|
2005/01/18, 05:54 PM
Hi Everyone... I just wanted to post what I did/ate yesterday so everyone could tell me if I'm on the right track and if there's any suggestions... thanks to everybody...
Brkfst- 1scoop protein shake, 8oz skim milk, and 1/2 cup oatmeal (uncooked) total 350kcal (38 grams pro)
Snack- 1scoop protein shake, 8oz skim milk, total 200kcal, (34 grams pro)
Lunch- 6" subway turkey breast-no cheese, no mayo, no salt
1.5 cups spinach, 2tbl olive oil dressing. Tea. Total 550kcal. (30 grams pro)
1 Hour workout chest and abs, 20 mins elliptical, 1hr yoga.
Snack- 1scoop protein shake, 8oz skim milk, total 200kcal (34 grams pro)
Dinner- 3 pieces baked chicken, 1/4 cup quinoa, 1/2 cup corn, 16 oz skim milk. total 700kcal (60 grams pro)
Total for the day;
2000 kcal
190 grams protein
Does this look good to everyone?
--------------
My mind tells me to win, my spirit shows me how, and my body delivers.
Cari
PureSnowChic@aol.com
Southern California
|
|
|
|
2005/01/18, 06:53 PM
hmm...where do i start, i know i'm going to recieve hell for this again, but i stand firm on this information.
mother nature (or god) did not intend for humans to consume their nutrients from a sythetically created shake. all of the nutrients in suppliments are dead or "non-foods" and actually take more nutrients to digest, absorb and eliminate than you receive from them. i'll ask a question, can scientists CREATE life? because this is what would need to be done in order for suppliments to have value and actually increase vitality....no just keep you "fit."
i don't actually worry about suppliments being the root cause of someone's death, but i do know that they create more dysfunction than they cure. there are no VALID long term studies on any of these products, because A) they haven't been studied long enough and B) the researchers don't ask the right questions or look in the right places.
just be careful is all i'm saying and for god's sake, don't take the research that these companies provide seriously. for the most part the research is funded by the same company that actually manufactures and sells these products.
here's my advice...for what's it's worth...eat for your metabolic type, don't count calories or nutrients (unless youre in competition), drink half your body weight in clean water, stay the hell away from paseurized/homogenized dairy products (here comes the @hit storm again)and if at all possible, try to eat 100% certified organic foods. there's more advice that i could give, but all it will do is bog you down.
now i know that i'm going to get people that are going to fight me to the burger when it comes to suppliments and especially milk consumption (you guys love your milk). i'm not out to make friends with this information, i just simply want to educate as many people as i can on the degenerative effects of pasteurized/homogenized dairy products.
for those of you who think i'm full of crap, just simply look at any definition of either of these processes and realize that you cannot sustain life under these conditions. since REAL nutrients are alive, they fall into this category. without digestive enzymes, your body cannot digest the nutrients in these products (calcium, vitamin D lactose, etc.).
i'm sorry if i offend some of you with this information, but what's true is true and sometimes the truth is ugly and disturbing...just like me :laugh:
|
|
2005/01/19, 09:42 AM
I agree....mostly
eat a whole food if you can........use protein shakes, bars etc. for emergencies.....and after workouts.
eat some eggs in the morning.......a peanut butter and apple for a snack...........don't relie to much on supplements.
--------------
My drinking squad, has a cheerleading problem!!
|
|
2005/01/19, 09:57 AM
190 grams of protein a day. That’s a serious amount of protein to be taking a day. It wouldn't be so bad if it was from natural sources but you seem to be getting most of your protein from supplements. I would have one protein shake a day only.
|
|
2005/01/19, 01:24 PM
I must agree with the above's...I do believe there is a time and place for protein shakes and I use them, along with the bars. For instance, I such a bad case of acid reflux that I cannot eat after 5:00 or so, but I go to the gym at 4:45 and work out for an hour and a half, so I try to eat my 5-6 small meals and then have my protein drink following my workout. I was finding myself SO fatigued after a workout and then not eating until 9:00 a.m. the following morning that I found the protein shake gave my body some help and yet it didn't mess with my stomach, it was what I had to do. Try to eat your meals - use your shakes and bars when you can't rather than as a replacement would be my thoughts on the subject.
