/ck/ - Food & Cooking

quinoa, chick peas, barley, brown rice and zucchini noodles

... vegetables, anon

>>16756954
>I've been told to stay away from potatoes, pasta, rice and whatever
>carbs are... le BAD

>>16756967
He never said they were bad, he said he was trying to lose weight, fucking dumbass sperg.

>>16756965
Only meat and vegetables? I've been raised on meat+potatoes+vegetables. Having only two of the three sounds wrong

>>16756963
Okay these sound pretty good, thank you.
>Brown rice
Is that one barely healthy? Nobody has mentioned it to me before, they just said outright to stay away from rice

>>16756992
You're not going to get fat from fucking potatoes. It's always the lazy ass ketards demonizing them.

>>16757005
I know it's not the worst thing in the fucking world, but if eating anything else will help me lose weight faster then i want to try that

Just avoid carbs entirely. It will suck not having filler shit but you'll get used to it. You'll lose weight really quickly if you do it

>>16756992
brown rice has fiber and other nutrients

>>16756954
onion, capsicum, brocolli, pickles

>>16756954
> I've been told
By a dietician, that you've hired? In that case ask them, not internet people.

>>16756975
>carbs make you.. le FAT

>>16756954
Sounds like your doctor told you to go low carb. I went keto years ago. To unlock vegetables you must roast or sauté them in animal fats. I guarantee you that they are better than any pile of starches on your plate. Try cabbage, green beans, cauliflower, brussels sprouts, broccoli, spinach, and mushrooms. You must save all the fat rendered out of your meats to cook them with. Pad with butter. Don't forget about coleslaw, creamed spinach, and salads. Avocados are also nice. Sloppa/sandwiches are easily served up using romaine lettuce leaves as buns or tortilla replacements.

Tree nuts and pumpkin seeds are nice snacks.

from my research, what you want to avoid is processed grains. so I would minimize those. and have more whole grains if you are going to eat carbs.

>>16756954
>stay away from potatoes, pasta, rice and whatever. What the fuck is left then?
Meat, dairy, eggs, fruit and veggies.
Just stay away from starchy foods.

>>16756992
>I've been raised on meat+potatoes+vegetables.
Breakfast aside, that's the standard "balanced" meal: protein, starch & something vitamin-heavy (fruits or veggies).
The starch is mostly just extra calories. Cutting them out is the obvious way to lose weight.


>>16757005
>You're not going to get fat from fucking potatoes.
He did get that fat from fucking potatoes, that's why he's trying to lose weight.
Try to keep up.

>>16757200
>you want to avoid is processed grains.
Le hippie meme.

>If you are going to eat carbs.
He's trying to lose weight, Shaggy.

>>16757249
You don't have to go full retard to lose a bit of weight, it's expensive and unappetising for many people.

That said, cutting unnecessary carbs or swapping them for grains/legumes with higher protein and fibre content can certainly help.

>>16757265
>You don't have to go full retard to lose a bit of weight, it's expensive
No idea what you mean by "full retard", and cutting foods out of your diet can't possibly be "expensive".
Are you sure you replied to the right post?

Some good advice in here, thank you.
Should i skip sauses? Obviously i'm not going to eat bearnaise or something like that, but is there something more healthy or something?

>>16756954
I lost a ton of weight this year, and I still ate potatoes and rice and pasta
You can eat carbs, just make sure they're not refined, and eat in moderation. I also recommend separating ingredients. You can eat vegetables with everything, but the other product groups I wouldn't mix
So for instance eat your meat with veggies one day and the next day have pasta or potato with veggies
etc
This weight loss stuff is really simple desu
Stop eating garbage
Don't eat too much
Move more

>>16756954
>To lose weight i should eat
Why everyone so dumb?

>>16757018
>capsicum
Peppers anon. Nobody ever says capsicum because it's gay

>>16757543
Depends on the sauce. Avoid cream and butter heavy sauces. Also sugar based sauces like ketchup, bbq sauce and shit like that. Many gravy or stew like sauces can be made pretty lean by roasting the veggies or even also the meat in the oven instead of roasting them in oil/fat, which requires quite a lot of oil/fat.
If you want to go full authist you can make a big ass amount of gravy or sauce espagnole, let it sit so all the fat solidifies on the top and can be scrapped off pretty easily. Then freeze it in small portions of like 100ml and use those as a base for more refined sauces.
Or even simplier than that: Get into seasonings. If something is strongly seasoned you often don't really need a sauce anymore.
In the end you just have to eat less and slower but not just ban basic things like potatoes, rice and noodles or even fruits.

>>16756967
>>16757060
based

People of the middle ages in europe weren't fat and they ate mostly meat with few vegetables and no fruit. FACT!

>>16757589
>bbq sauce
Not trying to be pedantic here, but there are lots of different types of bbq sauce, and a good, homemade North Carolina style sauce should be OK for those on a diet. It's mostly vinegar, roast peppers and onions, various spices and a _little_ sweetness, I like some apple juice in mine instead of sugar.

>>16756954
>What the fuck is left then?

There is this thing called vegetables
You might want to look up that word in the dictionary

>>16756954
how about you just fucking exercise you fat fuck. nobody looses weight from diet alone and as long as your disgusting lard ass doesn't chug down a 3-liter of faygo with 2 jack's pizzas like you've been doing every night of your pathetic life you'll make progress as long as you get off your couch and put those cottage cheese legs to work.

>>16757543
>Should i skip sauses?
>>16758019
>There is this thing called vegetables
There you go OP. Google "pasta primavera".

>>16758205
>nobody looses weight from diet alone
false. exercise burns a pittance of calories. just eat good food instead of sugary crap.

>>16757669
People ate less.

>>16758232
anon, where do you think calories go if you don't burn them? are you that fucking stupid?

>>16757013
Try barley.

>>16758237
you will end up eating less if you dont eat the sugary crap. also you burn more calories at rest.

>>16758247
good thing I literally mentioned that in my post, learn to read in botswana? christ. diet alone won't change shit. exercise alone won't change shit. you have to do both.

>>16757013
>but if eating anything else will help me lose weight faster
There is no food that makes you lose weight. That's the opposite of what food does. That why they tell you to stay away from them so you eat less. Because eating less makes you lose weight. You may feel like you're walking blindfolded in a jungle but it's very simple.
Just
Eat
Less.

>>16758254
>you have to do both
except you literally dont. fix up your diet and lose some weight first then exercise is easier

>>16758274
>except you literally dont
yes you do. show me evidence of one person ever who's lost weight while never exercising. it's not possible anon.

>>16758254
>diet alone won't change shit. exercise alone won't change shit. you have to do both.
Not him, but you're 100% wrong, and you should already know it.
Obviously doing both is more effective and will take the weight off quicker, but you lose weight through caloric deficit, no matter what the method.

>>16756954
>>16756992
Remember anon, healthy does not mean low calories. If you are trying to lose weight, you need to consume less calories then you burn off (CICO).

Shit like rice, avocados, peanut butter, nuts, pasta, oils (like EVO) etc, etc, have a shit ton of calories in them in small amounts. Try to find low calorie alternatives, like subbing rice for cauliflower rice (or mixing a little rice in with cauliflower rice).

Eat a lot of vegetables, you can also have fruit just chose the shit that gives you a lot of volume for the calories (like watermelon).

>>16758295
if you just start taking in less calories your endocrine system will shift your body into fat production and storage mode. this is basic middle school stuff anon.

>>16758289
>show me evidence of one person ever who's lost weight while never exercising. it's not possible anon.
kek is this a troll. what do you think happens if you stop eating? i think the kids call it fasting nowadays. what happens if you cut your calories in half? what happens if you cut your carbs in half? what happens if you cut sugar and refined carbs and replace with healthier carbs. notice how exercise has nothing to do with any of this. in fact exercise just makes you hungrier.

>>16758289
>show me evidence of one person ever who's lost weight while never exercising
It's like you never heard of concentration camps.

>>16758301
ok so you're saying that you can literally lay in bed all day and never move a muscle and you'll lose weight?
>>16758304
they literally worked there anon, you think they just sat on their asses the whole time?

>>16758297
The goal here is "bang for your buck". Chose foods that you can eat a lot of that have low calories. You don't have to avoid certain food groups (eg: carbs and fats) just realize that fats have 9 calories per gram and both protein and carbs have 4 calories per gram. So you can eat more if you reduce your fat intake.

>>16758300
>this is basic middle school stuff anon.
You mis-spelled "fiction".
Your body can't store calories that aren't there.

>>16758310
low carb is better for weight loss for most if not all

>>16758310
>energy intake substantially higher than reported AND an overestimation of physical activity
thanks for proving my point anon!

