08-16-2011, 09:50 AM
|
#21
|
|
All SEC
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Viera, FL
Posts: 949
|
Wow, lots of white rice lovers on this thread. LOL If you like the taste of Chipotle rice you can make your own by adding lime juice and chopped cilantro in at the end. It won't taste "exactly" like Chipotle because they saute their rice in oil before they add the liquid. I make this at home so that I can control the calories. They (and I) use basmati rice.
I do agree with you, Dream. You can eat what you want, in moderation. That's the whole basis of Weight Watchers.
|
|
|
08-16-2011, 09:51 AM
|
#22
|
|
Gator Country's Ring of Honor
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 62,227
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeafUF
If he keeps the meals the same that is. No doubt cutting out a 1000 calories will lead to a drop off. So long as he doesnt cut out those snacks only to find a way to add 1000 calories into his three meals.
|
Yes, the operative phrase is always: "Without changing anything else."
But I should have mentioned that even the meals are going to be smaller. I'm putting him on The 'S' Diet. He gets to eat all the foods he enjoys, but on (S)maller plates, no (S)tacking food high and no (S)econds.
|
|
|
08-16-2011, 09:58 AM
|
#23
|
|
Gator Country's Ring of Honor
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 62,227
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajoseph
That's a great point, although I really don't agree that there "are no terrible foods." Bluntly, I eat like a pig at my meals (twice a day) ... it's just me. I motabolize food quickly, and I try and stay active. So, I watch what I eat. I stringently monitor my carb intake (and eat a ton of salad). But if I steer off plan, my cholesterol levels are dramatically effected
|
Yes, but does 'steering off plan' translate to weight gain ? I ask because it seems to be the typical pattern for cholesterol to react to weight-gain/weight-loss regardless the foods eaten (including carb levels). Witness the recent 'Twinkie Diet' experiment in which the UK nutrition professor, believe his name is Haub, lost 27 pounds in ten weeks eating mostly sugary treats. His cholesterol numbers improved dramatically and across the board.
Please understand that I'm not stampeding people into eating foods they're not comfortable eating. I'm simply reacting to the dubious 'good foods vs. bad foods' notion that has people sadly depriving themselves (usually without success) of foods they truly enjoy.
Now, as to whether cholesterol readings even matter is another issue. I have noticed that upwards of 70% of heart attack victims had normal readings at the time.
|
|
|
08-17-2011, 01:26 AM
|
#24
|
|
Premium Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Posts: 4,436
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner
We're not get much from you other than aphorisms, are we ?
People are overweight because they tend to consume more calories than they expend, regardless their food choices.
|
Do you always rely on absolutes vs understanding things can be a little more nuanced?
__________________
You can't communicate your way out of something you behaved yourself into
|
|
|
08-17-2011, 11:39 AM
|
#25
|
|
Gator Country's Ring of Honor
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 62,227
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fubar1
Do you always rely on absolutes vs understanding things can be a little more nuanced?
|
I thought that was your category, "bad foods", "evil food manufacturers", etc.
|
|
|
08-18-2011, 11:19 AM
|
#26
|
|
VIP Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 980
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dreamliner
Yes, but does 'steering off plan' translate to weight gain ? I ask because it seems to be the typical pattern for cholesterol to react to weight-gain/weight-loss regardless the foods eaten (including carb levels). Witness the recent 'Twinkie Diet' experiment in which the UK nutrition professor, believe his name is Haub, lost 27 pounds in ten weeks eating mostly sugary treats. His cholesterol numbers improved dramatically and across the board.
Please understand that I'm not stampeding people into eating foods they're not comfortable eating. I'm simply reacting to the dubious 'good foods vs. bad foods' notion that has people sadly depriving themselves (usually without success) of foods they truly enjoy.
Now, as to whether cholesterol readings even matter is another issue. I have noticed that upwards of 70% of heart attack victims had normal readings at the time.
|
Steering off plan absolutely translates to weight gain (in inches if not pounds). It's why I am very cognizant of my eating patterns. I "cheat" on weekends only, where I am more active. On a related point, "cholesterol readings" is not strictly limited to cholesterol count; it is a breakdown of tryglicerides, hdl, LDL, etc. The studies I have read all seem to agree that these measurables absolutely matter.
|
|
|
08-18-2011, 11:46 AM
|
#27
|
|
Gator Country's Ring of Honor
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 62,227
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajoseph
Steering off plan absolutely translates to weight gain (in inches if not pounds). It's why I am very cognizant of my eating patterns. I "cheat" on weekends only, where I am more active. On a related point, "cholesterol readings" is not strictly limited to cholesterol count; it is a breakdown of tryglicerides, hdl, LDL, etc. The studies I have read all seem to agree that these measurables absolutely matter.
|
Yes, I'm taking into account the breakdown. For example, a new study shows that increasing HDL doesn't seem to make much of a difference. The entire Blood Lipid Hypothesis is subject to question.
