No wonder it's so easy to get fat these days

Alex_6n2 said:
Works for me....
Click to expand...

Try eating a little less in the evening meal and then having a later meal when hungry again.

your bodily functions burn around that number without you actually doing anything. look up BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate)
Click to expand...

Very unlikely - most men are probably around 1800-2000 or slightly under without actually doing any activity. You need to be pretty active to be 2500.

My "BMR" is 1700 according to the calculator. I lose weight if I eat under 2300 calories though due to the amount of activity I do.
 
Pre-packed supermarket sandwiches are generally pretty bad for you. If you make your own sandwiches you can save yourself loads of money, plus you could use wholemeal or brown bread which is much better for you, and use some low fat omega 3 spread inside the sandwich. Add in a filling such as Tuna and you have a tasty and healthy lunch!

If you are going to have a salad, make your own and try not to use a dressing, or if you have to, make sure it is as light as possible. The dressing that supermarkets use in salads is usually the thing with the huge calorie and fat content.
 
vincent1989 said:
definitely not. afaik the recommended kcal intake also relies upon you walking the minimum recommended 10k steps per day.
Click to expand...

I've not finished reading the entire thread yet so there may be a ninja edit coming up. However this post had me bemused.

10,000 steps per day you say? So (bear with me) 10,000 paces per day?
That is an awfully long way don't you think? At an estimate that means that our Red friends recommend I walk around 9km per day :o

I have made this figure by doing a simple experiment: if it's 10,000 paces and each of my paces is three feet (the experiment was how I measured my pace)= 30,000 feet.


That's a LOT of distance to cover.



On topic:

Sandwiches when bought, or anything pretty much when bought contains so many calories. M&S BLT is like 600. I could eat two of those in a sitting and feel like i've had at most a light lunch= 1/2 of my day's allowance and still hungry :(

The day's calorie allowance however has a flaw or two:

1. If Raymond, for example, is 4 feet and 11 inches tall and of normal build, he is recommended a maximum of 2.5k calories per day.
I am 6 feet and 5 inches and of large build, yet they say I should eat the same as Raymond.
Is there any logic behind that whatsoever? Surely a bigger man needs more to eat, by the simple logic that he is larger and requires more energy to fuel his larger system?

2. If Raymond has just turned 18, he is a man, and is recommended 2.5k calories per day.
Raymond's grandpa has just turned 100, he is a man, and is also recommended 2.5k calories per day (the same amount as his grandson).
Surely an 18 year old's body requires a larger energy intake than that of a 100 year old man?

I think that calorie counting is balls frankly! My friend does this (not dieting) and I inwardly do a little facepalm when she says the number of calories in a foodstuff that one would avoid if trying to better one's eating patterns.

It's what you eat not what you don't eat; counting calories assists in making you conscious of how much you're eating etc, but it doesn't necessarily assist in losing weight, as fewer calories doesn't necessarily mean healthier.

To the OP:

Good on you for trying to shed some pounds! Steer well clear of those sandwich aisles mate: shocking how much (if you're watching what you're eating) of your 'RDA' a small sandwich triangle takes up, and yet it still leaves you hungry :(

Edit: OP, what is your 'diet'? 18lbs in 3 months, hats off to you sir!

Another Edit: I did the BMR thing which gave me 2209 and if I were described as sedentary I would require 2650 calories per day :o

Never heard of BMR before. They should make this known to more people as that's quite a handy thing to know of. ('they' being unspecified peoples who assist with dieting and teach you the BMI equations etc)
 
Last edited:
IT guys sit behind desks all day working on servers and all night playing counter strike so they should be fat. Especially when downing all that red bull and pizza during all night gaming sessions.

I wouldn't trust a skinny guy with my PC.
 
I find those "this fraction of a pack contains" things on food packets immensely irritating. The best one I found recently were those mini tubes of pringles which are either 42g or 47g. On the tube, it just says "25g contains".

WHY?!? :mad::mad::mad:
 
I'm definitely suffering from this too atm, especially as they've opened a Simply M&S at the petrol station 2 minutes from our work. I thought it'd be a healthy option compared to Maccy Ds or Pub lunches... but I was quite wrong.

The problem is I go in there quite hungry and end up buying far too much stuff. For example last week bought a cheese & tomato sandwich, a selection of little sausages and sausage rolls (shared with a friend..), bag of crisps, drink and some cheesecake for pudding. Total calorie count was almost 1300 which is more than a Big Mac meal! If I just have a sandwich and a bag of crisps i'm left hungry all afternoon.

