the other non thread related topic.

Healthy, Low-Calorie Foods Cost More on Average (http://www.csrees.usda.gov/newsroom/impact/2008/nri/03191_food_prices.html)

I apprieciate the point that your are trying to make and I know your heart is in the right place but the information is skewed. Plus this study is based on super market items not fast food.

Believe me, I am not trying to say poeple should eat unhealthy food, just that you can eat healthy on a budget, it just takes more effort than the drive through window.

Did you notice what foods they compare in the study? :smiley36:

Low calorie Foods:
Oysters
Red Peppers
Blue Berries
Lobster
Cod
Olive Oil

High Calorie Foods:
Sugar
Cookies
Butter
Margerine
Peanut Butter
Lard

:smiley36: You really have to be joking, $36.32 a day?

Based on a standard 2000-calorie diet, the researchers found a diet consisting primarily of calorie-dense foods costs $3.52 a day, but a diet consisting primarily of low-calorie food costs $36.32 a day. The average American eats a variety of foods throughout the day, spending $7 a day.

:smiley5: Sooo, for $36.32 a day per person for the single mom and three kids we would be looking at $145.28 a day for 365 days a year at $53,027.20 food cost to feed the family this proposed low calorie food diet.

I know that I can feed a family of four very heathy food for a whole week for under the $145.28 a day that is claimed in that report. :smiley2:

Food is a very difficult thing to study. That's why I picked a USDA study that at least tried to look at very specific detail. No need to dive down into their math, because Americans don't eat that way anyway.

The important thing is the concept. There are a million studies proving the same concept that this one did, which is that crappy food is more calorically dense, and cheaper per calorie, and that you can therefore fill yourself/your kid up more cheaply with crappy food. Go price the cost of a lean meat, a fresh vegetable, and a starch for 4. Then price 4 regular McDonald's hamburgers or a Domino's nasty pizza. Comes in around 5 dollars, for everyone. Why do you think that the poor eat more junk food than those who are not?

We can just agree to disagree on this one. Trust me, I want healthy food to have a cost advantage. But I don't believe that it does. Show me a study that even hints at healthy food being cheaper. I worked many struggling families who were really trying, but they simply couldn't afford to put good fresh low calorie food in front of their families every meal, and their kids were obese and had Type 2 diabetes as a result. They had dieticians at their disposal, so they knew HOW, but didn't have the means.

How did we get from pasty men to this anyway?

Might depend where you live as well. In NYC it was much easier and cheaper for me to eat fresh healthy food than in Denver, it is a bit more expensive and harder to come by, but doable. My only "junk" in typically beer/wings or rare stop at fast food, so I don't really know how much it cost to shop for crappy food. I do recall it is hard to give up the "junk" though...BR

Largo
04-04-2010, 16:35
I'm sorry, but healthy food does cost less than sugary crap. Consider the following:

$5 package of bologna, vs. $5 worth of chicken wings (family pack).

$3 package of potato chips vs. $3 worth of produce.

$5 box of Cap'n Crunch vs. $5 worth of oatmeal.

$5 worth of string cheese vs. $5 worth of apples.

I could continue.

And even if Mom wants to go the fast food route, a $5 footlong at Subway is much more food, than $5 at Burger King.

Lulubelle
04-04-2010, 17:40
I'm sorry, but healthy food does cost less than sugary crap. Consider the following:

$5 package of bologna, vs. $5 worth of chicken wings (family pack).

$3 package of potato chips vs. $3 worth of produce.

$5 box of Cap'n Crunch vs. $5 worth of oatmeal.

$5 worth of string cheese vs. $5 worth of apples.

I could continue.

And even if Mom wants to go the fast food route, a $5 footlong at Subway is much more food, than $5 at Burger King.

You missed the study's point about cost for caloric density. If someone is hungry, and has 2 dollars, they can fill themselves up more easily with junk than they can healthy food. Your figures above are comparing "apples to oranges" in that they are not equal in the amount of caloric energy that they deliver. Google away, the cost of fresh food has been proven many times in many ways to be a barrier to healthy eating amongst the poor and lower middle class. Those with no economic barriers have no excuse.

Largo
04-04-2010, 17:52
Why measure food in terms of calories?

One cup of corn syrup has more calories than an apple, but an apple will stave off hunger and make you much more healthy.

DevilDiver
04-04-2010, 18:57
Why measure food in terms of calories?

One cup of corn syrup has more calories than an apple, but an apple will stave off hunger and make you much more healthy.


That is correct, calories really are not the issue here. High or low calorie count does not determine if a food is healthy or not.

Example:
McDonald's Cheeseburger - 277 calories

Dehydrated Apple Slices (60g) - 346 calories

Truthfully I suspect that the true reason "poor people" or any other people for that matter that choose junk food is because they like it, of course when they are sitting in a clinic discussing why their child is obese they are going to blame everyone but themselves.

That is why the has government has to do something about this, these people need help and education with more federal funding. These junk food companies are tricking and intimidating under privileged starving children with their tasty food just for profit. How could you even suggest that they cook for themselves, those rich company CEO's take huge bonuses and go out to eat and then leave the poor people to cook their own food. It is so unfair.........
It's OK, Uncle Ronald McDonald understands, he has another .99 cheeseburger waiting just for you.

Splitlip
04-04-2010, 19:03
Back to Pale Men. I'm going to go survey the beach. I hope that old skinny man tanned to leather who wears thong banana hammocks is not around today.

Jimmy Buffett hangs out at your beach? Cool!

:smilie39:

FWIW however:

JB's skin is not "leathery".

Having said that, he, I and others did the damage to our skin 30 years ago.

SEMO Scuba
04-04-2010, 19:47
Part of the reason people eat poorly is that they are lazy. It takes much more time and effort to buy good foods and cook or prepare them, than opening a box, popping some pre-prepared food in the microwave, or buying a burger or hot dog.

On top of that many "parents" (I use that term loosely), are simply inept.

Lulubelle
04-04-2010, 22:17
Why measure food in terms of calories?

One cup of corn syrup has more calories than an apple, but an apple will stave off hunger and make you much more healthy.

Largo, did you READ the USDA article? Or any other basic metabolism and satiety review? People need a threshold of calories to feel full, go about the activities of their day, etc. The article uses the example of a 2000 calorie a day diet which would probably be close for most adult males. It is a heck of a lot cheaper to get 2000 calories with crappy food than healthy food. Heck,you can probably knock that out at one sitting at McD's. And those crappy foods do have some addictive quality, and because they are cheap, people tend to overdo it. Hence the cycle.

I don't know what everyone's background is, but unless you have worked directly with the working poor, is it really appropriate for you to assume what they do and why they do it?

You and I would choose the apple, because we have the means to get our necessary calories from healthy foods. And I go so granola with my own food choices (local, organic, free range, wild caught, you name it) that it is $$$. I wish that everyone could choose the healthiest foods.

emclean
04-05-2010, 06:29
can I back up a bit, where are the $8 whole turkeys?


Part of the reason people eat poorly is that they are lazy. It takes much more time and effort to buy good foods and cook or prepare them, than opening a box, popping some pre-prepared food in the microwave, or buying a burger or hot dog.

depends on the situation, back in my poor days, I was out of the house for work 10-12 hours a day, most every work day. so time was an issue.

WngStvn
04-05-2010, 08:40
I have to agree with the idea that junk food is cheaper food. $5 worth of string cheese vs. $5 worth of apples, is not something you should compare. $5 worth of apples don't really fill me up like $5 of fatty string cheese. So, density of calories seem to be an important factor. Maybe we can compare where to buy $5 worth of healthy cheese to the $5 worth of junk string cheese and the quantity you can buy for $5.

Also, I don't think people are lazy. I think at a certain point, the amount of time they have to spend working to make a living out weights the luxury time they have to spend on making "slow" foods. Imagine if you make minimum wage and have rent and bills to pay for. Not to mention if you have to raise a family, I doubt you have time to even get a good 8 hours of sleep let alone have time to cook a healthy dinner.

I know this doesn't apply to everyone. There are those who are lazy or like junk foods. But those studies on why healthy food are more expensive per calories than junk food is focusing on the poor families that want their kids to eat healthy but doesn't have the means for it. Time is money and money is time. For those who don't understand and think it is just some gibberish, think of it like this, I have to spend time working to make money. That is how time is money. But with money, I can hire someone to do stuff for me so I have more free time. That is how money is time. This is a simple example; but it seems to me, the poorer you are and the less you make per hour, the less money and time you have. This is just my 2 cents.

DivingCRNA
04-05-2010, 09:15
Wow, I did not mean for this to take on a life of it's own....

That said, the obesity issue can't be that it takes so many calories to feel full, because people are clearly NOT stopping at their daily required calories to sustain themselves, or they would not be so fat.

Fat=stored excess energy. There is excess energy because less energy is burned than is taken in. The math is just that simple. To be at a healthy weight a fat person has to burn more calories than are taken in to get there and then maintain a balance for the rest of their lives.