>>16758305
>ok so you're saying that you can literally lay in bed all day and never move a muscle and you'll lose weight?
Not the guy you're asking, but the answer to that is very obviously yes.
Maintaining the pounds on long-term bedridden patients is a huge challenge in medicine. I'm sure you know at least one nurse or doctor who can tell you that.

>>16758310
>underreported food by 47±16%
>overreported exercise by 51±75%
That's literally he's point…

>>16758333
maintaining muscle and bone density is, not fat levels.

>>16758336
Uhh no. Your body needs a certain amount of calories per day (TDEE) your body doesn't care where the calories come from, it could be from fat or muscle.

>>16758341
I don't see your point? chronically I'll probably who are medically bedridden and have a whole host of endocrine issues end up having problems putting on weight because their body is eating itself. that edge case has nothing to do with a lardass that sits on the couch 16 hours a day and who only gets exercise when they waddle to the kitchen or the shitter. suddenly drinking less soda alone doesn't make you become healthy. you have to exercise to build up muscle and bone density which is a big part of why bedridden patients are still unhealthy even though their overweight.

>>16758353
>even though their overweight.
even though they're not overweight
sorry m8 I'm drunk as piss

>>16758353
>suddenly drinking less soda alone doesn't make you become healthy.
should we be drinking more soda to become healthy? i dont drink any soda and i feel fine

>>16758359
>suddenly drinking less soda alone
alone is the keyword of that sentence.

>>16758361
so soda is benign or good for you?

>>16758364
it's bad for you dumbfuck, what about diet and exercise is so confusing?

>>16758353
The lardass is fat because obviously they are eating more calories then they are expending. A person who weighs 600 pounds needs to consume like over 4k calories per day just to maintain that weight. And those same 600 pound people have a shit ton of muscle cause SHOCKER they have to move 600 pounds around when they need to go somewhere.

If that lardass suddenly went into a coma and stayed in bed all day, their body would convert their fat and muscles into energy so it could survive.

Anyway, I'm done trying to teach idiots on 4chan about basic shit...look this shit up on google.

When I did keto, I was fine with eating extra fats as they were satiating. But as I started running again, I started eating more carbs for performance.

You can be fine eating fats instead of carbs as long as you're in ketosis as you don't get the sugar/insulin induced cravings. But it's not optimal if you run or work out heavy.

>>16758371
>The chronic drinker is alcoholic because obviously they are drinking more than they should.
Bravo youve cracked the case

>>16758371
diet and exercise is proven to be more effective than diet alone. there is no argument against that.

>>16758386
No shit?

>>16758393
that's what I've been saying the whole time. again. what's your point?

>>16758396
I'm not the same person? I just saw someone post something retarded and corrected it?

>>16758402
>I didn't read the thread
opinion disregarded
try lurking
have a nice day

>>16758396
no you said diet alone is not enough for weight loss. that is wrong and i said so and now youre moving the goalposts. bravo bravo

>>16758405

>>16758408
show me any evidence of a single person losing weight in a healthy manner without exercise. literal starvation due to being in a coma or bedridden does not count, dropping muscle and bone mass does not count, as the entire goal of losing weight is to be more healthy.

>>16758409

>>16758425
>Show me one instance of a person losing weight without exercising...Oh and it can't be x,y,z

Nigga you dumb?

>>16758425
Man you're really adamant on dying on this hill even though you're 100% wrong aren't ya

>>16758434
are you? why lose weight if you're just as unhealthy afterwards?
>>16758435
prove me wrong then? I don't see any evidence being actually brought forth besides this post >>16758310 which ended up supporting my argument.

>>16758425
what is a weight loss trial? literally just find any of them that dont advise exercise and or control for physical activity. 5 seconds of googling wouldve resolved this but for some reason you need to come bitch and argue on a Mongolian basket weaving forum about how many pineapple you can shove up your rectum

>>16758435
I'm done, have fun arguing with this retard.

>>16758441
if it's so easy to find why don't you post evidence to shut me up then? if it's so commonplace and obvious why can't you prove it?

>>16758449
because at that point ill start ketofagging and nobody wants that. get some exercise its good for you but not for weight loss

>>16758458
I accept your concession

>>16758449
Weigh yourself at night after dinner. In the morning after you wake up weight yourself again. CONGRATS YOU JUST LOST WEIGHT WITHOUT EXERCISING.

/thread

>>16758467
kek noooooo that doesnt count

>>16758467
the act of walking to the scale alone is exercising dumbfuck.

>>16758449
The fact that you went from arguing "there is no possible way to lose weight with just dieting" to "there is no healthy way to lose weight with just dieting" is more than enough to let me know that it doesn't matter what I say but whatever.

If you stop eating you will lose weight. If you eat less calories than your body uses just by existing you will lose weight. You can train 16 hours a day exercising and if you eat more calories than you are expending you will gain weight. That's all there is to it, there is no argument here.

>>16758478
starvation losses aren't healthy. it's pretty safe to assume that if you want to lose weight you would like to become more healthy. dealing in absolutes and semantics like this just shows you have no real argument and just want to win something.

>>16758467
Med, now.

>>16758482
Eating less calories then you consume is "starvation"...lol wut

>>16758486
biologically speaking yes, that's the definition of being in a starvation state.

>>16756954
calories in calories out

>>16757013

Food doesn't magically make you gain weight, especially not potatoes which are the most satiating thing in the world WHICH MEANS YOU EAT LESS

>>16758490
Post selfie...I bet you are fat

>>16758334
>That's literally he's point…
Noes, it's not.

>>16758500
yes, the one person who's arguing that you should exercise is fat lol

>>16758490
no its not starvation state takes days of not eating. by your logic you are starving in between meals
>>16758493
yes we know boy genius

>>16758514
as long as your aren't actively digesting you are starving.

>>16758507
Again, moving the goal posts. No one said you shouldn't exercise. You are the one that made the idiotic statement that you can't lose weight WITHOUT exercise, which is false.

>>16758522
prove it then.

>>16758522
Wow, I left the thread for an hour, and he's still pushing that line?
Calories In, Calories out, there is no other truth.

>>16758527
Drink a gallon of water without pissing then weight yourself. After you piss, weight yourself again.

There. Proven.

>>16756954
Eat whatever you want with it as long as it's not literal fast food slop. Who cares if you have some rice, a potato, etc with your meal as long as you're counting the calories? As long as you're at a deficit, you'll lose weight.

>>16758527
>prove it then.
Not him, but ummm...

>>16758533
like a true champ

>>16758547
>being paralyzed and immobile is healthy

>>16758543
>As long as you're at a deficit, you'll lose weight.
Any reasonable person would agree.
But it's obviously easier (and healthier) to get to a deficit by reducing carb-based calories rather than protein or veggie-based calories.

>>16758560
Are you implying he stays trim by exercising?
How many calories do you burn moving those goalposts?

>>16758562
Or you know you could reduce fat, which has 9 calories per gram instead of protein or carbs, which is 4 calories per gram.

>>16758562
eating less carbs even at the same number of calories increased energy expenditure. I guess its ketofagging time

>>16758568
I don't think he was physically healthy when he was alive. again. the point of losing weight it to be healthy not to just weight less

>>16758574
>calories per gram is significant
We're not backpacking, Anon.
But what did you fucking think I meant?
"Here, have a stick of butter, it should be fine, it doesn't weigh that much!"
Jesus, Dude.

>>16758574
anon fat and in particular protein are more satiating. Carbs are not necessary to eat, fat and protein are. Essential fatty acids are a thing while essential carbs are not

>>16758581
Still not hearing how he stays trim without exercising under your bullshit "needs exercise" model.
https://youtu.be/KeswYJgf5mM

>>16758597
being trim and deteriorating due to illness are not the same thing.

>>16758601
Calories Out, Calories In, my homosexual friend.
Still not hearing anything about needing exercise.

>>16758608
prove it then, your only example was a terminally ill dude who's dead. post some actual science then.

>>16758608
Exercise means more calories out. Problem as far as weight loss is it will make you hungry and calories in will go up accordingly.

>>16758616
I'm positing a reasonable point that is just plain common sense in response to the same baseless claims you've been making for over an hour.
The first law of thermodynamics requires caloric deficit must result in weight loss.
How about you provide some evidence for your "must needs exercise" claim?

>>16758608
what do you think calories out means? what do you think exercise means? are you so stupid that you think exercise = working out?

>>16758632
calories in calories out. if you're not burning any then there's no deficit dumbass.

>>16758636
Not evidence, not interested.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ipse%20dixit

>>16758632
>caloric deficit must result in weight loss.
Wrong caloric deficit is weight loss. There's an equal sign there.

>>16758641
https://www.google.com/search?q=equlibrium+calories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

>>16758644
>>16758650
nice papers lol
you say calories in calories out, but without the calories out part there's no equilibrium. you factually have to burn calories to lose weight.