I just can't help myself these days. I think the problem is shopping for lunch when hungry. I should buy it first thing in the morning after breakfast.. but then it's not as exciting :p
 
Last edited:
Voltar said:
On topic:

Sandwiches when bought, or anything pretty much when bought contains so many calories. M&S BLT is like 600. I could eat two of those in a sitting and feel like i've had at most a light lunch= 1/2 of my day's allowance and still hungry :(

The day's calorie allowance however has a flaw or two:

1. If Raymond, for example, is 4 feet and 11 inches tall and of normal build, he is recommended a maximum of 2.5k calories per day.
I am 6 feet and 5 inches and of large build, yet they say I should eat the same as Raymond.
Is there any logic behind that whatsoever? Surely a bigger man needs more to eat, by the simple logic that he is larger and requires more energy to fuel his larger system?

2. If Raymond has just turned 18, he is a man, and is recommended 2.5k calories per day.
Raymond's grandpa has just turned 100, he is a man, and is also recommended 2.5k calories per day (the same amount as his grandson).
Surely an 18 year old's body requires a larger energy intake than that of a 100 year old man?

I think that calorie counting is balls frankly! My friend does this (not dieting) and I inwardly do a little facepalm when she says the number of calories in a foodstuff that one would avoid if trying to better one's eating patterns.

It's what you eat not what you don't eat; counting calories assists in making you conscious of how much you're eating etc, but it doesn't necessarily assist in losing weight, as fewer calories doesn't necessarily mean healthier.
Click to expand...


I note your variables in each and everyone of us, the 2500 number is a typical amount and number used most common, it's not an absolute. I realise this and its why I aim to eat lower than than during the course of the day.

Voltar said:
Good on you for trying to shed some pounds! Steer well clear of those sandwich aisles mate: shocking how much (if you're watching what you're eating) of your 'RDA' a small sandwich triangle takes up, and yet it still leaves you hungry :(
Click to expand...

My "diet" is quite simple physics, I aim to use more energy than I take in each day so that my body will use the fat reserves and that should mean i lose weight.

In reality I watch what I eat, I noticebly eat less, eat "better" (i don't think i actually eat better than before, I just eat less bad stuff than before).

Things i have cut out - Chocolate, crisps (well, I have like a packet once every 2 weeks or so), Fizzy drinks (if i drink it, i have diet), yogurt (I used to have it for breakfast with some fruit but they are quite calorific !), and I cut down on a lot of carb.

I have fruit for breakfast normally, and with either 1 coffee or tea with a slice of lemon (people look at me funny at work). At lunch I normally get a M&S Salad, and aim that under 300 cal. Which means usually by 7pm typicall i've only had 400/450 cal the most. At dinner I go free on most food and i don't count calories at dinner but I do have some "rules". Like I will tend to have more vegetables than potatoes or bread (i'll still have some bread), and I'll try to pick some lean meat instead. After that i'll make myself a cup of coffee, which i make it the way I always have.

Now and again, i'll let go. Like I still have 1 bacon sandwich on Friday Morning, and I still go to Nandos now and again but i just avoid the chips instead. I even had a KFC last Friday !

Weird thing is, I don't miss chocolate. I still love it just the same, but i have no craving for it. Plus I don't have that afternoon dip anymore, the one where you crave food around 3:30, that craving has gone. Probbaly something to do with GI ?
 
Raymond Lin said:
West to Tesco today to grab lunch today, being on a diet (just eating less cal than i use) so I got into an habit of checking the calories content on pretty much everything at the moment. :eek:

Anyway, what I never even think twice of picking up and eat before, like a Prawn layer salad has 270 calories....I thought, that's not too bad...and then it says "Per Half Pack provides"....

Then i looked at a Chicken pasta....780 Calories, most sandwiches are around 500 calories, wack in a packet of walkers and a drink, you are talking about 800 to 900 calories for lunch.

If a male need 2500 calories to break even, that's 35% of the daily intake at lunch. I suppose on the surface it doesn't look too bad, but for me, dinner is normally a bigger meal, so if a sandwich and crisp can be 900 cal. Dinner can top 1000 to 1200 easy. Add breakfast, and if a Digestive (70cal each) with a tea in between...you can really add on the Ibs without realising !
Click to expand...