--------------
Veda
MISERY IS OPTIONAL
***When you are up to your ears in trouble, try using the part that is not submerged.
***The difference between a dream and a goal is a plan.
HAVE A GREAT DAY!
|
|
2005/01/19, 01:45 PM
You are getting an awful lot of calories from Milk :surprised: You may want to cut that down, and replace it with water, even in your Protien drinks (when your cutting), and as the others have said, use more whole foods as a source of protien.
I personally think 2000cals For a girl of your size while cutting is also alot of calories, I am 200, 5'7 and I'm taking in about the same amount (maybe 1-200 more). You may want to decrease the amount by 250, if your not seeing any gains :dumbbell:
|
|
2005/01/20, 03:28 PM
the world health organization considers 2,100 calories and below starvation...man or woman. in this country we make the mistake of worrying about how MUCH we consume...but not WHAT we consume. we are comprised of nearly 100 trillion cells that are replaced at a rate of about 3 trillion per DAY! where does the nutrients for these cells come from?
is the fat that keeps the integrity of our cells and that surrounds our hearts and lines our nerves etc. etc. etc. coming from that bag of chips you just ate or that synthetically produced shake that you just drank. most shakes come with tons of protein, but oddly enough...no fat or very low levels of fat. we were designed by mother nature (or god), to consume protein WITH fat...saturated mostly when we consumed wild game, seafood, etc. do you realize that without saturated fat, it's much harder to absorb and shuttle calcium to your bones? where does your body leach most saturated fats if there is a deficit? your heart!
do you know what types of omega fats you're getting when you consume a free-range egg as opposed to a commericaly raised hen-house egg? you should...omega 3 to omega 6 ratio should be 1:1 or around there. with free range, this is USUALLY the case. with commercially raised, the ratio is usually 1:16-30! there is laundry list of complications that arise from consuming a fat ratio similar to this.
|
|
2005/01/20, 04:43 PM
============
Quoting from nellyboy:
the world health organization considers 2,100 calories and below starvation...man or woman. in this country we make the mistake of worrying about how MUCH we consume...but not WHAT we consume.
=============
So you are saying, that it doesn't matter how much we eat, as long as its healthy. I'm sorry, but that is totally Bogus info for someone looking to loose weight. Yes, you need to eat healthy, and I agree with the rest of your statement. However, when you want to loose weight, you need to decrease your calories. I also do not think that 2100 Calories is on the brink of starvation, I eat 5 meals of about 500 cals each, lots of fruits, Veggies, Whole Grains, Fresh meat, chicken, and Fish. But I keep my calories between 2100 and 2200, I do not feel Sluggigh, or Hungry all the time, however this is not for the long term, its for losing weight.
|
|
2005/01/20, 04:57 PM
that's you and do you have any references to back not only the claim that 2100 is not starvation and calorie deficits in relation to weight loss? the world health organization is considered to be the foremost experts on starvation, so unless you can prove to me that they are wrong...
|
|
2005/01/20, 05:37 PM
Actually I was hoping you could back your claim up, and not just post that they say so. Do you have a link to them saying this, I'd be interested in reading up on it, if they advocate that you can eat as many calories as you want and lose weight, I'd be quite surprised.
I'm looking for it, but I believe the Canada Food Guide suggests about 2000 cals for the average person, depending on Size/Activity levels. I could be wrong, but I believe this is right, Looking for that info.
I will admit 2000 is low for maintance levels for MOST people. But you can't really put one number out and say its starvation, or over eating for everyone. Each person will have differnet needs, some people sit in a chair all day (myself) and others do Labor all day, obviously someone doing Physical labor, can't sustain themselves on 2000 cals/day. Where a small person, doing mostly office work, with not much activity, 2000 cals might be over their maintance.
