Wow, no wonder we're fat. Calorie tracking.

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
The sometimes tedious activity of tracking calories has nonetheless yielded some insight into why we're so overweight.

I just had a typical $11 breakfast at a restaurant.

2 eggs over easy
2 pork chops
1 english muffin, cut in halves
2 cups hash browns

Total calories: 980

2 eggs over easy: 140
2 pork chops: 400
1 english muffin, cut in halves: 100
2 cups hash browns: 340

I'm going to guess that this also had:

Zero fiber. Very little vitamins. Lots of sodium. 100% of the carbs are simple carbs that quickly turn into sugar and then into fat if not used for exercise or work immediately after.

Couple this with the sedentary lifestyle that most people have, and it's no wonder that people are so overweight and so unhealthy as well.
 

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
5,586
2,946
136
Portion size is a little big, I would have a hard time housing two pork chops, two eggs and 2 whole cups of hash browns. Other than that, there should be quite a lot of vitamins in there. Problem is mostly portion size.
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Portion size is a little big, I would have a hard time housing two pork chops, two eggs and 2 whole cups of hash browns. Other than that, there should be quite a lot of vitamins in there. Problem is mostly portion size.

They were relatively thin pork chops. Lots of cheap filler (hash browns). Compared to something like grilled pork chops served with grilled veggies and some brown rice or whatever, it seems way less nutritious and also way less filling.
 

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,348
642
121
It's portion sizing. Growing up with non American parents, portion sizes are COMPLETELY different around the world compared to America. It is mindboggling how much Americans eat.
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
It's portion sizing. Growing up with non American parents, portion sizes are COMPLETELY different around the world compared to America. It is mindboggling how much Americans eat.

It also has a lot to do with food types, no? Not only are our portions huge, we eat a lot of calorie-dense foods, meaning we can eat less but continue to get more calories, but we end up eating more of it.
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
43,974
6,325
136
I don't see anyone ordering that much food. Disgusting.
I see it happening but that's a lot of food for me. 1 grilled chicken biscuit is enough to get me through to lunch...I'm 6'1" 203lbs.

2 cups of hash browns is a lot of simple carbs. Does the calorie # include the grease/oil used to fry them in? Same question for the eggs.
 

Megatomic

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
20,127
6
81
After a long run I used to eat a meal like that and still be hungry. No more taters and bread for me though, I have to ask for a bowl of fruit instead.
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
That's typical for breakfast? I don't think too many Americans are eating a $11 breakfast every morning. A lot of them are eating pure sugar pop tarts for breakfast washed down with coffee that is laced with whatever fake creamer their job orders and sleeves of sugar. Top that off with a burger, fries, and HFCS drink of choice for lunch, and whatever processed food their kids will eat for dinner (McD's dollar menu?)... And suddenly you realize how little nutrition is consumed by people on a regular basis. I'm even describing people who keep there portions under control... Most do not and include various snacking of additional sugar throughout the day.
 

sushiwarrior

Senior member
Mar 17, 2010
738
0
71
I might eat something like that if I was having family over or something, but on an average day? I couldn't eat more than a sausage mcmuffin (no egg). Which is perhaps 400 calories or so. Usually I eat oatmeal with a bit of jam for flavour. Not everyone eats like a pig every breakfast.
 

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,851
6
81
My typical breakfast:
* Protein powder = 150 cals (2 scoops, Calories: 150, Fat: 2g, Carbs: 7g, Protein: 26g)
* frozen fruit = 50 cals
* ice cubes + water = 0 cals

Total breakfast: 200 cals

Easy, quick, and tastes great.
 

TallBill

Lifer
Apr 29, 2001
46,017
62
91
Consistent eating is important as well. 5-6 meals throughout the day. Mine are in the 800-1000 calorie range.
 

Megatomic

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
20,127
6
81
5-6 meals x 800-1000 calories each - woah there is no way I could eat that much!
I counted (approx) the number of calories I ingested on the day I ran a 50 mile race this year. Including the calories I consumed during the race, 4000 kcal total. About the same the next day. The 2nd day after the race I was back to about 2800 kcal. But I think TallBill is a weightlifter, those dudes can put away some food.
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,483
32
81
I counted (approx) the number of calories I ingested on the day I ran a 50 mile race this year. Including the calories I consumed during the race, 4000 kcal total. About the same the next day. The 2nd day after the race I was back to about 2800 kcal. But I think TallBill is a weightlifter, those dudes can put away some food.

He's also much larger and much more active than the average man.

As a more average-sized guy at 5'8", 155lbs, I consume roughly 2500-3000kcal per day due to my activity levels. I eat two to three meals per day, but usually snack throughout the day if possible.
 

Sluggo

Lifer
Jun 12, 2000
15,488
5
81
My typical breakfast:
* Protein powder = 150 cals (2 scoops, Calories: 150, Fat: 2g, Carbs: 7g, Protein: 26g)
* frozen fruit = 50 cals
* ice cubes + water = 0 cals

Total breakfast: 200 cals

Easy, quick, and tastes great.

