Once you're fat, it's impossible to get permanently thin again.

[EgonSpengler]

I was shopping for some Greek yogurt since my wife and I went back on South Beach (we restart it every now and then simply to reset our diet...weight loss is pretty minor) and checked some Vanilla flavored that I'd bought the week before...39g of sugar per serving. I was speechless.

I was drinking a bottle of iced tea last week and looked at the label: 16g of sugar. Alright. Oh, wait... "Servings per container: 2.5." So it was really 40g of sugar. Sons of female dogs.

I would place sugar intake as being an addiction. But as stated you still need to eat moderately. Artificial sweeteners mess with your brain, causing the body to produce too much insulin, to combat the sugar that is not there, and the insulin stays in the body longer, or so they say.

Sweeteners get added to all kinds of crazy stuff, too. You can go way over a healthy amount of sugar without even eating anything "sweet" if you don't pay attention.

 

[Old Hippy]

The studies take this into account. Do you really think nobody's heard that you need to make permanent eating changes? The point is that it's almost impossible to actually stick to the change.

if you don't sick to it you have not made a lifestyle change...
wishing to be less fat dose not work

that's the point everybody here knows that you have to make permanent eating changes... cut out all the crap we eat in the west you don't need a fad diet you need to eat like your grandparents did.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I was drinking a bottle of iced tea last week and looked at the label: 16g of sugar. Alright. Oh, wait... "Servings per container: 2.5." So it was really 40g of sugar. Sons of female dogs.

Ooh, yeah, companies are really sneaky about serving sizes. So shady how they're able to hide nutritional information like that. Any idea how "serving size" is calculated? Is it up to the manufacturer or are there legal guidelines?

that's the point everybody here knows that you have to make permanent eating changes... cut out all the crap we eat in the west you don't need a fad diet you need to eat like your grandparents did.

The early 20th century is when we started getting all sorts of industrialized food with none of the regulation. I doubt my grandparents ate much healthier food than I do now.

 

[timtofly]

Sweeteners get added to all kinds of crazy stuff, too. You can go way over a healthy amount of sugar without even eating anything "sweet" if you don't pay attention.

Food manufactures want you to keep buying their products (addiction). LOL

Consumers need to put the pressure on them like they did the tobacco industry to change how they put too much sweeteners in everyday consumables.

 

[Snerk]

I really hate the taste of artificial sweeteners. Makes me nauseous. So I never buy anything with the damned things.

 

[Old Hippy]

Ooh, yeah, companies are really sneaky about serving sizes. So shady how they're able to hide nutritional information like that. Any idea how "serving size" is calculated? Is it up to the manufacturer or are there legal guidelines?

here all foods must have a 100gram list next to the serving size list so you can compare with products on the shelf next to them

The early 20th century is when we started getting all sorts of industrialized food with none of the regulation. I doubt my grandparents ate much healthier food than I do now.

true but their Greek yogurt did not have 39 grams of sugar per serving

 

[EgonSpengler]

Ooh, yeah, companies are really sneaky about serving sizes. So shady how they're able to hide nutritional information like that. Any idea how "serving size" is calculated? Is it up to the manufacturer or are there legal guidelines?

No idea. It sure seems arbitrary. 2½ servings in a 99¢ bottle of iced tea? That's clearly just meant to confuse the consumer.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I really hate the taste of artificial sweeteners. Makes me nauseous. So I never buy anything with the damned things.

Same with my wife. To me it just tastes overly sweet, so I prefer not to consume them.

true but their geek yogurt did not have 39 grams of sugar per serving

True enough, but we had things like this:

Spoiler :

No idea. It sure seems arbitrary. 2½ servings in a 99¢ bottle of iced tea? That's clearly just meant to confuse the consumer.

Just looked it up...seems the FDA is trying to update serving size regulations, so maybe things will become clearer in a few years after the food industry stops trying to block it.

 

[Mouthwash]

Exercise plays a rather small role in losing weight. It really is all about caloric intake.

This video is simplifying the issue, but at least has proper research at its basis:


Link to video.

Now what I want from you Mouthwash (and anyone else mentioning it) is proper research on how fat cells do not die off. Not because I don't trust you, because I instinctively do, but because this topic is highly interesting to me.

I'm not arguing that fat cells are immortal, others are. The studies Wong cited are simply the results of attempted weight loss. For all I know, we could have little goblins inside of us which make us hungry because they like the living space.

 

[civvver]

I think it's stress and sleeping and too much stimulation. We're constantly stimulated by screens and tons of people around us all the time, then we don't sleep enough and it makes you crave bad foods, carbs, sugar, fats, alcohol. I know that's it for me. Plus time, when you're busy all the time it's so much easier to run through mcdonald's or pick up takeout on the way home than sit down and prepare something healthy that still tastes good. Everyone's go to healthy food is salad and chicken but do you know how boring salad and chicken is? Tastier healthy stuff usually takes too long to make.

However I do think we need a focus shift from being thin to being healthy. Your weight doesn't matter nearly as much if your blood sugars, cholesterol and blood pressure are fine. Obviously having more weight makes those numbers likely to be a lot worse so they are connected, but you should exercise to make those numbers better, not to look good in a bathing suit.

