Page 1 of 1
Recent Conversation
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:57 pm
by Over43
I am going to paraphrase a recent conversation I had with an acquintance. At the time I had lost about ten pounds. You judge for yourselves.
Acquintance: You look like you have been losing weight.
Me: I have, I have lost about ten plus pounds.
A: How?
M: I lift weights one day a week, and I eat three meals a day.
A: You only lift once a week?
M: Yes, it is called Super Slow weight lifting, I started again about March 1.
A: That can't work, you aren't doing any cardio. What about the diet?
M: It is called the No S Diet. Developed by Reinhard Engels. He is a genius from Massachusetts. You eat three meals a day, no snacks, no sweets, no seconds, except for days that start with S.
A: That doesn't work you have to eat at least six meals a day to ramp up you metabolism.
M: I'll see you tomorrow.
I'm not sure what else I could have said?
Re: Recent Conversation
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:46 pm
by earl7z
Over43 wrote:A: That can't work, you aren't doing any cardio. What about the diet?
.
.
.
A: That doesn't work you have to eat at least six meals a day to ramp up you metabolism.
.
.
.
I'm not sure what else I could have said?
"I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong," comes to mind

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:33 am
by little lion
Nobody believes me either. That's not true, one of my brothers believed me. He's been nos-ing since October and he's lost a lot of weight. He's gone down 4 pants sizes. I've lost 35 lbs. I tell everyone who asks me, and everyone has some excuse about why it works for me but won't for them.
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:18 am
by oolala53
People can't believe that they would actually choose to eat reasonably without more stricture. They also can't accept that most traditional diets have actually failed to teach most dieters to be happy with eating less. Hype mongers are very good at getting people to believe because hype appeals to human weakness, not calm rationality.
I don't think there is anything else you could have said. My colleagues have seen me lose and maintain, but no one asks anymore.
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:52 am
by clarinetgal
It sounds like your colleague had his mind already made up, so he wouldn't be open to new ideas.
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:54 am
by Dandelion
One thing I've noticed lately is how unpopular the idea of 'gluttony' is - or any suggestion that maybe, no matter how 'healthy' our food choices, maybe we just eat too darn much.
I saw a conversation on bite counting on another forum. The OP was blasted -mostly by foolish, extreme examples of why it couldn't work, even though you could substitute the word 'calorie counting' for 'bite counting' in each example and see how ridiculous it was, but largely because the reason people were claiming it wouldn't work for them was because they wouldn't be able to eat the huge volumes of food they were able to eat by counting calories.
While they were at it, they also belittled a similar 'fad diet' where you just eat three plates of food a day. They all got a good laugh out of that one.
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:53 am
by oolala53
Oh, yeah, those faddist French and Italians eating three meals a day for generations.
Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:57 am
by eschano
Hahahahaha! Thank you all for brightening my day.
I know those conversations too.
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 4:18 am
by uschi
funny!
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 11:58 am
by finallyfull
The longer I No S the more AMAZED I am at how completely brainwashed the entire country seems to be against three squares a day.
This was a foundational cultural norm, and it's been blown to bits in a very short time. I have yet to find anyone except people on this message board that hasn't drunk the kool-aid. If I mention I eat three meals a day, I might as well say I'm on a liquid diet.
Crazy is the new normal.
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:40 pm
by oolala53
I can't believe how much people think eating often will keep them from wanting to overeat. I was never hungry when I binged. One diet doctor recommended having a snack before going to a big eating event. Oh, how many such events I ruined by starting before I got there! He also claimed there was no problem in eating a snack bar in 90 seconds rather than skip a snack. If there is anything that helps limit eating is learning over time to really savor what we do eat.
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:45 am
by eschano
Hahahaha! Oolala, that's such horrendously bad advice I think it is hilarious!
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2014 8:04 am
by Skelton
Yep, that 3 meal a day fad diet that I remember was the only way to eat growing up in England in the 1960's and 1970's!
I didn't know anyone who was overweight, never mind obese.
And now, so many are brainwashed into eating meals and healthy snacks, I read some advice recently that advised people to eat every 2 hours!