It is easy math.

Largo
04-05-2010, 09:24
I don't think that there is such a thing as a healthy cheese. Take the nicest Brie that you can find, and pop it in the oven for a few minutes. You can see the fat come out of the cheese.

I'm not comparing apples to cheese. I'm suggesting that people choose something that makes you feel good and provides lots of fiber, instead of something that packs on the pounds, and stops up the intestine.

People make a lot of excuses for their poor decisions.

The fact is, you can save a lot of money by buying whole, uncooked food items at the store and preparing it yourself.

I think the reason we're even debating the issue is that when people go to the grocery store, in addition to food, they also buy sodas, twizzlers, paper towels, glass cleaner, etc. then they look at their purchase and think, "Wow, that's not much food for $200."

DevilDiver
04-05-2010, 10:13
1. Healthy cheese?
First String Cheese is Mozzarella that is processed into a smaller handheld form instead of the traditional loaf or wheel shape. It is still Mozzarella, high in calcium, Vitamin A, B12 and protein. Fat content is determined by the use of Whole or Skim Milk. Eaten in the correct portions it is "healthy"...

If we are discussing Healthy Cheese I am guessing you would mean some kind of low/fat free option. This could/would be higher in sodium, less vitamins (unless fortified) and added preservatives and flavorings. Not only not a healthy choice but just bad cheese.

2. Slow Foods?
I guess you refer to cooking verses pre-packaged or Fast Food.

Seriously... Yes, it does take time and basic knowledge to cook. Does it take a long time to cook? Depends on what and how. Can a healthy meal for 1,2, 3, 4 or 10 people be prepared in 30 mins or less? Yes, every day, all day long, 365 days a year, it just take some basic knowledge and practice.


3. "Those Studies"
I don't know about "those studies" but the one referred to was not about "Poor families who want their kids to eat healthy but do not have the means for it" and it never claimed to be. It was about focusing the public thoughts on a incomplete theory that high calorie foods are unhealthy and to blame for "obesity plaguing the United States, this trend may hinder low-income families".
Nutrition is actually very simple and you can make many aspects of any individuals diet (healthy or not) to blame if you want to point out a specific part of it.
Fat = Bad
Sugar = Bad
Sodium = Bad
The fact is you need all of these in a Heath diet in correct portions. By focusing people on a specific portion and demonizing it they are promoting an agenda (Nutrition education programs can address this challenge and provide additional help for planning healthy meals) for the organization that did the study.


I fully understand the idea of "the need for people to eat healthy" and agree with it but to assume that these people are forced or unable to do so is incorrect. To suggest that lower income families cannot afford to purchase "Healthy Food Options" is incorrect, Current (USA) programs such as WIC and Foodstamps are designed to promote the purchase of healthy food items, not microwave pizza.

Nature vs Nurture : Personal Responsability : Availability
All reasons people choose to eat what they do

Time : Taste : Motivation : Marketing / Media : Financial Situation
Factors that influence peoples choices

People have to eat to survive. What, when, how and how much are choices.

gNats
04-05-2010, 11:01
I don't think that there is such a thing as a healthy cheese. Take the nicest Brie that you can find, and pop it in the oven for a few minutes. You can see the fat come out of the cheese.

I'm not comparing apples to cheese. I'm suggesting that people choose something that makes you feel good and provides lots of fiber, instead of something that packs on the pounds, and stops up the intestine.

People make a lot of excuses for their poor decisions.

The fact is, you can save a lot of money by buying whole, uncooked food items at the store and preparing it yourself.

I think the reason we're even debating the issue is that when people go to the grocery store, in addition to food, they also buy sodas, twizzlers, paper towels, glass cleaner, etc. then they look at their purchase and think, "Wow, that's not much food for $200."

Can't believe I am chiming in here, but you do make a point Largo. My favorite moisturizer and cleanser are $20 each. And they seem to run out at the same time. Add household items, such as paper toweling, toliet paper, dog food, and cat litter to the cart and my simple trip to the store to buy tonight's dinner (raw meat, 2 potatoes, and a head of brocolli) turns into a paycheck for one meal.

My grandmother (rest her soul) amazed me with her routine once she and my grandfather were on social security. I remember visiting her one week (they spent the summers in a 600 sq ft cottage up north).

She would go shopping first for grocery items at the local Megamart. Then the produce market for fresh veggies. Next was Kmart or some other discount store for cleaners, cleansers, and paper products.

Then there was the "outside the norm store" where a good deal "was to be had." We drove 15 miles out of the way to get 5 Campbell soups for $.75 that day a $.20 savings over the grocery store.

The cottage was at least 20-30 minutes from town, so figure in gas (this was in 1995) I struggled to find the great cost savings.

But, if at anytime my grandfather asked her, how much did food cost this month, she knew. She also budgeted differently for the "household items" opposed to basic food.

Genius or too much time on her hands? Who knows? It's just a fond memory of mine.

WngStvn
04-05-2010, 11:04
Nature vs Nurture : Personal Responsability : Availability
All reasons people choose to eat what they do

Time : Taste : Motivation : Marketing / Media : Financial Situation
Factors that influence peoples choices

People have to eat to survive. What, when, how and how much are choices.

I totally agree.

Healthy cheese... well, I would define it as non-processed cheese. But it was just an example when cheese was compared to apples; and I was pointing out it shouldn't be apples vs oranges, but apples vs apples. There might be better examples. Should we all just break everything into nutrition and calories?

Time vs Money vs Nutrition vs Calories vs Quantity.

I don't think I need to list them all and their effects because I think at a certain point, we are all focusing on a different sub-sect of the discussion. Cause hey, I totally agree if someone is lazy and likes fast food, their health problem is their own. I was just arguing for those people who cannot chose and well, it not a theory to me or an afternoon TV special. I know people who really cannot help it. But lets not have the Let them eat cake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake) syndrome.

BTW, yeah, the program promotes. But try as best they can, they do not have the resources to solve or help further than promoting; especially when they cannot solve the time problem.

gNats
04-05-2010, 11:07
2. Slow Foods?
I guess you refer to cooking verses pre-packaged or Fast Food.

Seriously... Yes, it does take time and basic knowledge to cook. Does it take a long time to cook? Depends on what and how. Can a healthy meal for 1,2, 3, 4 or 10 people be prepared in 30 mins or less? Yes, every day, all day long, 365 days a year, it just take some basic knowledge and practice.

There are plenty of cookbooks on the market that feature 30 minute or less meals, or cooking at home for $10 a meal. I think I once saw a cookbook 1000 ways to prepare chicken.

It can be done. What the heck did our grandparent (and parents) do in the 30s, 40s, and 50s without "meal in a bag" food choices?

Not every meal we eat has to include 30 different spices from third-world countries. When I start to complain about the cost of cooking at home, I look at my menu plan. Typically, those are the weeks I am experimenting with ethnic foods and have to buy a ton of ingredients I don't normally keep on hand.

When you stick to the basic foods, ingredients, and cooking methods, cooking at home is inexpensive and healthy.

gNats
04-05-2010, 11:12
Kentucky Fried Chicken had a great marketing platform a few years back.

Remember when they asked families to take $10.00 + tax and try to buy the ingredients to make a chicken dinner with 2 sides, rolls, and desert at home?

Families were going through the aisles picking out ALL the ingredients - spices, flour, .... in addition to the beans, potatoes, and chicken. It was ingenious. If you start with an empty kitchen, bare cupboards, it is cheaper to go to KFC and get a dinner for 4.

I know from experience, the initial "start up" of a kitchen is very expensive. And as your culinary tastes grow, your grocery bill gets larger.

My desire to make homemade ravioli cost me over $50. I had to get a pasta machine. I kept thinking, "I could have gone to Bucco's for this." But, each time I use that pasta machine, my costs go down.

For young people starting out and people who are living check to check without my "excess" food in their pantries, that KFC commercial makes good sense.

DivingCRNA
04-05-2010, 11:18
OK, my basic keep your weight under control plan is as follows:

1. Use smaller plates. This is so you feel like you ate a full portion, but it is smaller.

2. Chew longer and eat slower. This gives you stomach time to tell the brain that it is full.

3. Do not eliminate any food because it is "bad". Recognize the calorie dense food items and consume them in moderation so you do not feel "deprived". Forget Adkins, South Beach, Grapefruit, etc... They all lead to feeling deprived and craving things. We are omnivores. Eat everything, but watch the AMOUNTS. Eat a Snickers every two weeks, but do not eat two in a day, etc...

4. Cook as much as you have time for. This shows you what is going into foods.

5. Be active, watch less TV. Ge off the couch and get outside or to the gym to do what is within your activity tolerance. It is good for your mental outlook, turns you to comfort food less often, and helps burn the calories that are put in. Even just walking that poor dog that never goes outside to do anything but poop helps.

6. Sit down when you eat. Eating on the fly at work and quickly shoveling in all you can often leads to overeating out of fear of not knowing when you will get to eat again.