>>16758662
>without the calories out part
We both know you burn 1800-2400 calories a day just sitting on your ass.
Your bait needs to get better than this, Mr. Sealion.
https://youtu.be/vwnXxQHf454

Chaffles are so good for bread and hamburger buns. Everyone should try it. Better than lettuce wraps for sure.

>>16758543
Carbs are fattening so it's best to avoid them when trying to lose weight. Mammals have carbs in milk because carbs are like a weight gain drug. You'd be crazy to eat carbs as an adult unless you are bulking.

>>16758692
That looks like a great idea.

Side note: Why is every burger I see on the internet so fucking tall you'd need a knife and fork to eat it?
Anon, your burger would be great with one patty.

>>16758707
They really are great. I ignored them for a year because I thought the name was dumb. There's lots of variations to get different textures, too. SeriousKeto has a wonderbread chaffles recipe that is a perfect substitute for untoasted white bread. Usually I just do mozzarella and egg.

The photo isn't my burger I just thought it looked photogenic. Here's my fully carnivore burger with only cheese egg and beef. Delicious and super healthy.

Sometimes I use primal kitchen ketchup as a condiment. If I was less lazy I'd make healthy mayo. Mustard is also good if you're low-carb not carnivore. And I like fermented dill pickle slices since vegetables should only be eaten fermented.

Chaffles also make great breakfast sandwiches. Fried eggs fit on there perfectly. I use a silicone ring sometimes to get truly perfect eggs. The yolk can be centered by pushing with the back of a spoon.

>>16758738
Looks awesome.
I've got to try this soon.

>>16756954
milk/dairy/cheese
broccoli
tomatoes
mushrooms
carrots
cabbage
onions
beets
leaves with some mass on them like bok choy
chickpeas - very versatile, plenty of protein and the flour is a good substitute in many recipes
seeds/nuts
coconut and derivatives
low carb pasta/bread, you should find in any decent supermarket
>>16756992
>sounds wrong
theres no wrong in adapting food to your needs

>>16758692
>Chaffles
What the actual fuck. How is that healthy? I thought cheese was fatty as hell.
That looks delicious

>>16758802
Fats from animals especially ruminants are very healthy. Humans evolved to eat a diet very high in animal fat. Humans are apex predators who hunted the biggest fattest animals. Other carnivores target weaker prey so get leaner meat and are more evolved to use protein energy.

All modern diseases are caused by processed carbs and plant-based oils.

>>16758205
>>16758254
>>16758289
>>16758305
>>16758425
>>16758439
>>16758449
>>16758527
This is my weight loss from four years ago with zero exercise and nothing but a low calorie diet and quitting drinking. You’re wrong, dude.

Also, I did eventually start working out but literally all I did here was go to work at my desk job and come home.

>>16758831
>All modern diseases are caused by processed carbs and plant-based oils.
Congratulations, you just completely shit all over any credibility you had in the first part of your post, godless hippie.

>>16758851
Name a single disease of civilization not caused by carbs and/or vegetable oil.

>>16758842
To be clear, when I say I started working out, I mean after that photo was taken. Like, I work out now, didn't then.

Also, OP, you're getting conflicting advice because for some reason, the people who told you about eating meat and fish and shit while cutting out carbs didn't tell you about keto or other low-carb diets. Look them up on Google, and you'll understand more. Cheese and certain sauces (like Buffalo sauce) may seem unhealthy, which, in terms of fats and sodium content respectively, they kinda are. But they don't have any carbohydrates. If you cut carbs from your diet, you WILL lose weight, but be warned, this kind of dieting doesn't allow a cheat day. You need to stay under a certain amount of carbs (like, 20) to lose weight in this method. If you consume more carbs, your body will drop out of ketosis and just make you fat again.

The alternative to this is calories in, calories out. Either way, you need to be counting something to keep track of what you're trying to keep low in order to not gain weight.

>>16758868
Lung cancer.
Most (all?) forms of cancer.
Covid.
Influenza.
Any other virus.
Any bacterial disease, including the Black Plague, Cholera, etc.
Chronic Respiratory Diseases.
You can still get heart disease no matter what you eat, just the likelihood changes.

In fact, in the CDC's list of leading causes of death:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm
...only heart disease and diabetes seem to be principally caused by diet.


>>16758868
>disease of civilization
>of civilization
That;s just plain moving the goalposts, jobless stoner.

Simply not true. The benefits of carb reduction are linear.

Also no counting or tracking of anything is needed on keto. You eat to satiety. Intake is controlled by hunger.

>>16758903
Was a reply to >>16758879

>>16758897
Cancer is a metabolic disease. You're also severely retarded and don't understand virus and bacteria infections are ancient diseases. Not modern (a.k.a. diseases of civilization).

Also you don't understand synonyms which also indicates mental disability (a synonym for retarded, retard).

>>16758903
I've lost weight doing low carb/Atkins before, as have multiple people in my life, so you're wrong. And you still have to monitor your carbs on keto, idiot.

>>16758923
>Cancer is a metabolic disease.
No, it isn't. It's genetic.

>You're also severely retarded
Wow, what an articulate argument. You go to med school for that?

>virus and bacteria infections are ancient diseases
Exacerbated by "civilized" living conditions, communal wells, high population density, modern air travel, etc.

>diseases of civilization).
Again with the moved goalposts.

>(a synonym for retarded, retard).
That's not very "groovy" of you, Anon.
Also somewhat incoherent since I can't quite tell if you're also claiming mental retardation is also caused by foods you don't like.

Go back to your bong and let the grown-ups talk in peace.

>>16758926
>I've lost weight doing low carb/Atkins before, as have multiple people in my life, so you're wrong
Uh, what? Do you think this makes your stupid uninformed opinions the word of God or something? Post cranial capacity, brainlet.

+50kcal/day boost per 10% reduction in carbs. Linear benefit. No magical threshold.
https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/151/3/482/6020167

> you still have to monitor your carbs on keto
No. You're severely misinformed. You just eat unlimited amounts of low-carb foods. If you think you need to count carbs you're doing it wrong and eating the wrong foods.

>>16758949
Yes, low carb foods you fucking moron, you have to monitor what foods are low carb. That's counting carbs. Jesus Christ.

>>16758842
Congrats anon, you look good.

>>16758949
dried eggs?

>>16756954
Non starchy vegetables. Broccoli, cauliflower, green beans, bell peppers, peas, mushrooms, lettuce, carrots, celery, things like that. Avoid Potatoes, corn, and beats.

>>16758948
If you don't understand the difference between modern disease (e.g. alzheimer's, atherosclerosis, type 2 diabetes, obesity, cancer) and non-modern disease (e.g. bacteria and virus infection) you are not an intelligent person. If you cannot admit a mistake you're not an honest person either.

It would be a waste of my time to try and converse with a dishonest idiot such as yourself.

For the benefit of any third parties who are reading, cancer is definitely a metabolic disease as proven by experiments which transplant cancerous DNA into healthy cells. Supposedly cancerous DNA doesn't make cells cancerous. Cancerous mitochondria do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06e-PwhmSq8

>>16758963
>Broccoli,
Broccoli is especially good for dieting because it will fill your belly up, leaving you feeling full, with relatively few calories.

>>16758949
Also, you're not gonna lose weight on keto eating a bunch of fruit. It's packed with carbs and sugar. 4 on the avoid list and 5 on the eat as much as you like list counteract each other. One mango has 45 grams of sugar and 50 carbs. You may as well eat a chocolate bar.

>>16758965
Just drop the fucking insults.
Your original claim was:
>>16758831
>All modern diseases are caused by processed carbs and plant-based oils.
And you're just plain wrong.
Either prove your nonsensical claim or fuck right off.
And please also explain how Covid isn't a "modern disease" while you're at it.

>>16758962
I'm aware of the existence of powdered eggs but I have no idea what people use them for. Maybe used in recipes or something.

>>16758972
The food list is from 1951 before globalism gave us year round tropical fruit in every supermarket. You can see it excludes bananas and grapes as those would have been the common high sugar fruits at the time.

>>16758982
Your words in my eyes are like the stench of shit in my nose. You take pride in stupidity and think ignorance is a valid argument. The distinction between modern disease and ancient is trivial. Throwing up such a hurdle to discussion so early on shows it will never go anywhere. Any attempt at dialog will result in you playing dumb and asking to be educated on every tiny detail.

>Viruses were already infecting organisms some 300 million years ago
https://www.livescience.com/16015-oldest-viruses-insects.html

If you have to feign(?) a lack of reading comprehension to muster any argument you probably are wrong and you shouldn't be arguing at all.

>>16759000
>Your words in my eyes are like the stench of shit in my nose.

>>16759000
>You take pride in stupidity and think ignorance is a valid argument.
I'm not the one making an unsupported assertion, I'm not the one that needs to make a valid argument.
I'm still waiting for you to validate your claim.
Not going to read any more of your nonsense.
Surely there's some other board or thread more well-suited to you?