 

[Vectors]

I was drinking a bottle of iced tea last week and looked at the label: 16g of sugar. Alright. Oh, wait... "Servings per container: 2.5." So it was really 40g of sugar. Sons of female dogs.


Sweeteners get added to all kinds of crazy stuff, too. You can go way over a healthy amount of sugar without even eating anything "sweet" if you don't pay attention.

I'm guessing that it was a 20 ounce bottle and the reason is 8 ounces is a cup which is the US standardized drink size, check a 2 liter bottle, it is listed in 8 ounce servings. The problem is when it is applied to a container that while multiple servings of the drink is still designed to be consumed as a single serving.

 

[daft]

Fat/Schmat, it's what inside that counts, right?

Oh yes, except nowadays, you'd better slim up and not only that, get fit and muscular/athletic, if you dream of getting with a woman, fat boy.
Or forget about the modern/fit women even looking at you.
Such are the facts.

 

[Acken]

Strangely I know more people having cycles in their weight rather than being able to stabilize. It always seem to me that their diet works then they pay less attention, get the weight back and start over.

Calculating and checking your calorie intake takes a lot of discipline and time.

I personally have the opposite issue though, I'm a bit underweight and have a tendency to skip a bit too many meals. Eating more really feels like a chore to me. However it seems to change since my 30th birthday... took 10 pounds in the last year.

 

[civvver]

I'm guessing that it was a 20 ounce bottle and the reason is 8 ounces is a cup which is the US standardized drink size, check a 2 liter bottle, it is listed in 8 ounce servings. The problem is when it is applied to a container that while multiple servings of the drink is still designed to be consumed as a single serving.

In the last couple years drinks and chips and other snacks have started listed the entire bag's worth of calories and such. They still have one serving listed but next to it a whole container amount so people can recognize hey I probably shouldn't eat this entire 4 oz biggie size bag of chips, or at least if I do I see it has 40 grams of fat.

Fat/Schmat, it's what inside that counts, right?

Oh yes, except nowadays, you'd better slim up and not only that, get fit and muscular/athletic, if you dream of getting with a woman, fat boy.
Or forget about the modern/fit women even looking at you.
Such are the facts.

It is what's inside that counts... what's inside your wallet. Seriously if you want chicks you can either get really good looking or make a lot of money. Either works.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Fat/Schmat, it's what inside that counts, right?

Oh yes, except nowadays, you'd better slim up and not only that, get fit and muscular/athletic, if you dream of getting with a woman, fat boy.
Or forget about the modern/fit women even looking at you.
Such are the facts.

I find it absolutely hilarious how you complain about the perceived superficiality of women who only want athletic men and at the same time exhibit this notion that you "deserve" a fit woman.

Women should be happy to date a fat guy, with a nice personality, but god forbid you'd end up with a fat chick with a nice personality, right?..

It is what's inside that counts... what's inside your wallet. Seriously if you want chicks you can either get really good looking or make a lot of money. Either works.

My girlfriend probably invites me out to lunch more often that the other way around and I'm certain she's spent more on my presents than I do on hers because I simply don't give a shift about that kind of stuff. Maybe you're looking in the wrong places?

I can see how dating is expensive for men, but I don't think there's more "gold diggers" now than a few decades ago, it's the other way around. At least now it's socially acceptable to split the bill for a meal, try doing that in the 1950s..

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Calculating and checking your calorie intake takes a lot of discipline and time.

I don't agree, if you can do arithmetic in your head you can be effective with a tiny fraction of the time you'd need for even a halfway respectable workout regimen. Aside from said arithmetic/measuring, reducing calorie intake fundamentally requires *not* doing something (aka eating more calories).

In contrast, working out 50 minutes three times a week requires committing to the workout + changing + going to the gym if applicable + misc logistic stuff. This is many times greater than simply adding up your caloric intake for the day and stopping when you run out (with a marginal effort to have something around 1/3 left at the end for dinner).

Calorie reduction is obviously much better for losing weight. However that's not necessarily true if you want to measure health outright. It depends how overweight.

Oh yes, except nowadays, you'd better slim up and not only that, get fit and muscular/athletic, if you dream of getting with a woman, fat boy.
Or forget about the modern/fit women even looking at you.
Such are the facts.

I don't believe this, it's inconsistent with what I've read and observed. It is unusual for people with egregiously different appearances to go out, but aside from that attraction isn't so simple.

It is what's inside that counts... what's inside your wallet. Seriously if you want chicks you can either get really good looking or make a lot of money. Either works.

Money will buy you a certain kind of affection for sure, but probably not the kind the previous poster had in mind.

I can see how dating is expensive for men, but I don't think there's more "gold diggers" now than a few decades ago, it's the other way around. At least now it's socially acceptable to split the bill for a meal, try doing that in the 1950s..

There are probably more in the absolute sense (there are more total people), but I doubt the % has gone up. Maybe it's even gone down.

Women should be happy to date a fat guy, with a nice personality, but god forbid you'd end up with a fat chick with a nice personality, right?..

Indeed. I at least like to see people holding themselves to standards they hold others.

It's not a level playing field though, and I say that from a lens that has been on both sides of it, even going to one and (mostly) back. Baseline impressions are pretty variable when you physically look better or worse...and considering the amount of effort required from one person to the next that's pretty nasty.