i didnt recommend it as a subsitute for water. i recommended for exactly what eee asked for, which was something to help him not eat, whether that be food or snacks. i've used it and have found it perfect for something to buy when you're out and u want something low-calorie as your friends are buying ice cream, snacks, candy or w/e. i have honestly tried to find evidence of this insulin response that you've mentioned but any information on this is scarce, so any links are appreciated. all-in-all, from someone experienced with both dieting and drinking coke zero, if you feel comfortable with the caffeine (which honestly isn't a lot compared to coffee and energy drinks, and especially not compared to EC stacks) and you know how to count calories, then try it out. if you deviate from your diet more on coke zero than not, then perhaps it's not for you (might be related to insulin). i count calories and have found it easier to stay on diet, especially on a low-carb one when I'm drinking coke zero.
best way to stop eating
posted in
Off Topic
i didnt recommend it as a subsitute for water. i recommended for exactly what eee asked for, which was something to help him not eat, whether that be food or snacks. i've used it and have found it perfect for something to buy when you're out and u want something low-calorie as your friends are buying ice cream, snacks, candy or w/e. i have honestly tried to find evidence of this insulin response that you've mentioned but any information on this is scarce, so any links are appreciated. all-in-all, from someone experienced with both dieting and drinking coke zero, if you feel comfortable with the caffeine (which honestly isn't a lot compared to coffee and energy drinks, and especially not compared to EC stacks) and you know how to count calories, then try it out. if you deviate from your diet more on coke zero than not, then perhaps it's not for you (might be related to insulin). i count calories and have found it easier to stay on diet, especially on a low-carb one when I'm drinking coke zero.
Hallowi didnt recommend it as a subsitute for water. i recommended for exactly what eee asked for, which was something to help him not eat, whether that be food or snacks. i've used it and have found it perfect for something to buy when you're out and u want something low-calorie as your friends are buying ice cream, snacks, candy or w/e. i have honestly tried to find evidence of this insulin response that you've mentioned but any information on this is scarce, so any links are appreciated. all-in-all, from someone experienced with both dieting and drinking coke zero, if you feel comfortable with the caffeine (which honestly isn't a lot compared to coffee and energy drinks, and especially not compared to EC stacks) and you know how to count calories, then try it out. if you deviate from your diet more on coke zero than not, then perhaps it's not for you (might be related to insulin). i count calories and have found it easier to stay on diet, especially on a low-carb one when I'm drinking coke zero.
just, stop
[quote=Hallow]i didnt recommend it as a subsitute for water. i recommended for exactly what eee asked for, which was something to help him not eat, whether that be food or snacks. i've used it and have found it perfect for something to buy when you're out and u want something low-calorie as your friends are buying ice cream, snacks, candy or w/e. i have honestly tried to find evidence of this insulin response that you've mentioned but any information on this is scarce, so any links are appreciated. all-in-all, from someone experienced with both dieting and drinking coke zero, if you feel comfortable with the caffeine (which honestly isn't a lot compared to coffee and energy drinks, and especially not compared to EC stacks) and you know how to count calories, then try it out. if you deviate from your diet more on coke zero than not, then perhaps it's not for you (might be related to insulin). i count calories and have found it easier to stay on diet, especially on a low-carb one when I'm drinking coke zero.[/quote]
just, stop
just, stop
why would i stop? the only evidence provided so far have been super inconclusive and with low sample sizes.
why would i stop? the only evidence provided so far have been super inconclusive and with low sample sizes.
i read all abstracts, and from what i could gather none of them seemed to be able to conclude that aspartame was detrimental to one's health. i struggle with english on that level (with a lot of hard words) so if you could explain how the articles together or a specific one alone proves how bad aspartame is then go ahead
i read all abstracts, and from what i could gather none of them seemed to be able to conclude that aspartame was detrimental to one's health. i struggle with english on that level (with a lot of hard words) so if you could explain how the articles together or a specific one alone proves how bad aspartame is then go ahead
I haven't seen any recent meta-analyses that indicated aspartame is unsafe for consumption, don't throw individual studies at me and cherry pick (some from 20 years ago). Reviews of lots of different studies have all concluded that at human doses aspartame is safe.
EDIT: And ya I did read them before you ask. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are what matters, not a handful of studies you found by googling "aspartame bad".
I haven't seen any recent meta-analyses that indicated aspartame is unsafe for consumption, don't throw individual studies at me and cherry pick (some from 20 years ago). Reviews of lots of different studies have all concluded that at human doses aspartame is safe.
EDIT: And ya I did read them before you ask. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are what matters, not a handful of studies you found by googling "aspartame bad".