>>16758897
You probably think the sun causes skin cancer, too.
>In contrast, several studies have demonstrated that ω-6 PUFAs induce progression in certain types of cancer. In this review, we discuss epidemiological and experimental studies addressing the relationship between the development of some types of cancer, including colon and colorectal carcinoma, breast cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer and neuroblastoma, and the ingestion to ω-3 and ω-6 (PUFAs).
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444340917001170

>>16759012
You were already refuted here: >>16758965

The somatic mutation theory of cancer is proven wrong. Cancer is a metabolic disease.

Other than that you just listed a bunch of ancient diseases. This behaviour suggests you have a conscious belief you are wrong but want to win the argument regardless. Deliberately pretending you don't understand what was meant by "modern disease" or "diseases of civilization" in and of itself shows you are wrong and you know you are wrong.

>>16758983
My whole point is that it's incorrect advice. It doesn't matter if it's 1951, if you handed someone that right now as weight loss advice, they'd come to you and ask why they weren't losing anything.

>>16759083
As long as we agree that tracking calories and/or carbs is unnecessary the detail of which foods should be included in your diet is irrelevant.

>>16756954
Damn that looks like some tasty protein

>>16759105
We don't agree. Unless you're just eating raw foods, there are too many discrepancies in method of cooking, oils, etc., that will completely fuck up your dietary goals if you're not tracking it.

>>16758923
>viral infections and bacteria aren't diseases of civilization
Add parasites to the list and you'd be totally wrong. Like half the bible is about how settled, agriculturalists were to deal with plaques, parasites and crowded living.

>>16759130
Then why did you divert into such a silly tangent? Remove fruit from the accepted food list and your nitpicking is nullified.

> there are too many discrepancies in method of cooking, oils, etc
Cooking changes how carbs are digested but barely changes the metabolic response to protein or fat. On a low-carb diet this is not a concern.

If you think you have to count your food then log it in a diary and consciously restrict how much you eat, your diet is wrong. You don't understand how to eat human food.

>>16759139
Are you actually not English literate or do you just think feigning illiteracy is a valid argument?

What verbiage would you prefer to distinguish between ancient diseases (e.g. virus and baterial infections) and modern diseases (e.g. cancer, obesity, type 2 diabetes, alzheimer's)?

>>16759149
If you have to lose a massive amount of weight, you obviously don't understand how to eat. I had to count calories (I didn't log them in a diary or anything, but I kept track of how many I was eating and was always conscious of the count within 100 calories), but that's because I had gotten fat and obviously had to make a major change.

It's not a surprise that fat people don't understand how to eat. That's the whole point. OP doesn't even know how to discern what is a "healthy" food or how to actually lose weight.

>>16759166
This is a very bizarre argument. Your comments have no clear logical thread to them. You seem to be disagreeing only for the sake of being disagreeable.

To summarize my argument:
1. Counting calories is not necessary.
2. Counting carbs is not necessary.
3. The only thing necessary to be lean and healthy is eat appropriate human food to satiety.

If you have any disagreement you think is valid please be direct about it. No need to be obtuse.

>>16759214
To lose weight, eating food to satiety is not going to work. Fat people crave more food, have stretched out their stomachs, and their body hormones are all off, making them crave more food.

The only way to stop being a fatass is to look at what is actually in your food and change your lifestyle. This isn't a thread about maintaining a healthy weight, it's about a fat person who needs to lose it.

>>16759236
Finally this is meaningful discussion. The current scientific evidence is showing that fat and protein give proper satiety signals even in obese or diabetic people. It's only carbohydrate which causes insatiable appetite. There is also evidence that seed/vegetable oils cause inappropriate hunger cues.

In fact people who eat unlimited fat and protein achieve better weight loss than people counting calories on alternative diets.

Humans can achieve perfect health on a low-carb healthy-fat diet without counting anything. You just need to be strict about never eating refined carbs or seed oil.

>>16758949
How much do they actually mean by "as much as you want" ?

>>16756954
Quinoa
Vegetables that aren't starchy or too sugary (as in, no tubers or corn).
Make sure to drink at least one glass of water (don't go full retard though) every hour after getting out of bed as well. Staying very well-hydrated is important for both satiety, and pretty much any other function you want to perform well (sleep, cognition, and working out all included).

Never sit still for more than an hour straight without about a ten-ish minute "break" for physical activity (walk, workout, run, swim, some basketball or whatever).

Broccoli, celery, cauliflower, asparagus, radishes, green peas, chick peas, leek, onion, farlic, fennel, artichoke, brussels sprouts, kolrabbi, sunchokes, cabbage, mushroom(not a veggie but people put these in the same partitional reservation on their plates), eggplant, okra, peppers, kale, chard, spinach, lettuce, bamboo shoots, beans.

If you work out more than once a week, you'll have to eat some carbs or you'll start breaking down. Just make sure the carbs you eat are not too harsh on your blood sugar levels. Get some carbs with a decent amount of fibers in 'em too.

There are plenty of things to eat with your meats and eggs that are not tubers, rice, or pasta.

>Meat and eggs
So wait hang on, egg and bacon is healthy?

>>16757543
Soy sauce and fish sauce are low in calories.

>>16758205
>nobody looses weight from diet alone
Wrong. It's 99% diet. Training is completely irrelevant since it burns so little calories even if you spend 1 hour lifting.

>>16758628
>>16758636
Exercise burns very little calories compared to the amount of time you need to spend on doing it.

>>16758641
>if you're not burning any then there's no deficit
>>16758662
>you factually have to burn calories to lose weight

You burn more calories simply by being alive you fucking retard. Exercise is meaningless.

>>16761805
Yes. Food cholesterol doesn't affect the cholesterol in your body.

>>16762053
So what does affect it if not food?

>>16756954
Onions, brussel sprouts, asparagus, spinach, bell peppers, jalepenos, the list goes on. Pretty much anything green anon.

>>16758402
I want to shoot a hot load on that belly

>>16758522
kek these are kinda funny

>>16756954
Eating rice and shit is fine if you don't over eat. It's all about calories not anything else.

I honestly had no idea how common it is to eat meat and vegetables only, no potatoes or anything.
Where i'm from it isn't a proper dinner if it doesn't have potatoes. It's like eating a sandwhich but not eating the bread

>>16761388
It literally means as much as you want. Satiety makes eating undesirable so you can't overeat. When you choose food correctly you can eat enough to satisfy hunger without worry.

>>16762914
I'm a brainlet, so forgive me for asking. But do you mean i can stuff my face full of salmon or steak or anything else on that list and there's no issue?
Being hungry is not a part of the weight-loss process?

>>16762963
Right. Unless you have a brain tumor or some other rare medical problem, protein and fat are too satiating to gain weight on.

Humans can eat as much meat, eggs, or lactose free dairy as they desire while being lean and in perfect health. That's why keto has become so popular. If you're overweight you will even lose weight without hunger.

>>16756954
If you count your kcals does not matter what you eat, just be careful to eat varied and vegetables to have enough micronutrients.

If you don't, well, anything that will fill you but is not kcal dense like cruciferous veggies (broccoli, lettuce, cauliflower.

But don't sweat it, I lost 4 kg eating small portions of pasta and rice every single day

>>16762993
Man thank you very much, this changes a lot for me. I should've paid attention in what, 3rd or 4th grade.

Kind of upset that I haven't seen the GOAT lifehack posted yet in here.

OP, if you wanna lose weight, pair your meat with riced cauliflower, broccoli, etc. High fiberous vegetables will absorb the flavors you add to them, so toss in a dash of chili powder, paprika, taco flavoring, whatever into the "rice".


Absolute best thing you can pair with a meat and lose weight.

>>16763023
Here's an hour long video covering basically everything you need to know about nutrition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRzBGHx93hc

Some key points:
- vegetable oils are bad
- refined carbs are bad
- saturated animal fat is good
- animal protein is good
- salt is good

Why avoid bananas and grapes specifically?

>>16763128
Whoops meant to reply to >>16758949

>>16763128
They are extremely high sugar fruits.

>>16762963
Just stop eating when you're full because the body is very well adapted to knowing when you're full from eating the diet you were supposed to eat (whole animal foods, vegetables and fruit).
The problems with modern diets can be summarized into one point:
Processed food.
>eating ground rice vs whole rice gives a much larger insulin spike and throws natural hormone secretion out of whack
>industrial byproducts that are ripped out of seeds using processes we didn't have until 150 years ago make up a significant portion of daily calories
Seed oils. Processed carbs. These are the big no-no's and it should be obvious, but somehow people don't understand (hell they don't even consider) that radically changing something is not always harmless to the delicate ecosystem that is your body.

