Being thin does not automatically mean you are not fat



XiaoZhen wrote:
:: On May 17, 11:14 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
:: wrote:
::: On May 16, 10:23 pm, XiaoZhen <xiaozhenb...@gmail.
::
:::: Ok, easily, briefly, no rice, noodles, biscuits, sweets/candies, no
:::: sugared drinks with ocassional low fat yoghurt, 75% dark chocolates
:::: and my own low caloried high fibre oats/wheat/ wheat germ cookie,
:::: in my diet. Most vegetables avoiding starchy ones like potatoes.
:::: Meat with visible fat trimmed, chicken with skin on. Nuts and
:::: seeds. Low fat milk and cheeses, Minimal oil used sesame , olive,
:::: peanut oil. Methods of cooking roasting, stir fry, stewing,
:::: steaming or boiling. Roughly, two thirds fibre and one third low
:::: fat protein on my plate. No weighing, no counting calories, carbs,
:::: fat and protein. Now that I am 49 to 50 kg, I put fruits back to
:::: my diet. These are not even comprehensive I covered these in 6
:::: chapters of my blog.
:::
:::: And when I started on this diet, it was a breeze, as I ate my
:::: favouriate foods as much as I like, except for some sugar cravings.
:::: No fasting, I eat as much as I like through the day and don't go
:::: hungry. But when I eat Low Carb, Low Fat, High Fibre, High
:::: Protein, I am unable to consume a lot of food at a go. These are
:::: again covered in three chapters in my blog. The recipes in my
:::: blog show 30% of what I eat. will slowly update more.
:::
:::: With much difficulty, and hopefully I am close : 40 - 50% fibre,
:::: 30 - 40% protein, 10% fat, 10% carb. The type of food and method
:::: of cooking is indeed low caloried. Not only that, I am suggesting
:::: people eat as natural as they can and avoid processed food as much
:::: as possible.
:::: In my blog, I recommend people try out different levels while on
:::: Low Carb, Low Fat, High Fibre, High Protein, because I understand
:::: different people react differently to different foods.
:::
::: I want to make sure I understand this. Are the above percentages
::: based on food calories, weight or volume?- Hide quoted text -
::
::::: On May 17, 10:43 pm, [email protected] wrote:
::
::::: How much actual protein, carb and fat in grams is there on
::::: average and how many calories on average?
::
:: Proportions, which mean volume, I don't count calories or weight or
:: carbs or protein or fats.

So again, how do you come up with 40-50% fiber?

I think you're totally full of it.
 
On May 18, 3:02 am, XiaoZhen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 17, 10:43 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > I also think that whatever diet anyone is on, emphasizing whole foods
> > and lots of produce is the healthiest way to go.
>
> What you have written is close to my idea of well balanced diet,
> eating from all groups of food, keeping simple carbs and fats low.

I also wrote that my diet is 57% fat by calories.

That is not a low-fat diet by any definition I've ever heard.
 
On May 18, 10:09 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On May 18, 3:02 am, XiaoZhen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 10:43 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > I also think that whatever diet anyone is on, emphasizing whole foods
> > > and lots of produce is the healthiest way to go.
>
> > What you have written is close to my idea of well balanced diet,
> > eating from all groups of food, keeping simple carbs and fats low.
>
> I also wrote that my diet is 57% fat by calories.
>
> That is not a low-fat diet by any definition I've ever heard.

Jackie, my agreement is only for the emphasizing whole foods and fresh
produce, other than that our diet differs greatly.


>By volume, I eat probably 75%+ vegetables.

Wow, I think by what you say, I do not take as much vegetables as you
do.

>How do you know your diet is low-carb, low-fat or high-protein then?

I thought long and hard on the title of my blog. Low Carb, Low Fat,
High Fibre, High Protein is the best way to describe my diet. 10%
carb, 10% fat, 40-50% fibre, 30-40% protein sounds about right.

But I have people mistakening it for Atkins, which it is definitely
not.
 
On May 17, 9:44 am, [email protected] wrote:
> On May 16, 10:41 pm, XiaoZhen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 12:06 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > So, unless there is some agreement on what "well balanced
> > > means", your posting about the connection between a well balanced diet
> > > and good health would seem to me to be meaningless.
>
> > I am saying there can never be an agreement, and not just between you
> > and me.
>
> I don't think she wanted agreement, but your definition. Your posts
> are often not very specific so I don't really know what you mean by
> well-balanced either.



My main point was that it's useless to throw around terms like "well
balanced diet", when everyone acknowledges that there is widespread
disagreement on what well balanced is. Without a definition, it's
meaningless. People impute all kinds of health benefits to this
"well balanced diet", yet no one knows what it is.

BTW, I'm a he.
 
On May 18, 9:09 am, [email protected] wrote:
> On May 18, 2:58 am, XiaoZhen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Proportions, which mean volume, I don't count calories or weight or
> > carbs or protein or fats.
>
> How do you know your diet is low-carb, low-fat or high-protein then?

