Standard meal size?

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
poetgirl
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:42 pm
Location: Colorado

Standard meal size?

Post by poetgirl » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:31 pm

What constitutes a meal for you? I'm having trouble knowing exactly when to stop eating at designated meal times, and I was just curious to know how big of a plate am I suppose to be having? (I haven't read the No S book yet, so I'm kind of ignorant when it comes to general rules for this diet.) I know no seconds are allowed, but can someone give me a guideline to work with? Or is it purely individual? Thank you all!

April

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: Standard meal size?

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:47 pm

poetgirl wrote:What constitutes a meal for you? I'm having trouble knowing exactly when to stop eating at designated meal times, and I was just curious to know how big of a plate am I suppose to be having? (I haven't read the No S book yet, so I'm kind of ignorant when it comes to general rules for this diet.) I know no seconds are allowed, but can someone give me a guideline to work with? Or is it purely individual? Thank you all!

April
Officially, there are no rules about plate size that are part of No S.

I combine No S with another diet, the Nine Inch "Diet". I bought some nine inch Fiestaware luncheon plates, and those are my plates for N days. I still use our old 10.5" plates for S days.

There is research showing that the same amount of food looks and feels like more on a smaller plate. It's weird- every time I fill up a 9" N-day plate, I think, "this won't be enough". But then when I'm finished eating, it is. I had the same kind of experience when I first started No S with the "no seconds" rule.

kccc
Posts: 3957
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:12 am

Post by kccc » Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:38 pm

From the website (click "No S Diet" up above to get the page - lot of good info there):
What do you mean by "seconds?"
As I mentioned in a post to the No S diet group, by "no seconds," I officially mean one physical plate, and I think for beginners especially it's good to stick with this, even if it means a fairly overloaded plate. If the amount of food on your one plate is a little bestial and disgusting, that's part of the educational process.
Of course, if you're eating from something that should be used as a platter, you might want to reconsider. ;) (I actually take that into account when eating at some restaurants.)

Try it for a while with whatever plates you happen to own.

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:28 pm

KCCC wrote:Try it for a while with whatever plates you happen to own.
I concur. Get no seconds down, then, if you want to, you can shop for some smaller plates. If you're like me, you'll notice you're not getting as much food as before, and there's a part of my brain that Does. Not. Like. That. One. Bit. It threw fits over "no seconds", and I was a seething ball of resentment after meals, for a while. ("No sweets" and "no snacks" were not nearly so much trouble for me) This same part of my brain does not like the nine-inch plates, either. I'm not sure I would have come out on top if I'd tried to introduce it to "no seconds" and "smaller plates" at the same time.

Don't try to avoid plate-stuffing at first, either. You might need to see, like I did, that I could be satisfied with the amount of food on one plate, with no seconds. Brian Wansink has done research and found that people who "preplate their food" (which means "take one plate, no seconds") eat about 14 percent less than people who allow themselves to take seconds and thirds. You might have some very full plates at first, but that's OK. You can work on that later.

That's another important point. It's not necessary, or wise, to try to get everything perfect from the get-go. If you try to establish too many different habits at once, you spread your willpower too thin, and end up keeping none of them (this is why the vast majority of New Year's resolutions don't work). But if you change your habits gradually, a few at a time, it works better.

poetgirl
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:42 pm
Location: Colorado

Post by poetgirl » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:07 pm

Thank you, guys! These are some awesome tips. I've found that when I stuff my plates full, my total calorie amount comes out to approximately 2,000 calories, still lower than when I was snacking all day. The plates I use are small.

I agree with the point that changing eating habits bit by bit is easier and more effective than trying to change it all at once. This is an important aspect to remember. :)

clarinetgal
Posts: 1709
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:16 am
Location: Western Washington State

Post by clarinetgal » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:29 am

I know for me, when I want to lose weight, I'm successful when I put all of my meals onto 8 inch plates. If I want to just maintain, I'll use my 10 inch plates.

Post Reply