Liquid calories

Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
User avatar
matagi
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:52 am
Location: In a parallel universe

Re: Liquid calories

Postby matagi » Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:19 am

Calvin27 wrote:It's actually pretty hard to give up nice tasting liquids, *looks at coffee and coke.
I tend to be of the "don't deny yourself stuff, just eat much less of it" school of thinking. That means I have my occasional one glass of wine with dinner and my serving of two malt-o-milk biscuits with my afternoon cuppa on weekends. It really is just a question of willpower, but the thing that really derails some people is the thinking that if they have blown their diet on one occasion, that's it, no point in continuing. Whereas what one should do is acknowledge the slip up and then get back on track. There was an interesting (if slightly contrived and simplistic) documentary about this on SBS a few weeks back.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Liquid calories

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:52 am

Yeh, there's a reasonable number of people who get a diet that's mathematically correct and then fail because it doesn't cater for desirability and existing habits.

For many its a case of gradual adaption, which allows you time to loose the desirability.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
kb
Posts: 2570
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby kb » Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:13 am

(Apologies for the overzealous cropping)
matagi wrote:It really is just a question of willpower
Often, but sometimes not. For example, with untreated or not fully treated depression the small serotonin hit you get from sugar (or dopamine from dairy) can be enough to make it almost impossible to be sensible (and sane). Which is slightly ironic since avoiding sugar highs and crashes would be so much better medium to long term.
matagi wrote: , but the thing that really derails some people is the thinking that if they have blown their diet on one occasion, that's it, no point in continuing. Whereas what one should do is acknowledge the slip up and then get back on track.
This is so true. Probably has a few components such as convenient rationalisation in an addiction situation and general tendency to catastrophisation.
Image

Calvin27
Posts: 2435
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:41 am

matagi wrote: There was an interesting (if slightly contrived and simplistic) documentary about this on SBS a few weeks back.
there was one just his week looking at the fats vs sugar debate. Apparently the dude on the fatty, but no sugar diet was at more risk of diabetes than his twin on the high sugar, no fat diet. Absolutely blows my mind. I think the point of the show was that humans can only consume so much sugar or fat in isolation before they self moderate. But when you combine them (think coke with fries, ice cream, fried donuts) you could eat a craload more and blow your energy intake.
Heavy road bike
Cushy dirt bike
Very cushy dirt bike
Bike crushed by car (RIP)
No brakes bike
Ebike

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby rapunzel » Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:55 am

matagi wrote:I tend to be of the "don't deny yourself stuff, just eat much less of it" school of thinking.
+1 here. I think there is a point to the new-ish terminology of orthorexia nervosa (edit: and over-exercise / over-activity) - creating a whole new kind of eating disorder for future generations!

Being very diet obsessed smacks of more modern affluence to me. When you don't have access to adequate food or particular types of foods, the concept of cutting out whole food classes or worrying over whether you had one or two biscuits seems more than ridiculous. But context...
kb wrote: For example, with untreated or not fully treated depression the small serotonin hit you get from sugar (or dopamine from dairy) can be enough to make it almost impossible to be sensible (and sane). Which is slightly ironic since avoiding sugar highs and crashes would be so much better medium to long term.
Good point.
Kept seeing ads recently for some (UK?) show about finding out what kind of eater a person is in order to tailor diets - did anyone watch that? Anything of interest?

But I digress from the liquid topic...

Any updates on the workmate who prompted the start of this thread?

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Liquid calories

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Aug 06, 2015 1:57 pm

Might be difficult to work out if there's a special issue related to sugar or whatever, I'll ask the obvious questions.

Anyway I'm thinking about removing a food group, more along the lines of keeping everything in proportion and make it easier to be calorie deficient
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

liamw
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby liamw » Thu Aug 06, 2015 4:55 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Did they state the reason that those on artificial sweeteners gained weight?
I don't have the link on hand, but from memory it was suggested that the problem was because the body reacted as if there was sugar but then, because there wasn't any, screwed things up. It started affecting things like gut bacteria composition.

Speaking anecdotally, friends of mine who have drunk diet coke (for example) because it was low calorie, have actually lost weight when they cut it out. They didn't replace it with the full sugar variety, but instead started getting their caffeine from things like tea.

Speaking personally, I find the taste of artificial sweetener to be revolting. You are better off "slipping" and having something with sugar instead of a diet drink, in my opinion. However, that is purely opinion, not anything else.

EDIT: Here we go - a link to the New Scientist piece discussing it...

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... tolerance/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The science is still up in the air, but I suppose the question is still there...