7. Get used to being a little hungry when you go to bed. It cuts down on heartburn and keeps you from getting in the habit of having to be full to fall asleep.

8. Moderate alcohol. Alcohol is VERY calorie dense. Like anything else, it is fine in moderation. 2 beers a night really add up in calories.

9. Drink plenty of water. Sometimes when we feel "hungry" it is actually thirst.

10. Avoid diet sodas and drinks. This sounds counter intuitive, but the sweetness with a lack of calories actually interferes with the bodies ability to account for energy taken in. Drink regular soda, but less of it. No one NEEDS 6 sodas a day.

So, using these steps, you can be poor and buy all that crap and eat it and not get fat and be a burden on society. But one has to be mindful of what one is doing. Our society is very short on that in the era of "Hope" and "Change".

This, like everything else in life, is about the choices we make on a moment to moment basis. None of this is the government's fault, or the food maker's fault. We make a decision every time we pick something up and put it in our mouths. The result is cumulative.

This comes from someone when dropped 25 pounds last year using this plan. I have kept it off with this plan.

WngStvn
04-05-2010, 11:26
Yeah, damn those people with money and time on their hands but spend it on junk foods.

But notice you did not really consider those who work 2 jobs to support their families and maybe only have time to get home, shower, and sleep. Please see Latchkey kid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid).

Maybe they can just buy a weeks or 2 weeks worth at Costco and it will be cheaper than the corner deli? (Please read up on low income.)

Maybe they can just prepare ahead of time and re-heat? (Please read up on low income.)

The startup cost on a car is lower than its maintenance... this might seem like a silly example, but when you don't even have that extra $20 to spend, a $20 dollar difference might as well be a $10,000 difference.

I grew up knowing a lot of immigrate kids, so I just might be telling the stories of those around me when I said that time and money affects diet even when people want better.

But yeah, damn those with the resources but wastes it. Its their own fault for being fat and unhealthy.

WngStvn
04-05-2010, 11:40
Oh, I don't know if I need to raise this point, but there are people who makes less than minimum wage; especially if their English is not so good. By less, I know some who makes $20 a day for 12 hour labor. I think we can all guess the reason why they don't form a union or report this to the authority.

But the point is to hammer in why I said that some people don't even have $20 flexibility in their budget. I realize I am posting this on a scuba forum and to be honest, scuba is not a low income hobby, so I might be preaching to the wrong crowd. If thats the case, my mistake.

If anyone cares, I am personally on a calorie restriction diet Calorie restriction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie_restriction). So I tend to buy a lot of nutritionally dense food at Costco. I have my own garden too and I fertilize with waste water from my aquarium. I eat about $15 a day.

gNats
04-05-2010, 11:47
Yeah, damn those people with money and time on their hands but spend it on junk foods.

But notice you did not really consider those who work 2 jobs to support their families and maybe only have time to get home, shower, and sleep. Please see Latchkey kid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid).

Maybe they can just buy a weeks or 2 weeks worth at Costco and it will be cheaper than the corner deli? (Please read up on low income.)

Maybe they can just prepare ahead of time and re-heat? (Please read up on low income.)

The startup cost on a car is lower than its maintenance... this might seem like a silly example, but when you don't even have that extra $20 to spend, a $20 dollar difference might as well be a $10,000 difference.

I grew up knowing a lot of immigrate kids, so I just might be telling the stories of those around me when I said that time and money affects diet even when people want better.

But yeah, damn those with the resources but wastes it. Its their own fault for being fat and unhealthy.

I'm sorry, I don't understand your post. Are you referring to a previous post as a counter? If so, you should quote the post.

WngStvn
04-05-2010, 12:03
Oh, sorry about that, it was just getting so big and kind of messy. I guess just take it as a general statement. I will quote next time. :)

gNats
04-05-2010, 12:18
Oh, sorry about that, it was just getting so big and kind of messy. I guess just take it as a general statement. I will quote next time. :)

Okay :smiley20:

I was hoping you didn't think my comments about 30 minutes or less meals insinuated that I thought people had all the time in the world and were lazy.

Although, your link did provoke additional thoughts in me. My mother went back to work when I was 13 to help the family budget. I was left in charge of my sister who is 4 yrs younger than me.

So, I guess that makes me a latchkey kid, right?

Summer vacation days looked something like this:

My mother would pull frozen meat out of the freezer before leaving for work and leave the following note for me on the kitchen sink:

Natalie:

Chicken on the grill, baked potatoes, salad, and green beans.

Start potatoes at 4:00, oven, 350. Don't forget to wash them this time.
Put chicken on grill at 4:45, low heat. Don't put sauce on. Don't keep turning chicken.
Make a salad using whatever is in fridge. Wash all vegetables.
Open can of green beans, put on stove, don't turn on. I'll do it when I get home.

Have your sister set the table at 4:45.

No fighting. (seriously, don't call me because you are fighting today!) Don't leave unless you call me. No friends over unless you call me.

Have your beds made, clothes put away, and the livingroom picked up before your dad gets home or you will get extra chores tomorrow.

No snacking. I know how much ice cream is in the container.


have a good day. I love you, Mom.


***
Maybe that is why I take healthy eating and cooking for granted. I was a primary meal preparer in my parent's house at the age of 13. As I got more proficient at cooking, her notes were condensed to:

Pick something for dinner. I'm sick of chicken. Maybe pork. Don't overspice it, last night's meal killed your dad.

STOP FIGHTING WITH YOUR SISTER.

Don't make me come home early.
-Mom

Lulubelle
04-05-2010, 12:38
For those of you claiming that healthy food does not cost more than junk food, can you please provide a valid source? I provided a widely quoted source from the USDA.

What most people seem to be arguing here is not the cost of healthy food versus junk but rather that overeating is bad and obesity is a problem. No kidding. And those with adequate resources to purchase healthy food truly need to be responsible for their own choices.

But trust me, or trust any number of valid resources out there, there is a reason why the working poor choose junk food over healthy food more than other socioeconomic groups, and it is simply because it is cheaper for the same amount of energy/calories provided, not because they are lazy or ill informed. And the food makers do everything in their power to make those foods addictive and readily accessible to the masses so that they can eat themselves into obesity. It is simply not as simple as some of you paint it to be. Anyone checked the price of produce lately? Tomatoes? $$$.

But I have not seen anything but opinion here to refute what is KNOWN in clinical/dietary circles, and for which I HAVE provided proof. Bring it on.

Personally, I'm baffled by junk food junkies who DO have the choice of healthy food and don't choose it. But then again, a filler full hormone laden ecoli infested burger isn't my scene, real food tastes far better to me. The closer to the way God made it the better.

Lulubelle
04-05-2010, 12:58
The Economics of Obesity: Why are Poor People Fat? | Natural Health (http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com/2010/02/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/)

While no scholarly medical journal, me thinks that this author is spot on. An interesting read.

DivingCRNA
04-05-2010, 13:33
Lulu,

There is one giant flaw in your logic of obesity. While poor people are choosing to eat the least expensive calories, they are still choosing to eat WAY TOO MANY OF THESE CHEAP CALORIES.

With refrigeration nearly universally available in the USA, there is no reason for a poor person to choose to consume 4,000 calories per day because it is "cheaper".

Just because a biggie sized meal is sold as a unit, there is not a law that says it all has to be consumed within 10 minutes of purchasing it.

Lulubelle
04-05-2010, 15:12
Lulu,

There is one giant flaw in your logic of obesity. While poor people are choosing to eat the least expensive calories, they are still choosing to eat WAY TOO MANY OF THESE CHEAP CALORIES.

With refrigeration nearly universally available in the USA, there is no reason for a poor person to choose to consume 4,000 calories per day because it is "cheaper".

Just because a biggie sized meal is sold as a unit, there is not a law that says it all has to be consumed within 10 minutes of purchasing it.

No giant flaws at all Don, I acknowledge as much in previous posts. And we are not talking about obesity as a whole, there are plenty of obese people who are not poor, we are talking about whether or not junk food costs less than healthy food and how that impacts the diet of the poor and therefor THEIR obesity rates. These calorie dense foods although cheap, are eaten to excess if you define excess by calories. And the food industry does everything in it's power to encourage it. One meal from Mc D's has at least a days' worth of calories for most adults. But lets talk about volume, fiber, feeling full. A plain hamburger would not be so harmful, but ask yourself if that would be enough volume for you? Probably not, so you'd eat another one and then you would feel full. With too many calories to get there. Contrast that with a healthy meal of lean protein and fiber containing vegetables, you get full on far fewer calories.

THAT is the conundrum of cheap food. Too many calories to get to the same level of fullness and satiety. And that is assuming that you have a normal satiety set point and do not have a defect in adiponectin or leptin. There are syndromes where there is no satiety mechanism at all, and parents have to lock the food up as the kids will literally eat themselves to death.

