Everyday Systems

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:51 pm**

Hi there, I've got two (unrelated) questions that I hope someone can help me with. Sorry about the long post!

1) I usually enjoy a small cup of hot chocolate every night made out of 70% dark couverture chocolate and full fat milk.

There is no sugar added and in the book it states that if a food item is not recognised as sweet, it's ok to eat on N days. So is dark chocolate a sweet?

2) now that I've replaced the snacks and the small meals during the day with full meals on a single plate, I'm finding that eating so much food at one go is a little too heavy. I force myself to clean the plate as I worry I won't have enough until the next meal. Is this a good idea or should I just stop eating when I'm comfortably full even if it's not enough to sustain me until the next meal?

What do you guys do? Many thanks in advance!

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:02 pm**

I'm still puzzled about dark chocolate. When I started NoS, I used to eat every day a square of 90% dark chocolate, which I love. I figured that 90% was pretty little sugar and therefore it must be OK. Technically, I think it is. But... I did not start losing any weight at all until I restricted it to S days. It is probably too calorie dense, even if it is "allowed". I do drink dark chocolate made of pure cocoa, and either no milk at all or a dash of half-skimmed milk. And that's fine as a snack when you absolutely need one.

And I should stop eating when you're confortably full. You'll feel hungry between meals in the beginning, but not for more than 2 or 3 weeks, afterwards that false hunger disappears, I'm not quite sure why but many have made that discovery. And you'll find out that being confortably hungry before a meal is a pleasant experience. In the meantime, hot drinks are allowed any time and are good fillers.

Welcome and good luck !

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:10 pm**

Some people have hot chocolate and don't count it. Personally, I think of all chocolate as dessert even the 80% I sometimes indulge in but whatever works. If it really doesn't taste sweet go for it but if it tastes sweet it will be much harder to train your tastebuds to stay away from sweets. I think you'll know the answer to that better than me as I haven't tried your hot chocolate (although it sounds delicious and I'd certainly want to).

I think it's ok to overeat at the beginning. It will automatically calm down or at least that is what happened to me. Just don't take it badly if you gain a few pounds at the beginning- they'll come of with lots more afterwards.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:35 pm**

Hi weebly, and welcome!
Re: your questions:
I personally treat any chocolate product, including hot chocolate, as an S. I know not everybody on here does. But just imagine how much more awesome it will taste on the weekends after you've been doing without it all week! (Most things that are labeled "no sugar added" have some kind of sweetener added in, and they are just pointing out that it technically doesn't have "sugar" per se in it. Check the label for words with the "-ose" ending, and artificial sweeteners.) It's NOT that we can't have anything with sugar in it, even on S days... but chocolate in my mind is just in that special "this is a sweet" category.
As for fullness, I'd recommend eating a little bit beyond comfortably full, but not quite up to trying to fully sustain yourself until the next meal. You can always have some milk or juice if you aim too low and get hungry more than an hour before your next meal.
Good luck. I'm sure you'll find the way to apply NoS that fits your style, by trial and error.

Posted: **Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:28 am**

Good point, Sonya. It really is about trial and error, to find what works for each of us.

I don't have hot chocolate during the week, but yours doesn't sound sweet. So, I think people could go either way on it. If it will make or break your adherence to the diet, then have it!

Re: piling up the plates, I definitely did that at the beginning. I was terrified of feeling 'starving' between meals. It turned out that what I was actually afraid of was feeling a little bit hungry.

You'll get used to it eventually, but there's no need to worry about it. Pile as much on as you want. I always erred on the side of too much on the plate at first. I didn't want to risk snacking because I had underestimated how much food to eat at lunch.

Posted: **Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:55 am**

If you are in your first 3 months, I say clean the plate but notice if you get legitimately hungry by the time of your next meal. If not, guesstimate putting a little less dense food on the plate and try it out. After a few months, start playing it by ear. Experiment with not finishing. Use smaller plates for some meals. Etc.

You don't have to get it figured out in a few weeks. In fact, you likely won't. Your eating will evolve, especially if you've been a dieter.

See if you can start letting the hot chocolate drop away. It doesn't have to be cold turkey.

Posted: **Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:28 am**

Thanks everyone! Appreciate the time taken to reply. I guess it all boils down to trial and error. I never realised how difficult it is to let go and trust my body to tell me what it does and doesn't need.

Posted: **Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:30 pm**

What it needs in the context of meals. There's definitely a learning curve, but it's better if you can relax into it, rather than watching every meal, IMHO, or trying to manipulate it very soon just to get the scale to move. And why should we know? Heavy cultures don't really support moderation. Slim cultures do. Individuals aren't expected to navigate eating completely on their own. They have traditional meals of small-to-moderate portions of a variety of tastes and textures. They enjoy what they eat!

And let your meals be in the context of life. Let yourself get more absorbed in other pleasures and pursuits while not losing the pleasure of moderate meals.

