Little motivational tips and tricks for those dealing with weight control issues

[Inyourendo]

Little motivational hint.......stop eating so much you fat barstool

[Jingthing]

Little motivational hint.......stop eating so much you fat barstool

Abusive posts as above are not welcome on this health forum. Really. Go away.

[Inyourendo]

Sorry...I agree.....I should have said please

[Jingthing]

Sorry...I agree.....I should have said please

No, you should take your bullying language troll posts somewhere else. Read the pinned forum rules. PLEASE.

[singa-traz]

That might be useful to some people: "

The 3 Most Powerful Ways To Change People Who Don't Want To Change"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2015/02/06/the-3-most-powerful-ways-to-change-people-who-dont-want-to-change/print/

[Jingthing]

I liked that article. Thanks singa-traz. Some good stuff in that.

Anyway, here's another issue that I wonder if other people have.

Dealing with FOOD WASTAGE when cooking at home.

I read about this as a big global problem as a shocking percentage of food bought for home consumption is simply never eaten because it rots.

Why is that?

Well, one big reason is apparently people aren't as good as they think they are at predicting what they are going to want to cook/eat tomorrow, and sometimes not even tonight!

For example, you might think you want to cook some chicken tomorrow night so you buy some. Tomorrow night comes and it turns out you don't want to cook chicken or perhaps you don't want to cook anything. But there's that chicken!

So my tip and trick is to try harder to avoid buying more too much food. That keeps it more flexible but you also don't want to buy too little because, well, then you might not have anything decent to cook in the house! I don't like to waste food or money but I also don't like to eat food if I'm not hungry for just not to waste it. I think a lot of people DO eat up food just because if they don't eat it, it will go to waste. That could be an issue for those dealing with weight control issues.

[Jingthing]

Here's a food tip that I've posted before but I think it fits here.

A lot of modern people eat a lot of CHICKEN.

I certainly do.

For cooking at home I like to have CHICKEN meat handy for cooking in all kinds of things:

soups, salads, stir fries, in pasta sauces, served cold for Chinese ginger scallion chicken, etc.

So rather than dealing with raw chicken most days, I do this.

Buy some SKINNED chicken breasts and cook them Chinese boil style.

A large pot with lots of water to cover the breasts.

Bring water to a boil.

Then put in the breasts.

Then turn off heat, and cover the pot.

Wait 20 - 25 minutes depending on size of breasts on how much meat in the pot.

Remove and cool.

Then put the meat in fridge ... good for about 3 days, sometimes 4.

The water used for the cooking can be used for a SOUP stock, which I often do.

This method has served me well, for flexibility in cooking, and for having some lean chicken meat ready to cook when I want to use it.

[MaeJoMTB]

Careful dude,

Extra tight pants might make you mince.

[happy Joe]

Overweight problems are of psychology. It's why dietitians advices are most of the time doomed to failure.

We are addict of food as other tobacco, alcohol or drugs.

So as for these other addictions it is almost impossible to act by decreasing. Sooner or later the person give in to envy and takes in very little time all she had laboriously lost before.

My method was to delete a number of foods:

- bread

- butter

- deli

- all sauces

- all the pastries and sugary foods.

- cheeses.

The only concession to this principle was the limited wine 1 glass per meal (large glass, huh) to keep fun.

Thus I lost 20 kilos at 33 years never resumed.

My daughter impressed by the way, studied medicine then she specialized in the break surgical bypass with spectacular results for the most serious cases. However these operations are sometimes accompanied by difficult psychological injuries.

[Jingthing]

An inspiring story, Happy Joe.

It's always great to hear of cases of major weight loss maintained for so many years.

I think the addiction aspect of foods is something all of us are familiar with.

Of course with addiction and food, it's different than addiction and other substances like illicit drugs. We all need to eat some foods.

Completely cutting out, 100 percent, certain food types can be done, but cutting out all nutritional intake, can't.

There are different approaches to that, but clearly the approach you chose and stuck with, has worked for you.