EDIT: And ya I did read them before you ask. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are what matters, not a handful of studies you found by googling "aspartame bad".
a comparative evaluation of animal (extensive) and human (limited) data supports the conclusion that excitotoxins, as used in foods today, may produce blood elevations high enough to cause damage to the nervous system of young children, damage which is not detectable at the time of occurrence but which may give rise to subtle disturbances in neuroendocrine function in adolescence and/or adulthood.
Evidence potentially implicating aspartame includes an early animal study revealing an exceedingly high incidence of brain tumors in aspartame-fed rats compared to no brain tumors in concurrent controls, the recent finding that the aspartame molecule has mutagenic potential, and the close temporal association (aspartame was introduced into US food and beverage markets several years prior to the sharp increase in brain tumor incidence and malignancy). We conclude that there is need for reassessing the carcinogenic potential of aspartame.
The study showed that the intake of aspartame in a not unrealistically high dose produced a marked and persistent increase of the availability of Phe to the brain, which was not observed after protein intake. The study indicated, furthermore, that Phe was cleared faster from the plasma after consumption of protein compared with aspartame.
Many studies on why that's not good
Show Content
ASPARTAME (ASM), an artificial sweetener, was shown to dose dependently increase 45Ca influx into and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) leakage from murine brain cell cultures. Astrocytes were more resistant than neurones to the effects of ASM. In cerebellar granule neurones, a 20% increase in calcium was found after an incubation time of 22 h in the presence of 0.1 mM ASM; at 0.5 mM concentration, calcium influx increased 40% compared with control cultures. At a concentration of 10 mM, influx was increased 13-fold after 5 h. Morphological appearance as judged by phase contrast microscopy was first visibly affected after exposure to 1 mM ASM for 22 h. Citrate, another food additive, was included in the study to demonstrate that cerebellar granule neurones could tolerate 10 mM additions to the medium and citrate did not cause 45Ca influx or morphological changes in neurones after 22 h. LDH leakage, a sign of severe cell damage, was observed at 1 mM concentrations of ASM after 22 h. Cerebral astrocytes on the other hand were more resistant and showed morphological changes, increased calcium influx and LDH leakage first at 5 mM concentrations of ASM.
Read: Severe cell damage in lab test with aspartame
also
the cumulative effects derived from the incorporation of label in the chronic administration model suggests that regular intake of aspartame may result in the progressive accumulation of formaldehyde adducts. It may be further speculated that the formation of adducts can help to explain the chronic effects aspartame consumption may induce on sensitive tissues such as brain (6,9,19,50). In any case, the possible negative effects that the accumulation of formaldehyde adducts can induce is, obviously, long-term. The damage to nucleic acids, mainly to DNA may eventually induce cell death and/or mutations. The results presented suggest that the conversion of aspartame methanol into formaldehyde adducts in significant amounts in vivo should should be taken into account because of the widespread utilization of this sweetener.
Show Content
Four male adult volunteers each received 500 mg, equivalent to 6-8.7 mg/kg, which is approximately the FDA's estimate of mean daily human consumption. Both treatments caused a rise in serum methanol. In rats the mean peak value was 3.1 mg/litre 1 hr after administration; serum methanol returned to endogenous values 4 hr after treatment. In the men, the mean rise over endogenous values was 1.06 mg/litre after 45 min.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3957170
Dude I'm just pulling the first couple random search results, excluding ones from tinfoil hat websites or other dubious sources, you'll find many, many more if you look.
Also what kind of a dumb argument is "only meta analyses count, this research is invalid because it disagrees with my opinion"?
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is most likely a bad idea.
