Page 1 of 1
2-3 meals a day study
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:56 pm
by ~reneew
I'm not sure if anyone has posted this, so thought I should. More proof.
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/two-meals ... 6C10423982
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:51 pm
by wosnes
Good article. Thanks for linking to it.
I've read this blog before and I think I linked to it sometime in the past:
American Women Didn't Get Fat in the 50s. Now she's published an
e-book, available on Kindle. I've sampled it but haven't purchased it yet. I think it would be compatible with No-S.
Of course!
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:08 pm
by automatedeating
Isn't that funny how trends change so rapidly in weight loss research? As we know, it wasn't long ago that it was pretty much anathema for someone to skip a meal if they considered themselves health conscious!
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:54 pm
by Jethro
The six meals a day myth originated out of professional bodybuilders diets that were designed to maintain muscle while losing fat.
To achieve their goals, bb ingested gargantuan quantities of protein, combined with intensive weight training, endless cardio and a panoply of drugs (anabolic steroids, HGH, thyroid medications, etc.).
Someone, evidently unaware of bb training and ancillary help, figured that this would be the best diet for everyone.
I like the article's closing comment :"One of the take home messages here -- a 500-calorie reduction in intake, regardless of how you do it, results in weight loss,"
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:03 am
by Jethro
wosnes wrote:Good article. Thanks for linking to it.
I've read this blog before and I think I linked to it sometime in the past:
American Women Didn't Get Fat in the 50s. Now she's published an
e-book, available on Kindle. I've sampled it but haven't purchased it yet. I think it would be compatible with No-S.
With regards to the linked article
American Women Didn't Get Fat in the 50s which states
"Many diets also require constant calculations to determine calorie counts. All this clogs up the brain. Psychologists measure the impact of this clogging on various tasks: logical and spatial reasoning, self-control, problem solving, and absorption and retention of new information. Together these tasks measure “bandwidth,†the resource that underlies all higher-order mental activity. Inevitably, dieters do worse than nondieters on all these tasks; they have less bandwidth," the eminent Swede doctor Andreas Eenfeldt, MD, has clearly shown that counting calories is an eating disorder:
http://www.dietdoctor.com/why-calorie-c ... g-disorder
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:52 pm
by eschano
I love it when people post interesting articles. Looking forward to get into it!
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:45 pm
by wosnes
Jethro wrote: the eminent Swede doctor Andreas Eenfeldt, MD, has clearly shown that counting calories is an eating disorder:
I haven't read the article yet, but I can't help but wonder if we're not a nation full of people with disordered eating problems.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:20 pm
by BrightAngel
Jethro wrote:
the eminent Swede doctor Andreas Eenfeldt, MD, has clearly shown that counting calories is an eating disorder.
www.dietdoctor.com
Dr. Eenfeld is a well-known Low-Carber,
and in this article he gives the low-carb argument against counting calories.
I've always found it interesting that Low-carbers distinguish between WHAT is good or bad to count,
i.e. counting Carbs is good. Counting protein grams is good,
but counting Calories is bad.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:15 pm
by Jethro
BrightAngel wrote:Jethro wrote:
the eminent Swede doctor Andreas Eenfeldt, MD, has clearly shown that counting calories is an eating disorder.
www.dietdoctor.com
Dr. Eenfeld is a well-known Low-Carber,
and in this article he gives the low-carb argument against counting calories.
I've always found it interesting that Low-carbers distinguish between WHAT is good or bad to count,
i.e. counting Carbs is good. Counting protein grams is good,
but counting Calories is bad.
Although the doctor has a bias towards low carb diets (ugh!) our illustrious guru, Reinhard Engels states:
"The calorie accounting diets are time consuming and joyless. You won't be able to stick with one of these because it will make you miserable. Besides the sheer tedium of compliance, if you come to think of food as fuel, a mere quantity, you'll come to loathe it -- and your number crunching-munching self. "
http://nosdiet.com/
Is he wrong?
The doctor has another article where he explains
"Why Calorie Counters are Confused:"
http://www.dietdoctor.com/why-calorie-c ... e-confused
At the end of the day, NOS rules. The beauty of NOS is that it's so adaptable and flexible that you could low carb and calorie count at the same time.
Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:23 pm
by BrightAngel
Jethro wrote:Reinhard Engels states:"The calorie accounting diets are time consuming and joyless.
You won't be able to stick with one of these because it will make you miserable... "
Is he wrong?
Nothing is true for EVERYONE.
For the past 9 years, every day I've recorded my food
in a software program that counts my calories for me.
This has become an Enjoyable HABIT for me,
and is the primary reason for my long-term success with weight-loss maintenance.
I'm certain that Reinhard's statement about calorie counting is true for HIM and many others,
however, it is ALSO NOT true for ME, and many others.
As Reinhard has acknowledged many times on this forum.
We aren't ALL the same,
but the principles of No S can be useful despite our differences.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:47 pm
by Jethro
BrightAngel wrote:Jethro wrote:Reinhard Engels states:"The calorie accounting diets are time consuming and joyless.
You won't be able to stick with one of these because it will make you miserable... "
Is he wrong?
Nothing is true for EVERYONE.
For the past 9 years, every day I've recorded my food
in a software program that counts my calories for me.
This has become an Enjoyable HABIT for me,
and is the primary reason for my long-term success with weight-loss maintenance.
I'm certain that Reinhard's statement about calorie counting is true for HIM and many others,
however, it is ALSO NOT true for ME, and many others.
As Reinhard has acknowledged many times on this forum.
We aren't ALL the same,
but the principles of No S can be useful despite our differences.
Dr. Eenfeld and Reinhard contend that calorie counting is not sustainable in the long run for the above stated reasons.
I can understand you questioning Reinhard. But Dr. Eenfeld? I thought doctors were always right.
However, you are an iconoclast. Your relentless and tenacious persistence in this onerous and thankless task in spite of overwhelming odds makes you an exceptional person.
If you sustain this endeavor for the next 25 years, I'll personally buy you a trophy.
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:51 pm
by heatherhikes
__________
H
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:38 pm
by ~reneew
Counting calories/fat grams/points for me personally, years on end lead me to habitually think of food and it's "value"... but basically food. Anything that leads you to think MORE about something, strengthens said addiction. That's what happened to me anyway. I ended up worse off than I began mentally.
I need to just not go there as often.