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby rapunzel » Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:49 pm

^ a quick Google finds you the ongoing saga, with the gut flora link just part of a bigger puzzle of unknowns - eg mentioned here http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalto ... belly-fat/

And trying to understand the effects of sweetness on our neurobiology: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/

But how much do you have to consume? And what other behaviours contribute? eg compensating by consuming more calories elsewhere?

Etc etc. Artificial sweetener issues have been ongoing for years. I remember a particular product having to carry the label saying it had been found to cause cancer in rats. It has since been removed to be in line with more current findings. But that doesn't mean people aren't still suspicious.... http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/arti ... 1207165030

apparently the jury is out on some of this. But there appears to be something going on that is not understood.

I can't stand the taste, personally, and prefer to stick to slightly less manipulated products. Or better, whole foods.

newie
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:51 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby newie » Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:53 pm

A few years ago I went through the process of tracking all my food and drink consumption for a couple of weeks, without changing anything. I then sat down and had a look to see where the kJ were coming from. It was a bit of a no-brainer after that exercise to see that the easiest way to cut kJ was through stopping drinking fluids with kJ in them as much as possible. So I swapped from cordial to water, cut out fruit juices and soft drinks. Apart from the morning cappuccino, I stuck to water, mineral water and herbal teas. I noticed that once I stopped the sugary drinks, whenever I did succumb and have them I would really feel the sugar rush. I used to drink Coke Zero but it also started to make me feel really strange when I drank it, so I don't anymore. It definitely does something funny to your body chemistry. I'm maintaining a healthy weight these days and am not as strict as I used to be. I just try to make it a conscious decision and be aware of any extra kJ in my drinks. I'll mix 1/3 fruit juice, 2/3 mineral water if I feel like a change. Or a weak lemon lime and bitters. I'll have a coke during a long ride on a hot day. Obviously beer/wine is fine when out, but I don't drink at home much. If I really feel like a nice juice, then I'll have one. I still avoid soft drinks though, although juices have just as much sugar apparently, at least there are some vitamins and even a bit of fibre so they're not as nutritionally empty. But my weakness on these cold nights at the moment is a hot milk milo. Actually, now I think about it, I've slipped quite a bit in that regard - I'll have to keep a close eye on how tight the jeans are getting.....

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Liquid calories

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Aug 06, 2015 6:22 pm

rapunzel wrote:Being very diet obsessed smacks of more modern affluence to me. When you don't have access to adequate food or particular types of foods, the concept of cutting out whole food classes or worrying over whether you had one or two biscuits seems more than ridiculous. But context...
I know where you are coming from with this... just eat a sensible diet in moderation. However, I really think there is a lot more to this. If you track the explosion in overweight in obesity (pun intended) in Western countries in the last few decades, there is an indication that there is something very wrong. Digging deeper, I am certain this can be put down to three main things: activity, food and attitudes to food. Back in the day, it was a no-no to 'eat between meals'. People were not seen eating in public either, as in walking down the street shoving food into their faces. Then food companies started manufacturing snack foods and advertising snacking. A clue about how this was used to break down attitudes to snacking is revealed in early advertising such as for milky way - it won't ruin your appetite. Marketing since then has positioned snack food as everything from comfort to celebration. Basically, snack food is the appropriate response to any social situation. Now it is common to walk around in public and watch people shoving food into their faces. So not only have we normalised snacking, we have normalised eating everywhere, at all times. At the same time, there is something very wrong with the food being sold. Mostly convenience foods will be cheap, tasty, easy to consume, nutritionally poor but calorie rich.

You could easily blame the new wave of overweight and obese on being inactive (lazy) and eating too much (greedy). And while I am 100% for individual responsiblity, you can't say that generations of people suddenly become greedy and lazy. There is more to it than that. We have become so far removed from a normal, balanced diet, that people don't even know what that would look like anymore. I have seen modern nutritionists analyse what looks like a healthy, balanced diet to me and they call it extreme. Well, to me a diet packed full of hyperpalatable, hyperprocessed foods is extreme. In any case, the reason for this cutting out whole food classes stems back to trying to get people to eat less processed foods. If you are meeting your daily calorie quota eating highly processed foods then you won't have room in your diet for fruit, veg, whole grains, legumes and all the other foods we need to be healthy. I guess the people peddling these types of programs guess if people cut our wheat or sugar that they will have to eat something, and they do enourage them to eat more minimally processed foods. I have seen nutritionists go nuts over this too. Oh, no! People shouldn't cut out a whole food group (speaking of sugar or wheat). News just in, sugar is not a food group and wheat is not a food group. I have not actually seen any diet program that cuts out whole food group. Can you think of any?
<removed by request>