Foo2
04-05-2010, 15:27
I know that this doesn't solve the whole time issue...but I'm a HUGE coupon shopper. Because I pay sooooo little for so many things, I can afford my fresh veggies and fruits. You'd be amazed at how much you can save when you shop smart. I get most of my toiletries for next to nothing. That reduces a lot. Just a thought.

Edit: Should have added that I work off of a $50 per week budget with my coupons feeding a family of 4 and expecting my newest little one soon. And feeding them all healthy, well balanced, nutritious meals. :)

DivingCRNA
04-05-2010, 16:09
Lulu,

There is one giant flaw in your logic of obesity. While poor people are choosing to eat the least expensive calories, they are still choosing to eat WAY TOO MANY OF THESE CHEAP CALORIES.

With refrigeration nearly universally available in the USA, there is no reason for a poor person to choose to consume 4,000 calories per day because it is "cheaper".

Just because a biggie sized meal is sold as a unit, there is not a law that says it all has to be consumed within 10 minutes of purchasing it.

No giant flaws at all Don, I acknowledge as much in previous posts. And we are not talking about obesity as a whole, there are plenty of obese people who are not poor, we are talking about whether or not junk food costs less than healthy food and how that impacts the diet of the poor and therefor THEIR obesity rates. These calorie dense foods although cheap, are eaten to excess if you define excess by calories. And the food industry does everything in it's power to encourage it. One meal from Mc D's has at least a days' worth of calories for most adults. But lets talk about volume, fiber, feeling full. A plain hamburger would not be so harmful, but ask yourself if that would be enough volume for you? Probably not, so you'd eat another one and then you would feel full. With too many calories to get there. Contrast that with a healthy meal of lean protein and fiber containing vegetables, you get full on far fewer calories.

THAT is the conundrum of cheap food. Too many calories to get to the same level of fullness and satiety. And that is assuming that you have a normal satiety set point and do not have a defect in adiponectin or leptin. There are syndromes where there is no satiety mechanism at all, and parents have to lock the food up as the kids will literally eat themselves to death.

Those are very rare syndromes. If they were the cause of obesity, we would see obesity as common all through history, instead of the explosion we have seen in the last 15 years.

I have a challenge for you, Lulubelle. Do this and tell me what happens. Go the the local McDonald's and pick your favorite "Value Meal" with large fries and drink and eat it quickly in your car. We will call this day one.

On day two I want you to go back at the same time of day, walk into the store, and order the same meal in the same size. Sit at a table and take AT LEAST 30 minutes to consume the food. Read a book, read the paper, browse the internet, maybe bring a friend and chat over a LEISURELY meal. But take your time eating.

In which circumstance to you feel fuller faster? Do you feel sick after eating quickly in your car? Do you feel like finishing the whole meal on day 2 when you take your time?

My point is that we have terrible eating habits in this country. We order too much and eat it too fast. We eat in our cars (that poor people have, thus they never walk). We are a spoiled, sloth-like people. No one wants to work for anything, everything is someone else's fault and our society's idea of paradise is something like the people living on the space ship in "Wally".

The frequency of gastric bypass surgery frightens me. It is a dangerous surgery. I have seen people DIE from it. The reality show "The Biggest Loser" shows that weight loss from morbid obesity can happen without surgery. But we want it all NOW, with no perceived effort.

I really think the issue is food addiction, not some phantom metabolism disorder. The scary thing is that food addiction and sexual addiction are tough to treat. Eating and sexual behavior are normal parts of what make us human. But to excess, they can destroy our lives.

It is a serious issue in our country that poor people are obese, drive cars, wear bling and have cable TV when the poor in India live in tin shacks and sort through the garbage for food.

So, while you are listing all the rationals for people being obese that do not include laziness and ignorance, what to you think is a real solution to the problem of obesity? Or do you really think it is not a problem?

Lulubelle
04-05-2010, 18:30
Those are very rare syndromes. If they were the cause of obesity, we would see obesity as common all through history, instead of the explosion we have seen in the last 15 years.

I have a challenge for you, Lulubelle. Do this and tell me what happens. Go the the local McDonald's and pick your favorite "Value Meal" with large fries and drink and eat it quickly in your car. We will call this day one.

On day two I want you to go back at the same time of day, walk into the store, and order the same meal in the same size. Sit at a table and take AT LEAST 30 minutes to consume the food. Read a book, read the paper, browse the internet, maybe bring a friend and chat over a LEISURELY meal. But take your time eating.

In which circumstance to you feel fuller faster? Do you feel sick after eating quickly in your car? Do you feel like finishing the whole meal on day 2 when you take your time?

My point is that we have terrible eating habits in this country. We order too much and eat it too fast. We eat in our cars (that poor people have, thus they never walk). We are a spoiled, sloth-like people. No one wants to work for anything, everything is someone else's fault and our society's idea of paradise is something like the people living on the space ship in "Wally".

The frequency of gastric bypass surgery frightens me. It is a dangerous surgery. I have seen people DIE from it. The reality show "The Biggest Loser" shows that weight loss from morbid obesity can happen without surgery. But we want it all NOW, with no perceived effort.

I really think the issue is food addiction, not some phantom metabolism disorder. The scary thing is that food addiction and sexual addiction are tough to treat. Eating and sexual behavior are normal parts of what make us human. But to excess, they can destroy our lives.

It is a serious issue in our country that poor people are obese, drive cars, wear bling and have cable TV when the poor in India live in tin shacks and sort through the garbage for food.

So, while you are listing all the rationals for people being obese that do not include laziness and ignorance, what to you think is a real solution to the problem of obesity? Or do you really think it is not a problem?

I'm going to pass on your experiment Don because I don't eat that crap. Ever. Never have.

You must be arguing with someone else, because I never said that overeating and lack of exercise was not the primary cause of most obesity in this country, it is. It is estimated that 70-80 percent of obesity is that simple. And I certainly never said that it isn't a serious problem, it is. Nor did I imply that rare syndromes were the primary cause for this explosion of obesity, they aren't. I am ONLY defending the cost of healthy food versus junk and the reasons why the poor are the most obese amongst us. Do you think that the poor are more lazy and ignorant than the rest of us? I don't.

Did you read either of the two sources I quoted Don? It appears that you did not. I'm not listing anything which rationalizes bad eating behaviors. I'm quoting valid sources which prove that healthy food is more expensive than junk, which back up some of the reasons why this is so, and elucidate why poor people eat these foods disproportionately compared to others. The solution is to stop subsidizing food ingredients which are toxic and high calorie, and if necessary, move those subsidies to healthier foods. Guarantee that will reduce obesity in the poor.

I don't need you to agree with me Don, and you don't need me to agree with you. But this whole conversation is like me trying to tell you about pain management in adults. Endocrinology and Metabolism are my areas of expertise, both clinically and in industry. I have worked with some of the most pre-eminent obesity scientists and clinicians in the world and have learned a lot from them. In order to do our work and find solutions, we had to understand every influence on eating behaviors and obesity, both those from the clinical settings we practiced in, and those from the research, both animal and human. I learned a few things along the way. I'm with you, people eat too much and don't exercise enough. But until healthy food is a more affordable choice relative to crappy food, we won't win with this particular group.

I'm tired of this wholesale indictment of a group of people whose shoes we don't walk in. No one has yet to offer any proof of anything different, except Foo2. Now maybe if she was running the show, poor families would be better able to feed their families on a budget.

I'm out.

DivingCRNA
04-05-2010, 19:06
Those are very rare syndromes. If they were the cause of obesity, we would see obesity as common all through history, instead of the explosion we have seen in the last 15 years.

I have a challenge for you, Lulubelle. Do this and tell me what happens. Go the the local McDonald's and pick your favorite "Value Meal" with large fries and drink and eat it quickly in your car. We will call this day one.

On day two I want you to go back at the same time of day, walk into the store, and order the same meal in the same size. Sit at a table and take AT LEAST 30 minutes to consume the food. Read a book, read the paper, browse the internet, maybe bring a friend and chat over a LEISURELY meal. But take your time eating.

In which circumstance to you feel fuller faster? Do you feel sick after eating quickly in your car? Do you feel like finishing the whole meal on day 2 when you take your time?

My point is that we have terrible eating habits in this country. We order too much and eat it too fast. We eat in our cars (that poor people have, thus they never walk). We are a spoiled, sloth-like people. No one wants to work for anything, everything is someone else's fault and our society's idea of paradise is something like the people living on the space ship in "Wally".

The frequency of gastric bypass surgery frightens me. It is a dangerous surgery. I have seen people DIE from it. The reality show "The Biggest Loser" shows that weight loss from morbid obesity can happen without surgery. But we want it all NOW, with no perceived effort.

I really think the issue is food addiction, not some phantom metabolism disorder. The scary thing is that food addiction and sexual addiction are tough to treat. Eating and sexual behavior are normal parts of what make us human. But to excess, they can destroy our lives.

It is a serious issue in our country that poor people are obese, drive cars, wear bling and have cable TV when the poor in India live in tin shacks and sort through the garbage for food.