[quote]a comparative evaluation of animal (extensive) and human (limited) data supports the conclusion that excitotoxins, as used in foods today, may produce blood elevations high enough to cause damage to the nervous system of young children, damage which is not detectable at the time of occurrence but which may give rise to subtle disturbances in neuroendocrine function in adolescence and/or adulthood.[/quote]
[quote] Evidence potentially implicating aspartame includes an early animal study revealing an exceedingly high incidence of brain tumors in aspartame-fed rats compared to no brain tumors in concurrent controls, the recent finding that the aspartame molecule has mutagenic potential, and the close temporal association (aspartame was introduced into US food and beverage markets several years prior to the sharp increase in brain tumor incidence and malignancy). We conclude that there is need for reassessing the carcinogenic potential of aspartame.[/quote]
[quote]The study showed that the intake of aspartame in a not unrealistically high dose produced a marked and persistent increase of the availability of Phe to the brain, which was not observed after protein intake. The study indicated, furthermore, that Phe was cleared faster from the plasma after consumption of protein compared with aspartame.[/quote]
Many studies on why that's not good
[spoiler][quote]ASPARTAME (ASM), an artificial sweetener, was shown to dose dependently increase 45Ca influx into and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) leakage from murine brain cell cultures. Astrocytes were more resistant than neurones to the effects of ASM. In cerebellar granule neurones, a 20% increase in calcium was found after an incubation time of 22 h in the presence of 0.1 mM ASM; at 0.5 mM concentration, calcium influx increased 40% compared with control cultures. At a concentration of 10 mM, influx was increased 13-fold after 5 h. Morphological appearance as judged by phase contrast microscopy was first visibly affected after exposure to 1 mM ASM for 22 h. Citrate, another food additive, was included in the study to demonstrate that cerebellar granule neurones could tolerate 10 mM additions to the medium and citrate did not cause 45Ca influx or morphological changes in neurones after 22 h. LDH leakage, a sign of severe cell damage, was observed at 1 mM concentrations of ASM after 22 h. Cerebral astrocytes on the other hand were more resistant and showed morphological changes, increased calcium influx and LDH leakage first at 5 mM concentrations of ASM.[/quote][/spoiler] Read: Severe cell damage in lab test with aspartame
also
[quote]the cumulative effects derived from the incorporation of label in the chronic administration model suggests that regular intake of aspartame may result in the progressive accumulation of formaldehyde adducts. It may be further speculated that the formation of adducts can help to explain the chronic effects aspartame consumption may induce on sensitive tissues such as brain (6,9,19,50). In any case, the possible negative effects that the accumulation of formaldehyde adducts can induce is, obviously, long-term. The damage to nucleic acids, mainly to DNA may eventually induce cell death and/or mutations. The results presented suggest that the conversion of aspartame methanol into formaldehyde adducts in significant amounts in vivo should should be taken into account because of the widespread utilization of this sweetener.[/quote][spoiler]http://www.wnho.net/formaldehyde_from_aspartame.pdf[/spoiler]
[quote]Four male adult volunteers each received 500 mg, equivalent to 6-8.7 mg/kg, which is approximately the FDA's estimate of mean daily human consumption. Both treatments caused a rise in serum methanol. In rats the mean peak value was 3.1 mg/litre 1 hr after administration; serum methanol returned to endogenous values 4 hr after treatment. In the men, the mean rise over endogenous values was 1.06 mg/litre after 45 min.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3957170[/url]
Dude I'm just pulling the first couple random search results, excluding ones from tinfoil hat websites or other dubious sources, you'll find many, many more if you look.
Also what kind of a dumb argument is "only meta analyses count, this research is invalid because it disagrees with my opinion"?
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is [b]most likely[/b] a bad idea.
[quote] Evidence potentially implicating aspartame includes an early animal study revealing an exceedingly high incidence of brain tumors in aspartame-fed rats compared to no brain tumors in concurrent controls, the recent finding that the aspartame molecule has mutagenic potential, and the close temporal association (aspartame was introduced into US food and beverage markets several years prior to the sharp increase in brain tumor incidence and malignancy). We conclude that there is need for reassessing the carcinogenic potential of aspartame.[/quote]
[quote]The study showed that the intake of aspartame in a not unrealistically high dose produced a marked and persistent increase of the availability of Phe to the brain, which was not observed after protein intake. The study indicated, furthermore, that Phe was cleared faster from the plasma after consumption of protein compared with aspartame.[/quote]
Many studies on why that's not good
[spoiler][quote]ASPARTAME (ASM), an artificial sweetener, was shown to dose dependently increase 45Ca influx into and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) leakage from murine brain cell cultures. Astrocytes were more resistant than neurones to the effects of ASM. In cerebellar granule neurones, a 20% increase in calcium was found after an incubation time of 22 h in the presence of 0.1 mM ASM; at 0.5 mM concentration, calcium influx increased 40% compared with control cultures. At a concentration of 10 mM, influx was increased 13-fold after 5 h. Morphological appearance as judged by phase contrast microscopy was first visibly affected after exposure to 1 mM ASM for 22 h. Citrate, another food additive, was included in the study to demonstrate that cerebellar granule neurones could tolerate 10 mM additions to the medium and citrate did not cause 45Ca influx or morphological changes in neurones after 22 h. LDH leakage, a sign of severe cell damage, was observed at 1 mM concentrations of ASM after 22 h. Cerebral astrocytes on the other hand were more resistant and showed morphological changes, increased calcium influx and LDH leakage first at 5 mM concentrations of ASM.[/quote][/spoiler] Read: Severe cell damage in lab test with aspartame