In summary:
Eat meat, dairy, fruit and veggies. Eat real whole food.
Avoid any type of cooking oil that didn't come from a coconut or an animal to be safest.
Extra point that isn't widely known:
Pork and chicken are different from cows because their dietary choices make up their fat. So since they feed these animals seed oils, their fat is basically the same as seed oils. Avoid fucking bacon grease.
That is all.

>>16756954
Legumes and Pulses
Veggies und Mushrooms
Tofu, Seitan, Tempeh, Textured Vegetable Protein
Weird stuff like Konnyaku, Seaweed
Bugs obviously

>>16757015
what about oatmeal?

>>16757013
eat less

healthy cooking

exercise

fuck me it's not that hard

>>16762477
how much your liver produces and genetics. high cholesterol doesn't necessarily mean high risk of cvd. what you want is high HDL and low triglyceride and that would be a good predictor of low cvd risk.

>>16756954
I've eaten nothing but meat and spinach for a year and I've lost a bit over 80 kg. Two small meals a day. Drink 0 calories.

>>16756954
>To lose weight i should eat
Less.

>>16763461
Also should add to this: 0 exercise. Exercise and carbs increase appetite. We're trying to make it as easy as possible to eat as little as possible without making life too uncomfortable

>>16756954
onion mushrooms garlic greens

>>16763151
>>16763093
Thank you, i really appreciate it. Suddenly this seems very doable

>>16763696
No problem dude I'm really happy to help people! I had a hard time losing weight personally until I figured out the calorie counting idea was inherently bogus. You've got to eat good food.

If you're interested in recipe ideas my mom really likes the cookbooks Real Keto Cooking by Michael Silverstein and Easy Everyday Keto by America's test kitchen.

There's a ton of delicious food you can make which is also healthy. And you never have to limit how much healthy food you eat.

Is brown rice OK?

>>16763849
Not if you're trying to lose weight.

>>16763849
brown rice sucks just stick with white cause it's right

>>16763942
Isn't white rice just empty carbs

>>16763959
He's being contrarian. Don't eat carbs.

>>16756954
Leafy greens and cruciferous vegetables, retard.

>>16763696
I found copies of these cookbooks just for you. They will show up on libgen eventually but here they are on catbox for now.
>Easy Everyday Keto: Healthy Kitchen-Perfected Recipes by America's Test Kitchen
https://litter.catbox.moe/r5jv9k.epub
>New Keto Cooking: Fresh Ideas for Delicious Low-Carb Meals at Home by Michael Silverstein
https://litter.catbox.moe/x70pmr.epub

>>16763696
This anon really is not giving you good advice, assuming you're OP. You really need to learn more about dietary science. He's simplifying it and it's very clear you do not understand what is going into your body.

You need to look at the numbers of what is actually going into your body. You're making a lot of assumptions about what is "healthy," and he's being misleading. Like, you keep asking about brown rice, because it *sounds* healthy, but it's not going to be compatible with his whole "eat as much as you want" mantra.

He also keeps mentioning satiety. You're overweight or obese, I assume, from asking these questions. Your body is going to be hungrier than he's giving it credit for, because your hormones and otherwise are imbalanced. Once you have a true understanding of what's going into your body, you'll have a better idea of how to lose weight and eat as much as you want.

To follow up, even Harvard says that if you're on Keto, it calls for a limit of carbs. This is why you need to count things. Every article will tell you that you need to stay in ketosis for this to work. This is why his common recommendation of fruit throughout this thread is absurd. One apple has 25g of carbs.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-weight/diet-reviews/ketogenic-diet/

"The ketogenic diet typically reduces total carbohydrate intake to less than 50 grams a day—less than the amount found in a medium plain bagel—and can be as low as 20 grams a day. Generally, popular ketogenic resources suggest an average of 70-80% fat from total daily calories, 5-10% carbohydrate, and 10-20% protein. For a 2000-calorie diet, this translates to about 165 grams fat, 40 grams carbohydrate, and 75 grams protein."

>>16757013
Calories in, in calories out. You can literally lose weight eating twinkies everyday.
Though you may fuck up your pancreas and insulin sensitivity on the long run

>>16764357
>write many words
>say nothing
Fuck off with your mealy-mouthed bullshit.

>>16756954
Carbs aren't the devil. At least not until you've cut out all the actual overly calorie dense food from your diet.

What junkfood are you eating? Obviously swap the soda for the sugar free stuff. Quit the crisps, crakers, cake, etc. Basically anything in the 300-400 cal per 100g range.

Imo that should be enough. Besides potatoes are 30% the calorie density of beef and are more satiating. Look for the actual source of your problems.

>>16764401
Eat the recipes in the books, or other low-carb recipes. Don't eat apples. Nobody told anyone to eat apples.

Are you a bit daft or just pretending?

>>16757151
>unlock
I think you mean activate.
Get on that activated spinach anon.

>Avocados
Nah. Ignore the healthy fat nonsense. If you eat lots of avocadoes and nuts you will gain weight quickly. Oils, all oils, are incredibly calorie dense.

>>16764473
Calorie density is irrelevant. Thinking calorie density matters led to the low-fat diet which has caused the obesity crisis.

>>16764498
>are incredibly calorie dense
Explain why you think this matters.

>>16757543
No need to race towards suicide.
Look at the calories. Ketchup (salt based) and siracha (specifically) are low calorie. Avoid mayo.

>>16764462
>hurr durr big words are scary and i don't have reading comprehension

>>16764487
Go back and read the recommendations - I'm going to quote a few, but not every single thing.
>>16763151
>Eat meat, dairy, fruit and veggies.
>>16758949
>You can eat as much as you like of the following foods:
>Fruit... except bananas and grapes

OP clearly has no idea what can and can't be eaten. That's why he needs to research everything he eats and take a look at what is low carb, if he's going to go low carb to lose weight. He still hasn't even made the distinction that brown rice is packed with carbohydrates. It might not necessarily be "unhealthy," but it doesn't match his goals if he's going low carb.

Even looking at the "New Keto Cookbook" that was posted, they list the macros per serving. Because people need to count and be aware of this, or they'll knock themselves out of ketosis. There are meals in that book that are set for "serves four," and if OP made one of them and ate the whole thing because he was still hungry, he'd knock himself out of ketosis and fuck up the entire point of the diet.

>>16758237
Go watch one of the eat and burn 10k calories challenges on YT. They're literally killing themselves doing 18h of cardio to offset one day of binging. And the research indicates that you only keep off 1/4 of the calories you ate due to compensatory eating and lethargy afterwards.

Exercise basically doesn't contribute to weight loss. You're going to do something like 1h, 3x a week. At an optimistic 400kcal burned per session, that's under 200 cal burned per day over a week. If you only keep off 1/4 of that you could've just not eaten an apple, eaten 6 less almonds, or threw away 5% of your pizza every day.

>>16764509
You can make healthy mayo yourself with butter instead of oils.

https://www.dietdoctor.com/recipes/butter-mayonnaise

>>16764582
I mostly agree with you, but exercise really can help jumpstart things. 30 minutes of running can burn at least one of the meals of the day. Paired with diet, muscle growth, and more, it'll speed up the process and show more tone and weight in the right places.

But yeah, diet first. There's really no way around it. It's also harder to work out when overweight, so it's not like someone is ever going to work out hard enough to make up for eating as much as they want unless they're an Olympic athlete or something in the first place.

>>16764544
When you eat the right macros you won't be still hungry. Those recipes are all suitable for an ad libitum diet. No need to count or restrict them.

>>16764624
This is untrue. Fat people way overeat. I'll just pick one recipe from the New Keto Cooking book. Check out the "Korean BBQ Pork Belly." A fat person will easily eat this much food. The macros PER SERVING in this dish with four servings is:

>Calories: 1,279
>Fat: 123.4 g
>Carbs: 16 g
>Net Carbs: 13.8 g
>Protein: 7.4 g

If OP made just this one dish and ate it himself, he'd consume 5,116 calories, and 64 grams of carbs, assuming he ate nothing else all day. Now he's out of ketosis, and consumed a huge amount of calories. He'll say "well I ate from the 'healthy' book and was told I could have as much as I want, what went wrong?"

>>16764617
>30 minutes of running can burn at least one of the meals of the day
You'll burn 200-500 calories depending on intensity. If you're not fat one meal (of three) is probably 800 calories. And that running will cause increased hunger and decreased energy expenditure through fatigue.
You're not even close to burning off one meal. If you want to keep off one meal you need to be burning 3200 calories, so like an 8 hour ruck.

This claim is completely disagreeing with me.

>It's also harder to work out when overweight
Sorta. The concern is probably rate of injury than lack of fitness though. A fat person doesn't have to run for very long to get and keep their heart rate up. Lack of fitness is just going to increase cardiovascular burden. A run 5mins, walk 25mins cycle or whatever you're capable of is effective. Literally start with walks if that's what it takes.
But running by itself, yea, not effective until you're fit enough to run for a long duration of time. You probably could cycle for a long time on a resistance bike's lowest setting while fat.