So, while you are listing all the rationals for people being obese that do not include laziness and ignorance, what to you think is a real solution to the problem of obesity? Or do you really think it is not a problem?

I'm going to pass on your experiment Don because I don't eat that crap. Ever. Never have.

You must be arguing with someone else, because I never said that overeating and lack of exercise was not the primary cause of most obesity in this country, it is. It is estimated that 70-80 percent of obesity is that simple. And I certainly never said that it isn't a serious problem, it is. Nor did I imply that rare syndromes were the primary cause for this explosion of obesity, they aren't. I am ONLY defending the cost of healthy food versus junk and the reasons why the poor are the most obese amongst us. Do you think that the poor are more lazy and ignorant than the rest of us? I don't.

Did you read either of the two sources I quoted Don? It appears that you did not. I'm not listing anything which rationalizes bad eating behaviors. I'm quoting valid sources which prove that healthy food is more expensive than junk, which back up some of the reasons why this is so, and elucidate why poor people eat these foods disproportionately compared to others. The solution is to stop subsidizing food ingredients which are toxic and high calorie, and if necessary, move those subsidies to healthier foods. Guarantee that will reduce obesity in the poor.

I don't need you to agree with me Don, and you don't need me to agree with you. But this whole conversation is like me trying to tell you about pain management in adults. Endocrinology and Metabolism are my areas of expertise, both clinically and in industry. I have worked with some of the most pre-eminent obesity scientists and clinicians in the world and have learned a lot from them. In order to do our work and find solutions, we had to understand every influence on eating behaviors and obesity, both those from the clinical settings we practiced in, and those from the research, both animal and human. I learned a few things along the way. I'm with you, people eat too much and don't exercise enough. But until healthy food is a more affordable choice relative to crappy food, we won't win with this particular group.

I'm tired of this wholesale indictment of a group of people whose shoes we don't walk in. No one has yet to offer any proof of anything different, except Foo2. Now maybe if she was running the show, poor families would be better able to feed their families on a budget.

I'm out.

I did read your sources. So what if crap is cheaper per calorie? People are eating too much. Just because Wendy's, Burger King, McDonald's, Babe's (Home of the Chubby Cheese) or KFC gives it to you in a bag does not mean that you have to eat all of it in one sitting. Eat slow until you are full. Put the rest in the fridge. Heat the rest in the microwave later when you are actually hungry again and eat it. Poor people in this country have fridges and microwaves.

I had a Philippina GF who used to do this when she was an intern and poor, because people in her country do not eat like we do here.

It is a complex problem, but I believe it to be a behavioral one. We are just a nation of gluttons.

Maybe if people bought good food instead of bling, grills, big screen TVs, new cars, satellite TV and the other crap they don't need, we would not have this problem. It is all personal choices.

inventor
04-05-2010, 19:29
Uh, Larry... Maybe this thread needs moved to the Too Hot Lounge?

I'll start a nice innocuos thread in its place:
Title: Knitting or Crocheting? Which do you prefer?
SubTitle: And all right minded citizens know it's knitting, you crocheting commie b*****ds can rot in #$%@.

gNats
04-05-2010, 20:20
EVERYBODY knows that crotcheting is for lazy people!! Sheesh

just kidding. I enjoy both.

alpha
04-05-2010, 20:56
The Economics of Obesity: Why are Poor People Fat? | Natural Health (http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com/2010/02/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/)

While no scholarly medical journal, me thinks that this author is spot on. An interesting read.

I went to the website:::::smilie39:

Where's the money going????:smilie39:

You SAVE 20% when you order 3 bottles of Choline Punch for just $83.88. Plus FREE shipping and handling. That’s a Total Savings of $69.82. You'll also get Repair Your Aging Brain in Just 15 Minutes A Day and Brain Food For a Youthful Mind just for ordering today!

Lulubelle
04-05-2010, 21:47
The Economics of Obesity: Why are Poor People Fat? | Natural Health (http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com/2010/02/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/)

While no scholarly medical journal, me thinks that this author is spot on. An interesting read.

I went to the website:::::smilie39:

Where's the money going????:smilie39:

You SAVE 20% when you order 3 bottles of Choline Punch for just $83.88. Plus FREE shipping and handling. That’s a Total Savings of $69.82. You'll also get Repair Your Aging Brain in Just 15 Minutes A Day and Brain Food For a Youthful Mind just for ordering today!

That was an ad in the middle of an interesting article silly. :smiley2: Did you go to the USDA website too ? It will no doubt avoid any mention of alternative super juices.

alpha
04-05-2010, 21:56
I went to the freezer to examine my recent catch that included:
Marie callenders #1. grilled chicken alfredo bake-1 serving per plate = calories 500
Fat 26gm with saturate fat 14gm and .5gm trans fat
Cholesterol 80mg
Carbohydrate 34gm
dietary fiber 4gm
sugars 4gm
protein 31gm
various vitamins & minerals.

Also marie's #2. beef & broccoli with 1 serving Calories 400
Total fat 14gm with saturated fat 4.5gm
cholesterol 45mg
carbohydrates 52gm
dietary fiber 3gm
sugars 5gm
protein 22gm

These were buy 1 get 1 so the price for both = about $3.75
Ok to be vague in the reply as ConAgra Foods obviously has lawylers that can read...
Healthy or Junk Food?

Smashee
04-05-2010, 22:21
Healthy or Junk Food?

Had to Google for it, so my impression is straight from the manufacturers website.

Junk. Pre-cooked, pre-packed, and from the look of the picture, pre-digested.
:smiley11:

alpha
04-05-2010, 22:30
The (http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com/2010/02/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/The) article says::::If you are poor and hungry, you are obviously going to buy the cheapest calories you can find. And in today’s world, the cheapest calories come from junk foods – whether those foods are found at the grocery store, the gas station, or in the fast food restaurant, conveniently located just down the street.


DISAGREE:::::: I see the best tasting/or best energizing/jolting product purchased by this group. Price has nothing to do with it. Cigarettes, caffeine, products that taste great (cooked fat tastes good), etc. are thus purchased over the antioxidants etc.
Another example of price having nothing to do with their purchases is the extreme percent of their income going to lotto tickets; we all know the odds are you will lose but yet the poor primarily play a much larger percent of their income.

alpha
04-05-2010, 22:33
Healthy or Junk Food?

Had to Google for it, so my impression is straight from the manufacturers website.

Junk. Pre-cooked, pre-packed, and from the look of the picture, pre-digested.
:smiley11:

So will this choice decrease my life expectany, mental capacity, or s*x drive that I need for my personal satisfaction?
Or, should I switch to choice Y and if so will I obtain these goals? And what would choice Y be?
P.S. .....good ballgame

alpha
04-05-2010, 23:07
Why people do what they do???

My theories::::
300 years ago life expectancy and reasons some lived longer than others were not well published and not distributed quickly and freely.
The wealthy were not as aware of why people lived longer. My guess is they thought it was just genetics ("family history" - back then). Thus the wealthy ate a lot as eating is fun and they were thus fatter. The poor actually had little choice as they could not afford to buy the food in vast quantities thus they stayed slim.

Today, reduced fat, carbohydrate, and calorie diets demonstrate that these groups are living longer. The internet/TV/Newspapers are available to transmit data rapidly and thus the world is aware of the significance. Fashion trends and good looks are actually beneficial in motivating people to lose weight and exercise to get into that swim suit.
So, what happens is the wealthy are people that are more informed of significant events. They either research themselves or pay someone and they have many friends ready to help them. They tend to be more disciplined and have more long term goals rather than short term goals. These traits lead to people willing to sacrifice a meal or cut back or eat something that "tastes" worse to lose a little weight and live longer/ feel better.

The poor today are not poor and can afford all the food they want vs. 300 years ago at least in the U.S. Let's eat live love and be happy. They do not have an entourage escorting them and helping them with their recommendations and only rely on their personal opinion. There is no personal trainer being paid by them to help motivate them not to eat and to kick them in the behind if they don't exercise. I believe more are short term oriented over all and prefer short term gratuities of eating the best tasting food/beverages that are available. The result is weight gain without increasing the sacrificial output of additional energy and exercise; so, more poor are fatter today than 300 years ago.

Smashee
04-05-2010, 23:16
So will this choice decrease my life expectany, mental capacity, or s*x drive that I need for my personal satisfaction?
Or, should I switch to choice Y and if so will I obtain these goals?


Beats me, mate. I just can't stand frozen ready-meals. :smiley36: As part of a well-balanced diet, I doubt it would make much difference to your health.

alpha
04-05-2010, 23:30
I like the Australian talk. Thanks mate.

As they implied earlier in the thread, Weight reduction will result in a higher percentage of people living longer by either 1. decrease input to moderate levels of everything (calories,fats, carbohydrates,proteins, vitamins, minerals, & even water can kill if in excess) or 2. increase output (exercise more)

The beneficial food choices are a smaller factor toward longevity in my opinion; as long as moderation is chosen in your diet.