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Liquid calories

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Aug 06, 2015 6:23 pm

newie wrote:But my weakness on these cold nights at the moment is a hot milk milo. Actually, now I think about it, I've slipped quite a bit in that regard - I'll have to keep a close eye on how tight the jeans are getting.....
Haha, yeah. This winter, I have been drinking milo too. My jeans are getting tighter :(
<removed by request>

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Liquid calories

Postby CKinnard » Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:22 pm

rapunzel wrote:
matagi wrote:I tend to be of the "don't deny yourself stuff, just eat much less of it" school of thinking.
+1 here. I think there is a point to the new-ish terminology of orthorexia nervosa (edit: and over-exercise / over-activity) - creating a whole new kind of eating disorder for future generations!

Being very diet obsessed smacks of more modern affluence to me. When you don't have access to adequate food or particular types of foods, the concept of cutting out whole food classes or worrying over whether you had one or two biscuits seems more than ridiculous. But context...
The problem with apparent eating disorders like orthorexia nervosa is that these ignore the elephant in the room. which is what? the 98% of people who have an aversion to fruit and vegetables, in preference for 'comfort' foods, who consume 85-90% of all taxpayer funded health care, and contribute to the obesity epidemic that will within our lifetimes bankrupt public health care.

anyway, Australia has never been very good at confronting harsh reality.

Image
Last edited by CKinnard on Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
matagi
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:52 am
Location: In a parallel universe

Re: Liquid calories

Postby matagi » Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:49 pm

CKinnard wrote: The problem with apparent eating disorders like orthorexia nervosa is that these ignore the elephant in the room. which is what? the 98% of people who have an aversion to fruit and vegetables, in preference for 'comfort' foods, who consume 85-90% of all taxpayer funded health care, and contribute to the obesity epidemic that will within our lifetimes bankrupt public health care.

anyway, Australia has never been very good at confronting harsh reality.
Image
Do you think people really have an aversion to fruit and vegetables? Or is it that "comfort foods" are easier to consume because they require minimal preparation?

(I can't work out why your chart isn't appearing)

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Liquid calories

Postby CKinnard » Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:15 pm

matagi wrote:Do you think people really have an aversion to fruit and vegetables? Or is it that "comfort foods" are easier to consume because they require minimal preparation?

(I can't work out why your chart isn't appearing)
yes I think people have an aversion to fruits and vegetables in the portions recommended by the Australian Dietary Guidelines.
Having 1 cup of veges a day doesn't cut it.

And everything that one eats in preference to the recommended volume of fruits and vegetables, has higher energy density! hence the obesity epidemic.

As for the minimal preparation question, there is no food more convenient to eat than fruit, which requires zero preparation.
Can you give me some examples of comfort foods you think require minimal preparation please.

User avatar
matagi
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:52 am
Location: In a parallel universe

Re: Liquid calories

Postby matagi » Thu Aug 06, 2015 10:07 pm

CKinnard wrote: Can you give me some examples of comfort foods you think require minimal preparation please.
Nope I can't - I don't do comfort food and I have no idea what constitutes comfort food for other people but the term suggests something that would be quick and easy to prepare which implies something fairly processed.

I agree about fruit - my "dessert" tonight was a mandarine. Just peeled it and ate it, what could be simpler?

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby rapunzel » Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:59 pm

rapunzel wrote:Being very diet obsessed smacks of more modern affluence to me. When you don't have access to adequate food or particular types of foods, the concept of cutting out whole food classes or worrying over whether you had one or two biscuits seems more than ridiculous. But context...
casual_cyclist wrote:just eat a sensible diet in moderation.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote:However, I really think there is a lot more to this.
Yes. Hence me stating ‘context’. Most Australians are affluent enough to be able to make of choices in what they eat – and as a society we have enough free time to spend analysing, discussing, and judging foods and diets – here we are… My point was that as a nation we are gifted with the affluence that allows us to make food choices based on health, environment, and ethics as opposed to just trying to get enough calories in any form. However, it does not mean that we exercise that choice very well at all times – but this must be seen within our own context and circumstances. My reminder of the fact that we are extremely lucky to have these choices as an affluent society is meant to be more about trying to maintain a balanced perspective on food in general.
casual_cyclist wrote:I am certain this can be put down to three main things: activity, food and attitudes to food.
Agreed - probably a lot to do with it.
Personally, I find the ‘attitudes to food’ skewed – and not just in relation to those making poor food choices. There is a lot of psychology involved. How many people use language like ‘I earned this’ or ‘I feel guilty about all the X I ate’ or ‘I’m going to have to do extra to pay for that’ or just the judgements made about others based on their food choices (especially in relation to their appearance and size…).

