"like drinking Gin-Tonic without the Gin."

What I suggest is to have the gin without the tonic.

 

Any serious gin drinker has it straight and any serious curry has no coconut milk in it.

 

Coconut milk waters down the flavour!

7 minutes ago, Justfine said:

Rubbish. Easy to make a good curry without coconut. You obviously know nothing about curries.

Yeah, rubbish, you obviously don't know how good kati tastes. And millions of Thais use it every day. I guess they are all ignorant in your opinion.

Thought Indian Curries (my favourite) use coconut milk and oil extensively...

14 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Yeah, rubbish, you obviously don't know how good kati tastes. And millions of Thais use it every day. I guess they are all ignorant in your opinion.

There are lots of dishes without coconut. I guess you've never cooked Thai food.

 

Too busy with cheap gin and mixers.

14 minutes ago, transam said:

Thought Indian Curries (my favourite) use coconut milk and oil extensively...

They typically use yoghurt or nothing.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Justfine said:

There are lots of dishes without coconut. I guess you've never cooked Thai food.

 

Too busy with cheap gin and mixers.

Keep guessing...

3 minutes ago, Justfine said:

They typically use yoghurt or nothing.

 

 

Perhaps you know nothing about Indian Curries...

They typically use yoghurt or nothing.
 
 

For fat they traditionally use ghee (concentrated butter) but using oil instead is more modern. Of course yogurt is used in some curries but they would also use ghee or oil. For some regions Mustard oil is widely used for flavoring. Ghee gives a rich heavy flavor.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

https://migrationology.com/100-best-thai-dishes-to-eat-in-bangkok-ultimate-eating-guide/

 

About 90% no coconut!!

9 minutes ago, transam said:

Perhaps you know nothing about Indian Curries...

Look up the recipes. Coconut lol

https://www.scoopwhoop.com/inothernews/28-indian-curries/#.iw8njy0yf

 

Most have no coconut.

No, I would not I make sure I am not obese and in good shape but severely limiting calories for a long time effects many things. I have seen how my mood goes down and sexual mood too if I severely limit my calories. 

5 hours ago, Justfine said:

6 hours ago, seancbk said:

I only eat for energy, so I eat very plain food and more or less the same thing everyday.

Eating is an inconvenience I'd rather avoid, plus I'd rather be hungry than fat.

 

 

Spices contain 50 to 60 times more antioxidants than regular food. Plus they taste good.

 

By plain food I did not mean tasteless.     I put chilli powder on everything (except my oatmeal).   

One of my favourite snacks is toast with butter, a little honey, lots of chilli powder and a little bit of sea salt.   You should try it!

 

39 minutes ago, seancbk said:

 

By plain food I did not mean tasteless.     I put chilli powder on everything (except my oatmeal).   

One of my favourite snacks is toast with butter, a little honey, lots of chilli powder and a little bit of sea salt.   You should try it!

 

Bread is 50% carbs.

It's a quality of life balance issue. I eat less calories of low quality food and two days a week eat no solids. i try not to until i have fasted for 16 hours, includin sleep time. I prepare my own food except when i go out to high end restaurants. By not eating fast food industrial garbage you are sticking it to the man, improving short term health, possibly long term health and save money for great meals.

It's interesting to see the amount of people who would take 10 years off their life just to eat fatty/sugary foods.  Is it really worth it?

 

I just see food as nourishment, so eating healthy foods or eating not healthy foods, it's the same for me so it makes sense to eat the healthy stuff.  Maybe some people have more active taste buds.

 

What about all the day to day side-effects of being unhealthy/fat?  A lot of them aren't comfortable/desirable.

 

Seems a no-brainer to me.

49 minutes ago, seancbk said:

 

By plain food I did not mean tasteless.     I put chilli powder on everything (except my oatmeal).   

One of my favourite snacks is toast with butter, a little honey, lots of chilli powder and a little bit of sea salt.   You should try it!

 

I never eat bread if it's wheat based but the rest is ok.sounds good

6 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

It's interesting to see the amount of people who would take 10 years off their life just to eat fatty/sugary foods.  Is it really worth it?

 

I just see food as nourishment, so eating healthy foods or eating not healthy foods, it's the same for me so it makes sense to eat the healthy stuff.  Maybe some people have more active taste buds.

 

What about all the day to day side-effects of being unhealthy/fat?  A lot of them aren't comfortable/desirable.

 

Seems a no-brainer to me.

This is not what JT is talking about he is talking about making sure your lean and eating enough so you don't gain or lose weight and then cutting again an other 25%. That is like being on a permanent diet so permanent hunger (might subside).

 

I have done quite a bit of dieting and know a lot about losing fat and working out. I know that when I am on a diet my energy is lower and my mood for sex is a lot lower too. 

 

I don't mind using a diet to cut some weight (it is needed sometimes) but at least later you go back to an energy balance. 