also
[quote]the cumulative effects derived from the incorporation of label in the chronic administration model suggests that regular intake of aspartame may result in the progressive accumulation of formaldehyde adducts. It may be further speculated that the formation of adducts can help to explain the chronic effects aspartame consumption may induce on sensitive tissues such as brain (6,9,19,50). In any case, the possible negative effects that the accumulation of formaldehyde adducts can induce is, obviously, long-term. The damage to nucleic acids, mainly to DNA may eventually induce cell death and/or mutations. The results presented suggest that the conversion of aspartame methanol into formaldehyde adducts in significant amounts in vivo should should be taken into account because of the widespread utilization of this sweetener.[/quote][spoiler]http://www.wnho.net/formaldehyde_from_aspartame.pdf[/spoiler]
[quote]Four male adult volunteers each received 500 mg, equivalent to 6-8.7 mg/kg, which is approximately the FDA's estimate of mean daily human consumption. Both treatments caused a rise in serum methanol. In rats the mean peak value was 3.1 mg/litre 1 hr after administration; serum methanol returned to endogenous values 4 hr after treatment. In the men, the mean rise over endogenous values was 1.06 mg/litre after 45 min.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3957170[/url]
Dude I'm just pulling the first couple random search results, excluding ones from tinfoil hat websites or other dubious sources, you'll find many, many more if you look.
Also what kind of a dumb argument is "only meta analyses count, this research is invalid because it disagrees with my opinion"?
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is [b]most likely[/b] a bad idea.
the301stspartanAlso what kind of a dumb argument is "only meta analyses count, this research is invalid because it disagrees with my opinion"?
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is most likely a bad idea.
That's not what he said though. There's also plenty evidence debunking this aspartame controversy.
You can't just cherry pick out the ones that say its bad and then claim you're right
[quote=the301stspartan]Also what kind of a dumb argument is "only meta analyses count, this research is invalid because it disagrees with my opinion"?
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is [b]most likely[/b] a bad idea.[/quote]
That's not what he said though. There's also plenty evidence debunking this aspartame controversy.
You can't just cherry pick out the ones that say its bad and then claim you're right
No, of course there isn't a study on 10000 humans who all died after drinking a bottle of coke zero. But there's plenty evidence that regularly consuming aspartame is [b]most likely[/b] a bad idea.[/quote]
That's not what he said though. There's also plenty evidence debunking this aspartame controversy.
You can't just cherry pick out the ones that say its bad and then claim you're right
I'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.
I'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.
Best way to stop eating? Take things slow for awhile, do your chores early in the day and have morsels in between them. Then fast with the remaining time. Gets you hungry and motivated to the point where you become cognizant of your eating behavior. If you still feel the need to binge, you need to continue working on self discipline. I do this and I've never been overweight or underweight.
Best way to stop eating? Take things slow for awhile, do your chores early in the day and have morsels in between them. Then fast with the remaining time. Gets you hungry and motivated to the point where you become cognizant of your eating behavior. If you still feel the need to binge, you need to continue working on self discipline. I do this and I've never been overweight or underweight.
ulmyxxI'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
[quote=ulmyxx]I'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.[/quote]
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
Like most things in life, discipline and planning are the key.
Like most things in life, discipline and planning are the key.
eeeulmyxxI'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt
[quote=eee][quote=ulmyxx]I'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.[/quote]
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt
eee3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it
[quote=eee]
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it
the301stspartan...
Idk man sideshow is a doctor
[quote=the301stspartan]...[/quote]
Idk man sideshow is a doctor
Idk man sideshow is a doctor
Who cares about scientific research? Aspartame is fucking disgusting yo
Who cares about scientific research? Aspartame is fucking disgusting yo
man diet soda is a great way to send weight loss threads into the shitter every time
man diet soda is a great way to send weight loss threads into the shitter every time
http://strengtheory.com/an-unbiased-look-at-artificial-sweeteners/
also to any future thread lookers who came to this hazardous thread looking for actual weight lost advice:
Obi and SteveC are right. weight loss comes down to calculating your BMR and tracking your calories. restrictive diets like keto and other methods like doing a handstand while you drink a glass of room temperature of water upside down to curtail your hunger may net you similar results but it is quite literally a matter of calories in vs. calories out.
http://strengtheory.com/an-unbiased-look-at-artificial-sweeteners/
also to any future thread lookers who came to this hazardous thread looking for actual weight lost advice:
Obi and SteveC are right. weight loss comes down to calculating your BMR and tracking your calories. restrictive diets like keto and other methods like doing a handstand while you drink a glass of room temperature of water upside down to curtail your hunger may net you similar results but it is quite literally a matter of [b]calories in vs. calories out[/b].
also to any future thread lookers who came to this hazardous thread looking for actual weight lost advice:
Obi and SteveC are right. weight loss comes down to calculating your BMR and tracking your calories. restrictive diets like keto and other methods like doing a handstand while you drink a glass of room temperature of water upside down to curtail your hunger may net you similar results but it is quite literally a matter of [b]calories in vs. calories out[/b].