1) Shop purchased sandwiches are never that healthy.
2) Instead of crisps eat some fruit
3) when you drink I hope it is not a fizzy drink
4) Lunch is an important meal of the day, more important then dinner. Eat more for lunch and less for dinner.
 
D.P. said:
1) Shop purchased sandwiches are never that healthy.
2) Instead of crisps eat some fruit
3) when you drink I hope it is not a fizzy drink
4) Lunch is an important meal of the day, more important then dinner. Eat more for lunch and less for dinner.
Click to expand...

1 - I don't buy sandwiches anymore, in fact, i eat bread about once/twice a week at most
2 - I eat a LOT of fruit, I have 4 nectarines sitting on my desk now.
3 - 90% of what I drink is water
4 - Meh, the diet is working :p plus I like a nice piece of steak and can hardly have that at work lol
 
That's why I always make my own food to brign to work with me. I'm not a fussy eater, but I like to eat well and I need to eat in big quantities (I easily put away 3500 cals a day) but I don't eat lots of calories for the sake of it, they have to be from decent sources.

All the premade stuff is hideous. Then again a lot of the bread that is pre-manufactured is hideous too and awful. I do buy breads from the supermarket I admit it's about the worse thing I eat but I have very little of it, but it is useful to have sometimes.

"Diets" are not a short term thing, a diet is not just about food either. It's about a lifestyle change, a way of living and eating. I eat a lot of food, but I eat well - sure I have a few cheat days.

Nutrition is so important and people just shove anything down their necks thinking they're being good but it's a farce it really is.

Fortunately the fitter and more lean muscle mass you have the more calories you burn just "being alive".

We've become a nation or a world of carb hungry people. We never used to eat so many carbs - they are so cheap to produce and provide a lot of cheap energy, however increase glucose levels and creates huge insulin spikes. Our bodies were not designed really to have such carb heavy diets. Proteins and fats (good fats, we need fats in our diets much to people's ignorance) should be the major intake of calories, carbs are important, but the ratio should be biased in terms of calorific value to the former 2.

Anyone who spends time studying nutrition and exercise soon learns the falicy that we live in in terms of nutrition.
 
Youstolemyname said:
It's fairly simple, consume less calories than you expend and you will lose weight.
Click to expand...

You can lose weight, but you don't necessarily lose fat by that ethos.

Remember you can still be slim but have a lot of visceral fat in your body which is far more dangerous. Visceral fats are stored around the organs in your body and are the biggest risk of heart related illnesses and other typical illnesses associated with fat.
 
Pre-packed salads, pasta and sandwiches are pretty much junk anyway, the high sugar, fat and calorie levels are proof enough of cheap ingredients.
 
Freefaller said:
"Diets" are not a short term thing, a diet is not just about food either. It's about a lifestyle change, a way of living and eating. I eat a lot of food, but I eat well - sure I have a few cheat days.
Click to expand...

That too, hence i don't cut myself off the little things i love. I don't really think of it as a diet, hence it was in inverted commas, I just eat less junk, more lean meat and veg, more fruit. It's been like this for 3 months and i am totally fine with it, I can walk past the pastries counter without blinking an eye, i don't find the cakes tempting nor do i really want to eat out.
 
Doctor_Zhivago said:
Have a slimfast for breakfast 210 kal, again for lunch 210 kal, then 1000 kal of food love for supper = great success
Click to expand...

I hope thats sarcasm, otherwise its the most retarded statement i've ever read.

As for those quoting govt. guidelines they're generally balls. FreeFaller hit the nail on the head with less calories in than expended may = weight loss. But this weight loss does not necessarily = fat loss.

Although calorie counting is a flawed logic its at least a good starting point for those starting out to get a better understanding. Though you ladies should venture over to SA and read the stickies for better guidence
 
Raymond Lin said:
That too, hence i don't cut myself off the little things i love. I don't really think of it as a diet, hence it was in inverted commas, I just eat less junk, more lean meat and veg, more fruit. It's been like this for 3 months and i am totally fine with it, I can walk past the pastries counter without blinking an eye, i don't find the cakes tempting nor do i really want to eat out.
Click to expand...

Congrats on the weight loss so far and keep up the good work, that last sentence is very encouraging in terms of you making a lifestyle choice rather than some fad diet
 
Also this 2,500kcal figure banded about is bull, most men won't get near that.

People also think that walking to work is an excuse to pig out, it takes an average man about an hour of walking to burn off a Mars bar. How much of your day is spent walking, I doubt it's an hour.

People just don't have a clue about nutrition, it's scary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom