Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

6600 Calories A Day

2

Posts

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    LRG wrote:
    geckahn wrote:
    LRG wrote:
    Ok, so I'm gonna start a muscle building diet soon, hitting the weights and all that; is this report saying I can hit up the doller menu for cheap and great tasting food for thats gonna put on mad calories which helps me put on muscle?

    awesome.

    haha, I doubt that would work for some reason. . .

    If you are seriously looking to start training soon I can point you in the direction of a thread with a ridiculous amount of excellent advice.

    The fitness thread in H/A? I know of it and I also got a book with alot of great info.

    I'm just excited at the idea that Micky D's isn't necessarily unhealthy for you since the doller menu is cheap, tasty, and it'd give me the extra calories to build muscle; I could eat it everyday for 8 weeks, but I doubt it will.
    Well, I wouldn't, because I've seriously gone off it, but I think the overall message I wanted to give with this thread was "fuck you fundamentalist dieticians, you're still fat and I'm still laughing at you"

    electricitylikesme on
  • Aroused BullAroused Bull Registered User
    edited January 2007
    Feral: What is a "number one"?

    Aroused Bull on
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar Audio Game Developer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Feral: What is a "number one"?

    :?

    You're not actually asking that are you?

    Incenjucar on
  • Aroused BullAroused Bull Registered User
    edited January 2007
    Incenjucar wrote:
    Feral: What is a "number one"?

    :?

    You're not actually asking that are you?

    What, am I supposed to know what a given fast food menu item is?

    Aroused Bull on
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2007
    Incenjucar wrote:
    Feral: What is a "number one"?

    :?

    You're not actually asking that are you?

    What, am I supposed to know what a given fast food menu item is?
    A hamburger, fries, and a drink.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Aroused BullAroused Bull Registered User
    edited January 2007
    Elkamil wrote:
    Incenjucar wrote:
    Feral: What is a "number one"?

    :?

    You're not actually asking that are you?

    What, am I supposed to know what a given fast food menu item is?
    A hamburger, fries, and a drink.
    See, that makes sense, but why the hell would I have known that? I don't eat fast food.

    Aroused Bull on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    geckahn wrote:
    There were other things important the movie did, like the whole thing about nutrition information at McDonalds.

    and McDonald's got rid of supersize.
    No, they just started calling "large" medium and "supersize" large.

    Salvation122 on
    sig.png
  • geckahngeckahn Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    geckahn wrote:
    There were other things important the movie did, like the whole thing about nutrition information at McDonalds.

    and McDonald's got rid of supersize.
    No, they just started calling "large" medium and "supersize" large.

    oh for real? sneaky motherfuckers. I never go there so I owuldnt know.

    Wendys > McD's

    geckahn on
  • real_pochaccoreal_pochacco Registered User
    edited January 2007
    Jr. Bacon Cheeseburgers ftw

    real_pochacco on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    geckahn wrote:
    geckahn wrote:
    There were other things important the movie did, like the whole thing about nutrition information at McDonalds.

    and McDonald's got rid of supersize.
    No, they just started calling "large" medium and "supersize" large.
    oh for real? sneaky motherfuckers. I never go there so I owuldnt know.

    Wendys > McD's
    Yeah, I pretty much always go to Wendy's too, and I stopped at a McD on a road trip to grab something to eat because it's what was availible. I didn't realize they'd switched names around and shit and ordered a large, meaning "That size that's still dumbly big but not so big I will shit my pants in an hour" and looked at what they gave me and was all WTF. Then the register jockey explained, and I called them sneaky motherfuckers, and everyone had a good laugh.

    Salvation122 on
    sig.png
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    But secondly, the results in the variance of the effect that the 6600 calorie diet had on people are amazing. Some people put on muscle mass rather then fat and didn't suffer any apparent liver problems, others suffered almost the same as the movie. Some people appear to deal with the extra calories by increasing their body temperature (and thus basal metabolic rate).
    So, no one seemed to really discuss this portion of the study.

    I think it's interesting. I have a feeling I know what the problem may very well be: high-fructose corn syrup.

    Yeah, I know, I'm like a broken record with this shit. But there was a study that came out a year or so ago, that correlates a rise in obesity rates with a rise in soda consumption. Yeah, I know, correlation/causation fallacy, but seriously, you're talking about a bunch of calories that are essentially a nutritional vacuum. Liquid death, if you will.

