[quote]MODOK wrote:
Contrary to popular belief, food density does not really limit caloric intake. Your body isn’t that stupid. You can eat 10 lbs of tree bark or grass and you’re still going to be hungry. Just like you can drink all of the water you want and still be hungry. They’ve studied this exhaustively in animals. No matter how diluted their chow is, they keep eating until they eat their caloric requirement.[/quote]
And eating an apple when you’re hungry is only useful if you’re a fattie who eats because he likes to. If I’m hungry, I can eat maybe 6 lbs of really sweet apples and still be as hungry…[/quote]
[quote]MODOK wrote:
Contrary to popular belief, food density does not really limit caloric intake. Your body isn’t that stupid. You can eat 10 lbs of tree bark or grass and you’re still going to be hungry. Just like you can drink all of the water you want and still be hungry. They’ve studied this exhaustively in animals. No matter how diluted their chow is, they keep eating until they eat their caloric requirement.[/quote]
And eating an apple when you’re hungry is only useful if you’re a fattie who eats because he likes to. If I’m hungry, I can eat maybe 6 lbs of really sweet apples and still be as hungry…[/quote]
[quote]MODOK wrote:
Contrary to popular belief, food density does not really limit caloric intake. Your body isn’t that stupid. You can eat 10 lbs of tree bark or grass and you’re still going to be hungry. Just like you can drink all of the water you want and still be hungry. They’ve studied this exhaustively in animals. No matter how diluted their chow is, they keep eating until they eat their caloric requirement.[/quote]
And eating an apple when you’re hungry is only useful if you’re a fattie who eats because he likes to. If I’m hungry, I can eat maybe 6 lbs of really sweet apples and still be as hungry…[/quote]
I would hate to see that bowel movement.[/quote]
but you would love to see a 1lb of sweet apples bowel movement? lol
so today I had a turkey sandwich with oat nut bread (gluten-filled shit) instead of making a sandwich with Ezekiel bread. I’m probably gluten-intolerant but fuck it, it’s 2 slices of good tasting bread and I feel better mentally. Now I just have to find bread that has 2 slices equal to around 30g carbs or so.
I never thought it mattered much. It is way more important how your individual body responds to carbs than making blanket statements. I have never found any trouble dropping weight keeping white rice in or anything else.
I’ve always basically figured this… to me if you are looking at it strictly from a health stand point: Surely whole oats or sweet potatoes offer more health benefits. From a physique standpoint: I see no difference in my body now that I’ve included things like cap’n crunch, ice cream, cookies, pancakes etc. I also tend to eat these things late at night before bed to no ill effect. (LeanGains)
That being said…I personally prefer to eat more “whole” foods particularly in regards to carb sources but not because I think they are magically better for my physique, but because they tend to satiate me more, I can eat more of it within my caloric requirement. A cup of oats fills me more than a brownie or a cookie…
The other thing that I tend to do for myself is…while I see most people watch the sources of their cals far more on a declared cut than on a declared “bulk”…I tend to do the opposite. When I’m eating in surplus…I just happen to eat less “bad” carbs…on a cut, I tend to mix in more “bad” carbs…why? My theory that if I’m in a deficit then it’s really not going to matter much. But if I’m already eating above what I need to sustain…perhaps making better food choices will contribute to more quality weight…but this is just broscience and something I do for myself. I wouldn’t be shocked at all if it made close to no difference.
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
[/quote]
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
[/quote]
Thank you[/quote]
Agreed…there are some authors on this site in particular who I won’t name…one in particular who seems to be the most carbophobic in general. It seems to be an absolute chore to find any pictures of this particular contributors body at all…wonder why…
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
[/quote]
Thank you[/quote]
Agreed…there are some authors on this site in particular who I won’t name…one in particular who seems to be the most carbophobic in general. It seems to be an absolute chore to find any pictures of this particular contributors body at all…wonder why…
[/quote]
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
[/quote]
Thank you[/quote]
Agreed…there are some authors on this site in particular who I won’t name…one in particular who seems to be the most carbophobic in general. It seems to be an absolute chore to find any pictures of this particular contributors body at all…wonder why…
[/quote]
He has big arms and delts.
[/quote]
I think we are probably talking about different people…
Great for you, but please don’t think you speak for the majority
In fact, this particular ‘source of carbs’ distinction forms the basis for much of those silly “clean vs dirty” nutrition debates – and all the conviction (read: presumed self-righteousness) that usually accompanies them
[/quote]
Thank you[/quote]
Agreed…there are some authors on this site in particular who I won’t name…one in particular who seems to be the most carbophobic in general. It seems to be an absolute chore to find any pictures of this particular contributors body at all…wonder why…
[/quote]
He has big arms and delts.
[/quote]
I think we are probably talking about different people…
[/quote]
well who are you talking about, because I have no idea. I’m not thinking Shugart b/c he’s been eating plenty of carbs on I3G.
It’s hard to believe fullness is related to the calories and not the volume combined with how fast it goes through your stomach.
6 cups of pasta is only 1200 cals - I don’t think I can finish 6 servings of pasta in one sitting. Some desserts have way over 1200 cals and are very easy to eat (compared to 6 servings of pasta). That’s why it’s easy to overdo it with the bad stuff. Tonight I ate 2450 cals in 1 meal, high fat, pretty easily, but just 300 calories of pork grinds, and I don’t want to eat again for 6-8 hours (that stuff expands tremendously in the stomach).
I can see diluting food with water making no difference since water goes through the stomach pretty fast.
[quote]qsar wrote:
It’s hard to believe fullness is related to the calories and not the volume combined with how fast it goes through your stomach.
6 cups of pasta is only 1200 cals - I don’t think I can finish 6 servings of pasta in one sitting. Some desserts have way over 1200 cals and are very easy to eat (compared to 6 servings of pasta). That’s why it’s easy to overdo it with the bad stuff. Tonight I ate 2450 cals in 1 meal, high fat, pretty easily, but just 300 calories of pork grinds, and I don’t want to eat again for 6-8 hours (that stuff expands tremendously in the stomach).
I can see diluting food with water making no difference since water goes through the stomach pretty fast.
[/quote]
I find pasta to be one of the least satisfying. I consistently used to have to eat 1 full 16 ounce box of pasta in a given sitting to feel any sense of fullness. That was with a whole bag of broccoli and 2 chicken breasts…
Agreed pasta and bread do nothing. Rice and potatoes are pretty close to nothing. Oatmeal is the only carb source that does anything. And all “junk” carbs nothing as well.
