Everyday Systems

oolala53 wrote: Ten hours of work with one half hour meal break? I didn't think that would be legal.

Mark Bittman wrote:There's a basic truth here: there are stages of hunger, and we -- Americans -- have become accustomed to feeding ourselves at the first sign. This is the equivalent of taking a nap every time you get tired, which hardly anyone does.

There are levels of hunger, and there is a very real difference between hunger and starvation. Starvation is a physical state; your body is deprived of essential nutrients or calories for a long period of time. Probably no one reading this book has ever been truly starving -- though we all think we know what starving feels like.

Hunger is a hardwired early-warning system. At first, your brain says, "Think about eating something soon." In the later stages it says, "Eat as soon as you can; make eating a priority." At no point does your brain say, "Eat now or you will do permanent damage," though at times it may feel as if that is true. But "Eat when hungry" has become a habit. We get hungry. We eat. We get hungry again. We eat again. And so on.

I'm not saying, "Don't eat when you're hungry." I'm saying that if losing or maintaining weight is important to you, think twice before you eat from simple hunger, or from other reasons, like emotion. And when you do eat, choose a piece of fruit; a carrot; a handful of nuts. If you're still hungry, have more. And more. Eat a pint of blueberries, or cherry tomatoes; have a mango, a banana, and an apple. Have a lightly dressed salad. You would be hard-pressed to gain weight eating this way.

You can also embrace hunger, strange as that may sound, just as you might embrace the delicious anticipation of a nap, or sexual craving. Your hunger will, after all, be satisfied; why not wait an hour? (You're not dying, after all!) You might also stop eating before you're full (three-quarters full is probably about right). And if you eat slowly, taking your time, you'll give the food time to reach your stomach and give you a sense of satisfaction before you have seconds or thirds.

Karen Le Billon wrote:The traditional French diet, as it turns out, has a higher proportion of "high satiety" foods than the conventional American diet. These foods are basically ones that make you feel full with fewer calories. A lot of research has been done on satiety, but the basic message is that some foods make us feel more full than others: whole grains, beans, lentils, oats, lean meats, fish, leafy greens, and high water/fiber content vegetables and fruits. As this list suggests, these foods are usually protein-and-fiber fich. They fill you up for longer, delaying the time at which you next fell hungry, particularly when eaten with an appropriate amount of high-fat foods (which stimulate the production of hormonal "satiety signals" and therefore make us feel satisfied longer.) This, of course, is exactly the mix of foods that French children are fed in the school cantine: protein, vegetables and a litte bit of fat in their cheese or dessert. As a result of eating this way, they feel satisfied for longer.

Contrast this with North America. When American children feel hungry, parental desperation tends to set in immediately. Children are given something -- anything -- to stave off hunger. If asked, many American parents would prefer to give something unhealthy to their kids rather than make them wait. If French children are hungry, on the other hand, they are simply promised that they'll be able to eat well at the next meal. And this training starts, in some cases, from birth.