WngStvn
04-06-2010, 00:19
Nutrition is not a simple 1-2-3 answer. It is not about reducing calories. I know I am going off tangent from the main topic about the difference in cost between healthy food and junk food, but stating everything as simply as calories is misleading; or just simply saying, eat this and do that.

Sugar are calories, if food was just simply calories, we might as well just eat sugar. Even if you only eat 2000 calories of sugar everyday, you will still have problems due to something else.

Also, remember the commercials for Total Corn Flakes? The one with how one bowl of Total equal a whole stack of bowls for the other brand? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_(breakfast_cereal) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_(breakfast_cereal) So, imagine if you had to eat that much food to just get your RDA.

An example of what happens when you just eat lean meat Rabbit starvation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation).

Everything has to be in balance.

"All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous." - Paracelsus Paracelsus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus)

Lulubelle
04-06-2010, 05:17
"All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous." - Paracelsus Paracelsus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus)

This is great, thanks for posting. It is true imho. As one type of "poison", Certain foods are more immunogenic than others, but all in adequate "doses" are likely to be toxic to some degree. That's why Italian babies have the highest incidence of documented celiac disease, for instance. Too much pasta for too many generations. Though no one has documented a rise in rice allergies amongst Asians. But then again, there is no gluten in rice. I guess the "poison" from excessive doses of rice comes in not meeting other nutritional needs if rice is replacing other necessary nutrients.

Alpha, I vote junk for your freezer finds. But not so much due to the nutrient balance, it isn't awful. More from the level of preservatives and processed ingredients. And no, no one really knows what these things will do to you over time, but I can't imagine that on any planet they are good, and might be bad, so I don't go there. I keep it simple, no food from a box for the most part.

alpha
04-06-2010, 07:42
The Economics of Obesity: Why are Poor People Fat? | Natural Health (http://www.totalhealthbreakthroughs.com/2010/02/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/)

While no scholarly medical journal, me thinks that this author is spot on. An interesting read.


I think the author is off the mark and missed the spot of identifying: Why poor people are fat.


The article says::::If you are poor and hungry, you are obviously going to buy the cheapest calories you can find. And in today’s world, the cheapest calories come from junk foods – whether those foods are found at the grocery store, the gas station, or in the fast food restaurant, conveniently located just down the street.


DISAGREE:::::: I see the best tasting/or best energizing/jolting product purchased by this group. Price has nothing to do with it. Cigarettes, caffeine, products that taste great (cooked fat tastes good), etc. are thus purchased over the antioxidants, veggies, & complex carbohydrates, etc.
Another example of price having nothing to do with their purchases is the extreme percent of their income going to lotto tickets; we all know the odds are you will lose but yet the poor primarily play a much larger percent of their income.

Why people do what they do???

My theories::::
300 years ago life expectancy and reasons some lived longer than others were not well published and not distributed quickly and freely.
The wealthy were not as aware of why people lived longer. My guess is they thought it was just genetics ("family history" - back then). Thus the wealthy ate a lot as eating is fun and they were thus fatter. The poor actually had little choice as they could not afford to buy the food in vast quantities thus they stayed slim & probably worked harder than today (expended more energy-burned more calories = more output vs. eating input).

Today, reduced fat, carbohydrate, and calorie diets demonstrate that these groups are living longer. The internet/TV/Newspapers are available to transmit data rapidly and thus the world is aware of the significance. Fashion trends and good looks are actually beneficial in motivating people to lose weight and exercise to get into that swim suit.
So, what happens is the wealthy are people that are more informed of significant events. They either research themselves or pay someone and they have many friends ready to help them. They tend to be more disciplined and have more long term goals rather than short term goals. These traits lead to people willing to sacrifice a meal or cut back or eat something that "tastes" worse to lose a little weight and live longer/ feel better.

The poor today are not poor and can afford all the food they want vs. 300 years ago at least in the U.S. Let's eat live love and be happy. They do not have an entourage escorting them and helping them with their recommendations and only rely on their personal opinion. There is no personal trainer being paid by them to help motivate them not to eat and to kick them in the behind if they don't exercise. I believe more are short term oriented over all and prefer short term gratuities of eating the BEST TASTING food/beverages that are AVAILABLE. The result is weight gain without increasing the sacrificial output of additional energy and exercise; so, more poor are fatter today than 300 years ago.

Thus, Gov't subsidizing food purchases will not cause the poor to eat more healthy.

dkh6070
04-06-2010, 07:44
I find some of the things on here VERY laughable. So we are defending FAT people by stating they have no access to healthy food because they are poor and work too much? I am middle class, very healthy, active lifestyle, my exercise time is greater than my TV time per week, and I'm male. I guess my days of winning an argument are clearly over. Ever wonder why everything is the way it is today. Nothing wrong with having what you desire as a treat in moderation. This is true in our society for eating, purchases, asking for assistance, thinking you are owed a job and it goes on. Most feel it is there right and they should have what they desire and not what's best for there health, family, finances, future etc.

Everyone should be allowed to handle themselves in any manner they see is best for them. If you made a bad decision, learn from it so you are in line with your goals. Don't make yourself to be a victim. Most are not victims, they made choices. Choices are regrettable, which part of learning.

Lulubelle
04-06-2010, 07:52
I find some of the things on here VERY laughable. So we are defending FAT people by stating they have no access to healthy food because they are poor and work too much? I am middle class, very healthy, active lifestyle, my exercise time is greater than my TV time per week, and I'm male. I guess my days of winning an argument are clearly over. Ever wonder why everything is the way it is today. Nothing wrong with having what you desire as a treat in moderation. This is true in our society for eating, purchases, asking for assistance, thinking you are owed a job and it goes on. Most feel it is there right and they should have what they desire and not what's best for there health, family, finances, future etc.

Everyone should be allowed to handle themselves in any manner they see is best for them. If you made a bad decision, learn from it so you are in line with your goals. Don't make yourself to be a victim. Most are not victims, they made choices. Choices are regrettable, which part of learning.

There are a lot of politics around food. There are subsidies for a lot of the highest calorie food ingredients making that junk food really cheap. Check out the research for yourself, economics do drive many of these decisions in the working poor. The really poor have food stamps/WIC, etc, they are fine. I suspect, but don't know, that if those same subsidies were moved to healthier food groups, junk would get more expensive, good food would get more affordable, and I suspect patterns of consumption would shift.

There must be some reason why the poor disproportionately consume junk food and have disproportionate rates of obesity, don't you think? I just don't agree that it is because they are more ignorant and lazy than the rest of us. What I find truly ignorant and lazy is when people who HAVE the means to buy good food eat junk anyway, and often bring their obesity upon themselves. Those of us who have the means to buy healthy food should do so, and not stand in judgment of those whose shoes we do not walk in.

One thing I DO think that ALL folks have the opportunity to do a better job of is exercise. It's free.

gNats
04-06-2010, 07:56
That's why Italian babies have the highest incidence of documented celiac disease, for instance. Too much pasta for too many generations.

Really? Never heard of it. Must have missed the Saputo, DeAngelo, and Bartalamucci bloodlines.

Maybe it has to do with the type of olive oil used.

:smiley2:

Lulubelle
04-06-2010, 08:05
That's why Italian babies have the highest incidence of documented celiac disease, for instance. Too much pasta for too many generations.

Really? Never heard of it. Must have missed the Saputo, DeAngelo, and Bartalamucci bloodlines.

Maybe it has to do with the type of olive oil used.

:smiley2:

It was kind of a cool study Nat. It only indicated that it is more common in Italian infants, that doesn't mean it is frequently found in the general population. And it is one large screening study. Celiac disease can be very subtle and often goes undiagnosed. But when it does, up goes cancer risk, osteopenia, and anemia. They screened thousands of healthy births and the prevalence was far higher than what was predicted based on symptomatic cases in adults. The many generations of gluten containing products was theorized to be a reason. A more likely reason for the differences between Italians and Americans for instance is that the average American baby is breastfed longer before introduction of cereals. Developing immune systems are more likely to react to something in their diet than more mature ones.

Foo2
04-06-2010, 13:38
I went to the freezer to examine my recent catch that included:
Marie callenders #1. grilled chicken alfredo bake-1 serving per plate = calories 500
Fat 26gm with saturate fat 14gm and .5gm trans fat
Cholesterol 80mg
Carbohydrate 34gm
dietary fiber 4gm
sugars 4gm
protein 31gm
various vitamins & minerals.

Also marie's #2. beef & broccoli with 1 serving Calories 400
Total fat 14gm with saturated fat 4.5gm
cholesterol 45mg
carbohydrates 52gm
dietary fiber 3gm
sugars 5gm
protein 22gm

These were buy 1 get 1 so the price for both = about $3.75
Ok to be vague in the reply as ConAgra Foods obviously has lawylers that can read...
Healthy or Junk Food?