I agree with you based on talking with some people who have had bariatric surgery that it is no panacea but sometimes the last resort for some people. The risks can be both psychological, physical, or both.

[robblok]

An inspiring story, Happy Joe.

It's always great to hear of cases of major weight loss maintained for so many years.

I think the addiction aspect of foods is something all of us are familiar with.

Of course with addiction and food, it's different than addiction and other substances like illicit drugs. We all need to eat some foods.

Completely cutting out, 100 percent, certain food types can be done, but cutting out all nutritional intake, can't.

There are different approaches to that, but clearly the approach you chose and stuck with, has worked for you.

I agree with you based on talking with some people who have had bariatric surgery that it is no panacea but sometimes the last resort for some people. The risks can be both psychological, physical, or both.

Actually cutting food intake is the ONLY way JT. I don't see any other way to reduce fat. (except maybe surgical)

Your acting like food is worse as heroin, its not.. in general illicit drugs are far more addicting. I have yet to see withdrawal symptoms from food.

My trick is simple.. just regularly step on a pair of scales.. mine are connected to the internet and keep all data so I can see what direction I am heading.. simple actually. (only drawback.. and that is only for people who active with sports is the muscle component in the weight).

If i was not that lazy id add a tape measure to be 100% sure.

[Jingthing]

An inspiring story, Happy Joe.

It's always great to hear of cases of major weight loss maintained for so many years.

I think the addiction aspect of foods is something all of us are familiar with.

Of course with addiction and food, it's different than addiction and other substances like illicit drugs. We all need to eat some foods.

Completely cutting out, 100 percent, certain food types can be done, but cutting out all nutritional intake, can't.

There are different approaches to that, but clearly the approach you chose and stuck with, has worked for you.

I agree with you based on talking with some people who have had bariatric surgery that it is no panacea but sometimes the last resort for some people. The risks can be both psychological, physical, or both.

Actually cutting food intake is the ONLY way JT. I don't see any other way to reduce fat. (except maybe surgical)

Your acting like food is worse as heroin, its not.. in general illicit drugs are far more addicting. I have yet to see withdrawal symptoms from food.

My trick is simple.. just regularly step on a pair of scales.. mine are connected to the internet and keep all data so I can see what direction I am heading.. simple actually. (only drawback.. and that is only for people who active with sports is the muscle component in the weight).

If i was not that lazy id add a tape measure to be 100% sure.

Yes of course reducing food intake is the most important factor in weight control (as I've said hundreds of times, even started some threads about it), but if you bothered to actually read my post, it would have been clear I was talking about the question of cutting out certain FOOD TYPES 100 percent. Not everyone losing or maintaining weight does that. Like butter. Some may cut it out 100 percent. Some might just have it in low portions. See the difference?

I was replying to someone who had cut out certain food types 100 percent.

Not everyone would choose that same list either or need to cut out ANYTHING 100 percent. Of course logically I can see the case for kicking out certain foods 100 percent and I do that myself actually. Like cheesecake. None for me!

It was only ONE anecdotal case, that list and 100 percent tactic, not applicable to all of humanity.

As far as the false fictional narrative you asserted, "your acting like food is worse than heroin ..." no, I'm not. Again, please stop putting bizarre fictional narratives in my mouth that I've never said. Reply to ACTUAL content please instead. Thank you.

[robblok]

An inspiring story, Happy Joe.

It's always great to hear of cases of major weight loss maintained for so many years.

I think the addiction aspect of foods is something all of us are familiar with.

Of course with addiction and food, it's different than addiction and other substances like illicit drugs. We all need to eat some foods.

Completely cutting out, 100 percent, certain food types can be done, but cutting out all nutritional intake, can't.

There are different approaches to that, but clearly the approach you chose and stuck with, has worked for you.

I agree with you based on talking with some people who have had bariatric surgery that it is no panacea but sometimes the last resort for some people. The risks can be both psychological, physical, or both.