Segnoeee3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it
Everything you just said is 100% wrong lol
[quote=Segno][quote=eee]
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it[/quote]
Everything you just said is 100% wrong lol
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
I lost weight better by eating 6 small meals every day because it boosted my metabolism. Skipping meals will only slow down your metabolism and you may eventually just break down from basically starving yourself and possibly gain the eating habits of a sumo wrestler where you eat a bunch all at once once a day. Except you won't be a sumo wrestler and you will hate yourself for it[/quote]
Everything you just said is 100% wrong lol
if u wanna gain weight: eat more, if thats too hard for u smoke a nice indica and pound back relatively healthy calorie dense foods (smoking weed increases appetite)
if u wanna lose weight: exercise, stay in a caloric deficit
its not rocket science, if you cannot do these simple things you have a lack of self-control. there is no excuse to be obese in 2016 theres so much information on this stuff everywhere online
if u wanna gain weight: eat more, if thats too hard for u smoke a nice indica and pound back relatively healthy calorie dense foods (smoking weed increases appetite)
if u wanna lose weight: exercise, stay in a caloric deficit
its not rocket science, if you cannot do these simple things you have a lack of self-control. there is no excuse to be obese in 2016 theres so much information on this stuff everywhere online
if u wanna lose weight: exercise, stay in a caloric deficit
its not rocket science, if you cannot do these simple things you have a lack of self-control. there is no excuse to be obese in 2016 theres so much information on this stuff everywhere online
flyingbuddyeeeulmyxxI'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.3 meals is bad advice for losing weight
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt
your body really doesn't need to eat all that regularly unless you're hella out of shape OR a pussy (or working manual labor)
3 meals is bad for most overweight people because a fair portion of people who are pushing up on obese struggle with portion control rather than grazing, and 3 meals will just exacerbate it. The rest of your advice is also retarded pseudoscience. Counting calories is all you need to lose weight
[quote=flyingbuddy][quote=eee][quote=ulmyxx]I'm pretty fucking skinny. Here are my tips: no soda, no snacks. 3 meals. Veggies fruits, rice, beans chicken. No cream, no sweet drinks. Personally I have a crasoint for breakfeast with a banana. NO JUICE. And water. Lunch and dinner I'm talking rice, veggies, and meat/beans. Eat slow, always drink water or tea. LOW OR NO SUGAR IN TEA. You are what you eat, so eat healthy.[/quote]
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt[/quote]
your body really doesn't need to eat all that regularly unless you're hella out of shape OR a pussy (or working manual labor)
3 meals is bad for most overweight people because a fair portion of people who are pushing up on obese struggle with portion control rather than grazing, and 3 meals will just exacerbate it. The rest of your advice is also retarded pseudoscience. Counting calories is all you need to lose weight
3 meals is bad advice for losing weight[/quote]
Are you implying skipping meals is better?
If so, no that's a bad idea. Your body needs food so that it can function throughout the day, skipping meals will only cause you to get tired and lazy.
Also, people can give you all the advice in the world to help you but only you can decide to act upon it. No other way around it really. Another thing about losing weight is you need to stick to the healthy eating habits/lifestyle. So many people go on 'diets' to lose weight only to go back to their old lifestyle a few weeks/months later and put it all back on.
My last tip for losing weight is to avoid b4nny's streams because they contain a lot of salt[/quote]
your body really doesn't need to eat all that regularly unless you're hella out of shape OR a pussy (or working manual labor)
3 meals is bad for most overweight people because a fair portion of people who are pushing up on obese struggle with portion control rather than grazing, and 3 meals will just exacerbate it. The rest of your advice is also retarded pseudoscience. Counting calories is all you need to lose weight
motherfuckers in this thread are fucking idiotsz. like eee comes here for advice and he turns out being way more well-informed than 98 percent of u all. dont comment if you dont feel you know what you're talking about
motherfuckers in this thread are fucking idiotsz. like eee comes here for advice and he turns out being way more well-informed than 98 percent of u all. dont comment if you dont feel you know what you're talking about
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.