I'd be hungry in 30 minutes.

For me:

3 eggs over easy cooked in a spot of oil, w/ 1TBS of ground flakseed
2 small oranges
2 toasted wheat bread, no butter, just toasted bread.
1 Qt water

Takes 5 minutes to cook, and it's damn good. :)

Probably about 450 calories, lasts me about 4 hours until I am ready to eat again.
 

TechVill

Junior Member
Aug 6, 2013
9
0
0
woowww.. 2 pork chops? that's a lot. the food choices are ok. i agree with everyone that it's about the portion.
 

Java Cafe

Senior member
Mar 15, 2005
302
0
76
Consistent eating is important as well. 5-6 meals throughout the day. Mine are in the 800-1000 calorie range.

Are there studies that confirm this? There are several very well-respected trainers (and researchers) who advise eating within a specific, small window of time every day. If the total number of calories consumed is the same (with the same macro splits), I would argue that food timing is at least irrelevant. For me, after trying to get a nutrition regimen with many small meals to work, for years, I am doing very well eating within a four-hour window in the evening, right after weight training. For my temperament and type, this is so much better. And countless people seem to feel this way too.
 

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,851
6
81
Are there studies that confirm this? There are several very well-respected trainers (and researchers) who advise eating within a specific, small window of time every day. If the total number of calories consumed is the same (with the same macro splits), I would argue that food timing is at least irrelevant. For me, after trying to get a nutrition regimen with many small meals to work, for years, I am doing very well eating within a four-hour window in the evening, right after weight training. For my temperament and type, this is so much better. And countless people seem to feel this way too.

If you're referring to intermittent fasting, that's for a very specific period of cutting or making gains while staying lean. The trainers that espouse this method generally acknowledge that making gains while staying lean will be slower than making gains while eating a lot to bulk up.
 

Java Cafe

Senior member
Mar 15, 2005
302
0
76
If you're referring to intermittent fasting, that's for a very specific period of cutting or making gains while staying lean. The trainers that espouse this method generally acknowledge that making gains while staying lean will be slower than making gains while eating a lot to bulk up.

I'd really like to see a well-done study (or two, preferably) that provides support for the hypothesis that there are significant differences in outcomes (whatever they be), between distributed meals and time-bound meals. Are you aware of any?
 

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,851
6
81
I'd really like to see a well-done study (or two, preferably) that provides support for the hypothesis that there are significant differences in outcomes (whatever they be), between distributed meals and time-bound meals. Are you aware of any?

In the bodybuilding forums it has been discussed quite a bit; the general idea has more to do with the individual's reaction to hunger.

In other words, waiting a long period of time in between meals, the post-prandial glucose levels spike initially and then dip slowly until they eventually hit a point where your body goes into starvation mode. The point of intermittent fasting is to get the advantages of the glucose dip in your blood sample but not have your body hit starvation mode, so you eat before those glucose levels hit a certain point where the starvation reaction happens.

So basically you get the benefits of fasting without the starvation mode reaction in your body. Furthermore it gives your stomach time to shrink up a bit, so when you do eat your meals within the 8 hour eating time frame (which differs from person to person, some people do 4-6 hours instead), you feel insanely full.

Personally I've had a lot of success with this method, and it seems to be catching on like wildfire in the bodybuilding forums. The main reasons I like it or that it works for me:

* It gives me more time in the morning to do things I need to do, basically gives me more time in the day that I would otherwise spend eating
* By having a simple control on my eating mechanism, it allows me to more easily track my calorie intake
* It has a great effect in terms of controlling hunger, and when you finally eat, you feel full as heck
* I don't have that "constantly hungry" feeling that I normally have when trying a diet
 

Java Cafe

Senior member
Mar 15, 2005
302
0
76
In the bodybuilding forums it has been discussed quite a bit; the general idea has more to do with the individual's reaction to hunger.

In other words, waiting a long period of time in between meals, the post-prandial glucose levels spike initially and then dip slowly until they eventually hit a point where your body goes into starvation mode. The point of intermittent fasting is to get the advantages of the glucose dip in your blood sample but not have your body hit starvation mode, so you eat before those glucose levels hit a certain point where the starvation reaction happens.

So basically you get the benefits of fasting without the starvation mode reaction in your body. Furthermore it gives your stomach time to shrink up a bit, so when you do eat your meals within the 8 hour eating time frame (which differs from person to person, some people do 4-6 hours instead), you feel insanely full.

Personally I've had a lot of success with this method, and it seems to be catching on like wildfire in the bodybuilding forums. The main reasons I like it or that it works for me:

* It gives me more time in the morning to do things I need to do, basically gives me more time in the day that I would otherwise spend eating
* By having a simple control on my eating mechanism, it allows me to more easily track my calorie intake
* It has a great effect in terms of controlling hunger, and when you finally eat, you feel full as heck
* I don't have that "constantly hungry" feeling that I normally have when trying a diet

As an IF-er, I am aware of all of this. My point was that there are those who believe that eating several small meals a day is "healthier," without ever having been shown any evidence to support that assertion.