    Thanatos on
  • TiemlerTiemler Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Law of Conservation of Energy 1, Lard-Assed War on Science 0
    Thanatos wrote:
    I think it's interesting. I have a feeling I know what the problem may very well be: high-fructose corn syrup.

    I quit that shit completely years ago. Anyone who cares about their health, not talking longevity here, but rather quality of life, really ought to do the same.

    Oh, and those Sobe drinks? Fuck those. They're full of the same shit. Just look at the ingredients list. Even their "green tea" is basically a giant bottle of cola.

    Tiemler on
  • The CheeseThe Cheese Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Thanatos wrote:
    Yeah, I know, I'm like a broken record with this shit. But there was a study that came out a year or so ago, that correlates a rise in obesity rates with a rise in soda consumption. Yeah, I know, correlation/causation fallacy, but seriously, you're talking about a bunch of calories that are essentially a nutritional vacuum. Liquid death, if you will.
    I read a book that talked about this. Fat Land? Something like that.

    The Cheese on
  • Ant000Ant000 Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Thanatos wrote:
    But secondly, the results in the variance of the effect that the 6600 calorie diet had on people are amazing. Some people put on muscle mass rather then fat and didn't suffer any apparent liver problems, others suffered almost the same as the movie. Some people appear to deal with the extra calories by increasing their body temperature (and thus basal metabolic rate).
    So, no one seemed to really discuss this portion of the study.

    I think it's interesting. I have a feeling I know what the problem may very well be: high-fructose corn syrup.

    Yeah, I know, I'm like a broken record with this shit. But there was a study that came out a year or so ago, that correlates a rise in obesity rates with a rise in soda consumption. Yeah, I know, correlation/causation fallacy, but seriously, you're talking about a bunch of calories that are essentially a nutritional vacuum. Liquid death, if you will.


    So easy to consume too, going back to the OP comment about how normal people would have to work to become obese - not necessarily so when taking into account the liquid calories that are so easy to ignore. When a weight loss thread came about in H/A all I contributed was: Cut out the [email protected] I've seen first hand what switching to water alone for your drinking needs can do to a person's waist line in multiple cases, and it is staggering.

    Also, high fructose corn syrup, it's not just in your large soda. It's in your McDonald's bun, in the mayo and the ketchup and sauces, the salad dressings, the croutons: Its everywhere man!

    That, combined with buckets of trans-fat and preservatives, and generally low quality ingredients...just because this study showed it doesn't automatically make you fat, doesn't mean it's healthy and that your body won't eventually pay the price.

    Ant000 on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    I was working at a fast food joint less then 6 months ago and I will tell you it is fucking TERRIFYING how much corn is in everything.

    Anything sweet is sweetened with corn syrup. Any bread is made from corn meal. It goes on and on.

    shryke on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Ant000 wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    But secondly, the results in the variance of the effect that the 6600 calorie diet had on people are amazing. Some people put on muscle mass rather then fat and didn't suffer any apparent liver problems, others suffered almost the same as the movie. Some people appear to deal with the extra calories by increasing their body temperature (and thus basal metabolic rate).
    So, no one seemed to really discuss this portion of the study.

    I think it's interesting. I have a feeling I know what the problem may very well be: high-fructose corn syrup.

    Yeah, I know, I'm like a broken record with this shit. But there was a study that came out a year or so ago, that correlates a rise in obesity rates with a rise in soda consumption. Yeah, I know, correlation/causation fallacy, but seriously, you're talking about a bunch of calories that are essentially a nutritional vacuum. Liquid death, if you will.
    So easy to consume too, going back to the OP comment about how normal people would have to work to become obese - not necessarily so when taking into account the liquid calories that are so easy to ignore. When a weight loss thread came about in H/A all I contributed was: Cut out the [email protected] I've seen first hand what switching to water alone for your drinking needs can do to a person's waist line in multiple cases, and it is staggering.

    Also, high fructose corn syrup, it's not just in your large soda. It's in your McDonald's bun, in the mayo and the ketchup and sauces, the salad dressings, the croutons: Its everywhere man!

    That, combined with buckets of trans-fat and preservatives, and generally low quality ingredients...just because this study showed it doesn't automatically make you fat, doesn't mean it's healthy and that your body won't eventually pay the price.
    Yeah, the real problem with the sodas in particular is that your body doesn't think they have calories. Like, they don't fill your stomach at all, and even if you drink 3000 calories' worth, you'll still be hungry.