Posted: **Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:55 am**

Just on the hot chocolate, I know the test is sometimes stated as "main ingredient is sugar", but I kind of like Reinhard's other idea of "would I consider this a dessert".

For example, on Tuesday a work colleague brough in pumpkin scones. Now, a pumpkin scone with butter on it has very little sugar, but in my head, it is a baked treat and thus saved for the weekend. I find it easier to build habit that way that to analyse the amount of sweetness in things in detail.

However, I've been No-S ing for well over a year now, and I wouldn't have worried about these details in the first few months.

Posted: **Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:32 pm**

Reinhard says you can have cocoa if you consume it the same way the Mayans did - with no added sugar.

Posted: **Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:35 pm**

If they'd had it, they would have used it, I'm sure!

Cocoa is definitely non-canonical, but a couple of teaspoons of the plain powder in my latte has not become a slippery slope. For anyone who fears it leading to playing fast with the rules, I'd recommend fence around the law.

Posted: **Thu Mar 27, 2014 12:03 pm**

Pure cocoa cannot be considered as sweet by any stretch of the imagination. I have it quite often, with 1 sweetener only (after 50+ years of dieting, I've come to prefer saccharine to real sugar), and with no negative side effects. It's delicious and invigorating. The same applies to a tiny square of 99% chocolate.

Posted: **Thu Mar 27, 2014 12:19 pm**

oolala53 wrote:If they'd had it, they would have used it, I'm sure!

Cocoa is definitely non-canonical, but a couple of teaspoons of the plain powder in my latte has not become a slippery slope. For anyone who fears it leading to playing fast with the rules, I'd recommend fence around the law.

oolala is right that this is an individual thing. Chocolate tasting stuff is definitely a fence around the law sort of deal for me. She has something that works well for her that is different.

One of the things about No-S is that it's really a lot about self-responsibility and not fooling yourself. The "diet mentality" does have all these silly laws and rules that are kind of meant to trick yourself into things.

No-S doesn't work like that. You need to be able to say, "I'm an adult, dammit, and I can choose this or not with my eyes open. This serves me and works for me, but this other thing doesn't."

You can certainly "game" No-S to be a really bad diet if you wanted to. It is totally No-S legal to have a bagel the size of a plate with cream cheese on it for breakfast, put a layer of French Fries on your plate for lunch, and have single layer of Pringles on your plate for dinner and it to be UTTERLY No-S legal.

You can't do it without knowing you're being an idiot. And "don't be an idiot" is part of the No-S system.

I know that regular doses of chocolate would definitely make me go into idiot territory because I'd keep trying to game it further. oolala is more mature than I am and can handle her cocoa powder in her lattes. *grin*

I am not good at moderation, so I take my tendency to go over the top to be what Reinhard calls Immoderately Moderate.

Not only that, I've also learned that for me, mods are the way to go from being Immoderately Moderate to being just plain immoderate. For me to stick to it, I have to hard-core vanilla about No-S.

Posted: **Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:22 pm**

NoelFigart wrote:
One of the things about No-S is that it's really a lot about self-responsibility and not fooling yourself. The "diet mentality" does have all these silly laws and rules that are kind of meant to trick yourself into things.

No-S doesn't work like that. You need to be able to say, "I'm an adult, dammit, and I can choose this or not with my eyes open. This serves me and works for me, but this other thing doesn't."

You can certainly "game" No-S to be a really bad diet if you wanted to....

You can't do it without knowing you're being an idiot. And "don't be an idiot" is part of the No-S system. (emphasis mine)

First, I want to say to NoelFigart "Welcome back!"

Second, one of the the things I like best about NoS is the "Now be an adult" aspect to it.... so your comments above resonate well with me!

Posted: **Thu Mar 27, 2014 11:41 pm**

um, the giant bagel, french fries, and layer of pringles on a plate is legal, as Noel pointed out. And I've had days like that. Not every day. And I don't necessarily think I was an idiot on those days. Just not in the mood for regular meals.

I only make this comment because I feel like I've come a long way on NoS without making my nutrition great, but if I had had to stop overeating AND start eating very healthily all at once, I don't know if I would have stuck to it this long.

Posted: **Thu Mar 27, 2014 11:51 pm**

automatedeating wrote:um, the giant bagel, french fries, and layer of pringles on a plate is legal, as Noel pointed out. And I've had days like that. Not every day. And I don't necessarily think I was an idiot on those days. Just not in the mood for regular meals.

If I was insulting, I am really sorry.

I was talking about trying to game the system and tried to come up with things that were technically legal that it would be unhealthy to choose all the time. But I didn't mean that if one has a sub-optimal meal from time to time that one is an idiot.

I agree that we don't have to live on salads alone! No more do I. As I've mentioned in another thread I enjoy my pizza...sometimes. Or a burger and fries. Again, sometimes.

Posted: **Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:13 am**

I definitely didn't feel insulted.

