Is Anybody Else A........

JustAnnie · Post by **JustAnnie** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:59 pm

Plain Jane eater like I am?

Wow......I perused some of the diet logs of people in the daily check ins and I feel like I'm living in an earlier century. They're eating all kinds of exotic veggies and meats prepared in gourmet type ways and I'm sitting here eating stuff like:

Cereal and banana

Sandwich and Soup

Chicken, potato, and salad.

How boring AM I?

Jaxhil · Post by **Jaxhil** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:07 pm

I tend to eat plainer foods too, especially for lunch and breakfast. Cereal doesn't fill me up though, so I usually have something with egg (like an egg and potato taco, or maybe 1 piece of bacon) and a yogurt. That usually keeps me going till lunch, which is frequently a bean and cheese quesadilla, or maybe a sandwich with a few fritos (yum, i don't eat many, but I love 'em!). I would really LOVE to have soup and sandwiches more frequently; I should make soup ahead and have it with lunch daily. It's really satisfying and good for you to boot!

Suppers vary, but we have four kids, so its usually pretty basic stuff; pasta, salad, hamburgers, fish sticks, (for them, we usually get something else, LOL), baked chicken, vegetables, things like that.

Besides, what you're eating sounds healthy and EASY-a MAJOR plus in my book!!

Hilary

Ray E. · Post by **Ray E.** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:31 pm

I'm a fairly boring eater too:

eggs & fruit for breakfast
PB&J, veggies (raw peppers and carrots usually) and fruit for lunch
meat, veggies and bread for dinner

I know what fills and satiates me so this type of eating suits me. If you ever read any of Clarence Bass's stuff (cbass.com) you'll see he eats the same way and credits this way of eating with keeping him in such great shape.

Ray

joasia · Post by **joasia** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:08 am

It may seem boring, but it sounds healthy!

Jammin' Jan · Post by **Jammin' Jan** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:21 pm

My meals are so dull and repetitive, I'm surprised anyone reads my check-in.

Breakfast: eggs, bread, juice
Lunch: meat, fruit, veg
Dinner: meat, fruit, veg

Doesn't get any more plain-Jane than that!

JustAnnie · Post by **JustAnnie** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:23 am

Well, at least I'm not alone!! The problems I had with some diets came when I was looking over some of their diet menus and they looked so foreign to me. A tilapia or salmon filet with cajun spices is about as wild as I get!!

Jammin' Jan · Post by **Jammin' Jan** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:20 pm

Yes, I agree. Also, those recipes in diet books call for too many ingredients. I don't have the time, interest, or money to put into eating like that. Besides, if you keep it simple, you can actually taste the food you're eating. Otherwise, it's just a lot of seasoning and sauce.

When I was doing the McDougall Program, I remember that Dr. McD said in one of his books that the less variety you have in your diet, the easier it is to control your eating and thus lose weight. He suggested two items at each meal. For example, oatmeal and fruit at breakfast, potatoes or beans or grains with vegetable for lunch and dinner. He said that if there is a lot of variety, then we are more likely to overeat. Over time, I came to see the practical wisdom in what he said, and I guess my meals have come to reflect that pattern. Three items, chosen from protein, fruit, vegetable, and starch, prepared simply and nutritiously. This is very satisfying on a daily basis. Sometimes I mess up, but I always come back to this pattern. I guess eventually we figure out what works for us and stay with it.

Kevin · Post by **Kevin** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:58 pm

While I can see limiting variety for higher calorie foods (meat, starch), I can't see limiting it for vegetables. I eat as many kinds of vegetables at a meal as I can. We usually have at least raw carrots, tomatoes, cucumber and peppers. Then maybe green beans, broccoli, or cauliflower cooked.

That variety, to me anyway, is important, and it has so little caloric content and so much nutritional content that I can't imagine it being a bad thing.

hexagon · Post by **hexagon** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:25 pm

Whatever works for you and makes you happy--I wouldn't worry about it. I find that my breakfasts are pretty plain, and my lunch/dinner can be kind of repetitive at times because I just cook up a big pot of whatever on Sunday and eat it for the rest of the week. (Ok, what I cook might be considered funky by some people here...)

I agree with Kevin about eating a variety of vegetables, and frankly, I don't think overall that variety is a bad thing, at least for me. I love to cook with lots of spices and make spicy food from many cuisines. I don't the variety has caused me to overeat. In fact, it seems like my overeating has involved bland "boring" foods, not stuff like kimchee or curry. (I can't really envision a kimchee binge...)

As I said, if you're happy with what you eat and you feel good, that's what matters!

Jammin' Jan · Post by **Jammin' Jan** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:53 pm

By "limiting" I didn't really mean to limit the types of vegetables; we McDougallers ate lots and lots of different kinds of veggies. They are so good for you! Dr. McD was just saying that not having lots of different choices at any one meal was more conducive to weight loss than the buffet model of dining.

wosnes · Post by **wosnes** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 11:56 am

A tilapia or salmon filet with cajun spices is about as wild as I get!!

I don't even get that adventurous! A little olive oil, salt and pepper usually does it for me.