Missed here: I think there is so much we do not understand about the body, food, digestion, genetics, etc. Posted above the article about neurobiology of sweetness; just one person’s look at it.
casual_cyclist wrote:there is something very wrong with the food being sold. Mostly convenience foods will be cheap, tasty, easy to consume, nutritionally poor but calorie rich.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote:You could easily blame the new wave of overweight and obese on being inactive (lazy) and eating too much (greedy).
Here I disagree. Mainly with your wording – ‘lazy’ and ‘greedy’. (Edit - sorry, in clarification C_C, I don't think you were labelling people lazy and greedy) Sedentary lifestyles have much to do with health issues, but being sedentary does not automatically = lazy. In fact, I’m sure if you were to survey people, a great percentage would say that they wish they were more active. And active does not = thin; and inactive does not = large.

And eating too much does not automatically = greedy. There are a myriad number of reasons for eating and overconsumption. As in someone’s earlier post above that I agreed with – things like depression and a serotonin hit (isn’t it also interesting that one of the key hormones in the digestive system is serotonin?); hence my interest (also posted above) in the TV program trying to explore the reasons people eat the way they do.

As you said – there is more to it.
casual_cyclist wrote:…a diet packed full of hyperpalatable, hyperprocessed foods is extreme.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote: In any case, the reason for this cutting out whole food classes stems back to trying to get people to eat less processed foods.
Yes – I am a proponent of reducing processed foods. But cutting out: e.g. choose one: all dairy, all meat, all carbs, all grains, all fats, all sugars, etc, etc depending on the person you listen to… is not a cure for the eating problems of everyone. Diets and related discussions have become the religion of a secular society. Like religion, people get very fired up for their one, just cause. It is very interesting.
casual_cyclist wrote:I have not actually seen any diet program that cuts out whole food group. Can you think of any?
Those based originally on religious reasons and/or ethical ones – vegetarianism (many different types) and veganism. Religious and/or ethical choices I understand. Health-wise, not necessarily healthier than other diets depending on the individual’s practices.

Many of the low carb diets propose you cut all carbs for a period, and if you then reintroduce them, they are still restricted in line with a set of rules.

Currently popular diets to drop sugar propose you cut all fruit for a period, and then only consume certain limited varieties thereafter. Since when are apples so horrible for you?

Diets to cut out fat – where many people would push to ridiculously low levels… suddenly the trend is going the other way as we better understand the different types and effects. But we understand very little.

Don’t eat eggs! Cholesterol! Oh, wait….

And not to mention the number of people who cut things out of their own diets or their children's diets because they think they have an allergy is on the rise.

Again – way off topic of the original thread. Maybe we should take it to the diet thread :oops: But I also had to throw in :P :

Image
Last edited by rapunzel on Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby rapunzel » Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:00 pm

matagi wrote:
CKinnard wrote: Can you give me some examples of comfort foods you think require minimal preparation please.
Nope I can't - I don't do comfort food and I have no idea what constitutes comfort food for other people but the term suggests something that would be quick and easy to prepare which implies something fairly processed.

I agree about fruit - my "dessert" tonight was a mandarine. Just peeled it and ate it, what could be simpler?
My guess is summed up in a few words: drive thru, takeaway

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Liquid calories

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Aug 07, 2015 3:09 pm

[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]

Been thru what's he consuming and the liquid calorie consumption was a little higher than I had guessed. There's also a lot of soup in there, whether we want to categorise that under liquid calories or not is debatable

He's going to try going close to cold turkey on the liquid calories with the exception of some wine on Friday and Saturday night.

Wish him success
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Calvin27
Posts: 2435
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby Calvin27 » Fri Aug 07, 2015 3:32 pm

mikesbytes wrote:[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]

Been thru what's he consuming and the liquid calorie consumption was a little higher than I had guessed. There's also a lot of soup in there, whether we want to categorise that under liquid calories or not is debatable

He's going to try going close to cold turkey on the liquid calories with the exception of some wine on Friday and Saturday night.

Wish him success
I'd include soup. The best soups are fatty, but worse, loaded with salt. This is pretty crud for your heart, but more importantly make you crave sweet drinks / deserts.
Heavy road bike
Cushy dirt bike
Very cushy dirt bike
Bike crushed by car (RIP)
No brakes bike
Ebike

User avatar
ValleyForge
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:37 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Liquid calories

Postby ValleyForge » Fri Aug 07, 2015 3:59 pm

mikesbytes wrote:[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]

Been thru what's he consuming and the liquid calorie consumption was a little higher than I had guessed. There's also a lot of soup in there, whether we want to categorise that under liquid calories or not is debatable

He's going to try going close to cold turkey on the liquid calories with the exception of some wine on Friday and Saturday night.