============
Quoting from nellyboy:
that's you and do you have any references to back not only the claim that 2100 is not starvation and calorie deficits in relation to weight loss? the world health organization is considered to be the foremost experts on starvation, so unless you can prove to me that they are wrong...
=============
|
|
2005/01/20, 06:08 PM
it was written about in a book called "the diet cure" by Julia Ross in 1999 and i'll have to find the book in my horribly unorganized library to find the exact reference, but i remeber right it was pulled from a report given to the U.N. in the mid 90's. but if i find the exact reference, i'll let you know.
yes it is unwise to say one number is the definitive amount before starvation, but i use this statement as a wakeup call. calorie reduction diets are not a lifestyle, they are a temporary fix that becomes negated as soon as the diet is completed and the person goes back to their lifesytle diet. weight gain is usually accompanied with this transition.
the canadian food guide is just as flawed as the u.s. food guide pyrimid...which is finally being modified...thank god! not that it will change much of anything, but hey atleast they're trying.
if you want more info on this type of thinking, mercola.com is a place to start and metabolictypingonline.com is another place to go.
|
|
2005/01/20, 06:18 PM
Completely Agree with this Statement!! That is the problem, people look at it, as a "Diet" and not a lifestyle change. I am only saying, that when a person is "overweight" then they will need to reduce their calorie intake, until they get to a weight they are happy with. At which time, its not time to go back to your old way of eating, you must re-assess, look at your goals, and add in more calories. I would not tell someone to only ever expect to eat 2000 calories again. No one could stick to it.
For instance in my case, with my given range 2000-2200 Cals, I should be loosing about 2lbs a week (and I am seeing these results) Once I hit my Goal, I will then slowly add in, as my Metabolism adjusts to the increase, about an Xtra 1000 Calories, to make up for the Deficit I have now.
I'm not saying I count every calorie, But keeping track, and taking pretty accurate guess's to your calorie intake, keeps you accountable.
I'll check out the Sites, Always interested in getting more information :cool:
============
Quoting from nellyboy:
yes it is unwise to say one number is the definitive amount before starvation, but i use this statement as a wakeup call. calorie reduction diets are not a lifestyle, they are a temporary fix that becomes negated as soon as the diet is completed and the person goes back to their lifesytle diet. weight gain is usually accompanied with this transition.
=============
|
|
2005/01/20, 08:06 PM
There needs to be a blend of the two. A caloric deficit (for loss) combined with a variety of healthy foods is the solution. not one or the other. Eating 5000 calories from all natural organic foods is not going to help you lose fat (and keep it off) any more than eating 2000 calories of junkfood a day is.
|
|
2005/01/21, 05:40 PM
Nellyboy, I know you said that 2000 calories is starvation. Is that caloric wise, or nutritional wise? There is a difference. For example I am female, no way could I eat as much food as you guys and not gain weight. On 2000 calories a day (as now) I am gaining. Thankfully I am gaining muscle from working out...
--------------
My mind tells me to win, my spirit shows me how, and my body delivers.
Cari
PureSnowChic@aol.com
Southern California
|
|
2005/01/21, 05:41 PM
Also I tried to go to that site, and it won't give you the results of that test unless you purchase...
--------------
My mind tells me to win, my spirit shows me how, and my body delivers.