About variety, though...there are certainly different schools of thought on that. Limit the variety in a meal or not. I know some people/cultures think that more variety in a meal (including sweets, but in the form of fruit), keeps one from craving other things between meals.

Then there's another kind of variety. I was talking with some friends about this. Most of us are in our 50s and grew up in the 50s-60s. There wasn't nearly as much variety available to us in our foods when we were growing up. I'm not sure that wasn't a good thing -- at least some of it. Having a greater variety of vegetables available is good, but having a couple of dozen different ways to cook them might not be so good.

This is from the introduction to How to Cook Without a Book by Pam Anderson.

I grew up eating good food. My mother and father, grandmother and aunts were all great Southern cooks. As a child I'd watch my grandmother make biscuits and pies by sight and feel. I don't think she owned a measuring cup or spoon; she certainly didn't own a cookbook
I'd spend hours in the kitchen with my mother and aunts as they prepared for big family dinners -- barbeque pork, coleslaw, turkey with cornbread dressing, banana pudding, peach cobbler. I never saw anyone open a cookbook. Everybody knew how to make what was on the menu. And, by God, everybody did it exactly the same way...
...The menu was pretty simple back then. Vegetables were cooked one way: seasoned with a chunk of fatback and simmered for hours. Fish and chicken were mostly fried, and cornbread was our baguette. We had one kind of lettuce, two kinds of pasta -- macaroni and spaghetti - and lunch meat meant bologna. Mushrooms, spinach, green peas, and black olives came from a can.
The limited ingredients and techniques made cooking very simple. My grandmother didn't need a cookbook. Every recipe was in her head and hands. Only when their memories failed would my mother and her sisters pull out The Auburn Cookbook (a product of the Auburn University home economics department) to remind them of their formula for divinity candy, 1-2-3-4 cake, and pecan pie.
Clearly, times have changed. Unlike our ancestors, we can buy or mail-order almost any ingredient from anywhere in the world. We also have much choice in how we prepare and cook these ingredients. Rather than incorporating all the new ingredients and techniques into our repetoire, however, we seem confused by it all. Bewildered by a world of choice, we seem to have lost our way.
Unlike my mother with her single preparation for green beans, I have many options. Should I snap them as she did, French them, leave them whole, or opt for haricots verts? Should I cook them for hours the way Mom did? Or should I steam, blanch, grill, broil, braise, roast, or even stir-fry them? Should I serve them hot, at room temperature, or even chilled with a dressing? Should I serve them unadorned or infuse them with flavors from the Far East, Far West, or someplace in between?
My mother bought green cabbage. I can buy green, red, Napa, Savoy, and even bok choy. I still buy the occasional can of California black olives, but I'm more likely to buy kalamatas, picholines, nicoise, or those that have been cured in oil. I can't count the number of pasta shapes I can buy at my local grocery store.

The limited ingredients and techniques not only made cooking simple; it made eating simpler. My friends and I have been experimenting with this. My pantry shelves, especially the condiments, herbs and spices have been reduced. It is making eating, as well as cooking, simpler. I'm sticking with what I grew up with and the Italian/Mediterranean foods I like. The rest of it I can have when I eat out.

Space_mom · Post by **Space_mom** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:09 am

I tend to agree with wosnes and Pam Anderson. Variety makes us eat more, and that was proven by some rat experiment, where food was put in front of two groups of rats. There was no limit as to the quantities they could eat, but one of the groups had more variety to chose from, and these rats grew fatter than the others.

Check out this article, apparently this has also been studied in humans too.

http://www.apa.org/releases/obesity.html

Also, according to the ShangriLa Diet, strong flavor-calorie associations raise your body weight setpoint and increase hunger.

cab54 · Post by **cab54** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:42 pm

Annie, that's just how I eat. Except it's toast and banana for me in the AM.

I get more and more simplifying about my life as I get older.

I have alwasy been a cook--LOVED trying lots of recipes, and for a while it was French food. Yummy. I still get a cooking 'artistic urge once in awhile, and I go with it, but I have used this no S diet to 'get back to my roots'. What you describe (food) is pretty much how I ate when I was a kid. Which is what I shoot for everyday, and almost always do, and I'm losing (slowly--I'm a middle aged woman

).

I think keeping food to 'just food' is the key and not getting all 'into' fancy/exotic is what works for some of us.

MerryKat · Post by **MerryKat** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:06 am

I laughed when I read this, as I don't do a daily listing of what I eat as I always feared it would bore people (including me to death)

Breakfast: Oats with PB / grated apple & cinnamon / sunflower seeds & cocoa powder / brown sugar & milk OR Cereal (sugar free / high fiber varieties) & milk

Lunch: Sandwich (rye / health bread) with cheese or a spread (cheese / meat / fish), 2 / 3 bits of fruit, celery / carrots

Dinner: Stewed meat OR grilled chicken OR grilled fish OR Lasagne with 2 or 3 veggies (as a very special monthly treat I will do roast veggies and chicken with the skin / pork chops)

Our diet is anything but exciting, but it works for us.

Occasionally over the weekends I will splash out and do something with eggs for a meal (usually dinner) - French Toast / scrambled eggs, bacon, toast / fritata.