Back to the 60's and 70's. Sometimes when I came home from school in the afternoon, I'd be hungry. Most of the time, my mum would offer me a glass of milk or a piece of fruit and that had to suffice. It did the trick and I'd get through to dinner time without feeling starved, but hungry enough to enjoy a family dinner, that we enjoyed together seated at the table.
Both my mother and grandmother would bake quite often, but the cakes or sweet pies they made would be eaten in small quantity, after a meal. And definitely not every day.
I also remember hearing adults saying: "Don't eat between meals, you'll ruin your appetite". (They also encouraged plate clearing, telling us that "babies are starving in Biafra", but plates were smaller than they are now!)
Of course, the food we ate was very much home cooked, apart from on a Friday evening when we would have "chippy tea", ie fish and chips (fries) or pie and chips from the local chip shop.
Looking back, we ate pretty much what we wanted to, but 3 times a day and in moderation. Sounds familiar ?
I was trying to remember when snacking became the norm here in England, and I think it was in the mid 1980's, but I'm not sure. I do know that it wasn't the norm in the 60's, or 70's to have a supply of snack foods in the fridge or junk food in the cupboard.
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 1:43 pm
by MerryKat
Lol!!! Thanks for a good laugh. I have had my fair share of these conversations!
Sadly (as Reinhardt says) most people don't want to fix things they want something to blame! It could never be their fault!
I now try not to discuss it unless someone really is curious. I have had a few people come and look but as far as I know only 1 has actually tried the plan. and they are loving it!!
My mum uses it for maintenance - she is tiny and always has been but has found as she has gotten older she can no longer eat whatever she wants and stay the same size.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 5:52 am
by CuriousAT
I'm not surprised that people scoff at NoS. But even with one week under my belt, and not a completely successful week at that, I can recognize the benefit from this.
NoS is beginning to teach me about the habits of my own body. I have already learned that if I skimp at breakfast, I will be plagued by thoughts of eating and hunger pangs all day long. I also learned the direct correlation between not sleeping and limited water intake and sweet cravings.
If one wants to be scientific about it, NoS is very helpful. It limits our intake of sweets, by far the worst offenders in our diets. It also teaches us how to eat so that we can stay full for the entirety of 3 to 4 hours. So obviously, it will work.

It's just that the only reason it works is because it is the only eating habit (I refuse to call it a diet) where we have to put in 100% effort.
Cheers!!!
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 12:40 pm
by MJ7910
a little bit of weightlifting can really help. i have been injuring my back/neck while trying to lift too heavy so starting over with lighter weights and just doing it slowly if possible. trying to do it 3x a week if i can along with some stretching . i do also walk 2x a week and do a long run 1x a week. i think that's enough cardio for me. it's not really intense except the one time a week i run. i think, to each their own. i never liked 6 meals a day. i always felt like i was always eating "a little" of something to make it like 200 calories and that never satisfied me. it just got on my nerves to eat that little! i want 3 normal to big meals... breakfast is smaller but lunch and dinner if i estimated might be 600-700 calories. that's just how it works for me.
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:37 pm
by chomp0
That's hilarious but I kind of feel bad for people that try to research dieting, there's so much conflicting advise and crazy fads out there. I'm glad I didn't fall for any of it.
Your acquintance really believes that the
only way to loose weight (besides cardio) is to eat at least six meals a day to ramp up your metabolism...
"I'm not sure what else I could have said?"
Just keep doing what your doing. Congrats on losing ten pounds.
Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 4:45 pm
by leafy_greens
little lion wrote:Nobody believes me either. That's not true, one of my brothers believed me. He's been nos-ing since October and he's lost a lot of weight. He's gone down 4 pants sizes. I've lost 35 lbs. I tell everyone who asks me, and everyone has some excuse about why it works for me but won't for them.
This is true. People have been conditioned to think there has to be some drastic, insane weight loss plan to actually lose weight. So if you tell them you are losing weight by eating sensibly, they don't believe it. It's hard and slow to lose weight by eating sensibly, which is not what most people want to bother with.
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:57 pm
by Dandelion
I was somewhere recently and overheard a conversation that included:
'If you want to lose weight, you HAVE to eat small meals every two hours, or your body goes into starvation mode and hangs on to every calorie'
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:20 am
by eschano
Lol Dandelion!