Cari
PureSnowChic@aol.com
Southern California
|
|
2005/01/21, 05:53 PM
it would be referred to as quality calories. if you consume 2,000+ processed, irradiated, pasteurized, etc you will surely gain unwanted weight. on the other hand, if your 2,000+ calories comes from high quality 100% certified organic foods, then much of the excess calories consumed will be used for repair (not just muscular, but hormonal, structural, visceral, etc. as well).
the best way to figure out whether you're receiving enough of too many calories is too keep a food journal with some ratings on it. rate your energy levels, mood, digestion (yeah i know, it's not pleasant), skin color/clearness(zits, rashes, fungal infections, etc), fingernails/toenails, hair, etc. i know it's extensive, but that's just the beginning of what could be done.
sorry about the test, i guess even the good guys have to make money. i'd forgot to include that with the info i gave. the book i referred to is probably cheaper anyway...it's like 12 bucks and it really is a gem surrounded by a bunch of turds. lol sorry, bad analogy.
|
|
2005/01/21, 08:27 PM
LoL, it was a really neat test... I WAS looking forward to my results. I agree with you on most parts... although I haven't heard about all the things you've talked about... I usually eat only certified organic and kosher foods...
--------------
My mind tells me to win, my spirit shows me how, and my body delivers.
Cari
PureSnowChic@aol.com
Southern California
|
|
2005/01/21, 08:34 PM
I'll give ya quick idea of one subject i brought up: irradiation.
the united states government needed a way to dispose of it's expended fuel years ago, so some scientists came up with the great idea of irradiation. the basic premise is that you shoot gamma rays directly on food in order to "sanatize" it. you read it right...gamma rays! how much radiation do they use? the answer is incredible: 250 to 450 million times that of ONE chest x-ray!!!! once again, this is not a typo.
if you want more info or see which foods are irradiated (the list will scare the hell out of you) go to mercola.com and type irradiation into his search engine.
|
|
2005/01/21, 08:34 PM
LoL, it was a really neat test... I WAS looking forward to my results. I agree with you on most parts... although I haven't heard about all the things you've talked about... I usually eat only certified organic and kosher foods...
--------------
My mind tells me to win, my spirit shows me how, and my body delivers.
Cari
PureSnowChic@aol.com
Southern California
|
|
2005/01/21, 08:43 PM
when i stated government, i was mainly talking about the military...but with that said, it's not just the military who was involved in these decisions.
|
|
2005/01/22, 08:27 AM
On many things I agree with you Nellyboy...but I must say that if I were to consume 2000 cals a day I would be gaining weight...fat....I maintain from 1500-1800 daily...with on free day a week. Men and women tend to have different metabolisms and really do require different amounts...I eat a lot of organic foods...wouldn't touch kosher food witha ten foot pole (that's after hearing too many things...) and eat mostly whole foods (one bar/shake a day)
PAT
|
|
2005/01/22, 10:27 AM
============
Quoting from nellyboy:
I'll give ya quick idea of one subject i brought up: irradiation.
the united states government needed a way to dispose of it's expended fuel years ago, so some scientists came up with the great idea of irradiation. the basic premise is that you shoot gamma rays directly on food in order to "sanatize" it. you read it right...gamma rays! how much radiation do they use? the answer is incredible: 250 to 450 million times that of ONE chest x-ray!!!! once again, this is not a typo.
if you want more info or see which foods are irradiated (the list will scare the hell out of you) go to mercola.com and type irradiation into his search engine.
=============
I just finished reading a book on this. It is amazing how they used it in the slaughter houses, but thats another subject.
--------------
Still trying to find out how to do the Hollywood Free Press.
Ivan
carivan@freetrainers.com
Montreal Canada
|
|
2005/01/22, 02:24 PM
speaking of slaughterhouses and commercially raised cattle, here's an interesting fact. in order to fatten the cattle up for slaughter the "farmers" will feed them: grain (they are not designed to effectively digest it), plastic chips, saw-dust, cement dust, various animal feces and vomit chopped up pieces of chicken, pork and other animals! can you imagine how healthy we'd be if that's what we ate? or the fact that they sit in a stall that's barely big enough to fit them into it and make them live their life and eat in their own filth.
|
|
2005/01/22, 02:45 PM
oh i forgot one thing that made me laugh for a week or so. the reason they feed the cattle cement dust (and i'm sure that it goes for the other crap too) is because there was a study done by some vets showing that if you fed cattle cement dust that there was a 30% increase in overall body weight! it's not that they actually feed them that made me laugh, it was the fact that some idiot had to have come up with the idea in the first place. i can just see it now: "hey Fred, i was thinking. ya know, what would make bessy here bigger? CEMENT DUST!"