Also, I'm not a big fan of concepts like 'cheat days' or 'cheat meals' as they convey 'good foods vs. bad foods.' Now, if you are only using them to describe going over your accustomed caloric limit, that's another matter. Many report that they do fare better, at least with hunger control, when they vary their calorie intake from time to time.
|
|
|
08-27-2011, 03:57 PM
|
#28
|
|
Gator Country Diamond
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 25,926
|
I was hitting Chipotle a lot when I first started my fitness and nutrition kick. First I did the bowls, then I switched to the salads. In the end, I figured out I was missing what I liked most about Chipotle and I went back to getting the full blown calorie bomb, the chicken burritos with just about everything. The difference was going once a week instead of three times a week.
There's a great fast food chain here in the Chicago area called Potbelly. They have very good food and it's an extremely slick brand experience, so I expect them to expand nationally. What I like about them is their online calorie calculator. I love their roast beef sandwich, but ordering it with the works is 670 calories. By opting for thin sliced bread, no oil, mayo or cheese, I get my sandwich down to 396 calories, and it's still a great sandwich. Just to be safe, I tell them to drain my peppers, which float in a an oil and vinegar mixture in the jar. I could eat at this place every day.
|
|
|
08-27-2011, 04:40 PM
|
#29
|
|
Gator Country Silver
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wherever I am I doing fine. I am here for a good not a long time.
Posts: 12,574
|
Potbelly isnt everywhere but they are in more than just the Chicago area. They have them all over DC. I agree its a great sandwich shop. It was actually the only tolerable one around DC at all.
__________________
|
|
|
09-06-2011, 07:55 PM
|
#30
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,876
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fubar1
The only thing I'd add is to stay away from Panda. It's entirely processed and the majority of their food is loaded with sugar, preservatives and oils.
There's definitely some unhealthy things to stay away from at Chipotle as well. The Pork, Barbacoa and Sour Cream are examples.
But at least their chicken is antibiotic free range chicken. And you have a much better shot at getting healthy calories there vs. Panda.
|
What is unhealthy about pork, shredded beef, and sour cream? I've got to side with Dream on this one. Calories is the main component. Free range is a load of nonsense.
|
|
|
09-06-2011, 08:59 PM
|
#31
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,876
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisleakfan4life
Their website lists the calorie breakdown as:
Cilantro Lime rice: 130 calories
Chicken: 190 calories
Red Tomato Salsa: 40 calories
Cheese: 100 calories
Total: 460 calories
Everything seems right except the rice, 130 calories seems very low(and the portion size is 3 ounces).
While im not good with weights, it seems like a lot more than 3 ounces is put into their bowls, it seems more like 1 scoop is 130 calories and they seem to put around 2-3 scoops.
|
I think you are spot on that it has to do with the 3 oz. There are 8 oz in a cup and I would venture to bet that the typical bowl has anywhere from 1/2 a cup to a full cup of rice in it depending on the maker.
|
|
|
09-07-2011, 11:53 AM
|
#32
|
|
Gator Country Diamond
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 25,926
|
Portion size and frequency are the issues with Chipotle. If you eat there more than once or twice a week, you should pay attention to what you order. Burrito Bols and salads are your best bet. If you eat there once a week or less, just go for broke. Otherwise, you don't really get your fix.
Crap. It's almost lunch and the Chipotle is only a block away. Look what I talked myself into. Maybe I can psyche myself into walking right past it on the way to Potbelly. Better, yet, I'll go the other way and walk home to make myself a tuna sandwich.
|
|
|
09-07-2011, 11:57 AM
|
#33
|
|
Gator Country Silver
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wherever I am I doing fine. I am here for a good not a long time.
Posts: 12,574
|
Ha, now I want to get Potbelly for lunch and Chipotle for dinner. But I am out west and Potbelly isn't an option.
What I am going to do is hit the gym then have a protein shake.
__________________
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|