I'm beginning to think Roger must be pretty close to the truth when he
said XiaoZhen's diet consists of eating wood. Because this just
doesn't add up. How do you get to 40-50% fiber by volume eating any
real food? Take lentils, which are one of the foods highest in
carb, for example. A cup of lentils, which weighs 200g, has 16g of
fiber, which is just 8% of the total content by weight. Now I don't
know what percentage it is by volume, because the references I use all
track it by calories and weight. Lentils may very well be a lot
higher in fiber by volume. However, how high could it be? So, I
don't know how you could get to a diet that is 40-50% fiber with real
foods. And when you consider that other foods that have no or little
fiber, eg chicken, fish, yogurt have to be added to the total daily
intake, this means whatever you're eating to bring the daily total up
to 40-50% would have to be a basicly pure fiber food. Which is,
what?
 
On May 18, 11:39 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I'm beginning to think Roger must be pretty close to the truth when he
> said XiaoZhen's diet consists of eating wood. Because this just
> doesn't add up. How do you get to 40-50% fiber by volume eating any
> real food?

You could get to 50% fiber if you ate a lot of psyllium husks.

Just not sure why anyone would want to!
 
XiaoZhen wrote:

> >How do you know your diet is low-carb, low-fat or high-protein then?
>
> I thought long and hard on the title of my blog. Low Carb, Low Fat,
> High Fibre, High Protein is the best way to describe my diet. 10%
> carb, 10% fat, 40-50% fibre, 30-40% protein sounds about right.
>
> But I have people mistakening it for Atkins, which it is definitely
> not.

That it's not Atkins isn't the issue. That it isn't low-carb, low-fat
and/or high-protein is the issue.

These words mean something specific to people, and while you may have
thought long and hard about it, using different definitions than
everyone else isn't useful.

Most nutritionists use percentage of calories to define these things.

If I tell you my web site is green and red, because I have thought
long-and-hard about what green means to me, but you look at it and see
that it's blue and grey... well, you're just going to think I'm an
idjit.

If I keep insisting it's green and red because those are MY personal
names for those colors even though everyone else calls them by other
names, you're going to think I am PURPOSELY trying to be misleading.

No one can even tell what your site is about without reading gobs of
your blog and doing the math themselves. I can't say I have any
interest in even looking when I don't know what it is actually about.
I would have to read the whole thing and do all the math to even get
an understanding of what you're proposing because you've rendered the
words you sue to describe it completely meaningless.

That is just flat-out too much work to do just to hold a conversation
with you, given that your definitions seem to be different than
everyone else's.

If you want to define what it means to you so I can "translate" what
*you* mean by low-carb, low-fat, high-protein and high-fiber, you need
to run some real numbers... based on percentage of calories... before
I could even begin to know what you mean.
 
On May 19, 4:11 am, [email protected] wrote:
> XiaoZhen wrote:
> > >How do you know your diet is low-carb, low-fat or high-protein then?
>
> > I thought long and hard on the title of my blog. Low Carb, Low Fat,
> > High Fibre, High Protein is the best way to describe my diet. 10%
> > carb, 10% fat, 40-50% fibre, 30-40% protein sounds about right.
>
> > But I have people mistakening it for Atkins, which it is definitely
> > not.
>
> That it's not Atkins isn't the issue. That it isn't low-carb, low-fat
> and/or high-protein is the issue.
>
> These words mean something specific to people, and while you may have
> thought long and hard about it, using different definitions than
> everyone else isn't useful.
>
> Most nutritionists use percentage of calories to define these things.
>
> If I tell you my web site is green and red, because I have thought
> long-and-hard about what green means to me, but you look at it and see
> that it's blue and grey... well, you're just going to think I'm an
> idjit.
>
> If I keep insisting it's green and red because those are MY personal
> names for those colors even though everyone else calls them by other
> names, you're going to think I am PURPOSELY trying to be misleading.
>
> No one can even tell what your site is about without reading gobs of
> your blog and doing the math themselves. I can't say I have any
> interest in even looking when I don't know what it is actually about.
> I would have to read the whole thing and do all the math to even get
> an understanding of what you're proposing because you've rendered the
> words you sue to describe it completely meaningless.
>
> That is just flat-out too much work to do just to hold a conversation
> with you, given that your definitions seem to be different than
> everyone else's.
>
> If you want to define what it means to you so I can "translate" what
> *you* mean by low-carb, low-fat, high-protein and high-fiber, you need
> to run some real numbers... based on percentage of calories... before
> I could even begin to know what you mean.


Yeah, I got to think harder and longer for a name that reflects more
of my blog. The issue here is whether how low is the carb, the fat
and how high is the fibre and protein. But in my experience, whenever
low carb is mentioned, people tend to think Atkins.

But I think that because you use numbers (calories, %tage of fats,
carbs, fibre, protein), you find it hard to comprehend how I can
discuss health and weight issues. Because I don't count, It makes it
equally difficult to tell you an estimate. Reading just "How to
Start" tells you the proportion of vegetables, meat and carb to go
on.