Wish him success
Thank heavens we're back on track. :roll:

To become morbidly obese, we only need to consume a little over 1% excess calories per day long term. Tell them that and about long term change and it will work. Liquid calories are always "under-represented" in retrospective personal diet diaries.
Ha ha ha! Cookies on dowels.

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Liquid calories

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:24 pm

Look, I generally agree with much of what you have said, but just some comments on what you said that I found interesting. Not having a go at you personally.
rapunzel wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:I have not actually seen any diet program that cuts out whole food group. Can you think of any?
Those based originally on religious reasons and/or ethical ones – vegetarianism (many different types) and veganism.
Vegetariansim and veganism both allow foods from the 5 basic food groups.
rapunzel wrote:Many of the low carb diets propose you cut all carbs for a period, and if you then reintroduce them, they are still restricted in line with a set of rules.
Not quite correct. They still eat vegetables, and vegetables are carbs. Some cut all grains, but grains aren't a food group. The 'grains' food group includes seeds and lots of the paleo types still eat seeds. Amaranth, buckwheat, and quinoa anyone? ;)
rapunzel wrote:Currently popular diets to drop sugar propose you cut all fruit for a period, and then only consume certain limited varieties thereafter. Since when are apples so horrible for you?
Sugar is not a food group. Fruit is a food group in some charts, although I am used to seeing it with vegetables. Anyway, as you point out you still consume fruit after an intial period.
rapunzel wrote:Diets to cut out fat – where many people would push to ridiculously low levels… suddenly the trend is going the other way as we better understand the different types and effects. But we understand very little.
Fat is not a food group.

I get interested when I see nutritionists being interviewed on tv, and carrying on about people quitting sugar because they shouldn't quit a whole food group. Sugar is not a food group. You would think a nutritionist would know that right?

Formally (currently), in Australia, there are 5 food groups:
1) Grain (cereal) foods, mostly wholegrain and/or high cereal fibre varieties (note this includes quinoa and other seeds for the paleo types)
2) Vegetables and legumes/beans (I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all vegetables)
3) Lean meats and poultry, fish, eggs, tofu, nuts and seeds and legumes/beans (I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all of these)
4) Milk, yoghurt, cheese and/or alternatives, mostly reduced fat (note the 'or alternatives' such as soy or almond milk for vegans, I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all of these)
5) fruit. You might have me on that one because I know some paleo types have no fruit. That said, most allow at least berries.

The main things to "quit" are fat (not a food group, so no food groups are omitted), sugar (not a food group, so no food groups are omitted), "carbs", which most closely relates to the grains group but they still eat seeds (from the grains group), vegetables (high in carbs), and most eat some from the fruit group (high in carbs), so again, no food group is omitted.

https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/sites/d ... _large.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
<removed by request>

User avatar
matagi
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:52 am
Location: In a parallel universe

Re: Liquid calories

Postby matagi » Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:25 pm

Calvin27 wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]

Been thru what's he consuming and the liquid calorie consumption was a little higher than I had guessed. There's also a lot of soup in there, whether we want to categorise that under liquid calories or not is debatable

He's going to try going close to cold turkey on the liquid calories with the exception of some wine on Friday and Saturday night.

Wish him success
I'd include soup. The best soups are fatty, but worse, loaded with salt. This is pretty crud for your heart, but more importantly make you crave sweet drinks / deserts.
Depends on whether the soup is homemade or out of a can. That said, a nice home made cauliflower soup is just begging for blue cheese on toast as an accompaniment so that can easily blow out in calorie terms.
Last edited by matagi on Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Liquid calories

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:27 pm

mikesbytes wrote:[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]
sorry :oops:
mikesbytes wrote:There's also a lot of soup in there, whether we want to categorise that under liquid calories or not is debatable
From what I have read, soup is good!
In the battle to lose weight, hunger is the dieter's worst enemy. But research has revealed a simple aid to taming the appetite: soup. It's dieting's best kept secret says one science writer.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8068733.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
<removed by request>

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Liquid calories

Postby rapunzel » Fri Aug 07, 2015 7:00 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:[wiggling finger]Seems to have gone off topic Guys/Gals[/wiggling finger]
sorry :oops:
+1

(C_C, I'm guilty of sloppy terminology and communication breakdown re: above discussion, will explain elsewhere to avoid more off topic)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: grt046