    Thanatos on
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Low Key wrote:
    Feral wrote:
    That, and this might be venturing off-topic, but I think it's ludicrous that "physical education" in public schools involves very little actual education. I didn't actually learn anything in PE. PE would be a really good opportunity to educate people about their physical bodies, like appropriate caloric intakes and how much a fast food value menu meal really is. Meh.

    How long did you do PE for? As an elective subject over here it involves a fair amount of basic anatomy (more than bilogy anyway) and nutritional information. As a compulsory subject though it's just designed to get kids active, improve motor skills and help them discover sports that they might enjoy on a long term basis. And teaching them to taunt the weak.

    Two years in high school (typically ages 14-18 over here), and all of elementary and junior high school (typically ages 5-13). And yes it was compulsory.

    We learned nothing about the human body. Absolutely nothing. Also, in high school, there was a seperate classroom course called "Health" which was really just a euphemism for "Sex Ed." Everything I ever learned about exercise or nutrition was in college.
    Thanatos wrote:
    I think it's interesting. I have a feeling I know what the problem may very well be: high-fructose corn syrup.

    I've been trying to eliminate it from my diet, which is proving to be harder than it really should be. I don't even drink regular soda. HFCS is in fucking everything.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • GimGim a quietly erotic life Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Go my children and read The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan. It goes a great deal into the industry of corn.

    Gim on
  • SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    The fact is, most people don't go around downloading nutirtional information off the internet and carefully counting the calories of each and every thing they eat. Hell, people didn't even know what a calorie was until fairly recently in terms of the history of dining. So I don't see the point of, "Yes, you can lose weight at McDonalds, as long as you do exactly the opposite of what people usually do when they buy from there."
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.

    I wonder if the atkins fad helped people inadvertantly by helping them cut down on trans and HFCS. Every baked good these days seems to have trans in it. Hell, even the "fresh baked" bread at Subway.

    Schrodinger on
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    In the UK nowadays they have RDA charts on the packaging, and for the whole meal option in the little nutrition booklets they keep by the counters. They give the percentage daily allowances of fat, calories, salt, sugar and protein.

    I mean, true most people dont know what a percentage is, or how to add up to 100 but still, its a start. I think it does show that they are at least vaguely concerned with their image, and it removes the excuse "Noone told me it was bad"

    If you want fast food, dont drink the drink, thats my policy. You can just about justify the burger and the fries, provided its your main meal of the day but the drink is totally pointless. Its sugar in water! Youd be better off supersizing the meal and drinking water. I bet if McDonalds started only selling diet coke (Yes I know its bad too since that sugar replacement thing can be bad for you) then the obesity epidemic would be over :)

    Wishful thinking away!

    tbloxham on
    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • GoodOmensGoodOmens Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Irond Will wrote:
    Also, like someone else mentioned, the "McD twice a day" diet really isn't all that outside the norm for a lot of people. One of my brothers used to hit McD a couple times per day for a supersize. Dude put on a morbid amount of weight over a short period of time.

    Wow, I can't comprehend that. I felt guilty this weekend when I went to Burger King for a double cheesburger and fries.

    I suspect that going to (for example) McD's regularly is something like the people who absolutely NEED their Dunkin' Donuts coffee everyday. It's routine verging on dependency.

    Of course, I'm about to buy a 3 Musketeers bar, so...

    GoodOmens on
    steam_sig.png
    IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Weight does not equal health. Eating McDonalds everyday may not make you fat(poundwise at least) but it will be bad for your heart, liver and jsut about everything else in your body. It's entirely possible to be skinny and be in extremely bad health. Likewise it possible to have a few extra pounds and be in excellent health

    nexuscrawler on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited January 2007
    Shinto wrote:
    I went to Burger King today.

    I go once every two years.

    I'm pretty sure it is McDonalds that uses the beef tallow with the fries.
    Supposedly, none of the big ones do in the US anymore.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Irond Will wrote:
    Shinto wrote:
    I went to Burger King today.

    I go once every two years.

    I'm pretty sure it is McDonalds that uses the beef tallow with the fries.
    Supposedly, none of the big ones do in the US anymore.

    Which is sad. They use to put a little bacon in whatever they use now, but I think some (Hindu?) vegans objected to that. Use to be that the fries were the only reason to go to McDs. Now there is none.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Irond Will wrote:
    Shinto wrote:
    I went to Burger King today.

    I go once every two years.

    I'm pretty sure it is McDonalds that uses the beef tallow with the fries.
    Supposedly, none of the big ones do in the US anymore.