It is possible to lose weight and improve health without numbers, I
have done it. Many people have done it.
My blog "The Asian Way - Low Carb, Low Fat, High Fibre, High Protein"
simply tells readers how I lost 14 kg over one year, and improved my
health, after 20 years of trying different diets.
 
XiaoZhen wrote:
:: On May 19, 4:11 am, [email protected] wrote:
::: XiaoZhen wrote:
::::: How do you know your diet is low-carb, low-fat or high-protein
::::: then?
:::
:::: I thought long and hard on the title of my blog. Low Carb, Low Fat,
:::: High Fibre, High Protein is the best way to describe my diet. 10%
:::: carb, 10% fat, 40-50% fibre, 30-40% protein sounds about right.
:::
:::: But I have people mistakening it for Atkins, which it is definitely
:::: not.
:::
::: That it's not Atkins isn't the issue. That it isn't low-carb,
::: low-fat and/or high-protein is the issue.
:::
::: These words mean something specific to people, and while you may
::: have thought long and hard about it, using different definitions
::: than everyone else isn't useful.
:::
::: Most nutritionists use percentage of calories to define these
::: things.
:::
::: If I tell you my web site is green and red, because I have thought
::: long-and-hard about what green means to me, but you look at it and
::: see that it's blue and grey... well, you're just going to think I'm
::: an idjit.
:::
::: If I keep insisting it's green and red because those are MY personal
::: names for those colors even though everyone else calls them by other
::: names, you're going to think I am PURPOSELY trying to be misleading.
:::
::: No one can even tell what your site is about without reading gobs of
::: your blog and doing the math themselves. I can't say I have any
::: interest in even looking when I don't know what it is actually
::: about. I would have to read the whole thing and do all the math to
::: even get an understanding of what you're proposing because you've
::: rendered the words you sue to describe it completely meaningless.
:::
::: That is just flat-out too much work to do just to hold a
::: conversation with you, given that your definitions seem to be
::: different than everyone else's.
:::
::: If you want to define what it means to you so I can "translate" what
::: *you* mean by low-carb, low-fat, high-protein and high-fiber, you
::: need to run some real numbers... based on percentage of calories...
::: before I could even begin to know what you mean.
::
::
:: Yeah, I got to think harder and longer for a name that reflects more
:: of my blog. The issue here is whether how low is the carb, the fat
:: and how high is the fibre and protein. But in my experience,
:: whenever low carb is mentioned, people tend to think Atkins.
::
:: But I think that because you use numbers (calories, %tage of fats,
:: carbs, fibre, protein), you find it hard to comprehend how I can
:: discuss health and weight issues. Because I don't count, It makes it
:: equally difficult to tell you an estimate. Reading just "How to
:: Start" tells you the proportion of vegetables, meat and carb to go
:: on.
::
:: It is possible to lose weight and improve health without numbers, I
:: have done it. Many people have done it.
:: My blog "The Asian Way - Low Carb, Low Fat, High Fibre, High Protein"
:: simply tells readers how I lost 14 kg over one year, and improved my
:: health, after 20 years of trying different diets.

This is a good name for your blog: 'how I lost 14 kg over one year, and
improved my
health, after 20 years of trying different diets.'
 
On May 19, 4:01 am, XiaoZhen <[email protected]> wrote:

> It is possible to lose weight and improve health without numbers, I
> have done it. Many people have done it.
> My blog "The Asian Way - Low Carb, Low Fat, High Fibre, High Protein"
> simply tells readers how I lost 14 kg over one year, and improved my
> health, after 20 years of trying different diets.

Of course you can lsoe weight without counting numbers.

But it's a lot harder to *talk* about it without having numbers to
know what one is talking about.
 
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes:

> I'm beginning to think Roger must be pretty close to the truth when
> he said XiaoZhen's diet consists of eating wood. Because this just
> doesn't add up. How do you get to 40-50% fiber by volume eating any
> real food?

Makes no sense to me either, especially in the context of eating lots
of fresh, whole foods. I don't think my local fresh fruit and
vegetable market has a single item for sale that approaches that level
of fiber content -- especially without including a lot of non-fiber
carbs. Even whole-grain products that tout their fiber content don't
come close. Take Triscuts, for example: made from whole wheat, 19
carbs, 3 fiber, equals 15.8% fiber. You could get 40% fiber by
including things like flax seed and psyllium husks, but that doesn't
really fit the talk about lots of vegetables and fresh, real foods.

I'm almost convinced the whole fiber craze was a scam anyway, or at
least an unnecessary side-effect of the popularity of high-carb,
low-fat diets. Maybe you need fiber to stay regular when you're
eating a lot of dense grain and protein without any fat to lighten
things up; but I've never been constipated on low-carb, even when I've
eaten nothing but meat, eggs, and cheese for weeks. (I realize fiber
may be valuable for other things, but constipation seems to be by far
the main reason people worry about it and take supplements for it.)



--
Aaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz
 
Aaron Baugher wrote:

:: I'm almost convinced the whole fiber craze was a scam anyway

Me too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back