:smiley11: Did you see the sodium content in those? 1230mg in #1 and 1200mg in #2. There are better ways to get your nutrition. I'm calling junk food.

Personally, I wouldn't go this route but if you are set on frozen foods, try these instead: Select Entrees - Chicken Alfredo Florentine - Healthy Choice (http://www.healthychoice.com/product-Chicken-Alfredo-Florentine_1678.html)
Asian Inspired Café Steamers - Five-Spice Beef & Vegetables - Healthy Choice (http://www.healthychoice.com/product-Five-Spice-Beef-Vegetables_2274.html)
And I'm gonna plug coupons again...these combined with sales and coupons get pretty cheap at times.
Healthy Choice - News & Offers - Get a coupon. (http://www.healthychoice.com/news-special-offers/)
With that coupon you can get Healthy Choice meals for $1.50-$2.00 depending on the item.

Diver Kat
04-06-2010, 14:34
I went to the freezer to examine my recent catch that included:
Marie callenders #1. grilled chicken alfredo bake-1 serving per plate = calories 500
Fat 26gm with saturate fat 14gm and .5gm trans fat
Cholesterol 80mg
Carbohydrate 34gm
dietary fiber 4gm
sugars 4gm
protein 31gm
various vitamins & minerals.

Also marie's #2. beef & broccoli with 1 serving Calories 400
Total fat 14gm with saturated fat 4.5gm
cholesterol 45mg
carbohydrates 52gm
dietary fiber 3gm
sugars 5gm
protein 22gm

These were buy 1 get 1 so the price for both = about $3.75
Ok to be vague in the reply as ConAgra Foods obviously has lawylers that can read...
Healthy or Junk Food?

:smiley11: Did you see the sodium content in those? 1230mg in #1 and 1200mg in #2. There are better ways to get your nutrition. I'm calling junk food.

Personally, I wouldn't go this route but if you are set on frozen foods, try these instead: Select Entrees - Chicken Alfredo Florentine - Healthy Choice (http://www.healthychoice.com/product-Chicken-Alfredo-Florentine_1678.html)
Asian Inspired Café Steamers - Five-Spice Beef & Vegetables - Healthy Choice (http://www.healthychoice.com/product-Five-Spice-Beef-Vegetables_2274.html)
And I'm gonna plug coupons again...these combined with sales and coupons get pretty cheap at times.
Healthy Choice - News & Offers - Get a coupon. (http://www.healthychoice.com/news-special-offers/)
With that coupon you can get Healthy Choice meals for $1.50-$2.00 depending on the item.
+1 .... every time I look at the contents of a Marie Callender item I want to run away screaming. Healthy Choice is a much better option, and most of the ones I've tried over the years have decent flavor.

alpha
04-06-2010, 18:16
1. I find some of the things on here VERY laughable. So we are defending FAT people by stating they have no access to healthy food because they are poor and work too much?

2.They made choices.

I agree on these points in particular. :smilie39:

I've now become motivated to watch the "Biggest Loser" on TV; but I don't really know why so I assume I too have become "brainwashed". :smilie39:

Lulubelle
04-06-2010, 19:27
Junk food is everywhere. But this is just nasty.

ça va faire une maudite poutine (it will make a damn mess)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Poutine.JPG/300px-Poutine.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutine

UCFKnightDiver
04-06-2010, 19:51
Personally I found it alot more expensive and time consuming to eat really healthy (and to eat 5 meals a day). I compromised and eat some bad foods and some good foods, but on the whole I eat less now than I did, and I cut out fast food. I've lost 15 lbs so far, and I am down to 199. If I go out for fast food now, I'll head over and get a ham Publix (southern grocery store) deli sub, rather than a cheese burger at McDonalds.

Smashee
04-06-2010, 21:01
But this is just nasty.

I think you misspelled "tasty". :smiley36:

Joking apart, junk food is everywhere and part of the reason why it's so popular is because it tastes good. Our bodies are designed to seek and enjoy high-sugar, high-fat foods. When things like this are rare, it's a great survival trait. When a Maccas is on every street corner, not so much.

dkh6070
04-07-2010, 07:08
I compromised and eat some bad foods and some good foods, but on the whole I eat less now than I did, and I cut out fast food. I've lost 15 lbs so far, and I am down to 199. If I go out for fast food now, I'll head over and get a ham Publix (southern grocery store) deli sub, rather than a cheese burger at McDonalds.

........and that is good choices. You thought about your options and chose the healthier option.

I'm not one to say everyone should become a Vegan. I'm not even saying I don't have fast food every once in a while. I ate Taco Bell Sunday evening driving home from out of town. I like Taco Bell but the last time I ate it prior to Sunday was about 2 months ago. To me, fast food or fatty food are the exception to the norm. The norm is healthy and the taco bell off the interstate is the treat or exception. Most people have that reversed. If you eat burger king everyday, dairy queen is not a treat, its more fat. If you eat healthy every day and your kid gets good report card, then DQ is a treat.

dkh6070
04-07-2010, 07:35
I would like to know what causes type 2 Diabetes. I understand type 1. It's failure of the pancreas. My aunt was detected at age 10 and had many issues with it to include blindness and limb amputations until she past a few year back.

I understand there may be some cases that developed type 2 that have nothing to do with weight and eating habits but I understood that 95% of it is caused by eating, weight problems and stress and 80% of all type 2 cases are obese. This is from the dlife.com website.

Here is the reason I ask; I had someone that was visually about 140lbs overweight. Just guessing but maybe 280lbs. They claimed that they have weight issues because they developed type 2. I asked them how long did they get diagnosed before they started gaining the weight.

The answer was "They didn’t detect it until I was at my heaviest and I went to the doctor. I have always been overweight but now I can't loose it because the diabetes makes it impossible for my metabolism to maintain my sugar levels.”

Am I wrong to think this person is living in denial and the reason they have type 2 is because they are fat and not the other way around. I don't have any feeling of empathy for this person. Am I wrong? I serious do not know what the facts are about this. I am friends with this person I just have a hard time listening to the pity party stories.

UCFKnightDiver
04-07-2010, 08:04
I believe that a stable sugar level is helpful to weightloss, but to be honest I don't know alot about it.

Sorry I can't be of more help,
Ryan

alpha
04-07-2010, 08:48
My friend google came up with:::

Some videos::: I did just listen to most of the first & last video by Carolyn Dean M.D. N.D. and she appears to give a logical scenario of possible events leading to type II and possible ways to "fix" the cells once damaged after continued high blood glucose levels. (However, I may change my mind if I watch a few more on the list at that page)
How You Can Reverse Diabetes Naturally (http://www.articlesbase.com/alternative-medicine-articles/how-you-can-reverse-diabetes-naturally-1979668.html) 4 fairly short videos are at the Bottom of the page but I do not see a way for one to get continuing education credits.

Beware as too much of "most anything" can harm you and this goes for magnesium levels and other items mentioned. The kidneys normally help regulate this however everyone has different functioning abilities of organs & systems. This electrolyte is important in regulating "heart rhythm" so caution is advised on levels taken. Magnesium (http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/magnesium-000313.htm) http://www.chfpatients.com/text/mag.txt Magnesium Oxide | Dr Greene.com (http://www.drgreene.com/adam/drugs-alternative-medicine/magnesium-oxide)

As always, I do not endorse any of these products or claims and let the reader take on their own risks to rewards.

Unfortunately, I went to the M.D. website at a different address and it looks like a lot of selling is occurring.

Lulubelle
04-07-2010, 08:59
I would like to know what causes type 2 Diabetes. I understand type 1. It's failure of the pancreas. My aunt was detected at age 10 and had many issues with it to include blindness and limb amputations until she past a few year back.

I understand there may be some cases that developed type 2 that have nothing to do with weight and eating habits but I understood that 95% of it is caused by eating, weight problems and stress and 80% of all type 2 cases are obese. This is from the dlife.com website.

Here is the reason I ask; I had someone that was visually about 140lbs overweight. Just guessing but maybe 280lbs. They claimed that they have weight issues because they developed type 2. I asked them how long did they get diagnosed before they started gaining the weight.

The answer was "They didn’t detect it until I was at my heaviest and I went to the doctor. I have always been overweight but now I can't loose it because the diabetes makes it impossible for my metabolism to maintain my sugar levels.”

Am I wrong to think this person is living in denial and the reason they have type 2 is because they are fat and not the other way around. I don't have any feeling of empathy for this person. Am I wrong? I serious do not know what the facts are about this. I am friends with this person I just have a hard time listening to the pity party stories.

