Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Is diet underestimated

This guy has an idea that might work for you... (at 25 seconds)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRJ02VB5Evk

Forrest

p.s. I guess from the Hoffman quotes thread my enjoyment of this song puts me squarely in the 'amateur' camp.

Dave, I thought what you wrote was most funny! I smiled. I laughed actually!

Don't worry I think some people just lack humour.
And I just think Batman should look like this ! OH YES I do!
AND BATMAN, if you get this message. CALL ME! . . .

Most folks would have smiled. You didn't.

Let's bring it back to something somewhat musical or put it to bed.

Human beings, unlike other species, aren't slaves to our genes. But for some people, it's still harder than for others to stay slim/lose weight. Some people are more attracted to eating than others, just as some people have addictive personalities.

The notion that some slim people can eat anything they want (and lots more than fat people), yet still remain slim, has been comprehensively debunked by numerous controlled studies. Self-reported so-called 'studies' are the source of this myth. How many people are able to spend 24 hours/day in the company of dieticians who can monitor exactly how many calories they are eating? A study I read recently showed that fat people under-report how much they ate by between 50 - 400%, while slim people tend to be more accurate, but still under-report generally. A lot of the 'missing calories' are from mindless snacking (which can be healthy fruit as well as unhealthy cookies, but they are all calories....) while watching TV, in between meals, with coffee breaks, while cooking and nibbling etc; others come from the under-estimation of how much food they are actually eating at mealtimes, or simply not realizing that what they are eating is a lot, lot more than 'one portion'. (BTW, a portion of steak/meat/fish is the size of a pack of cards).

The notion I have that some slim people can eat anything they want, yet still remain slim isn't based on a study - it's based on who I was from approximately 15 to 50. I wanted to gain some weight, but no matter how much I ate or what, it just didn't happen.

As far as studies based on self-reported data being debunked - AFAIK, such studies are still being done and are being published in reputable journals, so the debunking may not have been as comprehensive as you imagine.

There was recently a series of programs on Channel 4 in the UK where they put two people - one obese, the other very skinny - together to live for one week under constant monitoring. It was an eye opener for many viewers - including, I have to say, myself. The fat people were eating up to five times the amount of calories that the thin people were.

Then there was another series on the same channel, where they put whole families under 24-hour surveillance - CCTV was placed in all the rooms in their house (with the permission of the families involved). But what the participants didn't know was that they were also being followed everywhere they went by private investigators, who videoed them as they went to McD, KFC etc, etc. Beforehand, the people filled in comprehensive food diaries, which were given to dieticians to work out their daily (self-reported) calorie intake. Many, many of them seemed to be eating around 1500 cal/day, based on their food diaries, when in reality they were eating over 4000 cal/day, based on the 24-hour surveillance.

In yet another program shown a few years ago, this time on BBC TV, two friends - one slim, the other fat, were subjected to a series of tests, including basal metabolic rate (metabolic rate at rest) to find out whether the reason why the fat woman was fat was because she has a 'slow metabolism' (as she thought), because they both agreed that the slim woman ate far more than the fat one. Certainly, when they ate together in the café, the slim woman piled up her plate and finished it, while the fat one left hers half-finished. They were tested and monitored for one week, at the end of which the results were presented to them. The fat woman has a rather higher BMR than the slim one, as one would expect (after all, she has more fat cells and bigger fat cells to feed); and she ate twice as much as they both thought she did, most of the food being consumed in the privacy of her kitchen, or snacking while watching TV etc. Not in front of her friend, or other people. Whereas with the slim woman, she happily stuffed herself in front of others (and the cameras), but didn't snack at home - she ate far less at home than the fat woman....

If you think you really can't gain weight no matter how much you eat, see if you can live for one week with a fat person, and eat everything they eat, in exactly the same quantities.....even if you have to force yourself to . Then weigh yourself again at the end of that week.....

Or alternatively, just add a big tub of Ben & Jerry's (or Häagen-Dazs, or any other brand of your choice - just make sure it's full-fat and real ice-cream..) to your dinner every day - again force yourself to eat it if you have to (personally, I have no problem eating the lot in 5 minutes flat ), and weigh yourself after one week. Just bear in mind that the ice-cream is in addition to your normal meals (including desserts etc), not a replacement for them.

This is getting kind of sad - I'm outta here.

Yes, homo sapiens weren't evolved to be vegans, which is why vegans need vitamin and mineral supplementation to avoid health problems.

I work in a vegan shop and a lot of our customers don't look particularly healthy. Perhaps they haven't done enough research.