Actually cutting food intake is the ONLY way JT. I don't see any other way to reduce fat. (except maybe surgical)

Your acting like food is worse as heroin, its not.. in general illicit drugs are far more addicting. I have yet to see withdrawal symptoms from food.

My trick is simple.. just regularly step on a pair of scales.. mine are connected to the internet and keep all data so I can see what direction I am heading.. simple actually. (only drawback.. and that is only for people who active with sports is the muscle component in the weight).

If i was not that lazy id add a tape measure to be 100% sure.

Yes of course reducing food intake is the most important factor in weight control (as I've said hundreds of times, even started some threads about it), but if you bothered to actually read my post, it would have been clear I was talking about the question of cutting out certain FOOD TYPES 100 percent. Not everyone losing or maintaining weight does that. Like butter. Some may cut it out 100 percent. Some might just have it in low portions. See the difference?

I was replying to someone who had cut out certain food types 100 percent.

Not everyone would choose that same list either or need to cut out ANYTHING 100 percent. Of course logically I can see the case for kicking out certain foods 100 percent and I do that myself actually. Like cheesecake. None for me!

It was only ONE anecdotal case, that list and 100 percent tactic, not applicable to all of humanity.

As far as the false fictional narrative you asserted, "your acting like food is worse than heroin ..." no, I'm not. Again, please stop putting bizarre fictional narratives in my mouth that I've never said. Reply to ACTUAL content please instead. Thank you.

Then stop linking food to illicit drugs and acting like the addiction is the same. Your constantly doing stuff like that.

As for cutting out some foods 100%.. it works for some and not for others.. I agree there. For me 100% cuts work better (for really bad stuff) as sometimes taking it as it only increases MY cravings for it. Other foods of course you just decrease the amount.

Whatever works for you.

[Jingthing]

Then stop linking food to illicit drugs and acting like the addiction is the same. Your constantly doing stuff like that.

...

This thread is about the topic that it's about.

It's not about another platform for you to launch your endless BORING "JT thinks that, JT doesn't think this, JT is constantly doing this" character assassination agenda.

How about this, dude?

As you aggressively insist on turning EVERY thread that I start or post on here into the same bullying "JT is constantly BLAH BLAH BLAH" personal attack garbage, why don't YOU start a fresh NEW thread that exists to "criticize" the performance of and spread lies about various posters? Then that nasty TOXIC stuff can be segregated to ONE PLACE, and in my case, I would be very happy NOT to read or post to it.

Then actual CONTENT threads may avoid infection of that OFF TOPIC stuff?

[BelTha]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

[Jingthing]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

[Nilz]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

Your advise have never worked well unless you starve yourself or exercise forever.

The only method is to start eating natural food: Stop sugar and carbs.

You will NEVER go hungry. No excercise.

Check this out:

http://www.dietdoctor.com/how-to-lose-weight

Plenty of information. Nothing for sale, just free advise.

Try it for a few months, you will lose weight guaranteed!

[Nilz]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

This information is what we have been hearing all our lives but it's not true.

A calorie from sugar is treated differently than a calorie from fat.

Sugar: raises your blood sugar and by that trigger insuline hormone to store fat in your body.

Fat: doesn't raise your blood sugar, no trigger of insuline and body burns that fat instead.

Free information on this site.

http://www.dietdoctor.com/sugar-vs-fat-on-bbc-which-is-worse

Nothing for sale, no pills, no medicine, no gym memberships, only free advise.

[Jingthing]

You're preaching to the choir dude. We've covered those topic areas for years. Yes there is calorie math involved but that doesn't preclude consideration of how our bodies process different foods differently.

So there is math but not simple math. Some people think there is only simple math but we all know we need to look at food intake.

[singa-traz]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

Estimating the slice of cake at 400 Calories, you will burn this (and a bit more) by running 45 min and covering 6km.

You can run slower, but then your slice of cake need to be smaller too

To make the math work, you need to over-estimate the calories in, and under-estimate the calories burned.

It's misleading to say that the food intake is more important than the activity part, it's better to say that it is more effective.