Good question! I'm a certified diabetes educator, mind if I take a crack at this? Fundamentally, Type 2 diabetes means that you have plenty of insulin, in fact, probably too much (hyperinsulinemia), but your body no longer uses it well (insulin resistance). You are right, obesity combined with genetic propensity/family history are the main culprits for development of Type 2 diabetes. Though I do have a slim 48 year old colleague who was just diagnosed. But insulin is a fat storage hormone, so someone who is hyperinsulinemic will indeed have a tough time getting weight off. Notice that I didn't say impossible. If someone is diagnosed early and their blood sugars are not terribly out of range, they CAN often be controlled with diet and exercise alone. It doesn't even take a huge amount of weight loss to greatly improve the sensitivity of the insulin receptors. That's the good news. Now if someone is diagnosed later in the game and has very high blood sugars, it often isn't safe for them to go with diet and exercise alone. The question of whether or not diabetes then "keeps them fat" is somewhat related to the choice of meds. If they are put on insulin, when their bodies are already producing too much, then yeah, it is darn hard to not gain weight when you have too much of this fat storing hormone on board. Same holds true for some of the older oral agents like sulfonylureas. They also make the body produce more insulin adding to the hyperinsulinemia. BUT. The newer, and imho, better, oral agents work differently, some to help the body use the insulin it has better, some to reduce the liver's production of glucose. And there are also some newer non insulin injectable products which help improve insulin efficiency as well.

So, I'd say it depends on what agents your friend is on, if any.

With all that being said, it doesn't matter what his situation is, the tools are the same. He should not play victim here. Even if he does not shed a pound, exercise will do him a world of good. Even if he sheds one pound a month, that will do him a world of good. It he is on certain agents, it is TRUE, that losing will be very hard and results will come slowly. He should aim for directional improvement, not some massive weight loss.

I'd advise your friend to make appts with both a diabetes educator AND a dietician. He CAN improve his outlook, albeit with a different set of rules than most. And he needs to get moving. Intensity is not as important as frequency for a diabetic (or the rest of us). 30 minutes of brisk walking 5 days a week will help his insulin sensitivity, although I suspect it will take more than that for actual weight loss.

LeeParrish
04-07-2010, 09:29
It was a real eye opener for me when I took the time to read the past few years of DAN annual diver reports on injuries and fatalities. The vast majority of reported injuries and fatalites were in the group of men and women over 40, and for the most part the majority of those were overweight. I guess it makes some sense, due to the higher risk for general cardio-pulmonary disease, but if anything would give a diver with a few (or more) extra pounds an incentive it would be to look at those stats.

As for the healthy versus junk food debate, I'd agree, healthy food will typically cost more per calorie unit, but I don't think as much as some studies might make you think. You can make healthy choices without needing to buy only "organic, free range, etc.", and along with eating more healthy you also need to learn portion control. Example, tonight we will make spaghetti, the meat in the sauce will be ground turkey (which is the same or sometimes cheaper than the same level of lean ground beef), and the pasta will be whole wheat (which does cost about double the lowest priced non-whole wheat pasta). We will weight the pasta before we cook it and make 3 oz of pasta for each of us, which is actually a substantial amount once cooked. And since we won't need to eat the entire batch of sauce we will freeze the extra and get two more meals out of it. The meal will probably cost more than the lowest cost possible if we used less lean ground beef and plain pasta, but since we will eat less, the cost balances out some when compared to what an average person might eat anyway (say 2x of lower cost ingredients).

Unfortunately we've built a society that finds value in quantity rather than quality. Go to the average restaurant and the portions are much larger than they should be. But if they didn't serve that much (typically lower quality) food, people would complain that they "aren't getting much for their money". Our local dive club experienced this first hand when trying out new new restaurants to meet at, many complaints were in the line of "seemed expensive for the amount of food you got". And now the majority want to go back to an "all you can eat buffet" restaurant. The problem I find with these type of restaurants are for most people they really don't understand the difference between "all you CAN eat", and "all you SHOULD eat", and as such seem to over eat. All in the name of "getting my money's worth".

UCFKnightDiver
04-07-2010, 09:46
Hmm 3oz of pasta that's only probably around 315 calories, but I suppose with the sauce... I'll usually eat more like 5oz which gives me around 500 something calories + sauce. Also I'm only eating twice a day.

The biggest help to me as to sticking to a diet and eating healthy is not having any snack food/junk food in the house. It doesn't allow me to just snack needlessly, if I want something to eat I have to make it.

LeeParrish
04-07-2010, 09:56
What portion you want of course may vary, the point is that it's typically better to know the portion than to guess it. I just find it too easy to just dump the entire box of pasta in the pot, then since it's cooked feel obligated to eat it all. For me it's not easy to estimate many foods, so a $25 digital food scale was a good investment in being able to better know what a portion really is.

I tend to look at a 2000 calorie a day diet as an average and know that due to my sedentary job I need to probably stay on the lower side of things, especially during the times of the year when I may not get out as much. So for me some days may be more, some less. I also try to aim a little low since I know that once in a while I might actually want to indulge in a little something on the side.

alpha
04-07-2010, 13:55
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Poutine.JPG/300px-Poutine.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PoutineVery similar reasoning and logic concerning "brainwashing"??? posted & described by::: anonymous in "Hot forum area"



Perfect example of "brainwashing".

Eating fatty foods is based on fear. You're fearful that if you don't eat all you can now, you will be punished by hunger forever.

As adults, I respect everyone's freedom of eating, and I do not judge any person based on what food they choose to consume.




What grips me is that our children are brainwashed with the "fear" from an early age, rather than being able to make their own decision when they are old enough and wise enough to do so. If you instill a "fear" in a child from an early age, that fear will often last the rest of their life. Most overweight people I know are a product of those early teachings.
Fortunately, I never bough into the "fear", and although I came from a very overweight family, I made my own decision to not eat this fatty food.

I remember my parents being outraged when the government took fatty food out of the schools, but I think it's the best thing that every happened.




We recently pulled my youngest daughter from a school because the principle had a big picture of french fries and gravy in her office, and was constantly eating in front of the children. We filed a report on her with the school board, and she was investigated. The picture of the fries is gone, and if she is caught "talking of food" to a child (or anyone in the school for that matter) she will be instantly terminated.

If your going to teach your children about this, then teach them about all foods.
I know it's a hungry overweight persons duty to "talk/eat" of fatty foods, and bring others into your "group", but you must be realistic enough to understand that everyone doesn't believe in your fatty food diet. Fair enough?

:smilie39::smilie39::smilie39:Don't look if your brain is unable to make a choice, (use blindfolds) or see a lawyer to remove all the pictures of fries while claiming you "respect everyone's freedom of eating".:smilie39::smilie39::smilie39:For more choices, also change subjects to political parties, skin color, golfing, etc. & then include a fictitious fear, with an imagined picture you believe to be associated with said activity. :smilie39::smilie39::smilie39:

josh7284
05-07-2010, 08:59
Eat healthy! especially before diving, those greasy foods and what not can really make you feel wierd during a dive, dont want gas while down there

dewayne405
05-24-2010, 17:31
Wow, I can attest to the addiction of food and being obese. February of this year I topped the scale at 316lbs. I had zero energy, and knew that i was killing myself (nurses are supposed to know better). I made a decision to break the habits, lose the weight, and improve my health.

So, I opted to take HCG (long story, look it up if you're interested), coupled with a 500 calorie diet consisting of fresh vegetables, and lean protein. In addition, no sugar and low carbohydrates, and absolutely no soda / carbonated beverages. I did this for 45 days straight, and subsequently dropped 52 lbs, 9 inches off my waist, 8 off my chest.

I have been back on a "normal" dietary routine, and continue to lose weight, as I realized that prior to the diet, I was consuming on average 3500-4000 calories per day. Now I eat 1250-1800 depending on my activity levels of the day. Food is looked at as a fuel now, not as a reward or pleasure.

When I started this diet, I couldn't run 100 yards, yet now I run 2-3 miles every other day, in addition to running 12-14 flights of stairs daily. (Who needs an elevator?) Currently, working on getting my mile time into the sub-10 range. I am not nearly where I want to be, but a heck of a lot closer than I was in February. Its all about will power.

The epidemic of obesity is directly linked to the course of society. As a whole, we are a fast-food, fast-paced society. No one takes time to do for themselves, when its easier to just go out to eat or grab that junk food on the way. 45 days of not eating out, and no junk food opened my eyes to the reality that life is too precious to be spent waiting in a drive-through for $8 of fat /carbs /sugar.

Best of all, I can now buy and fit into a stock sized drysuit, and once I reach my end goal I will be visiting Larry and Joe to get my reward.
Now I have to get off this computer, and take my American-no longer quite so obese self out for a run...

scubaman450
06-16-2010, 13:46
405!!! You go!
I too have taken back me life! went from a 38 waist to 32....215 to 188 and the one most big deal thing that helped me do this How I eat and What I eat. No Bad Fats, no suger, This means NO JUNK FOOD how they can call the crap food is way over me.
I see folk'r fighting to keep there crapy way of eating like I see ciggeret smokers fighting to keep there smokes......Just Plain STUPID
If you wish to be a fatty then be one but don't try telling everyone that they don't look right or they need to eat more,cuz we all know what you really mean.......

I don't mean any one preson here and I'm looking to upset anyone. I can only speeck for myself.