>>16764651
If he did just eat 1/4 of that dish the hunger would push him into eating again. Which is why he shouldn't eat that meal, the calories per satiation is too high.

>no will power
you're an idiot

>>16764658
>If you want to keep off one meal you need to be burning 3200 calories
...You do realize the human body naturally burns calories at rest, right? Look up a TDEE, which is your daily energy expenditure. Your energy expenditure goes up with more muscle and more activity. It's basic science.

Also, I don't know why a meal has to be 800 calories, or you need to eat three 800 calorie meals a day. If you're a laborer, sure, but you're not sedentary then.

I'm all for dieting, just... exercise can help too.

>>16764670
Well, either you or another anon told him he can "eat as much as he wants" from the keto books, and he sure seems excited about it, and no shit, he shouldn't eat that meal. He should count his calories or/and his carbs, which is my only point. He needs to know what is in his meal, and we're talking to a person who thinks oatmeal is going to be "healthy" in a low carb diet.

Have you ever spoken to anyone who needs to be guided through the very simplicities of diet and nutrition before? I don't think you have.

>>16764503
If you eat more calorie dense foods you eat more calories. If you eat more calories you gain weight.
Explain why you don't think this matters.

>>16764499
>Thinking calorie density matters led to the low-fat diet
Anyone can jump to wrong conclusions. Why didn't you conclude a low sugar diet? Or a no processed foods diet? Are you dead from scurvy on your keto diet?
>which has caused the obesity crisis
What a load of shit. Cheap calorie dense food caused the obesity crisis.

>>16764651
That's only 4% calories from carbs. Low enough that you can eat unlimited amounts and not worry.

How refined the carbs are changes things but basically anything under 5% carbs is fine.

>>16764725
This is the worst possible fucking take ever. You ARE NOT IN KETOSIS AFTER 50 CARBS. Your body will store the ridiculous amounts of calories. And that's all assuming OP doesn't think he can have a "healthy" fruit juice or something throughout the day.

This thread is giving me an aneurism. How do people not recognize that OP is literally clueless and needs to be given real numeric advice, not just told he can continue to be a little piggy and eat all he wants?

>>16764717
>If you eat more calorie dense foods you eat more calories.
What makes you think this? Any organism that couldn't tell the difference between weight and nutrition wouldn't have survived long.

Using calories as a premise leads to some truly bizarre conclusions.

>>16764712
>You do realize the human body naturally burns calories at rest, right?
Yes, but that wasn't your claim.

>>16764712
>I don't know why a meal has to be 800 calories, or you need to eat three 800 calorie meals a day. If you're a laborer, sure, but you're not sedentary then.
What should my daily intake of calories be?
>NHS: 2500 for men
>FDA sedentary 21-25 year old: 2,400 calories

>>16764738
If you have to count things you aren't eating correctly. An appropriate human diet will result in health while eating as much as needed to satisfy hunger.

Your advice is flawed. If he doesn't know the difference between fattening and slimming food he should simply learn. There's no reason to start measuring and logging food in a diary like a madman.

>>16764742
You can make it more complex and use high satiety index per unit dehydrated calorie density.
But the added complexity isn't changing your decisions much, beyond skipping soup.

But go ahead, drink oil and eat jars of peanut butter. See how that goes for you.

>>16764793
>satiety index
Why do brainlets think this is an actual thing?

>go ahead, drink oil and eat jars of peanut butter
Nah I'll just eat unlimited meat, eggs, cheese, butter, etc. Plant-based oils are harmful and peanuts are too high in carbs.

>>16764756
>Yes, but that wasn't your claim.
My only claim was that you can add working out to diet, and it will be helpful.
>NHS: 2500 for men
>FDA sedentary 21-25 year old: 2,400 calories
Not if you're fat and trying to lose weight. And those numbers sound really high. I moderately exercise at 175 and 6'0, and my TDEE is 2,400 for maintenance. I burn 1,767 calories per day. I drink and stuff, but three 800 calorie meals a day for me would be a ton of food unless I just went with fast food.

>>16764772
You're such an idiot. He's trying to *lose* weight. He's already fat. He needs to learn, and by recording and weighing out his food, he'll realize "oh, those nuts I was told were healthy were actually 300 calories. I could have had a much tastier meal with more food if only I knew." You telling him he can eat whatever he wants is just going to lead to more of that, and not understanding why he's gaining weight.

Counting calories (or carbs) isn't about doing it permanently with an obsessive diary, but getting to know what you're putting in your body until you can estimate it accurately.

>>16764871
>hose nuts I was told were healthy were actually 300 calories
This is why you're wrong, though. Measuring something doesn't change whether it's healthy or not.

It's the substance that matters not the measurement. Water is a healthy drink. Coca-Cola is an unhealthy drink.

>>16764842
>Why do brainlets think this is an actual thing?
Because it's a thing. Google it broseph.

>>16764909
>It's the substance that matters not the measurement
>Makes a claim like "Water is a healthy drink. Coca-Cola is an unhealthy drink" based off of a measurement.
We can play the more calories doesn't mean unhealthy game. Calories will prevent you from starving to death and starving to death is unhealthy. But play it honestly, don't double standard when it comes to coke.

i lost 130 lbs...fat fucks(heh) complaing about how SOOO HARD it was always made me paranoid of failure and i just never even tried...it was the easiest fucking thing ever...literally just eat less and stop stuffing your face with bullshit...and i didn't even start exercising until after losing weight!

>>16764871
this shot of vodka is only 20 calories that means its healthy right?

>>16764909
It changes whether or not OP is going to lose weight or not though, which is the topic of the thread.

>>16764952
A shot of vodka is more like 70 calories. OP is asking how to lose weight. It's just like fat people who eat platefuls and platefuls of food because they "need to get their vitamins," which is technically true, but the strain their weight is putting on their bodies is much worse than the vitamins they may be getting from the excessive amount of calories they put in themselves.

>>16764717
>If you eat more calories you gain weight
Yes but no. That's why high fat, low carb diets are so beneficial. You just don't get as hungry. Most people simply will not eat as much even without counting calories. A diet in which you approach ideal body mass without trying very hard is nothing to balk at.

>>16764871
>and my TDEE is 2,400 for maintenance
I just used a calculator and it told me 5'8" 160lbs moderate exercise that my TDEE was 2,606 calories per day. And yours is 2,776.
Where are you pulling the numbers from? not that it would lead to any kind of consensus.

>>16764918
It's not a real thing.

>>16764975
Its in peer reviewed journals.

>>16764970
The first TDEE calculator I could pull up on Google.

>>16756963
>zucchini noodles
I love these a bunch but I don't have a noodler or whatever you call that machine so I use the potato peeler to make strips. It takes a while to do and I only get a little bit per one zucchini.

>>16764984
Lol, same, how fucking useless.

>>16764970
>>16764984
You also might want to adjust for age and amount of exercise. I’m not 21, and I selected light exercise because I’ve fallen off lately.

>>16764978
Lots of things are.

There's no satiety index. You're imagining something that doesn't exist because it sounds like a very official name for a very official thing. Pure fantasy.

>>16764988
I like spaghetti squash better. Zucchini noodles are too watery.

>>16765020
Straight science denier over here.
Are you a flat earther too?

>>16757543
Honestly, when cooking for your diet, only add sauces that you make yourself. I've all but stopped buying salad dressing and typically just whisk olive oil/vinegar with some spices to make my dressing. There's some exceptions, mainly with regards to basic ones that are difficult to make at home, (i.e. soy sauce, mayo, mustard, maybe certain hot sauces you only put <1tsp in a dish) but you definitely want to check ingredients in the nutritional facts or learn to make them yourself.

>>16765648
As far as I can tell you and I both agree that there's no such thing as the satiety index and the concept is totally bogus. If there was any legitimate satiety index you'd have posted it by now.

I thought you'd have immediately posted that one Kellogg's sponsored paper and I could have mocked you for your stupidity. You're dancing around and not posting it. Why? Seems like you are currently aware that it's bullshit and are too embarrassed to actually try supporting your claims.

I will reiterate that there's no satiety index of foods. It's a total fantasy. Actual scientific evidence shows fat is the most satiating, by the way. Carbs are not satiating.

>>16765702
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950329304000461
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7498104/

>As far as I can tell you and I both agree
Poor reading comprehension

> Kellogg's sponsored paper and I could have mocked you for your stupidity
Time to mock you for your stupidity. Keloggs has a paper, you're just some idiot on the internet. Furthermore your claim isn't that the index doesn't work, it's that the index doesn't exist. If you admit that Keloggs has one, it exists.

>>16765986
>perceived satiety
>perceived
We can immediately throw that paper in the trash.