"ya know Bill i think ya might be on to something!"
Great logic huh?
|
|
2005/01/22, 06:57 PM
there's a great article on mercola.com called "Top 10 Reasons for Opposing Irradiation" that everyone who is scared by this should read. just go up to his search engine and either type in irradion or the name of the article and be prepared to have your mouth hit the floor.
|
|
2005/01/22, 07:05 PM
oops...irradiation...my spelling has gone to hell since i started back on yahoo messenger!
|
|
2005/01/29, 11:10 PM
i maintain bodyweight on 3300 calories and i aint the skinny fast metabolism type lol i think my job just consumes too much of me... maybe thats why i get tired from gym so easy soometimes pisses me off>_<
|
|
2005/01/29, 11:58 PM
============
Quoting from lonegirl:
On many things I agree with you Nellyboy...but I must say that if I were to consume 2000 cals a day I would be gaining weight...fat....I maintain from 1500-1800 daily...with on free day a week. Men and women tend to have different metabolisms and really do require different amounts...I eat a lot of organic foods...wouldn't touch kosher food witha ten foot pole (that's after hearing too many things...) and eat mostly whole foods (one bar/shake a day)
PAT
=============
What is the problem with "kosher products" ?
Not attacking you here, just curious on how you came to your
decision.
--------------
Still trying to find out how to do the Hollywood Free Press.
Ivan
carivan@freetrainers.com
Montreal Canada
|
|
2005/01/31, 08:52 PM
lol@nelly....
lonegirl what's wrong with kosher foods?
|
|
2005/01/31, 08:53 PM
err lol..Nelly...the things people come up with
|
|
2005/02/01, 08:56 PM
I think the kosher thing refers to how they kill cows. I saw some peta video on it, though it is mostly propeganda. I did a lot of research after I saw the video, because it was pretty sick but there is truth to some of it. The truth is the laws dissallow the slaughterers from giving any drugs to the cow before killing it, so hense the cow feels pain. Also, there is some blood that flows to the brain even after the trachea is cut. I doubt they use any WORSE methods of fattening a cow up, considering you are not allowed to give it drugs. In the end I do not really care, if a cow had a chance, it would surely eat me. Damn dirty cows.
|
|
2005/02/01, 09:47 PM
============
Quoting from thelarry:
I think the kosher thing refers to how they kill cows. I saw some peta video on it, though it is mostly propeganda. I did a lot of research after I saw the video, because it was pretty sick but there is truth to some of it. The truth is the laws dissallow the slaughterers from giving any drugs to the cow before killing it, so hense the cow feels pain. Also, there is some blood that flows to the brain even after the trachea is cut. I doubt they use any WORSE methods of fattening a cow up, considering you are not allowed to give it drugs. In the end I do not really care, if a cow had a chance, it would surely eat me. Damn dirty cows.
=============
Did Peta also explain that if a cow/chicken has an organ that is diseased, or a broken bone, it is not fit to be kosher?
And also the cow/chicken must be fed kosher grain and never have been milked. These are just a few of the 100 or more laws of "koshruth"
Also the method of kosher kill is not valid.
--------------
Still trying to find out how to do the Hollywood Free Press.
Ivan
carivan@freetrainers.com
Montreal Canada
|
|
2005/02/02, 12:50 PM
Oh I agree... the method they kill the cow in the video is not valid. They use a saw, it should be a quick slice. I was just stating the facts about how a cow may feel a little still, but no one knows for sure if a cow actually feels it. It wobbles around, but so does a chicken without a head. Anyway, I hate peta, it is a bad organization. If you want to see a good piece on it, find penn and tellers bullsh** episode about it. Yah, kosher meat tends to be a lot "cleaner" than nonkosher and quite often tastier.
|