Being active remains an important part of staying healthy.

[Jingthing]

I totally agree the moving that body is very, very important to promoting health and helps in preventing disease, and have said so many, many times.

This is actually the case even when people are clinically overweight or obese ... everyone benefits from exercise regardless of their weight level (unless of course there is an unusual medical restriction against it).

Of course people choose different levels of exercise ... it's not necessary to be a gym rat or exercise fanatic to get benefits, but doing nothing is really a bad idea.

Personally, I have done at least a baseline of exercise all my life and really doubt I would be alive now if I hadn't ... not talking only about weight control specifically here but OVERALL health issues.

As far as semantics of more important vs. more effective ... you win . I don't care about such hair splitting. This isn't a court of law or a New York Times editors meeting.

[robblok]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

This information is what we have been hearing all our lives but it's not true.

A calorie from sugar is treated differently than a calorie from fat.

Sugar: raises your blood sugar and by that trigger insuline hormone to store fat in your body.

Fat: doesn't raise your blood sugar, no trigger of insuline and body burns that fat instead.

Free information on this site.

http://www.dietdoctor.com/sugar-vs-fat-on-bbc-which-is-worse

Nothing for sale, no pills, no medicine, no gym memberships, only free advise.

You forgot to add that if you eat too much fat it does not have to mobilize insulin to store the fat in a fat cell as it needs no conversion. Carbs are not the enemy.. excess carbs and simple carbs are.

The energy balance still counts.. eat too much fat and you will get fat anyway, it will get stored without the insulin.

[Nilz]

The main thing for you, that you need to understand if you have some extra weight you need to move more or eat less.

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

This information is what we have been hearing all our lives but it's not true.

A calorie from sugar is treated differently than a calorie from fat.

Sugar: raises your blood sugar and by that trigger insuline hormone to store fat in your body.

Fat: doesn't raise your blood sugar, no trigger of insuline and body burns that fat instead.

Free information on this site.

http://www.dietdoctor.com/sugar-vs-fat-on-bbc-which-is-worse

Nothing for sale, no pills, no medicine, no gym memberships, only free advise.

You forgot to add that if you eat too much fat it does not have to mobilize insulin to store the fat in a fat cell as it needs no conversion. Carbs are not the enemy.. excess carbs and simple carbs are.

The energy balance still counts.. eat too much fat and you will get fat anyway, it will get stored without the insulin.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The idea to replace carbs with fat is that you will feel more full with fat than with carbs, thus you eat less.

The body will eventually switch from storing fat to burning it, which is the body's real function.

Think about how long time in the human history we've had access to processed food such as bread and sugar, not very long.

Have you ever tried this? I have and lost weight without any excercise. The body is normalizing by itself.

[robblok]

We all know that. There isn't a person with a weight control issue alive that doesn't know that. Just knowing that is a start. But to tell people what they already know a MILLION times isn't really helpful. It is often seen instead as condescending. As if we don't know that, but we DO know that.

I would adjust that a little bit though. Scientific research has shown in an overwhelming way that the food intake part is much more important than the activity part of it. It's often a question of math. If you eat a slice of cake it take so many hours to work off those calories, so it's just much more PRACTICAL just to avoid eating that slice of cake!

This information is what we have been hearing all our lives but it's not true.

A calorie from sugar is treated differently than a calorie from fat.

Sugar: raises your blood sugar and by that trigger insuline hormone to store fat in your body.

Fat: doesn't raise your blood sugar, no trigger of insuline and body burns that fat instead.

Free information on this site.

http://www.dietdoctor.com/sugar-vs-fat-on-bbc-which-is-worse

Nothing for sale, no pills, no medicine, no gym memberships, only free advise.

You forgot to add that if you eat too much fat it does not have to mobilize insulin to store the fat in a fat cell as it needs no conversion. Carbs are not the enemy.. excess carbs and simple carbs are.