The other one is the one everyone thinks is a usable satiety index. That's the one I figured you'd post. It's paid for by Kellogg's. Aside from that the methodology is a joke.

Nobody in real life eats a limited portion of a food, then waits two hours, then eats the rest of the food they want to eat. It's farcical to try extrapolating this to the real world.

>your claim isn't that the index doesn't work, it's that the index doesn't exist.
Right. There is no such thing as the satiety index. I say that with full knowledge of the Kellogg's sponsored paper you think is gospel. Purporting to do something is not the same as actually doing it. It doesn't even define satiety properly. It hasn't been replicated. It's not an accepted standard.

The glycemic index exists. The satiety index does not. Go look at all the research into glycemic index and compare it to this supposed "satiety index" you're imagining is a real thing.

OP here. There's some misunderstanding here i feel.

I'm 190cm/6'2 tall, 105kg/231pounds. That's a BMI of 29.4. I'm fat, not morbidly obese.
Also i asked these questions
>>16762963
>>16761388
as an extreme. I wasn't going to actually stuff my face like that. I was going to eat until i was just about not hungry anymore

Now i feel like there's a bunch of conflicting information in the thread, and i'm back to not knowing who to listen to

>>16766043
All scientific evidence shows low-carb diets work best. Pic related. Some people add calorie counting on top of low-carb but most weight loss doctors agree it isn't necessary.

Do you read books? Here's one you can read on the subject.
>The Case for Keto: Rethinking Weight Control and the Science and Practice of Low-Carb/High-Fat Eating by Gary Taubes
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=17BE915A7922527C99C9F3E3CE29F792

>>16766043
Jesus Christ don't listen to the fat faggots in here. Cut back the carbs, it'll make the biggest difference and is literally proven to work the best. Too much of a fat shit to do that? Then fast, that also works.

>>16766037
>We can immediately throw that paper in the trash.
We can throw you in the trash.
The topic is perception. Hunger is a perception, the one that we're trying to avoid. Or induce, as with the other study.
>It hasn't been replicated
The other link replicated it.
>Nobody in real life eats a limited portion of a food, then waits two hours, then eats the rest
Nobody in real life is trying to produce replaceable results
>Kellogg's
This seems to be your actual issue
>It's not an accepted standard
Correct, it is an emerging area of research.

>Go look at all the research into glycemic index
You and I both agree it doesn't exist, faggot.

>>16766043
>Now i feel like there's a bunch of conflicting information in the thread, and i'm back to not knowing who to listen to
Good, sounds like you're now up to date with the literature.

>>16766085
Were perceived satiety the same as satiety they wouldn't have to add the modifier "perceived".

>Correct, it is an emerging area of research.
LOL no it isn't dumbass. It's a single useless paper that only gets attention because retards today like to pretend "the satiety index" exists and that it canonically proves potatoes are the most satiating food.

For some real scientific evidence see the image here: >>16765702 Fat is most satiating, followed by protein. Carbs least.

>>16757016
*fiber and arsenic

There’s nothing wrong with white rice and other vegetables with fiber. Also I need to take a ton of fiber supplements with any meal if it’s not entirely veggies anyway. My digestive system is fine, I just have a low tolerance for any disturbance at all so I keep things super regular.

>>16757200
Whole grain doesn’t help with anything besides getting slightly more fiber, and I guess it’s less of an “anti-nutrient” in the sense that it doesn’t fuck up zinc intake and stuff, but apparently everything does that so I just take a supplement in the morning and fast until noon. Don’t worry, I’m still plenty chubby.

>>16757236
Meat and eggs are the only thing that are vitamin heavy, besides K. Veggies are for minerals and the aforementioned vitamin K

>>16757265
Most legumes will fuck you over nutrient wise. Your body farts them all out or something. I could probably research this but I am going through alcohol withdrawal at the moment so I can’t be assed to do anything but shitpost

>>16763151
>Pork and chicken are different from cows because their dietary choices make up their fat. So since they feed these animals seed oils, their fat is basically the same as seed oils. Avoid fucking bacon grease.
So cutting away the fat for pork and eating chicken/turkey breasts is the way to go?
Is seed oil really that bad? Some keto articles mention that they're fine for keto

>>16767927
I've noticed no difference in weight loss when I eat cheap costco bacon. I also have heard Eric Westman a very experienced low-carb doctor say it's not a priority for him to cut PUFAs and he still has tremendous success with most patients.

I get the impression that bad fats are far more harmful when you eat them mixed with carbs.

>>16757543
Can you summarize your plans from the ideas in this thread? I don't feel like reading this shit website more than I need to

>>16763151
>So since they feed these animals seed oils, their fat is basically the same as seed oils.
>>16767927
That's not quite true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lard
>Total saturated 38–43%:
>Monounsaturated 47–50%:
>Oleic acid: 44–47%
>Palmitoleic acid: 3%
>Polyunsaturated Linoleic acid: 6–10%[1][2]
One would have to check the studies on what those pigs were fed, but even then I doubt linoleic acid would be *much* higher.

>>16767995
Well my shopping list currently reads
>Quinoa
>Cauliflower rice
>Barley
>Fish (salmon, cod, trout etc.)
>Meat (beef, pork, chicken and turkey)
>Eggs
>Broccoli
>Green beans
>Spinach
>Shirataki noodles
>Dark chocolate 70% cocoa
>Sriracha sauce
>Soy sauce
Figured i'd just start with this and see what i like. Never tried some of them. Other than that i've already cut out all soda, candy and chips. So i'm going to drink water and eat the food only until i am just about full.
How's that for starters?

>>16768038
>>16767964
So bacon and pork fat in general should be fine, and even more so in moderation at least?

>>16768100
The general suggestion when eating omega6 PUFAs is to add an omega3 source. So, grass fed stuff and fish mostly. And if you want and can afford it, go for cow fat or olive oil instead of lard. Do not eat poultry fat, it has even more omega6.

>>16768159
>Do not eat poultry fat, it has even more omega6.
is this true for duck fat as well? it tastes pretty good when i use it to fry my veggies so i hope its okay.

Wait one thing, if dairy products like cheese and cream is fine for keto, how come straight up cow milk is not?

>>16768216
https://theconsciouslife.com/foods/duck-fat-04574.htm?__cf_chl_managed_tk__=pmd_cjGzTA8H9_KiW4D8Z5cAogWjT5XYniPB3.edmAvYkD0-1633033946-0-gqNtZGzNAtCjcnBszQpl
Site says it's similar to lard.

>>16756954
Almost all salmon is terrible for you and loaded with all kinds of shit you don't want in your body. It's the tilapia of the sea

>>16768268
I'm Norwegian, the salmon here is completely fine

Trying to lose weight now, cutting out most sugary drinks and bacon (god I miss pork bacon). Doing stretches and eating the greens more. Feels nice.

>>16768319
lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYYf8cLUV5E

>>16768100
>Quinoa
39 grams of carbs per cup, 222 calories per cup
>Barley
135 grams of carbs per cup, 651 calories per cup
>Broccoli
Six grams of carbs per cup
>Green Beans
7 grams of carbs per cup
>Dark Chocolate
170 calories per 1 oz (one piece)

Nigga what are you doing? Your shopping list is going to do nothing but make you miserable for weeks and never lose you any weight.

Listen, you have two choices to lose weight. Limit your carbs to under 50 (preferably more around 20), or limit your calories (calculate your TDEE and eat at a deficit). The items in your cart aren't terrible for someone looking to maintain their weight, but you're going to come back here in two weeks and have lost nothing, because the items in your cart completely counteract each other in the two main ways to lose weight.

>>16768237
Cream is made by skimming the fat off of milk, separating it from the sugar content naturally found in milk. Similarly, cheese curds are separated from whey, which is the liquid part, that contains most of the sugars, and during the fermentation process, bacteria continues to eliminate most of the sugars remaining.

>>16769198
You can eat plenty of bacon and lose weight. I buy low sodium Kirkland because it has no sugar.

>>16769433
I'll check my Target for it, if not them than Winco.

The most important part of weight loss is the /fit/ness program you are on. The most important part of your /fit/ness program is your daily diet. You can modify both on the fly and achieve results for different goals. You have to learn the basic of nutrition and exercise. Once you do this the weight loss is permanent. If you do not do this the weight loss is temporary.

Easiest way to start is to cut out processed foods and move to whole protein and veg. Carbs are not as critical as getting an increase in plant fiber and nutrients to go with a big hunk of animal protein every day.

Learn to make "clean" foods from /fit/. By itself with a reduction in daily calories this would lead to weight loss and a slight amount of leaning up. With exercise of some type the weight loss will increase dramatically. If you want to avoid muscular look because troon or some shit, run. If you want to look good to 99.985% of the population do calisthenics and resistance training (bodyweight or iron).