    Which is sad. They use to put a little bacon in whatever they use now, but I think some (Hindu?) vegans objected to that. Use to be that the fries were the only reason to go to McDs. Now there is none.

    Well, vegetarians did too, since french fries are supposed to be potato.

    Fencingsax on
    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
  • firesidefireside Registered User
    edited January 2007
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    fireside on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.

    nexuscrawler on
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.

    Not that hard to find a big honking steak and a stick of butter.

    MrMister on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    MrMister wrote:
    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.

    Not that hard to find a big honking steak and a stick of butter.

    Now try finding that eating out at a deli for lunch.

    nexuscrawler on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2007
    Feral wrote:
    Your basic Burger King number 1 is 1230 calories (after a 479 calorie medium soda), not including cheese.

    There's something wrong with that soda calorie figure. One 12oz can of soda is about 150 calories. Fast food soda is invariably watered down compared to canned soda, and they typically fill the damned cup half full of ice. No way in hell is a medium soda the equivalent of 3 cans of soda. It would have to be, like, a 50 oz cup.

    edit: And if you remove the soda, that's not a horrible number of calories for a meal. It's 750, which is what each meal should be anyway. It's not exactly a well balanced meal, no, but it's not that bad, calorie-wise.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • firesidefireside Registered User
    edited January 2007
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    fireside on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    fireside wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.

    nexuscrawler on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2007
    fireside wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.

    Unless you cook your own meals, of course.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • RoanthRoanth Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    ElJeffe wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.

    Unless you cook your own meals, of course.

    Or, you know, order a sandwich at a deli and remove the two slices of bread (eat the rest like a meat salad with a knife and fork). Seen co-workers fo this plenty of times

    Roanth on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited January 2007
    GoodOmens wrote:
    Irond Will wrote:
    Also, like someone else mentioned, the "McD twice a day" diet really isn't all that outside the norm for a lot of people. One of my brothers used to hit McD a couple times per day for a supersize. Dude put on a morbid amount of weight over a short period of time.

    Wow, I can't comprehend that. I felt guilty this weekend when I went to Burger King for a double cheesburger and fries.

    I suspect that going to (for example) McD's regularly is something like the people who absolutely NEED their Dunkin' Donuts coffee everyday. It's routine verging on dependency.

    Of course, I'm about to buy a 3 Musketeers bar, so...
    Are you in Salem, GoodOmens? Nowhere outside New England would anyone consider Dunkins coffee except in desperation, let alone every day.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited January 2007
    ElJeffe wrote:
    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.
    Unless you cook your own meals, of course.
    Jeff is a deacon in the One True Church of Home Cookin'

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • firesidefireside Registered User
    edited January 2007
    Roanth wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.

    Unless you cook your own meals, of course.

    Or, you know, order a sandwich at a deli and remove the two slices of bread (eat the rest like a meat salad with a knife and fork). Seen co-workers fo this plenty of times
    Or just get a salad with no dressing.

    fireside on
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited January 2007
    Reading this thread makes me want a burger.

    [spoiler:a202b498aa]I learn nothing! :P [/spoiler:a202b498aa]

    Pata on
    SRWWSig.pngEpisode 5: Mecha-World, Mecha-nisim, Mecha-beasts
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2007
    fireside wrote:
    Roanth wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    fireside wrote:
    It's pretty obvious that quantity is the major factor in losing weight. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. That's why diets like Atkins are so goddamned stupid, because they are based around people avoiding important parts of a healthy diet for no reason at all.
    What foods do you avoid on diets like Atkins "for no reason at all"?

    honeslty he makes a good point. One of the reasons people on Atkins proably lose weight isn't so much the carbs. It's that you always have to be looking for Atkins friendly foods and as a result end up eating less since it's harder to find.
    It's hard to find meats, fish, cheeses, and vegetables?

    It's hard to find things made of nothing but those yes.

    Unless you cook your own meals, of course.

    Or, you know, order a sandwich at a deli and remove the two slices of bread (eat the rest like a meat salad with a knife and fork). Seen co-workers fo this plenty of times
    Or just get a salad with no dressing.

    Aren't oil-and-vinegar dressing pretty low in carbs? Or any dressing that isn't very sweet?

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • firesidefireside Registered User
    edited January 2007
    ElJeffe wrote:
    Aren't oil-and-vinegar dressing pretty low in carbs? Or any dressing that isn't very sweet?
    Probably. But manufacturers do enjoy sneaking sweeteners and thickeners (most likely a starch) into the oddest things.

    fireside on
2
Sign In or Register to comment.