The energy balance still counts.. eat too much fat and you will get fat anyway, it will get stored without the insulin.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The idea to replace carbs with fat is that you will feel more full with fat than with carbs, thus you eat less.

The body will eventually switch from storing fat to burning it, which is the body's real function.

Think about how long time in the human history we've had access to processed food such as bread and sugar, not very long.

Have you ever tried this? I have and lost weight without any excercise. The body is normalizing by itself.

Of course I have tried this, I have tried all methods of weight loss and nothing I repeat nothing changes the rules of energy balance.

You are right though if people are over sensitive to carbohydrates that they can get stored as fat even if there is an energy deficit. However once the body normalizes it can handle complex carbs (whole wheat) quite well. There is no need to cut out all carbs, just simple ones (sugar) and its always good to cut out processed foods.

I have lost 25 kg in the past (and kept it off) during the weight loss period I experimented with no carbs.. low carbs and all.. It was basically all the same (after I cut out the simple carbs and large servings of carbs)

[Jingthing]

I think it makes sense to personally try out different things, within reason and safety of course. What works for one may not work for another. The trouble is as individuals we only know our personal experience and it's hard to be objective about our personal experience. That's why it's called ANECDOTAL evidence when you're just talking about your own experience or the experience of another individual. Such "evidence" doesn't really prove much in a definitive way for all humanity.

That's where scientific research comes in. With that, we can get more objective information and see if that information can be used to benefit us personally in our weight control challenges, and also at larger societal levels.

But as most of us who read this forum know, science too can also mislead people. Like when the mainstream emphasis was on cutting fat and ignored sugar. That's was a costly mistake, advice from "science" widely followed both by individuals and in commercial and government policies.

[Jingthing]

This article is packed full of thought provoking information that might be applicable to helping with your weight control goals.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/25/why-we-eat-too-much/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_wb-eating-1130am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Why you eat so much
...

Another approach, unlikely as it sounds, is committing to eat things that taste better. "I know it's counterintuitive, but when things are more delicious you tend to eat less because you're satisfied more quickly," Just explained. "Whereas when something is acceptable but doesn't taste all that great, you'll end up eating more to achieve the same level of satisfaction. There is ample evidence for this."

All of the tricks, maneuvers and annoying adjustments we need to make in order to watch our waistlines, however, are the result of an uncomfortable truth that Rozin helped shed light on almost two decades ago.

"We like to think that we're rigged to think about and control what we eat and how much we eat," said Just. "But the truth is that we're rigged to eat whenever the opportunity rises."

"In that sense, we're really no different than dogs," he added.

[tominbkk]

An inspiring story, Happy Joe.

It's always great to hear of cases of major weight loss maintained for so many years.

I think the addiction aspect of foods is something all of us are familiar with.

Of course with addiction and food, it's different than addiction and other substances like illicit drugs. We all need to eat some foods.

Completely cutting out, 100 percent, certain food types can be done, but cutting out all nutritional intake, can't.

There are different approaches to that, but clearly the approach you chose and stuck with, has worked for you.

I agree with you based on talking with some people who have had bariatric surgery that it is no panacea but sometimes the last resort for some people. The risks can be both psychological, physical, or both.

I limit my carbs, but a couple times a month have meals with everything I have cravings for, then go right back to my diet. Works for me. Cheat days are too much for me but cheat meals are fine.

[Jingthing]

Who knew that 2016 was the international year of PULSES?

Anyway, here's some great information about the health benefits including helping with weight loss of eating different kinds of foods with FIBER:

Fiber: The least sexy weight-loss tool

It can be gross and gassy, but it can also help you get thinner

https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/national/fiber/1940/?hpid=hp_no-name_graphic-story-b%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[RyxhGee]

Good thing for motivation. It's to make your photo naked in some bad pose (where you don't look OK) and pin it on refrigerator it helps, trust me.

[Jingthing]

Good thing for motivation. It's to make your photo naked in some bad pose (where you don't look OK) and pin it on refrigerator it helps, trust me.

I believe you but I don't want to look at that!