31 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

It's interesting to see the amount of people who would take 10 years off their life just to eat fatty/sugary foods.  Is it really worth it?

 

I just see food as nourishment, so eating healthy foods or eating not healthy foods, it's the same for me so it makes sense to eat the healthy stuff.  Maybe some people have more active taste buds.

 

What about all the day to day side-effects of being unhealthy/fat?  A lot of them aren't comfortable/desirable.

 

Seems a no-brainer to me.

Food is one of my favourite forms of nourishment

Yes, if it gets to the point where scientific studies definitely prove the longevity benefit of this program, then I reckon the message will be put out there. Then, I imagine a rather small percentage of people will actually follow this program for life. It's a rather radical program. It's not for everyone. There are people already doing this based on the existing research. It takes a dedicated focus to follow through on it. 

I have already been promised another 10 years of life by giving up smoking ...

And another 5 years by drinking a glass of red wine each day ...

I use olive oil on my salads - there's another couple of years ...

Red meat is only for special occasions - Let's say 6 to 12 months extra for that ...

I drive a Volvo, and gave up my motorbike recently - must be worth a year or two ...

Always look each way several times before crossing the road ...

And I say my prayers every night.

 

Who can I sue if I don't live to be 100.

 

 

7 hours ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

It's interesting to see the amount of people who would take 10 years off their life just to eat fatty/sugary foods.  Is it really worth it?

 

I just see food as nourishment, so eating healthy foods or eating not healthy foods, it's the same for me so it makes sense to eat the healthy stuff.  Maybe some people have more active taste buds.

 

What about all the day to day side-effects of being unhealthy/fat?  A lot of them aren't comfortable/desirable.

 

Seems a no-brainer to me.

Ask 18 to 30 yos. A lot would choose more food over 10 years. 

 

 

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes, if it gets to the point where scientific studies definitely prove the longevity benefit of this program, then I reckon the message will be put out there. Then, I imagine a rather small percentage of people will actually follow this program for life. It's a rather radical program. It's not for everyone. There are people already doing this based on the existing research. It takes a dedicated focus to follow through on it. 

Given jockeys don't live that long I doubt the science is very strong at all. Looks iffy.

 

Jockeys get by on 800 to 1000 calories a day for decades.

7 hours ago, robblok said:

This is not what JT is talking about he is talking about making sure your lean and eating enough so you don't gain or lose weight and then cutting again an other 25%. That is like being on a permanent diet so permanent hunger (might subside).

 

I have done quite a bit of dieting and know a lot about losing fat and working out. I know that when I am on a diet my energy is lower and my mood for sex is a lot lower too. 

 

I don't mind using a diet to cut some weight (it is needed sometimes) but at least later you go back to an energy balance. 

I find on a low carb diet my energy is more steady. Things like flaxseeds, almonds, walnuts, baby spinach help with sustained energy plus coffee and spices like cloves and cinnamon. Make a protein shake with them. I have 2 or 3 a day. Healthy ice coffee.

 

On a high carb diet energy spikes then drops.

 

 

46 minutes ago, Justfine said:

Given jockeys don't live that long I doubt the science is very strong at all. Looks iffy.

 

Jockeys get by on 800 to 1000 calories a day for decades.

Jockeys are a horrible example for obvious reasons. It's a dangerous profession, they have to make weight and are prone to self harming eating disorders, and they rarely work past age 50. 

 

In any case, the OP refers to an actual scientific study. The point of this thread isn't really to confirm or deny whether further studies will  better prove the connection between limited intake for life and longevity. But again, jockeys -- really, really bad example. 

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Jockeys are a horrible example for obvious reasons. It's a dangerous profession, they have to make weight and are prone to self harming eating disorders, and they rarely work past age 50. 

 

In any case, the OP refers to an actual scientific study. The point of this thread isn't really to confirm or deny whether further studies will  better prove the connection between limited intake for life and longevity. But again, jockeys -- really, really bad example. 

Very low calories is self harming. I saw this theory written up 15 years ago.

 

Someone is just rehashing a dud idea.

 

Diet should be about nutrition not strict calories.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Jockeys are a horrible example for obvious reasons. It's a dangerous profession, they have to make weight and are prone to self harming eating disorders, and they rarely work past age 50. 

 

In any case, the OP refers to an actual scientific study. The point of this thread isn't really to confirm or deny whether further studies will  better prove the connection between limited intake for life and longevity. But again, jockeys -- really, really bad example. 

What's your blood pressure?

Just now, Justfine said:

Very low calories is self harming. I saw this theory written up 15 years ago.

 

Someone is just rehashing a dud idea.

 

Diet should be about nutrition not strict calories.

 

 

Please desist from your attempt to hijack this thread. 

https://www.movenourishbelieve.com/nourish/count-nutrients-calories/?store=%2F

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Please desist from your attempt to hijack this thread. 

The topic is diet. Im talking diet.

 

Not sure what you are talking about.