Good luck chubanon. Very simply: clean out your pantry, clean up your diet with whole foods, and start at least a brisk walk a day.

>>16769729
I will still eat big pasta meals the day before my cardio day. I will eat a huge calorie dense meal after a big workout, or any "leg day". I eat "clean" 80% of the time and eat whatever I want after. This only works because I exercise and learned how to cook good foods I really like. You have got to figure out what that means for you. I happen to like brocolli with parmesan cheese and spinach with garlic, and grilled meat/fish. Do your thing.

I also make protein pancakes, slather them with butter, and maple syrup. You can still do that if again - you are exercising.

>>16769321
If this is so bad for weight loss, how come you're the first one in the thread to talk shit about these?
Also, keto diets you should eat 50 grams or less of carbs, but on a low carb diet you can get up to 150. Are you saying i won't lose weight on a low carb diet?

Anyone else have a second opinion on this, please?

>>16770335
Anon, I've been in this thread since the time you posted it. I'm having a hard time figuring out if you're just trolling, incapable of using Google to look into anything yourself, or genuinely autistic, but I'll repeat once again...

I've continued to say, the best chance of you losing weight is to commit to low carb, or cutting calories. Both will work. Low carb lets you eat a lot more, as long as you don't ever break, but you have to stick to meats, cheeses, and a very limited amount of vegetables. Don't eat breads or things that make breads. Look it up.

With low calorie, you can eat whatever you want, but you need to count calories. You should focus on foods like chicken and vegetables, which will have very low levels of calories. Until you calculate your TDEE and check your food for the calories, you won't know what to eat.

There's no unilaterally "healthy" food. Look at the numbers.

>>16756954
>I've been told to stay away from potatoes, pasta, rice and whatever. What the fuck is left then?
Potatoes are probably fine, but whole grain pasta and brown rice should be alright too. Just don't eat much of the refined flour pasta and white rice. Also don't drink soda, don't eat snack foods like chips. Don't eat added sugar, if you want something sweet then have a piece of fruit. If you do that then you should drop some weight.

tldr cut out all processed foods

>>16770646
To be fair there are 66 posters in this thread, many of whom have given different advice (or so it seems to me, being uneducated in all this) and have argued. So forgive me for misunderstanding and or not knowing who to listen to.

>the best chance of you losing weight is to commit to low carb, or cutting calories. Both will work
This is my plan. I'm goint to try as best i can to stay at 50grams of carbs or under, AND my suggested daily calorie intake is around 2500, i aim to cut that down to 1500.
Unless i'm misunderstanding some more, isn't this good?
I truly appreciate the help btw

>>16762053
That's a blatant lie, where the fuck did this meme come from?

>>16756992
>I've been raised on meat+potatoes+vegetables
Yes and that is called a normal balanced meal. Americans would eat anything else but that, than come around and tell you their special healthy diet #243. If you want to cut carbs, start with the potato chips.

>>16770335
The quinoa and barley don't seem like great choices. They are basically pure carbs. Food should be inherently low-carb so you don't have to restrict how much you eat.

>>16770660
Whole food carbs are fine for people who aren't metabolically unhealthy. If you're trying to lose weight potatoes will make it far more difficult.

>>16769729
>eat lots of fats
>but also eat only lean ground beef
please explain?

>>16756954
I know what you mean. First there are the vegans, or the Atkins variants and they all push raw crap.

>>16771357
>people who aren't metabolically unhealthy.
you've just excluded most US adults

>>16772002
Nutrient density vs. caloric intake. I don't follow this strictly myself as I find it a waste of time. But one example would be removing egg yolk in eggs to increase the amount of protein while reducing the total amount of calories. When you are trying to cut down and need to retain gained muscle this is one technique.

I do a long term maintenance diet or a reconditioning diet. I try to stay consistent and if I feel I need to dial it down or up in any given week I do. It is more important to work on "cleaning" up a diet than it is to get finnicky over minor caloric differences in cuts of meat. Fine tune that later.

>>16773891
Oh yeah and also think about the difference between the fats in an avocado and in that ground beef. Might be an equitable amount of calories but the avocado is going to have a ton more nutrients than the fat from the beef. Drain the beef fat and add an avocado so you can get a complete protein with a micronutrient profile and good saturated fats.
>again, cleaning up to get this nitpicky is way more important than worrying about small details
focus on the macro level then dial it in months later and reward yourself with great tasting foods while you are doing it.

>>16773911
>the avocado is going to have a ton more nutrients than the fat from the beef.
Nice bait.

>>16756954
>All these stupid fucking rules made up by retards and con artists
To lose weight take in fewer calories than you expend

>>16773923
What's the best strategy to achieve that goal?

>>16774099
Whatever habits you personally can maintain
Most people don't even think about their caloric intake and mindlessly consume huge amounts of calories in their drinks and by snacking
Just look at what you eat in a day and figure out how to reasonably reduce it if you want to lose weight.

Overcomplicating it or turning it into some huge instantaneous change or crash diet is a sure-fire way to fail

>>16774099
>They lost more abdominal fat
Pseudoscience horseshit alert
You can't target fat in specific parts of your body for weight loss. Not with exercises or with nutrition.
Fat reduction happens on a first-on last-off system

>>16774123
The thing most sure to fail is measuring and logging everything you eat while willing yourself to stay hungry so you don't exceed your budget.

The only diet that will ever work long term is one that doesn't leave you hungry. It has to be unrestricted. Pic related is an example of an unlimited calorie diet that works.

>>16774133
Nobody said anything about targeted weight loss you dunce.

And the abdominal fat/trunk fat is referring to visceral fat which is the dangerous fat around your organs.

>>16774157
>Bro you're sure to fail by trying to look at what you eat and find small ways you personally can change your habits
>Bruh just change your entire diet all at once and go keto
>Reducing average daily calories by reducing things like soda and snacks that most people don't pay attention to leaves you STARVING!
You're a fucking moron and you'll get no more (you)'s from me
Two to one you're a fatass too

>>16774201
Counting calories is proven to be less effective than eating unlimited fat and protein.

Calorie counting is a totally incorrect way of thinking. It makes people do things like low-fat eating which causes them to fail.

>>16774217
Your stupidity makes me irrationally angry. Shut the fuck up and kys.

>>16774264
You're irrationally angry because you don't eat healthy. Your brain is short circuiting.

Stop eating processed plant matter. Eat meat and eggs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXlVfwJ6RQU

The only way to lose weight is to shove a jade egg up your pussy every night
It will suck the fatty toxins right out of your filthy stinking crease and you can shove diabetes juice down your gullet all day long

I think my stomach is broken because I find this shit so easy. I'm down to one low carb meal a day despite going to the gym. Not counting calories because it's gay but I've dropped 3kg already.

I eat nothing but jizz and I lost 10 kilos in two months
It's pure protein and vitamins, bruh
I mix it with a little bit of orange soda just for the vitamin c

>>16774309
Connor Murphy is that you???

>>16756954
Breakfast: 1 serving Steel Cut Oats with Berries and Banana

Lunch: Large plate of Vegetables with 1/2 an avocado and 1 fried egg on top. Don't use any dressings on top whatsoever.

Snack: 1 serving of Macadamia Nuts or Pumpkin seeds

Dinner: 4oz Sardines or Salmon w/ Cauliflower Rice or Asparagus, and Beans.

Only drink water throughout the day. You should lose weight

>>16774321
>>16774309
Who gave Chris chan a jail phone

>>16772034
You clearly don't know what OP means. He's referring to the sort of diet Dr. Jason Fung advises. Zero fructose, low amount of starch (less than 200g of potatoes (which contains 50g of carbohydrates) per day.

Most vegans don't advocate raw food. Neither did Atkins, and he was a retard who didn't differentiate between seed oils and natural fats. A very few low carbers recommend raw animal food.

The answer to OP's question, is BUTTER! It's likely that he's feeling hungry because his fat to protein ratio is too low, which leaves him wanting. Saturated fat suppresses hunger.

>>16769321
>Limit your carbs to under 50
>or limit your calories
Shouldn't you limit the calories on low carbs anyway? Is this an either or situation? Not both at the same time?

>>16775384
Limiting calories leads to doing things that don't work or actually make weight loss more difficult. Volume eating is based on calorie logic.

>>16775452
So basically don't be overly strict about it, but it does help?

>>16775452
This is retarded nonsense. What leads to relapses isn't the concept of calorie limitation, it's trying to change your diet too much too quickly.

>>16775466
Please do not listen to this fucking idiot, anon.
Just make reasonable changes to the diet you already have.
Your best-laid plans and conflicting research involving fats/protiens/macros/fad diet 82713 will fail because you will never be able to keep up that level of extra effort.

Back way the fuck up from the manic bender you're going on and look first at what your current diet is like. What do you eat in a day?