I just wanted to speak up because I have been pondering my own case of "nutrition-head" (as opposed to diet-head) that people talk about. Eventually I think I will post about it more formally, but for now I'm noting with interest that people can have massive rebound from trying to eat healthy just as much as from trying to diet......

Posted: **Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:24 pm**

for the first year my plates were only junk food. The amazing thing was that in my second year I switched to healthy, home-cooked food completely by itself- I didn't mod or anything at all, just happened. I wouldn't worry about what goes on your plate yet!

Posted: **Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:21 am**

How can you game the system?
Either No S is No S or it's something else. No S is not a nutritional approach, it's a quantity approach, that works for most people most of the time.

Posted: **Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:43 am**

Sorry, I agree with NoelFigart, if what she means is that people can convince themselves that they are following No S if they consistently stack their plates high no matter what they're real hunger is. They won't successfully game the system because as I and others have stated elsewhere, No S cannot help you defy the laws of chemistry. You still have to eat less than you need if you are going to lose weight, and you are going to have to end up eating maintenance intake to maintain, which will likely be quite similar to the calorie recommendations for maintenance of diet plans. You'll just get there by a different route. Sure, Reinhard never made any hard and fast rules about hunger as a determinant of meal size, but he does mention hunger in the book and implies that a participant will likely eat less over time, NOT filling the plate to overflowing. And if you read what his meal defaults are, you'll see that some people might never get to such moderation without some purposeful attention.

I love No S to death, but the truth is that no eating reduction system has been shown to be successful in the long term for the majority of people who have already become overweight. Some of them just have better odds. And most scientific studies just don't extend their work long enough to support and follow people as long as an approach like No S takes.

Sorry to hijack the thread!

Posted: **Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:14 pm**

oolala53 wrote:people can convince themselves that they are following No S
if they consistently stack their plates high no matter what their real hunger is.
No S cannot help you defy the laws of chemistry.
You still have to eat less than you need if you are going to lose weight,
and you are going to have to end up eating maintenance intake to maintain,
which will likely be quite similar to the calorie recommendations for maintenance of diet plans.
You'll just get there by a different route.

I love No S to death, but the truth is that
no eating reduction system has been shown to be successful in the long term
for the majority of people who have already become overweight.
Some of them just have better odds.

This is Absoutely True

Posted: **Sat Mar 29, 2014 2:44 pm**

It sounds like you are ready to lighten up your plates a bit. That's what usually happens. Trust the process, trust your body.

Posted: **Sun Mar 30, 2014 5:15 pm**

oolala53 wrote:No S cannot help you defy the laws of chemistry. You still have to eat less than you need if you are going to lose weight, and you are going to have to end up eating maintenance intake to maintain, which will likely be quite similar to the calorie recommendations for maintenance of diet plans. You'll just get there by a different route. !

I agree with oolala!
At some point I believe everyone has to come to this realization - eat less, move more, lose weight.
I also found that my maintenance plate doesn't look very different from my losing plate. My smaller body doesn't need that many calories. My doctor told me at my last visit ( much to my dismay) that most people can only add about 200 calories each day - some folks a tad more and some a little less - to maintain a weight loss. As we age, unfortunately, we don't need as many calories as we might have when we were younger...sigh! I've made peace with that and am happy with my three reasonable plates each day.
Mimi

Posted: **Mon Mar 31, 2014 8:46 am**

I agree with Oolala that you will eat need to eat less to lose weight but I have a lot of trust in the process as a lot of people seem to have seen an automatic reduction in their plates and healthier choices. NoS makes it really simple. Eat three plates, don't be an idiot.

Again, I ate mostly junk food at first and still lost and now that my plates are healthier again I lose even more. But it will depend on your body, your age, how much you have to lose and all that.

For me NoS is not a plan to lose weight. It might have initially started out like this but about 3-4 months in I realised this has nothing to do with losing weight and everything to do with normalising your relationship to food. Our relationship to food is one of the most basic relationships and if you find freedom there you'd be surprised how much freedom you'll gain in other places of your life.

No S allowed me to reduce my overall eating without feeling deprived. That's the game. So have your hot chocolate if you need it for now, I bet a year in you won't.

Posted: **Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:36 am**

And if you do as part of your meal, after all it's also a healthy choice !

Posted: **Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:03 pm**

Ooops, sorry ! I thought in terms of hot cocoa, not hot chocolate, because it's the only thing we have in the house. Might not make all that much of a difference, though...

Posted: **Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:17 pm**

Eschano, I'm with you. I do think most people won't have to try to eat less; it is a rather natural progression, but it also seems to take a bit of honesty for some. However, I'd say to take a year to see follow Vanilla without a lot of thought and see what happens.

I started No S for the reasons you came to appreciate after a few months, and I can't imagine another approach doing a better job.

Everyday Systems

Newbie questions - thanks in advance!

Newbie questions - thanks in advance!

Gaming the system?