I know you're not the most rational of people lys, but surely you vans we how calorie dense foods (ie high fat and sugar) provide a massive excess of calories.for the same volume as the low fat low sugar alternatives. Which means that the lower alternatives give better relief to cravings
Any other single people live off microwave meals?
- Thread starter Johnnytoxic
- Start date
I know you're not the most rational of people lys, but surely you vans we how calorie dense foods (ie high fat and sugar) provide a massive excess of calories.for the same volume as the low fat low sugar alternatives. Which means that the lower alternatives give better relief to cravings
I know fat is calorie dense, it is however very satisfying and tends to trigger the full feeling sooner
Fat is usually replaced with sugar which has lower nutritional value than sugar.
No it doesn't "full" is controlled by volume not calories, hence why protein is more filling as it stays in the stomach for loneger and also how those diet shakes.work.
And I'm not sure how you think fat can be replaced with sugar given they do very different things in the cooking process.
And I'm not sure how you think fat can be replaced with sugar given they do very different things in the cooking process.
In my experience they give a temporary relief and you end up eating more of them. It's like people smoking more Marlboro Lights instead of fewer Marlboro Reds. It ends up levelling out, but those products sell more units so they make more cash.
Full isn't controlled solely by volume. Also, hence why protein is more filling? Nope, protein is dense, that directly contradicts your claims on volume.
I don't mean that fat is literally replaced. Fat reduced food as it is would taste bland, sugar is used to increase the flavour.
End of the day ready meals aren't going to be great regardless of anything. Fat is very good for you, which a lot of people don't realise. And in fact Ketosis can be a great way to lose body fat, you have to eat fat to burn body fat.
Last edited:
Low calories have nothing to do with low sugar.
Because protein is digested in the stomach not the small intestine so protein stays on the stomach for longer meaning you feel Fuller for longer.
Ah so now you're admitting that you're just making **** up on the spot, because sugar would in no way replace the taste of fat. I recommend you learn to cool or at least read the back of packets before spouting ******** in future
They do by volume, low calorie will be low in fat and sugar for the same volume as fat and sugar are incredibly calorie dense.
And practically no one can stick to a ketosis diet without outside help it's incredibly.hard.to do
If you say so *ahem*
What would I achieve by learning to cool? What exactly is that? Putting stuff in the fridge?
No it's not. Loads of people have a keto diet. I understand that people are so used to eating things like sandwiches, pasta, rice etc. But if you cut it out it's most of the carbs gone already.
Last edited:
Don't nit pick it's obvious what he meant. Picking out grammatical errors instead of replying to his argument is making you seem all the more credible (that's sarcasm btw).
No a lot of people try, most fail outside of the very dedicated. Ketosis is a hers thing for your body to go through requires a lot of planning and effort and a lot of willpower, and more importantly to the subject doesn't come in microwave meals
Well done, you've proved you know **** all about cooking, I'm so sorry that I made a typo that you couldn't figure out, next time you're in the kitchen ask a grown up why sugar is not a substitute for fat in recipes.
No I haven't. I can cook fine. You're just misunderstanding me on purpose to further your argument.
Typically, food labelled as fat reduced is laden with sugar. At no point did I suggest that they have a set meal and they reduce the fat content and fill it with sugar instead. They simply produce meals where they can fill them with sugar and not use any of much fat.
For instance, Weight Watchers ready meals all tend to say low fat, but they are laden with sugar, ergo are still calorie dense with little nutritional content. They have the opposite desired effect which is of course no surprise since they want people to continue buying them as they know a large number of people rely on their products as part of their. "weight loss" schemes.
Captain strawman or what?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
No, fat isn't bad for you, you die without it, it's vital for thousands of processes in the body. Fat fills you up significantly more(per calorie) than carbs do, it filters your insulin response(well in particular the omega's do) and in general "low" fat food will have a higher portion of saturated fats.
Eating something with 20 grams of fat that is 5grams saturated fat, 10 grams polysaturated fat and 5 grams monosaturated fat is SIGNIFICANTLY healthier for you than eating some low fat meal that has 10 grams of fat removed but leaves you with 5 grams saturated fat, 4 grams poly and 1 gram mono.
It's to a degree(not via the same processes, but in terms of thinking about it) cholesterol, there is good and bad and a meal with a BALANCE of both is good for you while a meal with less cholesterol but all or mostly bad is very bad for you.
In general what low fat meals do is take all the constituant parts rather than an existing product. At which point they throw in cheap refined carbs, cheap refined sugar, cheap horrible bad fats and you get your statistically great low calorie low fat low salt meal... but there is also nothing good in it.
It's hard to make a say macaroni cheese with good quality everything then "remove" the bits you don't want. So mostly these meals are made up of individual bits. As with most supermarkets they generally use cheap crap. There is a reason in america that corn syrup is in everything, because it's stupid cheap and they can fill up products with it for cheaper than better quality less refined for you foods.
Calories aren't king for losing weight, or controlling it. People seem to forget your body actually uses what you put in it for more than just energy, more energy is spent in the day maintaining your body. Feed your body bad fuel and bad parts and your body can't work efficiently or do a whole lot with it.
Tefal, fullness isn't about volume and it's also self defeating. if you take out fat or other things and eat more of other things, you just get used to eating a larger volume.
Fullness isn't due to volume for the most part purely because the stomach is INSANELY stretchy. sometimes you can eat an entire pizza, sometimes a couple scrambled eggs leave you so full you couldn't eat anything else... there is a reason for that. Anyway it's self defeating because on any diet EVERYONE slips, if you are used to eating a large volume, when you slip... you're simply more likely to eat a large volume of crappy food. It's a mental thing, a learned behaviour. When dieting you should be eating smaller portions and training yourself to only want to eat smaller portions.
Because the stomach is "adjustable" in size, significantly, fullness isn't based on volume. Almost anyone who eats higher fat/protein/low carb meals will feel fuller on less calories and be less inclined to over eat.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,636
ITT Diet warriors start forum war 3.
Eat clean no processed crapp etc etc, don't eat too many calories, LOTS of veg is very good for you and promotes great mental health.
DONE
Eat clean no processed crapp etc etc, don't eat too many calories, LOTS of veg is very good for you and promotes great mental health.
DONE